Hello Gibsalot--
This here one is a narrow niche MSKB.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/936686/en-us
The MSKB offered is helpful if you meet two conditions:
1) Nero InCD is installed
2) The driver verifier utility reached by typing "verifier" (lose quotes) in
the run box has "special pool" enabled resulting in a BSOD stop error
message.
There is a hotfix offered by MSFT for people in this category.
I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing that's a narrow slice of the
population of people I see who can't open a Vista control panel sometime
during its use (one of the Steven Sinofsky "just ship it problems" that went
into those pretty packages out of Redmond that shipped months before a
hundreds of things weren't fixed.)
Beside reduced functionality mode when the Vista isn't legit, control panel
problems are turning up on forums and groups like this one with
exponentially more frequency.
Stevie Makes Trains Run On Time, But Often Off the Track
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/ssinofsky/default.mspx
Some of the Nvidia control panel drivers can conflict with Vista, but that's
only some of them.
Here's what I'd do:
I'd try these:
I'd either use System File Checker (and if that does not helpyou), Startup
Repair (if you own a Vista DVD), which does not require a no boot situation
to help you fix many Vista components, or try Sytem Restorefrom either the
Vista DVD's Recovery link or from the F8 menu. Links that show you how to
do this are below.
***SFC as a Remedy***:
SFC or System File Checker is a bit like the spare tire in your car or a
backup battery I suppose. In Vista of course, they have changed it somewhat
and come up with a new name--Redmond stands for name it something different
twice a year and now it's part of WRP or Windows Resource Protection. It
scans protected resources including thousands of files, libraries, critical
folders, and essential registry keys, and it replaces those that are
corrupted with intact ones. It fixes a lot of problems in Windows XP, OE,
Windows Vista, Win Mail, IE6, and on Vista or if it is installed on XP, IE7.
It protects these things from changes by any source including
administrators, by keeping a spare of most of them.
How to Run SFC:
Type "cmd" into the Search box above the Start Button>and when cmd comes up
at the top of the Start menu>right click cmd and click "run as Admin" and
when the cmd prompt comes up at the cmd prompt type "sfc /scannow" no quotes
and let it run. This may fix things quite a bit. It replaces corrupt files
with intact ones, if you're not familiar with it.
If no help from SFC, you can try a restore point to before this happened or
you try the steps below if you have a Vista DVD:
***Startup Repair from the Vista DVD***
How to Use The Vista DVD to Repair Vista (Startup Repair is misnamed by the
Win RE team and it can be used to fix many Vista components even when you
can boot to Vista):
http://www.windowsvista.windowsreinstall.com/vistaultimate/repairstartup/index.htm
If you elect to run Startup repair from the Vista DVD (it can fix major
components in Vista--I've verified this many many times; it's good for more
than startup problems, and the Win RE team simply screwed up when they named
it not understanding its full functionality):
Startup Repair will look like this when you put in the Vista DVD:
http://www.vistaclues.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/click-repair-your-computer.png
You run the startup repair tool this way (and system restore from here is
also sometimes effective):
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/925810/en-us
How To Run Startup Repair In Vista Ultimate (Multiple Screenshots)
http://www.windowsvista.windowsreinstall.com/vistaultimate/repairstartup/index.htm
It will automatically take you to this on your screen:
http://www.vistaclues.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/click-repair-your-computer.png
That will allow you to go to the Vista setup that has a Repair link on
thelower left corner>click it and then you'll see a gray backgrounded list
and I want you to click Startup Repair from it and follow the directions.
The gray screen after you click the first link in the above pic will look
like this:
http://www.windowsreinstall.com/winvista/images/repair/staruprepair/Image17.gif
Click Startup Repair, the link at the top and after it scans>click OK and
let it try to repair Vista. It will tell you if it does, and if it
doesn't, try System Restore from the Recovery Link on the DVD. If these
don't work booting into Safe Mode by tapping the F8 key and using System
Restore from one of the safe modes besides VGA may work. That means you
have the option to try 4 different safe modes to get to system restore, (one
from the Recovery link on the DVD) and sometimes one will work when the
others won't.
You could also try a Repair Install with Vista which is done exactly the
same way as in XP:
***Repair Install Steps*** (can be used for Vista) MVP Doug Knox
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/helpandsupport/learnmore/tips/doug92.mspx
***Using the F8 Environment***
***Taking Full Advantage of the F8 Options (Windows Advanced Options Menu)
by starting the PC and tapping F8 once per second when the firmware screen
with the pc manufacturer's name shows a few seconds after restarting***:
The F8 options in Vista are the same as XP, and the link for Safe Mode Boot
options is labled XP by MSFT but they are the same for Vista (they haven't
updated to add Vista to the title as they have with several MSKBs that apply
to both).
Again, pressing F8 repeatedly when you seem the firmware screen may be is a
generic way to launch Windows RE on some OEM Vista computers.
You could also:
Think: I have 4 different ways to get back my XP at F8 and try 'em in order.
1) Safe Mode 2) Safe Mode with Cmd to Sys Restore which is simply a cmd
prompt in safe mode 3) Safe Mode with Neworking 4) LKG or Last Known Good
Configuration
Try to F8 to the Windows Adv Options Menu>try 3 safe modes there (I don't
use WGA) and Last Known Good>then I go to Win RE in Vista. That gives you a
choice of Safe Mode, Safe Mode with Networking,and Safe Mode with Command
Prompt.
These methods are outlined in
A description of the Safe Mode Boot options in Windows XP/and Vista
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315222/
Frequently Asked Questions Regarding System Restore from MSFT:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/plan/faqsrwxp.mspx
System Restore can be run from the Win RE recovery environment from the same
link as Startup Repair, and sometimes it will work from one F8 safe mode
location or from the Win Recovery Environment when it won't work from other
locations.
How to start the System Restore tool at a command prompt in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304449
Good luck,
CH
_________________
There ain't no comparison of Viet Nam and Iraq unless you're a rich white
kid named Bush who coked out and hid when asked to report for a physical for
a plane actually going to Nam who fooked up every bizness he got near and
you know nearly everyone in your party wouldn't sacrifice a fingernail for
any war or their kids.
August 23, 2007 NEW YORK TIMES
News Analysis
Historians Question Bush's Reading of Lessons of Vietnam War for Iraq
By THOM SHANKER
WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 - The American withdrawal from Vietnam is widely
remembered as an ignominious end to a misguided war - but one with few
negative repercussions for the United States and its allies.
Now, in urging Americans to stay the course in Iraq, President Bush is
challenging that historical memory.
In reminding Americans that the pullout in 1975 was followed by years of
bloody upheaval in Southeast Asia, Mr. Bush argued in a speech on Wednesday
that Vietnam's lessons provide a reason for persevering in Iraq, rather than
for leaving any time soon. Mr. Bush in essence accused his war critics of
amnesia over the exodus of Vietnamese "boat people" refugees and the mass
killings in Cambodia that upended the lives of millions of people.
President Bush is right on the factual record, according to historians. But
many of them also quarreled with his drawing analogies from the causes of
that turmoil to predict what might happen in Iraq should the United States
withdraw.
"It is undoubtedly true that America's failure in Vietnam led to
catastrophic consequences in the region, especially in Cambodia," said David
C. Hendrickson, a specialist on the history of American foreign policy at
Colorado College in Colorado Springs.
"But there are a couple of further points that need weighing," he added.
"One is that the Khmer Rouge would never have come to power in the absence
of the war in Vietnam - this dark force arose out of the circumstances of
the war, was in a deep sense created by the war. The same thing has happened
in the Middle East today. Foreign occupation of Iraq has created far more
terrorists than it has deterred."
The record of death and dislocation after the American withdrawal from
Vietnam ranks high among the tragedies of the last century, with an
estimated 1.7 million Cambodians, about one-fifth of the population, dying
under the rule of Pol Pot, and an estimated 1.5 million Vietnamese and other
Indochinese becoming refugees. Estimates of the number of Vietnamese who
were sent to prison camps after the war have ranged widely, from 50,000 to
more than 400,000, and some accounts have said that tens of thousands
perished, a figure that Mr. Bush cited in his speech, to the Veterans of
Foreign Wars. Mr. Bush did not offer a judgment on what, if anything, might
have brought victory in Vietnam or whether the war itself was a mistake.
Instead, he sought to underscore the dangers of a hasty withdrawal from
Iraq.
But the American drawdown from Vietnam was hardly abrupt, and it lasted much
longer than many people remember. The withdrawal actually began in 1968,
after the Tet offensive, which was a military defeat for the Communist
guerrillas and their North Vietnamese sponsors. But it also illustrated the
vulnerability of the United States and its South Vietnamese allies.
Although American commanders asked for several hundred thousand
reinforcements after Tet, President Johnson turned them down. President
Nixon began a process of "Vietnamization" in which responsibility for
security was gradually handed to local military and police forces - similar
to Mr. Bush's long-term strategy for Iraq today.
American air power was used to help sustain South Vietnam's struggling
government, but by the time of the famous photograph of Americans being
lifted off a roof in Saigon in 1975, few American combat forces were left in
Vietnam. "It was not a precipitous withdrawal, it was a very deliberate
disengagement," said Andrew J. Bacevich, a platoon leader in Vietnam who is
now a professor of international relations at Boston University.
Vietnam today is a unified and stable nation whose Communist government
poses little threat to its neighbors and is developing healthy ties with the
United States. Mr. Bush visited Vietnam last November; a return visit to the
White House this summer by Nguyen Minh Triet was the first visit by a
Vietnamese head of state since the war.
"The Vietnam comparison should invite us to think harder about how to
minimize the consequences of our military failure," Mr. Bacevich added. "If
one is really concerned about the Iraqi people, and the fate that may be
awaiting them as this war winds down, then we ought to get serious about
opening our doors, and to welcoming to the United States those Iraqis who
have supported us and have put themselves and their families in danger."
To that end, some members of Congress and human rights groups have urged the
Bush administration to drop the limits on Iraqi refugees admitted to the
United States.
Mr. Bush also sought to inspire renewed support for his Iraq strategy by
recalling the years of national sacrifice during World War II, and the
commitment required to rebuild two of history's most aggressive and lawless
adversaries, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, into reliable and responsible
allies.
But historians note that Germany and Japan were homogenous nation-states
with clear national identities and no internal feuding among factions or
sects, in stark contrast to Iraq today.
The comparison of Iraq to Germany and Japan "is fanciful," said Steven
Simon, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He noted that
the American and allied militaries had eliminated the governments of Japan
and Germany, and any lingering opposition, and assembled occupation forces
that were, proportionally, more than three times as large as the current
American presence of more than 160,000 troops in Iraq.
"That's the kind of troop level you need to control the situation," Mr.
Simon said. "The occupation of Germany and Japan lasted for years - and not
a single American solider was killed by insurgents."
Senior American military officers speaking privately also say that the
essential elements that brought victory in World War II - a total commitment
by the American people and the government, and a staggering economic
commitment to rebuild defeated adversaries - do not exist for the Iraq war.
The wars in Korea and Vietnam also involved considerable national sacrifice,
including tax increases and conscription.
