So much for signing on to Microsuck with a new legal copy of XP PR

[Guest]

Anyways here's my problem .. I did a full system backup of a 160 WD SATA disk
total size is "160,014,912 Yes it's WD 160 Gb sata disk ... from newegg I did
a asr backup backup to my 2nd WD SATA also from newegg a I disconnected
disk1 disk3 was added 160,039,680 non WD disk but larger then disk1 .. I
try a ASR restore and microsuck tells me that disk3 is too small ... riddle
me this is win that stupid that can't understand cross brands ???? ... you
know if the world went to linux it would be simplier ... So why can't I
restore to a larger disk ... I think it's a bug ... probably one that would
never be fixed ,, it's winblows and BG doesn't care... besides Vista is out
and the prople speak ... most say it sucks ... and true .. think about for
every version of winblows you need 2x cpu and 2x memory .. which means for
99% of all home owners they need a new PC ... more $$ Hell Fedora you can
run core 3 - 7 on old pentiums and it works trust me I have core 5 running
on a P3 400MHZ and 256M memory and it's fast ... faster then windows

back to my problem why is winblows failing ??? the disk is = to or larger

dale G

 

[Patrick Keenan]

Anyways here's my problem .. I did a full system backup of a 160 WD SATA
disk
total size is "160,014,912 Yes it's WD 160 Gb sata disk ... from newegg I
did
a asr backup backup to my 2nd WD SATA also from newegg a I disconnected
disk1 disk3 was added 160,039,680 non WD disk but larger then disk1 .. I
try a ASR restore and microsuck tells me that disk3 is too small ...
riddle
me this is win that stupid that can't understand cross brands ???? ... you
know if the world went to linux it would be simplier ... So why can't I
restore to a larger disk ... I think it's a bug ... probably one that
would
never be fixed ,, it's winblows and BG doesn't care... besides Vista is
out
and the prople speak ... most say it sucks ... and true .. think about
for
every version of winblows you need 2x cpu and 2x memory .. which means
for
99% of all home owners they need a new PC ... more $$ Hell Fedora you can
run core 3 - 7 on old pentiums and it works trust me I have core 5
running
on a P3 400MHZ and 256M memory and it's fast ... faster then windows

back to my problem why is winblows failing ??? the disk is = to or larger

dale G

First, the problem you're describing isn't with Windows. It's with
ntbackup, which isn't exactly a cutting-edge backup utility. There's a
reason 3rd party and imaging apps are sold and are popular, and why it isn't
even included with all XP distributions.

So you'll have better results looking at ntbackup issues, than with generic
XP issues.

What is the exact error message? Googling *that* will probably give you
good clues.

To your specific problem, are you tryng to transfer a working XP install
from one drive to another?

If so, a better bet might be to download and install the Acronis TrueImage
Home trial (100 meg, www.acronis.com), to the original drive, then clone it
to the new larger drive. You must do this in "manual" mode, as the
"automatic" mode doesn't allow you to set the target partition size.
You'll be done in about an hour.

HTH
-pk

 

[Vanguard]

in message

Oh, goodie, a post full of childspeak.

Anyways here's my problem ..

So you usually insult those from whom you ask help? Bet it doesn't
too well.

...

As if an ellipsis is a replacement for a period character, or for at
least 4th grade level writing.

from newegg I did a asr backup backup

No, you didn't. Newegg is an online vendor selling software and
hardware. They do do your backups.

from newegg a I disconnected disk1 disk3

Newegg has no control over your disks.

you know if the world went to linux it would be simplier

No, just you going to Linux would make it easier for the rest of us.

never be fixed ,, it's winblows and BG doesn't care... besides Vista
is out
and the prople speak ... most say it sucks ... and true

Many are just like you. They haven't a clue why they need a new
version of an OS. Oooh, it's new. Big deal.

every version of winblows you need 2x cpu and 2x memory

No, you decided to switch from 9x-based Windows to NT-based. As
you've said, go to some Linux distro. If you don't load its GUI
desktop and remain at the command shell, RAM requirements will be very
low.

Hell Fedora you can
run core 3 - 7 on old pentiums and it works trust me I have core 5
running
on a P3 400MHZ and 256M memory and it's fast ... faster then
windows

So why are you here? Oh, I see, a troll pretending to ask a question
when, in fact, it's another child proselytizing their personal Linux
choice and doing while stroking themself in public. From your
rambling here, not likely you're an expert on Fedora, either.

Since you're trying to use ASR which merely boots from the floppy to
then load a fresh install of Windows to then run NTbackup using the
logical backup files, why not just do it yourself? Do the fresh
install and run NTbackup to do the restore.

If Microsoft provided a decent backup program then all the 3rd party
backup software vendors would be screaming that Microsoft was stealing
their market. Every time Microsoft adds minor support for a feature,
someone cries foul. So get used to using 3rd party software.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/818903/
"... installs a simple installation of Windows and automatically
starts a restoration using the backup ..."

 

[Leythos]

Hell Fedora you can
run core 3 - 7 on old pentiums and it works trust me I have core 5 running
on a P3 400MHZ and 256M memory and it's fast ... faster then windows

Having used Fedora Core 4-7, I can assure you that with a GUI interface
it's not faster than XP, it's "on-par", but there are many things that
Linux doesn't offer as easily or with as good an interaction/conversion
as with a Windows system. Fedora is my favorite version of Linux, have
it on 4 machines, but I use Windows for interaction with clients, my
exchange servers, my web servers, my ftp servers (using FileZilla Server
as the FTP service), and as my file servers/domain controllers.

Your other problems are your own making.

--

Leythos
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)

 

[Guest]

First, the problem you're describing isn't with Windows. It's with
ntbackup, which isn't exactly a cutting-edge backup utility. There's a
reason 3rd party and imaging apps are sold and are popular, and why it isn't
even included with all XP distributions.

So you'll have better results looking at ntbackup issues, than with generic
XP issues.

What is the exact error message? Googling *that* will probably give you
good clues.

To your specific problem, are you tryng to transfer a working XP install
from one drive to another?

If so, a better bet might be to download and install the Acronis TrueImage
Home trial (100 meg, www.acronis.com), to the original drive, then clone it
to the new larger drive. You must do this in "manual" mode, as the
"automatic" mode doesn't allow you to set the target partition size.
You'll be done in about an hour.

HTH
-pk

Actually 1st ... I'm using the backup utility that comes with XP Pro SP2 ...
and it worked before but I was using the exact same size and vendor drives
.... no problems.. And the way the spec was created a SG = WD=TS=FJ ... etc
else raid 5 wouldn't work .. so what's broken in Winsuck XP .. I know the
Seagate disk is larger then the WD ... Both are 160Gb's but one is Sata and
the other is Sata2 .. my BIOS tells me that ... but I check on the net and
it's not a big deal ... they pretty much said most people are confused ...
SATA and SATA2 doesn't mean faster disks ... I know they are wrong on that
because I use to benchmark systems ... not PC's 100K and up systems ... but
it also worked on PC.. so Does WinBlows have a problem with a SATA 160 not a
SATA2 160 ???

 

[Guest]

in message

Oh, goodie, a post full of childspeak.


So you usually insult those from whom you ask help? Bet it doesn't
too well.


As if an ellipsis is a replacement for a period character, or for at
least 4th grade level writing.


No, you didn't. Newegg is an online vendor selling software and
hardware. They do do your backups.


Newegg has no control over your disks.


No, just you going to Linux would make it easier for the rest of us.


Many are just like you. They haven't a clue why they need a new
version of an OS. Oooh, it's new. Big deal.


No, you decided to switch from 9x-based Windows to NT-based. As
you've said, go to some Linux distro. If you don't load its GUI
desktop and remain at the command shell, RAM requirements will be very
low.


So why are you here? Oh, I see, a troll pretending to ask a question
when, in fact, it's another child proselytizing their personal Linux
choice and doing while stroking themself in public. From your
rambling here, not likely you're an expert on Fedora, either.

Since you're trying to use ASR which merely boots from the floppy to
then load a fresh install of Windows to then run NTbackup using the
logical backup files, why not just do it yourself? Do the fresh
install and run NTbackup to do the restore.

If Microsoft provided a decent backup program then all the 3rd party
backup software vendors would be screaming that Microsoft was stealing
their market. Every time Microsoft adds minor support for a feature,
someone cries foul. So get used to using 3rd party software.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/818903/
"... installs a simple installation of Windows and automatically
starts a restoration using the backup ..."

Dude is't not a disk problem .. all disks say 160 GB SATA are the same
... else they wouldn't worn in a raid 5 config .. cause they are not exect ..
trust me I know that .. I also know XP backup and ASR restore works on
drives that are twins ... i.e. that means that is drives of the same size
from the same manufacturer... ie ... seagate .. WD ... etc..

XP backup can't handle non size disks ....

I even teasted that ... with PM I made my disk look smaller and XP Still
looked at it as larger

Win does Blows ... and I know both ... you can dd a non intel box all day
long .. sorry I beta tested Win 1.0 back then now that sucked my Unix box
was faster for 15 years

Anyways just saying you are not correct

 

[Guest]

Having used Fedora Core 4-7, I can assure you that with a GUI interface
it's not faster than XP, it's "on-par", but there are many things that
Linux doesn't offer as easily or with as good an interaction/conversion
as with a Windows system. Fedora is my favorite version of Linux, have
it on 4 machines, but I use Windows for interaction with clients, my
exchange servers, my web servers, my ftp servers (using FileZilla Server
as the FTP service), and as my file servers/domain controllers.

Your other problems are your own making.

--

Leythos
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)

Trust me Unix is always faster on lesser PC's have you ever tried to
install XP on a 400 mhz P3 or even a 900Mhz and does it work???? I have
Fedora core 5 and 6 runnig on on a system that most people wouldn't have
but it works .. it multi tasks and I can compile on it ... it works and ues
it's raster then having any version of Winblowz that can multiTask ... can
you telnet,ssh into a XP or 200 system that small and still be fast ???

 

[Gordon]

Trust me Unix is always faster on lesser PC's have you ever tried to
install XP on a 400 mhz P3 or even a 900Mhz and does it work????

Certainly does - my laptop is a Tecra 9000 with 900MHz processor and 1GB
RAM - XP certainly works OK on that...

 

[Patrick Keenan]

Actually 1st ... I'm using the backup utility that comes with XP Pro SP2
...

Yes, that's ntbackup, which isn't actually part of Windows XP. It doesn't
even come with some versions of XP.

and it worked before but I was using the exact same size and vendor
drives
... no problems..

Well then, work around the ntbbackup problem. Do a temporary restore to a
similar drive, then use an imaging application.

And the way the spec was created a SG = WD=TS=FJ ... etc
else raid 5 wouldn't work .. so what's broken in Winsuck XP .. I know the
Seagate disk is larger then the WD ... Both are 160Gb's but one is Sata
and
the other is Sata2 .. my BIOS tells me that ... but I check on the net
and
it's not a big deal ... they pretty much said most people are confused
...
SATA and SATA2 doesn't mean faster disks ... I know they are wrong on
that
because I use to benchmark systems ... not PC's 100K and up systems ...
but
it also worked on PC.. so Does WinBlows have a problem with a SATA 160
not a
SATA2 160 ???

The problem is with ntbackup, not with Windows.

It does help if you dig in the right place.

HTH
-pk

 

[Vanguard]

Dude is't not a disk problem .. all disks say 160 GB SATA are
the same
.. else they wouldn't worn in a raid 5 config .. cause they are not
exect ..
trust me I know that .. I also know XP backup and ASR restore works
on
drives that are twins ... i.e. that means that is drives of the
same size
from the same manufacturer... ie ... seagate .. WD ... etc..

XP backup can't handle non size disks ....

I even teasted that ... with PM I made my disk look smaller and XP
Still
looked at it as larger

Win does Blows ... and I know both ... you can dd a non intel box
all day
long .. sorry I beta tested Win 1.0 back then now that sucked my
Unix box
was faster for 15 years

Anyways just saying you are not correct

Bye ... dude ... enjoy ... blowjobber

 

[Vanguard]

in message

Trust me Unix is always faster on lesser PC's have you ever tried
to
install XP on a 400 mhz P3 or even a 900Mhz and does it work????

Yep, even works on my really old P3 800Mhz Slot2. Probably even works
with the old P3 550MHz Slot2 that got replaced.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/sysreqs.mspx