Windows not load

[BillW50]

In

Most people don't know what EWF is, much less have it running. By
default, Windows, of all flavors, installs a swap file. A cursory
search reveals no MS web site that confirms what you say about
turning of the swap file. Can you cite?

Here are the major differences of XP with EWF.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms912916(v=WinEmbedded.5).aspx

Most people run XP EWF without a pagefile and here is why:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms912874(v=WinEmbedded.5).aspx

If you want to use a pagefile with EWF, here is what you should do:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms912851(v=WinEmbedded.5).aspx

Although most SSD netbook users usually don't have multiple partitions
that they can use. So in their case turning off the pagefile is the only
thing they can do. As the RAM would get filled in no time flat unless
you make the changes in the first link above.

I am triple booting but, as I wrote, none of the OSes are linked for
booting purposes. I've had this set up for over a year and no problems
except that the Win 7 hard drive died and was replaced with no
problems.
If you separate them, you won't have the problems you've had but
you're Mr. Computer Expert, right?

They were separated smart ass! And it is only Paragon who thinks they
are doing me a favor by modifying my boot to boot non-existing Windows 7
instead of XP. They are the only disk copy program who are making this
mistake. But then again, there are lots of third party software that
also screws up dualboot setups anyway. As I remember the horrors of
these programs writing their own special MBR and destroying dualboot
systems.

 

[BillW50]

In

In

Maybe here is what you are looking for:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms933155(v=WinEmbedded.5).aspx

"You should disable pagefile [aka swapfile] support on your run-time
image, or, if possible, relocate your pagefile to a non-protected
volume. Using a pagefile can add a significant amount of overhead in the
RAM overlay. For more information, see Changing the Location of the
Pagefile."

 

[BillW50]

In

I'm sure that 99.9999% of Windows Users not only don't use EFW but
aren't willing to do registry hacks. You should have known better,
being as you're a computer expert and all. <chuckle>

No dumbass! This is meant for the developer to do, not the user.
Although if the average user was interested in EWF, they could use:

EWF Tool Version 1.0 BETA

Which does it all for them.

So why didn't you disconnect the drives that weren't being modified by
Paragon, smart ass?

They were dumb ass!

And you have to use it.

Acronis True Image 2009 Home as well as anything else I have tried
requires Windows to be shutdown before it can do the disk copy. Paragon
does not require this and does it live. Although fixing Paragon's
mistake with every disk copy is getting a bit old.

So don't use them with all the hard drives connected, duh!

I don't dumb ass.

 

[BillW50]

In

In Maybe here is what you are looking for:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms933155(v=WinEmbedded.5).aspx

"You should disable pagefile [aka swapfile] support on your run-time
image, or, if possible, relocate your pagefile to a non-protected
volume. Using a pagefile can add a significant amount of overhead in
the RAM overlay. For more information, see Changing the Location of
the Pagefile."

Yawn, answered in my other post.

Too dumb to understand that newsgroups don't posts instantly. Your other
post was there yet.

 

[BillW50]

In

In Alias wrote:
On 03/26/2011 04:29 PM, BillW50 wrote:
In Alias wrote:
Especially if you eliminate the swap file on XP, which is kind of
stupid. So, the real culprit here is your stupidity as Ubuntu
assumes people won't eliminate the swap file and most don't.

Nothing stupid about it. As Microsoft even tells you to turn it off
when you have Microsoft's EWF (Enhanced Write Filter) running. As if
you didn't, Windows would crash in a few minutes. But clueless
people like you are just too ignorant to know any better.

Most people don't know what EWF is, much less have it running. By
default, Windows, of all flavors, installs a swap file. A cursory
search reveals no MS web site that confirms what you say about
turning of the swap file. Can you cite?

Maybe here is what you are looking for:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms933155(v=WinEmbedded.5).aspx

"You should disable pagefile [aka swapfile] support on your run-time
image, or, if possible, relocate your pagefile to a non-protected
volume. Using a pagefile can add a significant amount of overhead in the
RAM overlay. For more information, see Changing the Location of the
Pagefile."

The article above has to do with compact devices like pen drives and was
written in 2006 long before SSD hard drives were readily available. Got
a recent link that deals with SSD hard drives, sport?

I guess you don't know. That article talks about:

"The instructions provided in How to Configure EWF for CompactFlash
require a CompactFlash to IDE adapter. USB CompactFlash card readers are
not supported."

And what is a CompactFlash with an IDE adapter? It is a SSD.
CompactFlash uses the same flash memory as a SSD does. They come in two
types. SLC (single layer chip) and MLC (multi layer chip). SLC type
lasts longer, costs more, and writes faster than MLC types.

 

[BillW50]

In

In Maybe here is what you are looking for:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms933155(v=WinEmbedded.5).aspx

"You should disable pagefile [aka swapfile] support on your run-time
image, or, if possible, relocate your pagefile to a non-protected
volume. Using a pagefile can add a significant amount of overhead in
the RAM overlay. For more information, see Changing the Location of
the Pagefile."

Yawn, answered in my other post.

Too dumb to understand that newsgroups don't posts instantly. Your other
post was there yet.

Sorry, I meant *wasn't* there yet.

 

[Peter Foldes]

In Alias wrote:

Bill

You are arguing with a very well known Troll who is purposely keeping you wound up .
Just some heads up. Just watch his reply to this post from me and you will see. Best
to ignore this poster

BTW: Your understanding of the EWF tool is right on the spot

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[BillW50]

In

Bill

You are arguing with a very well known Troll who is purposely keeping
you wound up . Just some heads up. Just watch his reply to this post
from me and you will see. Best to ignore this poster

BTW: Your understanding of the EWF tool is right on the spot

Oh thanks for the heads up Peter. ;-)

 

[Jason]

When changing a motherboard I've had to change processor and RAM as well as
the new motherboards don't support the old processors and RAM.

 

[Jason]

Please explain. Electrolytics are electrolytics. The small ones can be
replaced by tantilum. The bigger ones need to have at least the same voltage
rating. I've quite often replaced capacitors especially electro's as it is
their design that causes them to fail especially when running at high
temperatures. Depending on where they are the capacitance value can be
slightly higher too.

 

[BillW50]

In Alias wrote on Sun, 27 Mar 2011 10:33:12 +0200:

The also come in hybrid.

Yes they do. Although I don't have one of those SSD/HDD yet. ;-)

Now you know not to run a Linux Live CD when you don't have a
page/swap file.

Better yet, I know never allow Linux to run on a Windows machine.

Fact is, not many people run EWF or have even heard of it so most
people would not have the problems you had.

Problems? It is like running the whole Windows in a sandbox. It is one
of the best protection you can get under Windows. As no virus, malware,
or anything else can ever hook themselves into the OS.

You come on like you're a computer expert so one would think you
would have researched this before trying it.

I did! They all say Linux Live won't hurt Windows XP at all. So much for
all of the research, eh?

 

[BillW50]

In Alias wrote on Sun, 27 Mar 2011 10:34:35 +0200:

I must be doing something wrong because I don't have your problems and
I'm triple booting.

I didn't have problems at first either when I was triple booting either.
But it is just a matter of time before it all catches up with you.

Course, I don't use EWF like most people.

I don't use EWF on this computer either (only on my SSD machines). But
dualbooting screwed this machine up. As Windows 7 did something on this
machine and left something behind that Paragon thinks that Windows 7 is
still there. But that is one of the dangers of having multiple OS on
your machine.

 

[BillW50]

In Alias wrote on Sun, 27 Mar 2011 17:07:10 +0200:

Your choice.

It is the *best* choice actually. I have over a dozen laptops here and I
can swap out a hard drive in two seconds. It isn't a big deal to switch
OS.

With the Live CD.

The Linux community says don't worry, Linux Live won't touch your
Windows partition. Sadly, that wasn't true at all. But then again, the
Linux community says a lot of things that are not true either.

That's fine and dandy but most people don't run it or have even heard
of it. What happens if you want to install a program?

Then you disable EWF and it works just like any other Windows. Once the
application is installed, you turn it back on again. All is well.

And as a added bonus, let's assume you have a program that you want to
try, but you are not sure if it would mess up your system. Then just
install it with EWF running. If you don't like it or it screws something
up. Just pull the plug (yes this is totally harmless with EWF enabled
and there is no wrong way to shut down Windows with EWF running) and it
is totally gone. Now you are back to where you started from in a flash.
No need to restore from a backup or anything.

I guess they assume that, like most people, you didn't nuke XP's swap
file. With SSDs becoming more popular and not so expensive, this will
change.

For starters, Linux has no business whatsoever touching anything in
Windows. Who cares how I have my Windows configured? You know damn well
if Windows played around in a Linux partition that people would have a
field day!

 

[BillW50]

In Alias typed:

To tell you the truth, I've never run a Live CD with Windows present.
When I ran the last Linux Mint CD it was to install Mint, not play
around just to see what happens. When the next Mint comes out, I'll
power down the PC, disconnect XP and 7, power it back up and install
the new version of Mint. Why throw anything else into the mix and
then cry out to the heavens that "it isn't right" like you do?

Now you know why I have a problem whenever somebody suggests just to run
Linux Live on a Windows system. ;-)

Still Linux has no business touching anything in Windows. That is just
totally uncalled for. You would think that Linux programmers would have
more sense than that. But I guess you get what you pay for.

 

[BillW50]

In

They probably figure that the percentage of Windows users that nuke
their swap file is small. With the advent of SSDs, this will probably
change. In the meantime, it would be nice if when booting the CD/DVD,
it would warn you before taking any action.

Well as far as I know, it is only Ubuntu that does this. Puppy Live
works just fine. But why in the world does Puppy turn up the brightness
to max? As for using bright LEDs for backlighting, I need sunglasses
just to see the screen. I kind of like Xandros too, as it boots in 20
seconds in easy mode. Although its flaw is it takes another minute just
to get a WiFi lock. :-(

 

[BillW50]

Variety is the spice of life. If it bothers you so much, stick with
Windows Enterprise, Ultimate, Professional or Home. No one is forcing
you to use Linux.

Really? How would I know how bad Linux is if I didn't actually use it?
And btw, hold your hands Windows 7 doesn't impress me either. ;-)

 

[BillW50]

Use it? You were talking about using a Live CD which isn't the same as a
real install.

Yes I started this thread by advising to not follow the advice to try a
Live CD on a Windows system. But I also have Linux installed on a number
of machines too, including this one. ;-)

I guess you're just shit out of luck.

Not really. As I haven't ran into a program that I want to run that
won't run under Windows XP yet. Heck back in 2007 just before Vista was
released, I stated that I can't see myself running Vista till at least
2011. Now that 2011 is here, I don't ever see myself running Vista at
all. ;-)

 

[BillW50]

Of the two, Win 7 is far superior to XP, IMHO. I skipped Vista.

Why do you think Windows 7 is superior to XP? Because of all of the eye
candy? Or perhaps because of the UAC? Or all of the hand holding? Or what?

I guess I am from the old school, as an OS should work in the background
and never get into the users way. Both Vista and Windows 7 gets in the
way all of the time. I can see inexperienced users would like it,
because it stops the user from doing something stupid. But it also gets
in the way of experience users too. Sorry, but I am not impressed.

Also Windows 7 eats about 400MHz worth of your processor speed just to
feed it while idling. When I was running Windows 7 on three machines and
all of the processors were running much hotter than they did for XP. And
because Windows 7 needs far more processor power for itself, high
demanding computer games even run slower yet. Sorry, I am *still* not
impressed.

 

[BillW50]

In

I like the new look, yes. You can turn UAC off.

It is okay, but you can have the same look under XP too without all of
the overhead. There are a number of shell replacements like Aston Shell
out there, widgets and all.

Yes you can turn off UAC, but that isn't what most people want. They
want it to remember which programs are ok and which ones are not. I
can't believe Microsoft missed the boat on that one. Although I have no
prove or anything, but I swear all of the great programmers at Microsoft
has retired. And all they have left is are young programmers that has no
expertise. And I see it in all of MS newer products.

It uses more resources than XP does but not as much as Vista. It
defrags while the computer is idle.

Defrags while idle? People still defrag? Back in the MFM days defragging
made a huge difference. But since IDE drives became plentiful, I never
seen more than a 1% improvement. And for that little, it just isn't even
worth the trouble.

It tells you a helluva lot more about problems that happened or may
happen.

Really? I find a lot of those messages of either being bogus or just
plain common sense! For example Asus EeePC uses a very uncommon
circuitry to check for true battery capacity. And Windows 7 (just like
Ubuntu) always reports the battery is failing when there is nothing
wrong with them.

If a Windows update doesn't install correctly, for example, it will
try again until it does install correctly.

People who knows what they are doing fix the failed updates. That is
what we do, we get our hands dirty and figure out why. Although I
understand the charm for those that are not interested.

It has its own imaging program.

A weak imaging program.

It transfers files to an external USB HD quicker than XP does and
tells you the speed which XP doesn't tell you.

I never saw the quicker speed, but I wouldn't doubt it. But how much
quicker are we talking about? As Windows 7 can take advantage of newer
technologies that XP doesn't. And you can see the speeds with XP it is
an option. It is called Process Explorer from Microsoft. If you don't
like that one, there is always Hard Disk Sentinel.

The search in Win 7 is amazingly fast and can even search emails in a
.pst file. In short, it's a better XP.

I also found XP search engine to be pretty sad. Probably why I never use
it and use Agent Ransack instead.

I have an Intel Dual Core with 2.5 gigs on each core and 4 gigs of 800
RAM with an nVidia GT 220 card with one gig of dedicated memory and
Win 7 boots faster than XP on the same machine and, IMHO, it responds
faster than XP.

You really need multiple cores running Windows 7 since the OS eats so
much of the processor for itself. I did try Windows 7 on single cores
and it is very sad. I have lots a multiple core machines here and I
should try Windows 7 someday on them. But I am sure I won't have it
installed very long. ;-)

 

[BillW50]

I use Linux Mint.

Yes well that is one of the problems with Linux, isn't it? Way too many
disros! As you can't pick the one you like, but the one that supports
your hardware. And paid ones like this one, works ok for a while and
then they drop support like a hot potato. Then you are stuck frozen in
time. And people complain about Microsoft. Geez! Microsoft is a saint
compared to the rest of them.