Repairing a drive without an installation?

Hiya.

I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the file
allocation table. I've been through virtually every convoluted process I've
found on Google.

Right now the drive in question is an NTFS formatted ATA drive on a WinXP
install. Nothing terribly fancy.

Rather than get into the problem, I'll try and make this simple. I was told
by a reliable source that the Vista "CHKDSK" is much better than anything
else out there - and especially considering that the XP Recovery Console is
not an option, I'm mighty eager to try it out. I know the drive works, as
when I boot from a Linux live CD I can access it, both read and write.
However, the Linux community really doesn't offer anything (that I've found)
capable of really cleaning up an NTFS volume.

However, I have no clue if it's possible to "repair" the disk without
installing Vista - and I'm not sure I'm ready to make that sort of leap,
especially if it'd be installing to a drive that's currently in a dodgy state.

Is there any way to repair the drive without installing Vista?

I clicked "repair computer" (forgive me if my paraphrasing is off, the
installation is running at what feels like 1mHz, so I'm not about to go back
and forth that much), and that brings up "System recovery options" - "select
an operating system to repair and click Next". "Only Windows Vista systems
are listed and can be repaired" - however, "Windows Vista systems" is a bit
ambigious, and I figured that, as a beta,, the language may be off a bit.

The box beneath it is blank, but it does give me an option to "load
drivers".

Assuming that I'm not just being overly optimistic, should I try anything
from here? Or am I wasting my time?


Thanks in advance for any help!

Semi-Clueless semi Newb--

"Rather than get into the problem" For what it's worth, getting into and
explicit with your problem helps us help you better. Why wouldn't you get
into it? If you're asking for help give us what we need to help you.

My advice would be to run chkdsk /f and then a chkdsk /r on XP and to tell
us exactly what you mean by "some goof with the file allocation table" and
to defrag your MFT using www.raxco.com Perfect Disk trial for Windows XP
full functionality for 30 days. If you dual boot or multi boot and XP and
Vista are on the same box, don't run chkdsk on the XP driver from Vista.

You typed:

"especially considering that the XP Recovery Console is not an option"

Well actually while Vista doesn't have the Recovery Console, if you dual or
multi boot and install the Recovery console from the cmd prompt you have
access to the Recovery console on that multiboot. From there you could run
a chkdsk /R on your XP drive if you couldn't get into Windows. While there
has been speculation for years that running a chkdsk from the Recovery
console is "more effective" than from XP, there has been no research I've
seen to back this up.

***Run chkdsk on XP from XP and Vista from Vista. You must have posted this
in a Vista group because you want to prepare a drive or a partition for
Vista I suppose.** And you meant that Vista doesn't have the Recovery
Console. But you don't need it to run chkdsk in XP; you don't need it to
run Chkdsk in Vista unless you can't get into Windows and feel you need to
run a chkdsk --sometimes in an endless loop that of booting that is helpful.

You say "I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the
file
allocation table"

I'd have said and you need to say what the goof is. What's going on exactly?
When you tell us we can better help you instead of inferring the problem.
What do you see, what do you have, what's happening on the box. You posted
in a Vista group, but right now you have XP Home or Pro.

"reliable source"--who what where-- a friend or acquaitaince doesn't matter
but a reference, I'd like to see. If a person did they give you a reference
that Vista Chkdsk is any better than XP or better than anything out there?
Share it with us please.

I'm not aware that the Vista Chkdsk is "better than anything out there" so
as in most cases, particularly lol iwith the superficial, erratic media in
the United States--I'm not ascribing that to you I want to help you- -I'd
like to see your source when you mention source. I was always taught when I
referenced a source to be explicit and name it.

Jill Zoeller [MSFT] used to have a blog called Ck Your Disks here:
http://blogs.msdn.com/chkdsk/

Jill stopped blogging on it nearly 6 months ago --last entry April 17, 2006
and I didn't see anything on her blog saying that chkdsk Vista was
qualitatively better than chkdsk on XP. I did see information with headings
like

MSDN Webcast: The Revolutionary Windows Vista Transactional NTFS (TxF)
Infrastructure
Posted Monday, April 17, 2006 3:11 PM by cfsbloggers
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
10:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada)

A search for Chkdsk on Jill Zoeller's Blog named Chk your Dsks comes up with
nothing on chkdsk. Welcome to Redmond MSFT. A search on Jill's current
helpful blog The Filing Cabinet http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/ on chkdsk
turns up nothing.

There are a lot of misconceptions about chkdsk and its switches. Many
people advocate chkdsk /f but that switch is implied at the IT chkdsknicks
say or as we say on the street included by chkdsk /R as in Redmond not case
sensitive. Having said that, and letting you know that there are MSKBs that
say chkdsk /R implies chkdsk /F, there are also MSKBs that advocate running
both of them like the one below, and one that says the /R swich is not
essential.

I find running the /R switch and the /F switches to be best and I run them
from the run box in XP.

In Vista, however, it's a different story. You're going to have to run
elevated so that means either allowing cmd to appear on your start menu and
right clicking it to run elevated or using the nice tip from Kristan Kenney
over at Windows Now here:

An Easier Way to Run Elevated
http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/kmk...-elevated.aspx

If you are using Windows Vista with User Account Control enabled and you
frequently run applications as administrator (or run elevated), this tip
will surely come in handy.

Click on the Start button.
In the "Start Search" box, type the name of the application you wish to run
elevated - for example: "cmd.exe", "Notepad", or "Windows Mail".
Hold CTRL+SHIFT on your keyboard and then press Enter.
You will then receive a User Account Control prompt asking you whether or
not you want to run the application.

In Windows XP, the operating system you're using now I would:

"Use one of the following procedures: • To run Chkdsk in read-only mode, at
the command prompt, type chkdsk, and then press ENTER.
• To repair errors without scanning the volume for bad sectors, at the
command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/f, and then press ENTER.

Note If one or more of the files on the hard disk are open, you will receive
the following message:
Chkdsk cannot run because the volume is in use by another process. Would you
like to schedule this volume to be checked the next time the system
restarts? (Y/N)
Type Y, and then press ENTER to schedule the disk check, and then restart
your computer to start the disk check.
• To repair errors, locate bad sectors, and recover readable information, at
the command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/r, and then press ENTER. "


How to perform disk error checking in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315265/en-us

For more information about Chkdsk, visit the following Microsoft Web
sites: • Chkdsk:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx
(http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx)
• Running Chkdsk to repair file systems:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx
(http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx)

The Benefits of Using CHKDSK
http://www.pegasus-afs.com/eSupport/using_CHKDSK.htm

See also:
http://www.updatexp.com/windows-xp-chkdsk.html

Weird file system problem - access denied after moving files
http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=220015


CH


Semi-Clueless semi Newb--

I like the name. It so describes the current administrations in the US's
death march producing death and more death as a gross national product.

Like this moronic situation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/op...gewanted=print

October 31, 2006
Editorial
The Untracked Guns of Iraq
About the last thing the United States ought to be doing in Iraq is
funneling weapons into black-market weapons bazaars, as sectarian militias
arm themselves for civil war. Yet that is just what Washington may have been
doing for the past several years, thanks to an inexplicable decision that
standard Pentagon regulations for registering weapons transfers did not
apply to the Iraq war.

Of more than 500,000 weapons turned over to the Iraqi Ministries of Defense
and Interior since the American invasion — including rocket-propelled
grenade launchers, assault rifles, machine guns and sniper rifles — the
serial numbers of only 12,128 were properly recorded. Some 370,000 of these
weapons, some of which are undoubtedly being used to kill American troops,
were paid for by United States taxpayers, under the Orwellian-titled Iraq
Relief and Reconstruction Fund.

This chilling information comes to us from the Special Inspector General for
Iraq Reconstruction, which has distinguished itself as the most vigilant
agency monitoring the money spent on the Iraq conflict. The agency, led by a
Republican lawyer who once worked in the Bush White House, has previously
reported on the contracting lapses and failures of supervision that allowed
billions of taxpayer dollars to be wasted instead of being used to rebuild
Iraq.

The latest special inspector general’s report came in response to a request
from Senator John Warner, another conscientious Republican. As chairman of
the Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner wanted to be sure that the
Iraqi security ministries had the skills and resources necessary to make
good use of the huge quantities of arms that Washington has been turning
over to them.

It turns out that the Pentagon not only failed to register the weapons, but
also failed to provide the spare parts, repair manuals and maintenance
technicians needed to keep them in working order. The agency found that
Iraqi security forces are still heavily dependent on Washington’s support
for the most basic military functions. And with America planning to scale
back much of that support over the next year, it is far from clear whether
Baghdad is preparing to pick up the slack.

Separately, the inspector general’s office also found insecurity so rampant
in six Iraqi provinces — five of them in the predominantly Shiite south —
that America’s joint military and civil reconstruction teams could not
operate there effectively.

These findings go a long way toward explaining why Iraq appears to be ever
more violent, with no clear plans yet coming from Baghdad or Washington that
seem likely to restore a semblance of order.

Makes ya wanna support Darcy Burner if you're anywhere near Belleview
Washington where I think a large software company is in the vacinity.

Liberal Republican Suburb Turns Furious With G.O.P.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/us...erland&emc=rss

"Bellevue has been growing more Democratic for several years, thanks to an
influx of liberal voters and a professional class that is changing teams.
This year, Bellevue may send its first Democrat to Congress. Darcy Burner,
who even supporters admit is inexperienced, may unseat Representative Dave
Reichert, a well-liked, longtime public servant, simply because constituents
want Democratic control of the House of Representatives."

http://www.darcyburner.com/











"semiClueless semiNewb" <semiClueless >
wrote in message news:6DFB5B54-FF4D-4166-900F-...
> Hiya.
>
> I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the file
> allocation table. I've been through virtually every convoluted process
> I've
> found on Google.
>
> Right now the drive in question is an NTFS formatted ATA drive on a WinXP
> install. Nothing terribly fancy.
>
> Rather than get into the problem, I'll try and make this simple. I was
> told
> by a reliable source that the Vista "CHKDSK" is much better than anything
> else out there - and especially considering that the XP Recovery Console
> is
> not an option, I'm mighty eager to try it out. I know the drive works, as
> when I boot from a Linux live CD I can access it, both read and write.
> However, the Linux community really doesn't offer anything (that I've
> found)
> capable of really cleaning up an NTFS volume.
>
> However, I have no clue if it's possible to "repair" the disk without
> installing Vista - and I'm not sure I'm ready to make that sort of leap,
> especially if it'd be installing to a drive that's currently in a dodgy
> state.
>
> Is there any way to repair the drive without installing Vista?
>
> I clicked "repair computer" (forgive me if my paraphrasing is off, the
> installation is running at what feels like 1mHz, so I'm not about to go
> back
> and forth that much), and that brings up "System recovery options" -
> "select
> an operating system to repair and click Next". "Only Windows Vista systems
> are listed and can be repaired" - however, "Windows Vista systems" is a
> bit
> ambigious, and I figured that, as a beta,, the language may be off a bit.
>
> The box beneath it is blank, but it does give me an option to "load
> drivers".
>
> Assuming that I'm not just being overly optimistic, should I try anything
> from here? Or am I wasting my time?
>
>
> Thanks in advance for any help!

Every drive manufacturer offers free programs for checking and formatting
their drives. Those programs have the advantage of taking no notice of any
programs or operating systems installed on the drive so you are sure to do a
thorough clean. Of course, if you just want to remove some stuff and not
others, they are no use to you.

"Chad Harris" wrote:

> Semi-Clueless semi Newb--
>
> "Rather than get into the problem" For what it's worth, getting into and
> explicit with your problem helps us help you better. Why wouldn't you get
> into it? If you're asking for help give us what we need to help you.
>
> My advice would be to run chkdsk /f and then a chkdsk /r on XP and to tell
> us exactly what you mean by "some goof with the file allocation table" and
> to defrag your MFT using www.raxco.com Perfect Disk trial for Windows XP
> full functionality for 30 days. If you dual boot or multi boot and XP and
> Vista are on the same box, don't run chkdsk on the XP driver from Vista.
>
> You typed:
>
> "especially considering that the XP Recovery Console is not an option"
>
> Well actually while Vista doesn't have the Recovery Console, if you dual or
> multi boot and install the Recovery console from the cmd prompt you have
> access to the Recovery console on that multiboot. From there you could run
> a chkdsk /R on your XP drive if you couldn't get into Windows. While there
> has been speculation for years that running a chkdsk from the Recovery
> console is "more effective" than from XP, there has been no research I've
> seen to back this up.
>
> ***Run chkdsk on XP from XP and Vista from Vista. You must have posted this
> in a Vista group because you want to prepare a drive or a partition for
> Vista I suppose.** And you meant that Vista doesn't have the Recovery
> Console. But you don't need it to run chkdsk in XP; you don't need it to
> run Chkdsk in Vista unless you can't get into Windows and feel you need to
> run a chkdsk --sometimes in an endless loop that of booting that is helpful.
>
> You say "I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the
> file
> allocation table"
>
> I'd have said and you need to say what the goof is. What's going on exactly?
> When you tell us we can better help you instead of inferring the problem.
> What do you see, what do you have, what's happening on the box. You posted
> in a Vista group, but right now you have XP Home or Pro.
>
> "reliable source"--who what where-- a friend or acquaitaince doesn't matter
> but a reference, I'd like to see. If a person did they give you a reference
> that Vista Chkdsk is any better than XP or better than anything out there?
> Share it with us please.
>
> I'm not aware that the Vista Chkdsk is "better than anything out there" so
> as in most cases, particularly lol iwith the superficial, erratic media in
> the United States--I'm not ascribing that to you I want to help you- -I'd
> like to see your source when you mention source. I was always taught when I
> referenced a source to be explicit and name it.
>
> Jill Zoeller [MSFT] used to have a blog called Ck Your Disks here:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/chkdsk/
>
> Jill stopped blogging on it nearly 6 months ago --last entry April 17, 2006
> and I didn't see anything on her blog saying that chkdsk Vista was
> qualitatively better than chkdsk on XP. I did see information with headings
> like
>
> MSDN Webcast: The Revolutionary Windows Vista Transactional NTFS (TxF)
> Infrastructure
> Posted Monday, April 17, 2006 3:11 PM by cfsbloggers
> Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
> 10:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada)
>
> A search for Chkdsk on Jill Zoeller's Blog named Chk your Dsks comes up with
> nothing on chkdsk. Welcome to Redmond MSFT. A search on Jill's current
> helpful blog The Filing Cabinet http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/ on chkdsk
> turns up nothing.
>
> There are a lot of misconceptions about chkdsk and its switches. Many
> people advocate chkdsk /f but that switch is implied at the IT chkdsknicks
> say or as we say on the street included by chkdsk /R as in Redmond not case
> sensitive. Having said that, and letting you know that there are MSKBs that
> say chkdsk /R implies chkdsk /F, there are also MSKBs that advocate running
> both of them like the one below, and one that says the /R swich is not
> essential.
>
> I find running the /R switch and the /F switches to be best and I run them
> from the run box in XP.
>
> In Vista, however, it's a different story. You're going to have to run
> elevated so that means either allowing cmd to appear on your start menu and
> right clicking it to run elevated or using the nice tip from Kristan Kenney
> over at Windows Now here:
>
> An Easier Way to Run Elevated
> http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/kmk...-elevated.aspx
>
> If you are using Windows Vista with User Account Control enabled and you
> frequently run applications as administrator (or run elevated), this tip
> will surely come in handy.
>
> Click on the Start button.
> In the "Start Search" box, type the name of the application you wish to run
> elevated - for example: "cmd.exe", "Notepad", or "Windows Mail".
> Hold CTRL+SHIFT on your keyboard and then press Enter.
> You will then receive a User Account Control prompt asking you whether or
> not you want to run the application.
>
> In Windows XP, the operating system you're using now I would:
>
> "Use one of the following procedures: • To run Chkdsk in read-only mode, at
> the command prompt, type chkdsk, and then press ENTER.
> • To repair errors without scanning the volume for bad sectors, at the
> command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/f, and then press ENTER.
>
> Note If one or more of the files on the hard disk are open, you will receive
> the following message:
> Chkdsk cannot run because the volume is in use by another process. Would you
> like to schedule this volume to be checked the next time the system
> restarts? (Y/N)
> Type Y, and then press ENTER to schedule the disk check, and then restart
> your computer to start the disk check.
> • To repair errors, locate bad sectors, and recover readable information, at
> the command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/r, and then press ENTER. "
>
>
> How to perform disk error checking in Windows XP
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315265/en-us
>
> For more information about Chkdsk, visit the following Microsoft Web
> sites: • Chkdsk:
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx
> (http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx)
> • Running Chkdsk to repair file systems:
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx
> (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx)
>
> The Benefits of Using CHKDSK
> http://www.pegasus-afs.com/eSupport/using_CHKDSK.htm
>
> See also:
> http://www.updatexp.com/windows-xp-chkdsk.html
>
> Weird file system problem - access denied after moving files
> http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=220015
>
>
> CH
>
>
> Semi-Clueless semi Newb--
>
> I like the name. It so describes the current administrations in the US's
> death march producing death and more death as a gross national product.
>
> Like this moronic situation:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/op...gewanted=print
>
> October 31, 2006
> Editorial
> The Untracked Guns of Iraq
> About the last thing the United States ought to be doing in Iraq is
> funneling weapons into black-market weapons bazaars, as sectarian militias
> arm themselves for civil war. Yet that is just what Washington may have been
> doing for the past several years, thanks to an inexplicable decision that
> standard Pentagon regulations for registering weapons transfers did not
> apply to the Iraq war.
>
> Of more than 500,000 weapons turned over to the Iraqi Ministries of Defense
> and Interior since the American invasion — including rocket-propelled
> grenade launchers, assault rifles, machine guns and sniper rifles — the
> serial numbers of only 12,128 were properly recorded. Some 370,000 of these
> weapons, some of which are undoubtedly being used to kill American troops,
> were paid for by United States taxpayers, under the Orwellian-titled Iraq
> Relief and Reconstruction Fund.
>
> This chilling information comes to us from the Special Inspector General for
> Iraq Reconstruction, which has distinguished itself as the most vigilant
> agency monitoring the money spent on the Iraq conflict. The agency, led by a
> Republican lawyer who once worked in the Bush White House, has previously
> reported on the contracting lapses and failures of supervision that allowed
> billions of taxpayer dollars to be wasted instead of being used to rebuild
> Iraq.
>
> The latest special inspector general’s report came in response to a request
> from Senator John Warner, another conscientious Republican. As chairman of
> the Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner wanted to be sure that the
> Iraqi security ministries had the skills and resources necessary to make
> good use of the huge quantities of arms that Washington has been turning
> over to them.
>
> It turns out that the Pentagon not only failed to register the weapons, but
> also failed to provide the spare parts, repair manuals and maintenance
> technicians needed to keep them in working order. The agency found that
> Iraqi security forces are still heavily dependent on Washington’s support
> for the most basic military functions. And with America planning to scale
> back much of that support over the next year, it is far from clear whether
> Baghdad is preparing to pick up the slack.
>
> Separately, the inspector general’s office also found insecurity so rampant
> in six Iraqi provinces — five of them in the predominantly Shiite south —
> that America’s joint military and civil reconstruction teams could not
> operate there effectively.
>
> These findings go a long way toward explaining why Iraq appears to be ever
> more violent, with no clear plans yet coming from Baghdad or Washington that
> seem likely to restore a semblance of order.
>
> Makes ya wanna support Darcy Burner if you're anywhere near Belleview
> Washington where I think a large software company is in the vacinity.
>
> Liberal Republican Suburb Turns Furious With G.O.P.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/us...erland&emc=rss
>
> "Bellevue has been growing more Democratic for several years, thanks to an
> influx of liberal voters and a professional class that is changing teams.
> This year, Bellevue may send its first Democrat to Congress. Darcy Burner,
> who even supporters admit is inexperienced, may unseat Representative Dave
> Reichert, a well-liked, longtime public servant, simply because constituents
> want Democratic control of the House of Representatives."
>
> http://www.darcyburner.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "semiClueless semiNewb" <semiClueless >
> wrote in message news:6DFB5B54-FF4D-4166-900F-...
> > Hiya.
> >
> > I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the file
> > allocation table. I've been through virtually every convoluted process
> > I've
> > found on Google.
> >
> > Right now the drive in question is an NTFS formatted ATA drive on a WinXP
> > install. Nothing terribly fancy.
> >
> > Rather than get into the problem, I'll try and make this simple. I was
> > told
> > by a reliable source that the Vista "CHKDSK" is much better than anything
> > else out there - and especially considering that the XP Recovery Console
> > is
> > not an option, I'm mighty eager to try it out. I know the drive works, as
> > when I boot from a Linux live CD I can access it, both read and write.
> > However, the Linux community really doesn't offer anything (that I've
> > found)
> > capable of really cleaning up an NTFS volume.
> >
> > However, I have no clue if it's possible to "repair" the disk without
> > installing Vista - and I'm not sure I'm ready to make that sort of leap,
> > especially if it'd be installing to a drive that's currently in a dodgy
> > state.
> >
> > Is there any way to repair the drive without installing Vista?
> >
> > I clicked "repair computer" (forgive me if my paraphrasing is off, the
> > installation is running at what feels like 1mHz, so I'm not about to go
> > back
> > and forth that much), and that brings up "System recovery options" -
> > "select
> > an operating system to repair and click Next". "Only Windows Vista systems
> > are listed and can be repaired" - however, "Windows Vista systems" is a
> > bit
> > ambigious, and I figured that, as a beta,, the language may be off a bit.
> >
> > The box beneath it is blank, but it does give me an option to "load
> > drivers".
> >
> > Assuming that I'm not just being overly optimistic, should I try anything
> > from here? Or am I wasting my time?
> >
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any help!
>
>

Yes they do and much of the software is the lowest end imaginable as are
their backups--but some of it is decent--so point well taken. It's analagous
to the 300 OEM named partners of MSFT putting in the lowest end power
supply on a box that gets by and won't allow you to upgrade much hardware in
contrast to the always hard working and excellent smaller independent system
builders many of us know who look out for their customers and try to select
quality hardware that will serve them well into the future.

CH

"Spirefm" <> wrote in message
news:54F2B741-DD01-4B1C-AC43-...
> Every drive manufacturer offers free programs for checking and formatting
> their drives. Those programs have the advantage of taking no notice of any
> programs or operating systems installed on the drive so you are sure to do
> a
> thorough clean. Of course, if you just want to remove some stuff and not
> others, they are no use to you.
>
> "Chad Harris" wrote:
>
>> Semi-Clueless semi Newb--
>>
>> "Rather than get into the problem" For what it's worth, getting into and
>> explicit with your problem helps us help you better. Why wouldn't you get
>> into it? If you're asking for help give us what we need to help you.
>>
>> My advice would be to run chkdsk /f and then a chkdsk /r on XP and to
>> tell
>> us exactly what you mean by "some goof with the file allocation table"
>> and
>> to defrag your MFT using www.raxco.com Perfect Disk trial for Windows XP
>> full functionality for 30 days. If you dual boot or multi boot and XP
>> and
>> Vista are on the same box, don't run chkdsk on the XP driver from Vista.
>>
>> You typed:
>>
>> "especially considering that the XP Recovery Console is not an option"
>>
>> Well actually while Vista doesn't have the Recovery Console, if you dual
>> or
>> multi boot and install the Recovery console from the cmd prompt you have
>> access to the Recovery console on that multiboot. From there you could
>> run
>> a chkdsk /R on your XP drive if you couldn't get into Windows. While
>> there
>> has been speculation for years that running a chkdsk from the Recovery
>> console is "more effective" than from XP, there has been no research I've
>> seen to back this up.
>>
>> ***Run chkdsk on XP from XP and Vista from Vista. You must have posted
>> this
>> in a Vista group because you want to prepare a drive or a partition for
>> Vista I suppose.** And you meant that Vista doesn't have the Recovery
>> Console. But you don't need it to run chkdsk in XP; you don't need it to
>> run Chkdsk in Vista unless you can't get into Windows and feel you need
>> to
>> run a chkdsk --sometimes in an endless loop that of booting that is
>> helpful.
>>
>> You say "I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the
>> file
>> allocation table"
>>
>> I'd have said and you need to say what the goof is. What's going on
>> exactly?
>> When you tell us we can better help you instead of inferring the problem.
>> What do you see, what do you have, what's happening on the box. You
>> posted
>> in a Vista group, but right now you have XP Home or Pro.
>>
>> "reliable source"--who what where-- a friend or acquaitaince doesn't
>> matter
>> but a reference, I'd like to see. If a person did they give you a
>> reference
>> that Vista Chkdsk is any better than XP or better than anything out
>> there?
>> Share it with us please.
>>
>> I'm not aware that the Vista Chkdsk is "better than anything out there"
>> so
>> as in most cases, particularly lol iwith the superficial, erratic media
>> in
>> the United States--I'm not ascribing that to you I want to help you- -I'd
>> like to see your source when you mention source. I was always taught
>> when I
>> referenced a source to be explicit and name it.
>>
>> Jill Zoeller [MSFT] used to have a blog called Ck Your Disks here:
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/chkdsk/
>>
>> Jill stopped blogging on it nearly 6 months ago --last entry April 17,
>> 2006
>> and I didn't see anything on her blog saying that chkdsk Vista was
>> qualitatively better than chkdsk on XP. I did see information with
>> headings
>> like
>>
>> MSDN Webcast: The Revolutionary Windows Vista Transactional NTFS (TxF)
>> Infrastructure
>> Posted Monday, April 17, 2006 3:11 PM by cfsbloggers
>> Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
>> 10:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada)
>>
>> A search for Chkdsk on Jill Zoeller's Blog named Chk your Dsks comes up
>> with
>> nothing on chkdsk. Welcome to Redmond MSFT. A search on Jill's current
>> helpful blog The Filing Cabinet http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/ on
>> chkdsk
>> turns up nothing.
>>
>> There are a lot of misconceptions about chkdsk and its switches. Many
>> people advocate chkdsk /f but that switch is implied at the IT
>> chkdsknicks
>> say or as we say on the street included by chkdsk /R as in Redmond not
>> case
>> sensitive. Having said that, and letting you know that there are MSKBs
>> that
>> say chkdsk /R implies chkdsk /F, there are also MSKBs that advocate
>> running
>> both of them like the one below, and one that says the /R swich is not
>> essential.
>>
>> I find running the /R switch and the /F switches to be best and I run
>> them
>> from the run box in XP.
>>
>> In Vista, however, it's a different story. You're going to have to run
>> elevated so that means either allowing cmd to appear on your start menu
>> and
>> right clicking it to run elevated or using the nice tip from Kristan
>> Kenney
>> over at Windows Now here:
>>
>> An Easier Way to Run Elevated
>> http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/kmk...-elevated.aspx
>>
>> If you are using Windows Vista with User Account Control enabled and you
>> frequently run applications as administrator (or run elevated), this tip
>> will surely come in handy.
>>
>> Click on the Start button.
>> In the "Start Search" box, type the name of the application you wish to
>> run
>> elevated - for example: "cmd.exe", "Notepad", or "Windows Mail".
>> Hold CTRL+SHIFT on your keyboard and then press Enter.
>> You will then receive a User Account Control prompt asking you whether or
>> not you want to run the application.
>>
>> In Windows XP, the operating system you're using now I would:
>>
>> "Use one of the following procedures: • To run Chkdsk in read-only mode,
>> at
>> the command prompt, type chkdsk, and then press ENTER.
>> • To repair errors without scanning the volume for bad sectors, at the
>> command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/f, and then press ENTER.
>>
>> Note If one or more of the files on the hard disk are open, you will
>> receive
>> the following message:
>> Chkdsk cannot run because the volume is in use by another process. Would
>> you
>> like to schedule this volume to be checked the next time the system
>> restarts? (Y/N)
>> Type Y, and then press ENTER to schedule the disk check, and then restart
>> your computer to start the disk check.
>> • To repair errors, locate bad sectors, and recover readable information,
>> at
>> the command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/r, and then press ENTER. "
>>
>>
>> How to perform disk error checking in Windows XP
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315265/en-us
>>
>> For more information about Chkdsk, visit the following Microsoft Web
>> sites: • Chkdsk:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx
>> (http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx)
>> • Running Chkdsk to repair file systems:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx
>> (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx)
>>
>> The Benefits of Using CHKDSK
>> http://www.pegasus-afs.com/eSupport/using_CHKDSK.htm
>>
>> See also:
>> http://www.updatexp.com/windows-xp-chkdsk.html
>>
>> Weird file system problem - access denied after moving files
>> http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=220015
>>
>>
>> CH
>>
>>
>> Semi-Clueless semi Newb--
>>
>> I like the name. It so describes the current administrations in the US's
>> death march producing death and more death as a gross national product.
>>
>> Like this moronic situation:
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/op...gewanted=print
>>
>> October 31, 2006
>> Editorial
>> The Untracked Guns of Iraq
>> About the last thing the United States ought to be doing in Iraq is
>> funneling weapons into black-market weapons bazaars, as sectarian
>> militias
>> arm themselves for civil war. Yet that is just what Washington may have
>> been
>> doing for the past several years, thanks to an inexplicable decision that
>> standard Pentagon regulations for registering weapons transfers did not
>> apply to the Iraq war.
>>
>> Of more than 500,000 weapons turned over to the Iraqi Ministries of
>> Defense
>> and Interior since the American invasion — including rocket-propelled
>> grenade launchers, assault rifles, machine guns and sniper rifles — the
>> serial numbers of only 12,128 were properly recorded. Some 370,000 of
>> these
>> weapons, some of which are undoubtedly being used to kill American
>> troops,
>> were paid for by United States taxpayers, under the Orwellian-titled Iraq
>> Relief and Reconstruction Fund.
>>
>> This chilling information comes to us from the Special Inspector General
>> for
>> Iraq Reconstruction, which has distinguished itself as the most vigilant
>> agency monitoring the money spent on the Iraq conflict. The agency, led
>> by a
>> Republican lawyer who once worked in the Bush White House, has previously
>> reported on the contracting lapses and failures of supervision that
>> allowed
>> billions of taxpayer dollars to be wasted instead of being used to
>> rebuild
>> Iraq.
>>
>> The latest special inspector general’s report came in response to a
>> request
>> from Senator John Warner, another conscientious Republican. As chairman
>> of
>> the Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner wanted to be sure that the
>> Iraqi security ministries had the skills and resources necessary to make
>> good use of the huge quantities of arms that Washington has been turning
>> over to them.
>>
>> It turns out that the Pentagon not only failed to register the weapons,
>> but
>> also failed to provide the spare parts, repair manuals and maintenance
>> technicians needed to keep them in working order. The agency found that
>> Iraqi security forces are still heavily dependent on Washington’s support
>> for the most basic military functions. And with America planning to scale
>> back much of that support over the next year, it is far from clear
>> whether
>> Baghdad is preparing to pick up the slack.
>>
>> Separately, the inspector general’s office also found insecurity so
>> rampant
>> in six Iraqi provinces — five of them in the predominantly Shiite south —
>> that America’s joint military and civil reconstruction teams could not
>> operate there effectively.
>>
>> These findings go a long way toward explaining why Iraq appears to be
>> ever
>> more violent, with no clear plans yet coming from Baghdad or Washington
>> that
>> seem likely to restore a semblance of order.
>>
>> Makes ya wanna support Darcy Burner if you're anywhere near Belleview
>> Washington where I think a large software company is in the vacinity.
>>
>> Liberal Republican Suburb Turns Furious With G.O.P.
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/us...erland&emc=rss
>>
>> "Bellevue has been growing more Democratic for several years, thanks to
>> an
>> influx of liberal voters and a professional class that is changing teams.
>> This year, Bellevue may send its first Democrat to Congress. Darcy
>> Burner,
>> who even supporters admit is inexperienced, may unseat Representative
>> Dave
>> Reichert, a well-liked, longtime public servant, simply because
>> constituents
>> want Democratic control of the House of Representatives."
>>
>> http://www.darcyburner.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "semiClueless semiNewb" <semiClueless >
>> wrote in message
>> news:6DFB5B54-FF4D-4166-900F-...
>> > Hiya.
>> >
>> > I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the file
>> > allocation table. I've been through virtually every convoluted process
>> > I've
>> > found on Google.
>> >
>> > Right now the drive in question is an NTFS formatted ATA drive on a
>> > WinXP
>> > install. Nothing terribly fancy.
>> >
>> > Rather than get into the problem, I'll try and make this simple. I was
>> > told
>> > by a reliable source that the Vista "CHKDSK" is much better than
>> > anything
>> > else out there - and especially considering that the XP Recovery
>> > Console
>> > is
>> > not an option, I'm mighty eager to try it out. I know the drive works,
>> > as
>> > when I boot from a Linux live CD I can access it, both read and write.
>> > However, the Linux community really doesn't offer anything (that I've
>> > found)
>> > capable of really cleaning up an NTFS volume.
>> >
>> > However, I have no clue if it's possible to "repair" the disk without
>> > installing Vista - and I'm not sure I'm ready to make that sort of
>> > leap,
>> > especially if it'd be installing to a drive that's currently in a dodgy
>> > state.
>> >
>> > Is there any way to repair the drive without installing Vista?
>> >
>> > I clicked "repair computer" (forgive me if my paraphrasing is off, the
>> > installation is running at what feels like 1mHz, so I'm not about to go
>> > back
>> > and forth that much), and that brings up "System recovery options" -
>> > "select
>> > an operating system to repair and click Next". "Only Windows Vista
>> > systems
>> > are listed and can be repaired" - however, "Windows Vista systems" is a
>> > bit
>> > ambigious, and I figured that, as a beta,, the language may be off a
>> > bit.
>> >
>> > The box beneath it is blank, but it does give me an option to "load
>> > drivers".
>> >
>> > Assuming that I'm not just being overly optimistic, should I try
>> > anything
>> > from here? Or am I wasting my time?
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance for any help!
>>
>>

Somewhat off topic, I just love seeing someone else post about the problems
with low end power supplies...
Thanks Chad!

now back to the topic

-Ben
"Chad Harris" <courtordertomsft@nosppever> wrote in message
news:%23ZAWmee$...
> Yes they do and much of the software is the lowest end imaginable as are
> their backups--but some of it is decent--so point well taken. It's
> analagous to the 300 OEM named partners of MSFT putting in the lowest
> end power supply on a box that gets by and won't allow you to upgrade much
> hardware in contrast to the always hard working and excellent smaller
> independent system builders many of us know who look out for their
> customers and try to select quality hardware that will serve them well
> into the future.
>
> CH
>
> "Spirefm" <> wrote in message
> news:54F2B741-DD01-4B1C-AC43-...
>> Every drive manufacturer offers free programs for checking and formatting
>> their drives. Those programs have the advantage of taking no notice of
>> any
>> programs or operating systems installed on the drive so you are sure to
>> do a
>> thorough clean. Of course, if you just want to remove some stuff and not
>> others, they are no use to you.
>>
>> "Chad Harris" wrote:
>>
>>> Semi-Clueless semi Newb--
>>>
>>> "Rather than get into the problem" For what it's worth, getting into
>>> and
>>> explicit with your problem helps us help you better. Why wouldn't you
>>> get
>>> into it? If you're asking for help give us what we need to help you.
>>>
>>> My advice would be to run chkdsk /f and then a chkdsk /r on XP and to
>>> tell
>>> us exactly what you mean by "some goof with the file allocation table"
>>> and
>>> to defrag your MFT using www.raxco.com Perfect Disk trial for Windows XP
>>> full functionality for 30 days. If you dual boot or multi boot and XP
>>> and
>>> Vista are on the same box, don't run chkdsk on the XP driver from
>>> Vista.
>>>
>>> You typed:
>>>
>>> "especially considering that the XP Recovery Console is not an option"
>>>
>>> Well actually while Vista doesn't have the Recovery Console, if you dual
>>> or
>>> multi boot and install the Recovery console from the cmd prompt you have
>>> access to the Recovery console on that multiboot. From there you could
>>> run
>>> a chkdsk /R on your XP drive if you couldn't get into Windows. While
>>> there
>>> has been speculation for years that running a chkdsk from the Recovery
>>> console is "more effective" than from XP, there has been no research
>>> I've
>>> seen to back this up.
>>>
>>> ***Run chkdsk on XP from XP and Vista from Vista. You must have posted
>>> this
>>> in a Vista group because you want to prepare a drive or a partition for
>>> Vista I suppose.** And you meant that Vista doesn't have the Recovery
>>> Console. But you don't need it to run chkdsk in XP; you don't need it
>>> to
>>> run Chkdsk in Vista unless you can't get into Windows and feel you need
>>> to
>>> run a chkdsk --sometimes in an endless loop that of booting that is
>>> helpful.
>>>
>>> You say "I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with
>>> the
>>> file
>>> allocation table"
>>>
>>> I'd have said and you need to say what the goof is. What's going on
>>> exactly?
>>> When you tell us we can better help you instead of inferring the
>>> problem.
>>> What do you see, what do you have, what's happening on the box. You
>>> posted
>>> in a Vista group, but right now you have XP Home or Pro.
>>>
>>> "reliable source"--who what where-- a friend or acquaitaince doesn't
>>> matter
>>> but a reference, I'd like to see. If a person did they give you a
>>> reference
>>> that Vista Chkdsk is any better than XP or better than anything out
>>> there?
>>> Share it with us please.
>>>
>>> I'm not aware that the Vista Chkdsk is "better than anything out there"
>>> so
>>> as in most cases, particularly lol iwith the superficial, erratic media
>>> in
>>> the United States--I'm not ascribing that to you I want to help
>>> you- -I'd
>>> like to see your source when you mention source. I was always taught
>>> when I
>>> referenced a source to be explicit and name it.
>>>
>>> Jill Zoeller [MSFT] used to have a blog called Ck Your Disks here:
>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/chkdsk/
>>>
>>> Jill stopped blogging on it nearly 6 months ago --last entry April 17,
>>> 2006
>>> and I didn't see anything on her blog saying that chkdsk Vista was
>>> qualitatively better than chkdsk on XP. I did see information with
>>> headings
>>> like
>>>
>>> MSDN Webcast: The Revolutionary Windows Vista Transactional NTFS (TxF)
>>> Infrastructure
>>> Posted Monday, April 17, 2006 3:11 PM by cfsbloggers
>>> Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
>>> 10:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada)
>>>
>>> A search for Chkdsk on Jill Zoeller's Blog named Chk your Dsks comes up
>>> with
>>> nothing on chkdsk. Welcome to Redmond MSFT. A search on Jill's current
>>> helpful blog The Filing Cabinet http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/ on
>>> chkdsk
>>> turns up nothing.
>>>
>>> There are a lot of misconceptions about chkdsk and its switches. Many
>>> people advocate chkdsk /f but that switch is implied at the IT
>>> chkdsknicks
>>> say or as we say on the street included by chkdsk /R as in Redmond not
>>> case
>>> sensitive. Having said that, and letting you know that there are MSKBs
>>> that
>>> say chkdsk /R implies chkdsk /F, there are also MSKBs that advocate
>>> running
>>> both of them like the one below, and one that says the /R swich is not
>>> essential.
>>>
>>> I find running the /R switch and the /F switches to be best and I run
>>> them
>>> from the run box in XP.
>>>
>>> In Vista, however, it's a different story. You're going to have to run
>>> elevated so that means either allowing cmd to appear on your start menu
>>> and
>>> right clicking it to run elevated or using the nice tip from Kristan
>>> Kenney
>>> over at Windows Now here:
>>>
>>> An Easier Way to Run Elevated
>>> http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/kmk...-elevated.aspx
>>>
>>> If you are using Windows Vista with User Account Control enabled and you
>>> frequently run applications as administrator (or run elevated), this tip
>>> will surely come in handy.
>>>
>>> Click on the Start button.
>>> In the "Start Search" box, type the name of the application you wish to
>>> run
>>> elevated - for example: "cmd.exe", "Notepad", or "Windows Mail".
>>> Hold CTRL+SHIFT on your keyboard and then press Enter.
>>> You will then receive a User Account Control prompt asking you whether
>>> or
>>> not you want to run the application.
>>>
>>> In Windows XP, the operating system you're using now I would:
>>>
>>> "Use one of the following procedures: . To run Chkdsk in read-only mode,
>>> at
>>> the command prompt, type chkdsk, and then press ENTER.
>>> . To repair errors without scanning the volume for bad sectors, at the
>>> command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/f, and then press ENTER.
>>>
>>> Note If one or more of the files on the hard disk are open, you will
>>> receive
>>> the following message:
>>> Chkdsk cannot run because the volume is in use by another process. Would
>>> you
>>> like to schedule this volume to be checked the next time the system
>>> restarts? (Y/N)
>>> Type Y, and then press ENTER to schedule the disk check, and then
>>> restart
>>> your computer to start the disk check.
>>> . To repair errors, locate bad sectors, and recover readable
>>> information, at
>>> the command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/r, and then press ENTER. "
>>>
>>>
>>> How to perform disk error checking in Windows XP
>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315265/en-us
>>>
>>> For more information about Chkdsk, visit the following Microsoft Web
>>> sites: . Chkdsk:
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx
>>> (http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx)
>>> . Running Chkdsk to repair file systems:
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx
>>> (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx)
>>>
>>> The Benefits of Using CHKDSK
>>> http://www.pegasus-afs.com/eSupport/using_CHKDSK.htm
>>>
>>> See also:
>>> http://www.updatexp.com/windows-xp-chkdsk.html
>>>
>>> Weird file system problem - access denied after moving files
>>> http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=220015
>>>
>>>
>>> CH
>>>
>>>
>>> Semi-Clueless semi Newb--
>>>
>>> I like the name. It so describes the current administrations in the US's
>>> death march producing death and more death as a gross national product.
>>>
>>> Like this moronic situation:
>>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/op...gewanted=print
>>>
>>> October 31, 2006
>>> Editorial
>>> The Untracked Guns of Iraq
>>> About the last thing the United States ought to be doing in Iraq is
>>> funneling weapons into black-market weapons bazaars, as sectarian
>>> militias
>>> arm themselves for civil war. Yet that is just what Washington may have
>>> been
>>> doing for the past several years, thanks to an inexplicable decision
>>> that
>>> standard Pentagon regulations for registering weapons transfers did not
>>> apply to the Iraq war.
>>>
>>> Of more than 500,000 weapons turned over to the Iraqi Ministries of
>>> Defense
>>> and Interior since the American invasion - including rocket-propelled
>>> grenade launchers, assault rifles, machine guns and sniper rifles - the
>>> serial numbers of only 12,128 were properly recorded. Some 370,000 of
>>> these
>>> weapons, some of which are undoubtedly being used to kill American
>>> troops,
>>> were paid for by United States taxpayers, under the Orwellian-titled
>>> Iraq
>>> Relief and Reconstruction Fund.
>>>
>>> This chilling information comes to us from the Special Inspector General
>>> for
>>> Iraq Reconstruction, which has distinguished itself as the most vigilant
>>> agency monitoring the money spent on the Iraq conflict. The agency, led
>>> by a
>>> Republican lawyer who once worked in the Bush White House, has
>>> previously
>>> reported on the contracting lapses and failures of supervision that
>>> allowed
>>> billions of taxpayer dollars to be wasted instead of being used to
>>> rebuild
>>> Iraq.
>>>
>>> The latest special inspector general's report came in response to a
>>> request
>>> from Senator John Warner, another conscientious Republican. As chairman
>>> of
>>> the Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner wanted to be sure that the
>>> Iraqi security ministries had the skills and resources necessary to make
>>> good use of the huge quantities of arms that Washington has been turning
>>> over to them.
>>>
>>> It turns out that the Pentagon not only failed to register the weapons,
>>> but
>>> also failed to provide the spare parts, repair manuals and maintenance
>>> technicians needed to keep them in working order. The agency found that
>>> Iraqi security forces are still heavily dependent on Washington's
>>> support
>>> for the most basic military functions. And with America planning to
>>> scale
>>> back much of that support over the next year, it is far from clear
>>> whether
>>> Baghdad is preparing to pick up the slack.
>>>
>>> Separately, the inspector general's office also found insecurity so
>>> rampant
>>> in six Iraqi provinces - five of them in the predominantly Shiite
>>> south -
>>> that America's joint military and civil reconstruction teams could not
>>> operate there effectively.
>>>
>>> These findings go a long way toward explaining why Iraq appears to be
>>> ever
>>> more violent, with no clear plans yet coming from Baghdad or Washington
>>> that
>>> seem likely to restore a semblance of order.
>>>
>>> Makes ya wanna support Darcy Burner if you're anywhere near Belleview
>>> Washington where I think a large software company is in the vacinity.
>>>
>>> Liberal Republican Suburb Turns Furious With G.O.P.
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/us...erland&emc=rss
>>>
>>> "Bellevue has been growing more Democratic for several years, thanks to
>>> an
>>> influx of liberal voters and a professional class that is changing
>>> teams.
>>> This year, Bellevue may send its first Democrat to Congress. Darcy
>>> Burner,
>>> who even supporters admit is inexperienced, may unseat Representative
>>> Dave
>>> Reichert, a well-liked, longtime public servant, simply because
>>> constituents
>>> want Democratic control of the House of Representatives."
>>>
>>> http://www.darcyburner.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "semiClueless semiNewb" <semiClueless
>>> >
>>> wrote in message
>>> news:6DFB5B54-FF4D-4166-900F-...
>>> > Hiya.
>>> >
>>> > I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the file
>>> > allocation table. I've been through virtually every convoluted process
>>> > I've
>>> > found on Google.
>>> >
>>> > Right now the drive in question is an NTFS formatted ATA drive on a
>>> > WinXP
>>> > install. Nothing terribly fancy.
>>> >
>>> > Rather than get into the problem, I'll try and make this simple. I was
>>> > told
>>> > by a reliable source that the Vista "CHKDSK" is much better than
>>> > anything
>>> > else out there - and especially considering that the XP Recovery
>>> > Console
>>> > is
>>> > not an option, I'm mighty eager to try it out. I know the drive works,
>>> > as
>>> > when I boot from a Linux live CD I can access it, both read and write.
>>> > However, the Linux community really doesn't offer anything (that I've
>>> > found)
>>> > capable of really cleaning up an NTFS volume.
>>> >
>>> > However, I have no clue if it's possible to "repair" the disk without
>>> > installing Vista - and I'm not sure I'm ready to make that sort of
>>> > leap,
>>> > especially if it'd be installing to a drive that's currently in a
>>> > dodgy
>>> > state.
>>> >
>>> > Is there any way to repair the drive without installing Vista?
>>> >
>>> > I clicked "repair computer" (forgive me if my paraphrasing is off, the
>>> > installation is running at what feels like 1mHz, so I'm not about to
>>> > go
>>> > back
>>> > and forth that much), and that brings up "System recovery options" -
>>> > "select
>>> > an operating system to repair and click Next". "Only Windows Vista
>>> > systems
>>> > are listed and can be repaired" - however, "Windows Vista systems" is
>>> > a
>>> > bit
>>> > ambigious, and I figured that, as a beta,, the language may be off a
>>> > bit.
>>> >
>>> > The box beneath it is blank, but it does give me an option to "load
>>> > drivers".
>>> >
>>> > Assuming that I'm not just being overly optimistic, should I try
>>> > anything
>>> > from here? Or am I wasting my time?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Thanks in advance for any help!
>>>
>>>
>

I know it was Ben ,but I justified it as one of my great analogies. :>) It
sure does though make people who haven't built their computer get the bug
fast. It took me a while to learn what most people understand--the big OEMs
the so called 300 named partners put the non-sexy so called hdw in just
enough to get buy and as cheap as they can.

That goes for some of the onboard video and sound cards to be sure and the
mobos. They know that the vast majority of their market a point Rick
Rodgers highlighted in a different way the other day when he was discussing
the Vista EULA from a different angle when Rick talked about the number of
people who upgrade their hdw themselves.

But if you hang in these groups and forums you get skewed because they
attract people who are into their hdw and software.

CH

"Ben Salisbury" <> wrote in message
news:%230rhjeh$...
> Somewhat off topic, I just love seeing someone else post about the
> problems
> with low end power supplies...
> Thanks Chad!
>
> now back to the topic
>
> -Ben
> "Chad Harris" <courtordertomsft@nosppever> wrote in message
> news:%23ZAWmee$...
>> Yes they do and much of the software is the lowest end imaginable as are
>> their backups--but some of it is decent--so point well taken. It's
>> analagous to the 300 OEM named partners of MSFT putting in the lowest
>> end power supply on a box that gets by and won't allow you to upgrade
>> much hardware in contrast to the always hard working and excellent
>> smaller independent system builders many of us know who look out for
>> their customers and try to select quality hardware that will serve them
>> well into the future.
>>
>> CH
>>
>> "Spirefm" <> wrote in message
>> news:54F2B741-DD01-4B1C-AC43-...
>>> Every drive manufacturer offers free programs for checking and
>>> formatting
>>> their drives. Those programs have the advantage of taking no notice of
>>> any
>>> programs or operating systems installed on the drive so you are sure to
>>> do a
>>> thorough clean. Of course, if you just want to remove some stuff and not
>>> others, they are no use to you.
>>>
>>> "Chad Harris" wrote:
>>>
>>>> Semi-Clueless semi Newb--
>>>>
>>>> "Rather than get into the problem" For what it's worth, getting into
>>>> and
>>>> explicit with your problem helps us help you better. Why wouldn't you
>>>> get
>>>> into it? If you're asking for help give us what we need to help you.
>>>>
>>>> My advice would be to run chkdsk /f and then a chkdsk /r on XP and to
>>>> tell
>>>> us exactly what you mean by "some goof with the file allocation table"
>>>> and
>>>> to defrag your MFT using www.raxco.com Perfect Disk trial for Windows
>>>> XP
>>>> full functionality for 30 days. If you dual boot or multi boot and XP
>>>> and
>>>> Vista are on the same box, don't run chkdsk on the XP driver from
>>>> Vista.
>>>>
>>>> You typed:
>>>>
>>>> "especially considering that the XP Recovery Console is not an option"
>>>>
>>>> Well actually while Vista doesn't have the Recovery Console, if you
>>>> dual or
>>>> multi boot and install the Recovery console from the cmd prompt you
>>>> have
>>>> access to the Recovery console on that multiboot. From there you could
>>>> run
>>>> a chkdsk /R on your XP drive if you couldn't get into Windows. While
>>>> there
>>>> has been speculation for years that running a chkdsk from the Recovery
>>>> console is "more effective" than from XP, there has been no research
>>>> I've
>>>> seen to back this up.
>>>>
>>>> ***Run chkdsk on XP from XP and Vista from Vista. You must have posted
>>>> this
>>>> in a Vista group because you want to prepare a drive or a partition for
>>>> Vista I suppose.** And you meant that Vista doesn't have the Recovery
>>>> Console. But you don't need it to run chkdsk in XP; you don't need it
>>>> to
>>>> run Chkdsk in Vista unless you can't get into Windows and feel you need
>>>> to
>>>> run a chkdsk --sometimes in an endless loop that of booting that is
>>>> helpful.
>>>>
>>>> You say "I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with
>>>> the
>>>> file
>>>> allocation table"
>>>>
>>>> I'd have said and you need to say what the goof is. What's going on
>>>> exactly?
>>>> When you tell us we can better help you instead of inferring the
>>>> problem.
>>>> What do you see, what do you have, what's happening on the box. You
>>>> posted
>>>> in a Vista group, but right now you have XP Home or Pro.
>>>>
>>>> "reliable source"--who what where-- a friend or acquaitaince doesn't
>>>> matter
>>>> but a reference, I'd like to see. If a person did they give you a
>>>> reference
>>>> that Vista Chkdsk is any better than XP or better than anything out
>>>> there?
>>>> Share it with us please.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not aware that the Vista Chkdsk is "better than anything out there"
>>>> so
>>>> as in most cases, particularly lol iwith the superficial, erratic media
>>>> in
>>>> the United States--I'm not ascribing that to you I want to help
>>>> you- -I'd
>>>> like to see your source when you mention source. I was always taught
>>>> when I
>>>> referenced a source to be explicit and name it.
>>>>
>>>> Jill Zoeller [MSFT] used to have a blog called Ck Your Disks here:
>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/chkdsk/
>>>>
>>>> Jill stopped blogging on it nearly 6 months ago --last entry April 17,
>>>> 2006
>>>> and I didn't see anything on her blog saying that chkdsk Vista was
>>>> qualitatively better than chkdsk on XP. I did see information with
>>>> headings
>>>> like
>>>>
>>>> MSDN Webcast: The Revolutionary Windows Vista Transactional NTFS (TxF)
>>>> Infrastructure
>>>> Posted Monday, April 17, 2006 3:11 PM by cfsbloggers
>>>> Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
>>>> 10:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada)
>>>>
>>>> A search for Chkdsk on Jill Zoeller's Blog named Chk your Dsks comes up
>>>> with
>>>> nothing on chkdsk. Welcome to Redmond MSFT. A search on Jill's
>>>> current
>>>> helpful blog The Filing Cabinet http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/ on
>>>> chkdsk
>>>> turns up nothing.
>>>>
>>>> There are a lot of misconceptions about chkdsk and its switches. Many
>>>> people advocate chkdsk /f but that switch is implied at the IT
>>>> chkdsknicks
>>>> say or as we say on the street included by chkdsk /R as in Redmond not
>>>> case
>>>> sensitive. Having said that, and letting you know that there are MSKBs
>>>> that
>>>> say chkdsk /R implies chkdsk /F, there are also MSKBs that advocate
>>>> running
>>>> both of them like the one below, and one that says the /R swich is not
>>>> essential.
>>>>
>>>> I find running the /R switch and the /F switches to be best and I run
>>>> them
>>>> from the run box in XP.
>>>>
>>>> In Vista, however, it's a different story. You're going to have to run
>>>> elevated so that means either allowing cmd to appear on your start menu
>>>> and
>>>> right clicking it to run elevated or using the nice tip from Kristan
>>>> Kenney
>>>> over at Windows Now here:
>>>>
>>>> An Easier Way to Run Elevated
>>>> http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/kmk...-elevated.aspx
>>>>
>>>> If you are using Windows Vista with User Account Control enabled and
>>>> you
>>>> frequently run applications as administrator (or run elevated), this
>>>> tip
>>>> will surely come in handy.
>>>>
>>>> Click on the Start button.
>>>> In the "Start Search" box, type the name of the application you wish to
>>>> run
>>>> elevated - for example: "cmd.exe", "Notepad", or "Windows Mail".
>>>> Hold CTRL+SHIFT on your keyboard and then press Enter.
>>>> You will then receive a User Account Control prompt asking you whether
>>>> or
>>>> not you want to run the application.
>>>>
>>>> In Windows XP, the operating system you're using now I would:
>>>>
>>>> "Use one of the following procedures: . To run Chkdsk in read-only
>>>> mode, at
>>>> the command prompt, type chkdsk, and then press ENTER.
>>>> . To repair errors without scanning the volume for bad sectors, at the
>>>> command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/f, and then press ENTER.
>>>>
>>>> Note If one or more of the files on the hard disk are open, you will
>>>> receive
>>>> the following message:
>>>> Chkdsk cannot run because the volume is in use by another process.
>>>> Would you
>>>> like to schedule this volume to be checked the next time the system
>>>> restarts? (Y/N)
>>>> Type Y, and then press ENTER to schedule the disk check, and then
>>>> restart
>>>> your computer to start the disk check.
>>>> . To repair errors, locate bad sectors, and recover readable
>>>> information, at
>>>> the command prompt, type chkdsk volume:/r, and then press ENTER. "
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How to perform disk error checking in Windows XP
>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315265/en-us
>>>>
>>>> For more information about Chkdsk, visit the following Microsoft Web
>>>> sites: . Chkdsk:
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx
>>>> (http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...us/chkdsk.mspx)
>>>> . Running Chkdsk to repair file systems:
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx
>>>> (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...c28621675.mspx)
>>>>
>>>> The Benefits of Using CHKDSK
>>>> http://www.pegasus-afs.com/eSupport/using_CHKDSK.htm
>>>>
>>>> See also:
>>>> http://www.updatexp.com/windows-xp-chkdsk.html
>>>>
>>>> Weird file system problem - access denied after moving files
>>>> http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=220015
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> CH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Semi-Clueless semi Newb--
>>>>
>>>> I like the name. It so describes the current administrations in the
>>>> US's
>>>> death march producing death and more death as a gross national product.
>>>>
>>>> Like this moronic situation:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/op...gewanted=print
>>>>
>>>> October 31, 2006
>>>> Editorial
>>>> The Untracked Guns of Iraq
>>>> About the last thing the United States ought to be doing in Iraq is
>>>> funneling weapons into black-market weapons bazaars, as sectarian
>>>> militias
>>>> arm themselves for civil war. Yet that is just what Washington may have
>>>> been
>>>> doing for the past several years, thanks to an inexplicable decision
>>>> that
>>>> standard Pentagon regulations for registering weapons transfers did not
>>>> apply to the Iraq war.
>>>>
>>>> Of more than 500,000 weapons turned over to the Iraqi Ministries of
>>>> Defense
>>>> and Interior since the American invasion - including rocket-propelled
>>>> grenade launchers, assault rifles, machine guns and sniper rifles - the
>>>> serial numbers of only 12,128 were properly recorded. Some 370,000 of
>>>> these
>>>> weapons, some of which are undoubtedly being used to kill American
>>>> troops,
>>>> were paid for by United States taxpayers, under the Orwellian-titled
>>>> Iraq
>>>> Relief and Reconstruction Fund.
>>>>
>>>> This chilling information comes to us from the Special Inspector
>>>> General for
>>>> Iraq Reconstruction, which has distinguished itself as the most
>>>> vigilant
>>>> agency monitoring the money spent on the Iraq conflict. The agency, led
>>>> by a
>>>> Republican lawyer who once worked in the Bush White House, has
>>>> previously
>>>> reported on the contracting lapses and failures of supervision that
>>>> allowed
>>>> billions of taxpayer dollars to be wasted instead of being used to
>>>> rebuild
>>>> Iraq.
>>>>
>>>> The latest special inspector general's report came in response to a
>>>> request
>>>> from Senator John Warner, another conscientious Republican. As chairman
>>>> of
>>>> the Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner wanted to be sure that the
>>>> Iraqi security ministries had the skills and resources necessary to
>>>> make
>>>> good use of the huge quantities of arms that Washington has been
>>>> turning
>>>> over to them.
>>>>
>>>> It turns out that the Pentagon not only failed to register the weapons,
>>>> but
>>>> also failed to provide the spare parts, repair manuals and maintenance
>>>> technicians needed to keep them in working order. The agency found that
>>>> Iraqi security forces are still heavily dependent on Washington's
>>>> support
>>>> for the most basic military functions. And with America planning to
>>>> scale
>>>> back much of that support over the next year, it is far from clear
>>>> whether
>>>> Baghdad is preparing to pick up the slack.
>>>>
>>>> Separately, the inspector general's office also found insecurity so
>>>> rampant
>>>> in six Iraqi provinces - five of them in the predominantly Shiite
>>>> south -
>>>> that America's joint military and civil reconstruction teams could not
>>>> operate there effectively.
>>>>
>>>> These findings go a long way toward explaining why Iraq appears to be
>>>> ever
>>>> more violent, with no clear plans yet coming from Baghdad or Washington
>>>> that
>>>> seem likely to restore a semblance of order.
>>>>
>>>> Makes ya wanna support Darcy Burner if you're anywhere near Belleview
>>>> Washington where I think a large software company is in the vacinity.
>>>>
>>>> Liberal Republican Suburb Turns Furious With G.O.P.
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/us...erland&emc=rss
>>>>
>>>> "Bellevue has been growing more Democratic for several years, thanks to
>>>> an
>>>> influx of liberal voters and a professional class that is changing
>>>> teams.
>>>> This year, Bellevue may send its first Democrat to Congress. Darcy
>>>> Burner,
>>>> who even supporters admit is inexperienced, may unseat Representative
>>>> Dave
>>>> Reichert, a well-liked, longtime public servant, simply because
>>>> constituents
>>>> want Democratic control of the House of Representatives."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.darcyburner.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "semiClueless semiNewb" <semiClueless
>>>> >
>>>> wrote in message
>>>> news:6DFB5B54-FF4D-4166-900F-...
>>>> > Hiya.
>>>> >
>>>> > I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the file
>>>> > allocation table. I've been through virtually every convoluted
>>>> > process
>>>> > I've
>>>> > found on Google.
>>>> >
>>>> > Right now the drive in question is an NTFS formatted ATA drive on a
>>>> > WinXP
>>>> > install. Nothing terribly fancy.
>>>> >
>>>> > Rather than get into the problem, I'll try and make this simple. I
>>>> > was
>>>> > told
>>>> > by a reliable source that the Vista "CHKDSK" is much better than
>>>> > anything
>>>> > else out there - and especially considering that the XP Recovery
>>>> > Console
>>>> > is
>>>> > not an option, I'm mighty eager to try it out. I know the drive
>>>> > works, as
>>>> > when I boot from a Linux live CD I can access it, both read and
>>>> > write.
>>>> > However, the Linux community really doesn't offer anything (that I've
>>>> > found)
>>>> > capable of really cleaning up an NTFS volume.
>>>> >
>>>> > However, I have no clue if it's possible to "repair" the disk without
>>>> > installing Vista - and I'm not sure I'm ready to make that sort of
>>>> > leap,
>>>> > especially if it'd be installing to a drive that's currently in a
>>>> > dodgy
>>>> > state.
>>>> >
>>>> > Is there any way to repair the drive without installing Vista?
>>>> >
>>>> > I clicked "repair computer" (forgive me if my paraphrasing is off,
>>>> > the
>>>> > installation is running at what feels like 1mHz, so I'm not about to
>>>> > go
>>>> > back
>>>> > and forth that much), and that brings up "System recovery options" -
>>>> > "select
>>>> > an operating system to repair and click Next". "Only Windows Vista
>>>> > systems
>>>> > are listed and can be repaired" - however, "Windows Vista systems" is
>>>> > a
>>>> > bit
>>>> > ambigious, and I figured that, as a beta,, the language may be off a
>>>> > bit.
>>>> >
>>>> > The box beneath it is blank, but it does give me an option to "load
>>>> > drivers".
>>>> >
>>>> > Assuming that I'm not just being overly optimistic, should I try
>>>> > anything
>>>> > from here? Or am I wasting my time?
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks in advance for any help!
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>

I thought I'd add that most of the RC commands are available from the Vista
CMD prompt in Win RE.

http://blogs.msdn.com/winre/default.aspx

CH

Mission Accomplished in 2003 he said. The chicken runaway Bush attacking
Kerry if people are dumb enough to follow the head fake. Cheney (5
deferments) attacking Kerry. 20,000 from my state headed Iraq third time.
Get ready for a draft boys and girls unless the complete pullout of the
epicenter of current daily ethnic cleansing the US has precipitated
happens.

http://radio.weblogs.com/0107064/MyI...wins_draft.jpg

http://ratchetup.typepad.com/iraq/im...ercasket08.jpg

Vote www.darcybruner.com former Softie PM running for Congress if you can.

Area near the MSFT campus beginning to wake from their deep slumber
including some Softies:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/us...gewanted=print

October 30, 2006
Liberal Republican Suburb Turns Furious With G.O.P.
By JODI KANTOR
BELLEVUE, Wash., Oct. 24 — The M.B.A.’s have had it. The engineers are
fuming.

For as long as anyone here can remember, Bellevue has been a stronghold of
socially liberal Republicanism. First, it was a prosperous Seattle bedroom
community, then a technological boomtown, where employees of Microsoft and
Internet start-ups consistently voted for fiscal restraint and hands-off
government.

But now, voters here are accusing the party in power of overspending and
overreaching — and when they do, they sound like people who write
manifestos, not software code.

“I’m a mild-mannered guy,� Michael Mattison, a partner in a software venture
development firm, said as he stabbed a piece of halibut in the sunlit dining
room of a local bistro. “But we can no longer be subdued.�

Bellevue has been growing more Democratic for several years, thanks to an
influx of liberal voters and a professional class that is changing teams.
This year, Bellevue may send its first Democrat to Congress. Darcy Burner,
who even supporters admit is inexperienced, may unseat Representative Dave
Reichert, a well-liked, longtime public servant, simply because constituents
want Democratic control of the House of Representatives.

“I am a Republican and have traditionally voted that way,� Tony Schuler, an
operations services manager at Microsoft with a Harvard M.B.A., said as he
sat with his wife, Deanna, in their home above Lake Sammamish. But Mr.
Schuler abhors what he sees as a new Republican habit of meddling in private
affairs.

“The Schiavo case. Tapping people without a warrant. Whether or not people
are gay,� he said. “Let people be free! It’s not government’s job to
interfere with those things.�

In Bellevue, the professional is political. Rather than religion or culture,
what unites the diverse population — a quarter of residents are foreign
born — are the values of their workplaces: technological innovation,
accuracy, efficiency.

And this year, one issue incenses them above all others: restrictions on
embryonic stem cell research.

It is a matter of concern across the country, even across parties. But for
many engineers and their ilk, restriction of stem cell research is what gay
marriage is to conservative Christians, a phenomenon so counter to their
basic values that they cannot vote for any candidate who supports it. After
all, for Bellevue’s professionals, science is not only a means of creating
wealth but also an idealistic pursuit, the most promising way they know of
improving the human condition.

“For hundreds of years, science has had its own jurisprudence over the
truth. It’s called peer review, and it works pretty well,� said Mr.
Mattison, whose father had Alzheimer’s and his uncle Parkinson’s disease. “I’m
outraged that a mere politician would interpret science for me.�

Voters like Mr. Mattison should be “natural constituents of Republicans,�
said Robert E. Lang, a professor of urban planning at Virginia Tech who did
research on Bellevue for a coming book on fast-growing “boomburbs,� which
have city-size populations but suburb-like atmospheres. “They’re golfers,�
Mr. Lang said. (Actually, Mr. Mattison prefers fly-fishing with private
guides.)

Voters here also describe themselves as “obsessed� by the mounting national
debt, which Mr. Mattison calls a “greater threat than terrorism� to the
nation’s health.

Lara Peterson, a single mother who markets hardware for Microsoft, said, “It
makes me insane to know that we had this huge budget surplus, and yet we’ve
run up such debt in a six-year period.�

Ms. Peterson has adopted two daughters from China and is working on a third.
As Gwen, her eldest, considered whether biting into an apple would dislodge
her dangling front teeth, Ms. Peterson acknowledged that her fixation was
personal.

China gains “so much power and control by carrying so much of our debt,�
said Ms. Peterson, who described herself as a Democrat who often crosses
party lines. If the United States one day resists repayment, she said, her
girls will “never have an ability to have a relationship with their
country.�

The politics of Microsoft employees is a subdrama unto itself. In the 2000
presidential election, many voted for President Bush, who was expected to
curtail the Clinton administration’s antitrust case against the company. But
now “the vibe is pretty Democratic,� Ms. Peterson said, and many employees
who cursed the Democrats just a few years ago now plan on voting for the
party.

Microsoft looms so large here, it influences the views even of those it does
not employ. Several members of the First Congregational Church of Bellevue,
speaking over home-pressed apple cider, said they were mortified by America’s
role abroad in a way they had not been since the Vietnam War.

They do have one source of global pride, though: Bill and Melinda Gates’
work in Africa, which they see as a kind of alternative to official foreign
policy and an example of how the United States should be helping the most
troubled spots on earth.

When she travels abroad, said Mary Nassif, a school psychologist, “I may not
take pride in being American, but I love saying I’m from Seattle.�

On a recent evening, immigrants gathered at the Crossroads Mall, where the
food court’s attempt at internationalism — a pad Thai vendor here, some
trays of tandoori there — seemed bland compared with its mix of Eritrean,
Laotian and Somali patrons. These immigrants, many from conservative
religious backgrounds, are among the Bellevue Republicans who feel the
strongest connection to their party on social issues.

Take Pia and Bong Bernadino, who moved here in 2002 from New Jersey,
boarding a train without jobs or even acquaintances awaiting them. Ms.
Bernadino had been scheduled to meet a friend in the lobby of the World
Trade Center at 9 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001; both she and the friend were late.
Later, she taught at a kindergarten on Canal Street, where the students were
so traumatized, they used their coloring time to draw babies falling out of
the sky.

The Bernadinos moved west to escape their shock and to pursue Mr. Bernadino’s
long-held dream of working for Microsoft. Now Mr. Bernadino spends his days
there as a game developer and his evenings running a Web design business
with his wife; they also plan to start an online store for novels signed by
their authors. They are saving for a house and sending money home to family
in the Philippines.

This year, as always, they are voting for candidates “with a strong family
orientation,� Mr. Bernadino said. “We’re very devout Catholics. If someone
is promoting pro-choice it may be questionable for us.�

Their other concern is diversity. To their delight, the ballot they received
in the mail this year had translations in seven languages, including their
native Tagalog. “This is paradise, the land of opportunity,� Ms. Bernadino
said of Bellevue.

Sheraz Malik, 29, is a Pakistani Muslim who came to the United States alone
10 years ago and became a citizen. Mr. Malik co-founded a long-distance
Internet telephone service, which he used to court his fiancée, a Pakistani
woman in Dubai. (It is not exactly an arranged marriage, he explained
between bites of a hot dog; his parents shortlisted candidates, and after a
year of online conversations, he chose one.)

Though Republican policies are generally favorable to his native country and
his religious values, Mr. Malik said, he has drifted toward the Democrats
since Sept. 11. “When the U.K. had the train blast, they didn’t go out and
start bombing people,� he said. “They examined what they were doing wrong,
both in terms of security and why a British-born Pakistani would do that.�

Soon he will cast an even more profound vote than the one in November,
deciding whether to bring his bride here or move with her back to Pakistan.
If he leaves, it will be partly because of post-Sept. 11 changes, like
immigration registration measures and what he sees as a general erosion of
due process.

“If you’re fighting for freedom outside the U.S. and then you suppress
freedom at home,� he said, “then what are you fighting for in the first
place?�

________________________

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/op...gewanted=print

October 31, 2006
Editorial
The Untracked Guns of Iraq
About the last thing the United States ought to be doing in Iraq is
funneling weapons into black-market weapons bazaars, as sectarian militias
arm themselves for civil war. Yet that is just what Washington may have been
doing for the past several years, thanks to an inexplicable decision that
standard Pentagon regulations for registering weapons transfers did not
apply to the Iraq war.

Of more than 500,000 weapons turned over to the Iraqi Ministries of Defense
and Interior since the American invasion — including rocket-propelled
grenade launchers, assault rifles, machine guns and sniper rifles — the
serial numbers of only 12,128 were properly recorded. Some 370,000 of these
weapons, some of which are undoubtedly being used to kill American troops,
were paid for by United States taxpayers, under the Orwellian-titled Iraq
Relief and Reconstruction Fund.

This chilling information comes to us from the Special Inspector General for
Iraq Reconstruction, which has distinguished itself as the most vigilant
agency monitoring the money spent on the Iraq conflict. The agency, led by a
Republican lawyer who once worked in the Bush White House, has previously
reported on the contracting lapses and failures of supervision that allowed
billions of taxpayer dollars to be wasted instead of being used to rebuild
Iraq.

The latest special inspector general’s report came in response to a request
from Senator John Warner, another conscientious Republican. As chairman of
the Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner wanted to be sure that the
Iraqi security ministries had the skills and resources necessary to make
good use of the huge quantities of arms that Washington has been turning
over to them.

It turns out that the Pentagon not only failed to register the weapons, but
also failed to provide the spare parts, repair manuals and maintenance
technicians needed to keep them in working order. The agency found that
Iraqi security forces are still heavily dependent on Washington’s support
for the most basic military functions. And with America planning to scale
back much of that support over the next year, it is far from clear whether
Baghdad is preparing to pick up the slack.

Separately, the inspector general’s office also found insecurity so rampant
in six Iraqi provinces — five of them in the predominantly Shiite south —
that America’s joint military and civil reconstruction teams could not
operate there effectively.

These findings go a long way toward explaining why Iraq appears to be ever
more violent, with no clear plans yet coming from Baghdad or Washington that
seem likely to restore a semblance of order.







"semiClueless semiNewb" <semiClueless >
wrote in message news:6DFB5B54-FF4D-4166-900F-...
> Hiya.
>
> I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the file
> allocation table. I've been through virtually every convoluted process
> I've
> found on Google.
>
> Right now the drive in question is an NTFS formatted ATA drive on a WinXP
> install. Nothing terribly fancy.
>
> Rather than get into the problem, I'll try and make this simple. I was
> told
> by a reliable source that the Vista "CHKDSK" is much better than anything
> else out there - and especially considering that the XP Recovery Console
> is
> not an option, I'm mighty eager to try it out. I know the drive works, as
> when I boot from a Linux live CD I can access it, both read and write.
> However, the Linux community really doesn't offer anything (that I've
> found)
> capable of really cleaning up an NTFS volume.
>
> However, I have no clue if it's possible to "repair" the disk without
> installing Vista - and I'm not sure I'm ready to make that sort of leap,
> especially if it'd be installing to a drive that's currently in a dodgy
> state.
>
> Is there any way to repair the drive without installing Vista?
>
> I clicked "repair computer" (forgive me if my paraphrasing is off, the
> installation is running at what feels like 1mHz, so I'm not about to go
> back
> and forth that much), and that brings up "System recovery options" -
> "select
> an operating system to repair and click Next". "Only Windows Vista systems
> are listed and can be repaired" - however, "Windows Vista systems" is a
> bit
> ambigious, and I figured that, as a beta,, the language may be off a bit.
>
> The box beneath it is blank, but it does give me an option to "load
> drivers".
>
> Assuming that I'm not just being overly optimistic, should I try anything
> from here? Or am I wasting my time?
>
>
> Thanks in advance for any help!

Windows Mem Diagonstic Can Be Run Without Installing Vista
http://blogs.msdn.com/winre/archive/...20/763951.aspx

CH

"semiClueless semiNewb" <semiClueless >
wrote in message news:6DFB5B54-FF4D-4166-900F-...
> Hiya.
>
> I currently have a hard drive that likely has some goof with the file
> allocation table. I've been through virtually every convoluted process
> I've
> found on Google.
>
> Right now the drive in question is an NTFS formatted ATA drive on a WinXP
> install. Nothing terribly fancy.
>
> Rather than get into the problem, I'll try and make this simple. I was
> told
> by a reliable source that the Vista "CHKDSK" is much better than anything
> else out there - and especially considering that the XP Recovery Console
> is
> not an option, I'm mighty eager to try it out. I know the drive works, as
> when I boot from a Linux live CD I can access it, both read and write.
> However, the Linux community really doesn't offer anything (that I've
> found)
> capable of really cleaning up an NTFS volume.
>
> However, I have no clue if it's possible to "repair" the disk without
> installing Vista - and I'm not sure I'm ready to make that sort of leap,
> especially if it'd be installing to a drive that's currently in a dodgy
> state.
>
> Is there any way to repair the drive without installing Vista?
>
> I clicked "repair computer" (forgive me if my paraphrasing is off, the
> installation is running at what feels like 1mHz, so I'm not about to go
> back
> and forth that much), and that brings up "System recovery options" -
> "select
> an operating system to repair and click Next". "Only Windows Vista systems
> are listed and can be repaired" - however, "Windows Vista systems" is a
> bit
> ambigious, and I figured that, as a beta,, the language may be off a bit.
>
> The box beneath it is blank, but it does give me an option to "load
> drivers".
>
> Assuming that I'm not just being overly optimistic, should I try anything
> from here? Or am I wasting my time?
>
>
> Thanks in advance for any help!