can not move icons on desktop

MEB · External Since: Jan 16, 2009 Posts: 42

Oh, and how about your settings for USERS.

--
~
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The *REAL WORLD* of Law, Justice, and Government
_______

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

"MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
news:OLHK19OsJHA.1212@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:

> Oh, and how about your settings for USERS.

thanatoid be only user. I don't even know where those settings
are.

Thanks again.

MEB · External Since: Jan 16, 2009 Posts: 42

Both Active Desktop and USERS [Control Panel] have settings which disallow
Icon changes and/or affect Icon and other behavior [including registry
modifications]..

--
~
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The *REAL WORLD* of Law, Justice, and Government
_______

"thanatoid" <waiting.DeleteThis@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9BDE14B96792thanexit@85.214.105.209...
> "MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
> news:OLHK19OsJHA.1212@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>
> > Oh, and how about your settings for USERS.
>
> thanatoid be only user. I don't even know where those settings
> are.
>
> Thanks again.
>

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

"MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
news:OEFctMVsJHA.2376@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:

> Both Active Desktop and USERS [Control Panel] have settings
> which disallow Icon changes and/or affect Icon and other
> behavior [including registry modifications]..

Well, this is good to know, but I just checked all my cpl
modules (I have some disabled) in TweakUI control panel, and
there IS no users. As for Active Desktop, I wouldn't even know
where to look - I believe it was never installed. Like I said, I
have been running this computer about 3-4 years and this has
NEVER happened before.

I also said in another reply that I am getting used to it, and
that even though I have IconSaver, having frozen icons is
probably better than having icons that move around of their own
volition.

Thanks for the comment in any case - and if you can think of WHY
I don't have"users" or how to use Active Desktop without the
drawbacks and the "show all as web page" in 98SE Lite (maybe
reinstall as "chubby" or "overweight" versions ???), I would
appreciate your letting me know.

Now that I have 1GB of RAM and 2GHz and ADSL (slowest there is,
but still ADSL) I could live with 98SE if there was some way to
keep the 95 shell without using "Lite". I don't use it just to
cause arguments, you know, I just like to keep things simple.
Really.

Thanks again,

Regards
t.

MEB · External Since: Jan 16, 2009 Posts: 42

"thanatoid" <waiting.DeleteThis@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9BDE777678946thanexit@85.214.105.209...
> "MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
> news:OEFctMVsJHA.2376@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>
> > Both Active Desktop and USERS [Control Panel] have settings
> > which disallow Icon changes and/or affect Icon and other
> > behavior [including registry modifications]..
>
> Well, this is good to know, but I just checked all my cpl
> modules (I have some disabled) in TweakUI control panel, and
> there IS no users. As for Active Desktop, I wouldn't even know
> where to look - I believe it was never installed. Like I said, I
> have been running this computer about 3-4 years and this has
> NEVER happened before.
>
> I also said in another reply that I am getting used to it, and
> that even though I have IconSaver, having frozen icons is
> probably better than having icons that move around of their own
> volition.
>
> Thanks for the comment in any case - and if you can think of WHY
> I don't have"users" or how to use Active Desktop without the
> drawbacks and the "show all as web page" in 98SE Lite (maybe
> reinstall as "chubby" or "overweight" versions ???), I would
> appreciate your letting me know.
>
> Now that I have 1GB of RAM and 2GHz and ADSL (slowest there is,
> but still ADSL) I could live with 98SE if there was some way to
> keep the 95 shell without using "Lite". I don't use it just to
> cause arguments, you know, I just like to keep things simple.
> Really.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Regards
> t.
>

http://www.msfn.org/board/Windows-95-shell-on-Windows-98-t120443.html

I have never tested this so "user beware"...

--
~
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The *REAL WORLD* of Law, Justice, and Government
_______

MEB · External Since: Jan 16, 2009 Posts: 42

"thanatoid" <waiting DeleteThis @the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9BDE777678946thanexit@85.214.105.209...
> "MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
> news:OEFctMVsJHA.2376@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>
> > Both Active Desktop and USERS [Control Panel] have settings
> > which disallow Icon changes and/or affect Icon and other
> > behavior [including registry modifications]..
>
> Well, this is good to know, but I just checked all my cpl
> modules (I have some disabled) in TweakUI control panel, and
> there IS no users. As for Active Desktop, I wouldn't even know
> where to look - I believe it was never installed. Like I said, I
> have been running this computer about 3-4 years and this has
> NEVER happened before.

Might be related to your new ADSL installation and prior modifications done
which you don't remember now... [we are getting old afterall]

No USERS in control Panel means either you disabled the cpl > OR you may
have uninstalled it > OR you have inadvertantly managed to erect policies
which have precluded its presentation in Control Panel. USERS is installed,
generally, by default, same with PASSWORDS.
Seems you may have locked {individual} folder *.htt creation...

>
> I also said in another reply that I am getting used to it, and
> that even though I have IconSaver, having frozen icons is
> probably better than having icons that move around of their own
> volition.
>
> Thanks for the comment in any case - and if you can think of WHY
> I don't have"users" or how to use Active Desktop without the
> drawbacks and the "show all as web page" in 98SE Lite (maybe
> reinstall as "chubby" or "overweight" versions ???), I would
> appreciate your letting me know.
>
> Now that I have 1GB of RAM and 2GHz and ADSL (slowest there is,
> but still ADSL) I could live with 98SE if there was some way to
> keep the 95 shell without using "Lite". I don't use it just to
> cause arguments, you know, I just like to keep things simple.
> Really.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Regards
> t.
>

*Users* come when networked [like you probably are with your ADSL
provider], and with password creation.

Active Desktop - right click on desktop > Active Desktop > Customize my
Desktop >>>>>

I never recommend Active Desktop use, I disable it on my systems. You may
need to check other *Folder* options and registry settings to correct your
locked Icon issues.

--
~
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The *REAL WORLD* of Law, Justice, and Government
_______

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

"MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
news:uGLJDlXsJHA.1504@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:

> http://www.msfn.org/board/Windows-95-shell-on-Windows-98-t12
> 0443.html

Wow, I am surprised, and VERY thankful. Looks like it's
certainly worth a try!

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

"MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
news:e02fSzXsJHA.3988@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:

<SNIP>

> Might be related to your new ADSL installation and prior
> modifications done

I have had ADSL for 5 months or so and the image is less than 2
months old...

> which you don't remember now... [we are getting old
> afterall]

No kidding.

> No USERS in control Panel means either you disabled the
> cpl > OR you may
> have uninstalled it > OR you have inadvertantly managed to
> erect policies which have precluded its presentation in
> Control Panel. USERS is installed, generally, by default,
> same with PASSWORDS.
> Seems you may have locked {individual} folder *.htt
> creation...

Frankly, all Greek to me...

<SNIP>

> *Users* come when networked [like you probably are with
> your ADSL
> provider], and with password creation.

Well, I'll look for it...

> Active Desktop - right click on desktop > Active Desktop >
> Customize my
> Desktop >>>>>

Not there. 98SELite.

> I never recommend Active Desktop use, I disable it on my
> systems. You may
> need to check other *Folder* options and registry settings
> to correct your locked Icon issues.

AFAICT, I have tried everything...

Thanks again, VERY much...

MEB · External Since: Jan 16, 2009 Posts: 42

"thanatoid" <waiting.TakeThisOut@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9BDF74E9E53Bthanexit@85.214.105.209...
> "MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
> news:e02fSzXsJHA.3988@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:
>
> <SNIP>
>
> > Might be related to your new ADSL installation and prior
> > modifications done
>
> I have had ADSL for 5 months or so and the image is less than 2
> months old...

Ah well, I didn't see that mentioned, maybe I missed that.

>
> > which you don't remember now... [we are getting old
> > afterall]
>
> No kidding.

Let's not go there...

>
> > No USERS in control Panel means either you disabled the
> > cpl > OR you may
> > have uninstalled it > OR you have inadvertantly managed to
> > erect policies which have precluded its presentation in
> > Control Panel. USERS is installed, generally, by default,
> > same with PASSWORDS.
> > Seems you may have locked {individual} folder *.htt
> > creation...
>
> Frankly, all Greek to me...

Hopefully someone will pick up on the .htt creation aspect [not saying
that's the fix, but it does have application]. There were several LONG
discussions on fixes and such.
PCR likely has one of those saved or compiled a help post...

Another potential is to create a USER assigning rights to change desktop
and use individual settings, then remove any password that might be
needed/created... hmm, that would, however, require you to have USERS in
Control Panel. Likely would destroy some of the Lite aspects as well.
I don't remember changing to Lite removing USERS or PASSWORDS, maybe I'm
wrong, its been quite a while.

>
> <SNIP>
>
> > *Users* come when networked [like you probably are with
> > your ADSL
> > provider], and with password creation.
>
> Well, I'll look for it...
>
> > Active Desktop - right click on desktop > Active Desktop >
> > Customize my
> > Desktop >>>>>
>
> Not there. 98SELite.

Oh yeah, forgot about that in the Lite world.

>
> > I never recommend Active Desktop use, I disable it on my
> > systems. You may
> > need to check other *Folder* options and registry settings
> > to correct your locked Icon issues.
>
> AFAICT, I have tried everything...
>
> Thanks again, VERY much...
>

I tried, sorry I couldn't spark anything.

--
~
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The *REAL WORLD* of Law, Justice, and Government
_______

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

"MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
news:OPSZU7csJHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:

<SNIP>

Today I bought a used made in Malaysia WD 80GB HD which I am
going to factory-test - it is only 2 years old and they will
give me my money back if the test result is not "factory new
condition". I will make a clean install of everything, let's
face it - 1/3 if not more of the apps I have I haven't used in
years, so it shouldn't be THAT much trouble. Besides, I need to
be punished for my overall bad attitude.

Needless to say, the 80 GB drive will have AT LEAST 20
partitions. I'll make a linux one and a BeOS one (if it needs
it, I know nothing about BeOS except it seemed VERY nice). What
the hell. You only live and compute once.

> Hopefully someone will pick up on the .htt creation aspect
> [not saying
> that's the fix, but it does have application]. There were
> several LONG discussions on fixes and such.
> PCR likely has one of those saved or compiled a help
> post...

I don't even know what .htt is but may look it up...

> I tried, sorry I couldn't spark anything.

It is *most* appreciated.

Regards.

BTW, I installed that 95 shell update you posted the link for.
It has not been long - so I can't say much. It didn't fix
anything, but it didn't break anything either, and that IS
saying something. It added a few things to my ctrl panel and it
screwed up my PicaView file manager image view add-on, but apart
from that everything seems OK. I am reasonably sure if I
reinstall PicaView it will be fine.

I will live with it for a few days and then post some comments
in the thread you gave me the URL for.

Thanks again.

MEB · External Since: Jan 16, 2009 Posts: 42

Well, if you over-installed on the Lite, you won't really know for sure how
it works or even if it works. You won't be much help on the forum either.
If you want to test it, try a fresh install of 98SE [a standard install]
with at least the system updates, then try the test 95 shell. I think that's
what its for and input with other mods previously used isn't going to
actually test or provide accurate results with the 95 mod.
What the heck, the new 80 gigs. leaves a lot of initial room to play with.

BeOS is/was nice, and so is Linux, just don't try too much at one time.
Frustration [do to lack of knowledge of the OS] may cause you to think both
are too limited or hard. Pick one and work from there [I'd suggest Linux].
Both have a learning curve to really enjoy and appreciate them.

--
~
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The *REAL WORLD* of Law, Justice, and Government
_______

"thanatoid" <waiting.TakeThisOut@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9BDF24B25D526thanexit@85.214.105.209...
> "MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
> news:OPSZU7csJHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>
> <SNIP>
>
> Today I bought a used made in Malaysia WD 80GB HD which I am
> going to factory-test - it is only 2 years old and they will
> give me my money back if the test result is not "factory new
> condition". I will make a clean install of everything, let's
> face it - 1/3 if not more of the apps I have I haven't used in
> years, so it shouldn't be THAT much trouble. Besides, I need to
> be punished for my overall bad attitude.
>
> Needless to say, the 80 GB drive will have AT LEAST 20
> partitions. I'll make a linux one and a BeOS one (if it needs
> it, I know nothing about BeOS except it seemed VERY nice). What
> the hell. You only live and compute once.
>
> > Hopefully someone will pick up on the .htt creation aspect
> > [not saying
> > that's the fix, but it does have application]. There were
> > several LONG discussions on fixes and such.
> > PCR likely has one of those saved or compiled a help
> > post...
>
> I don't even know what .htt is but may look it up...
>
> > I tried, sorry I couldn't spark anything.
>
> It is *most* appreciated.
>
> Regards.
>
> BTW, I installed that 95 shell update you posted the link for.
> It has not been long - so I can't say much. It didn't fix
> anything, but it didn't break anything either, and that IS
> saying something. It added a few things to my ctrl panel and it
> screwed up my PicaView file manager image view add-on, but apart
> from that everything seems OK. I am reasonably sure if I
> reinstall PicaView it will be fine.
>
> I will live with it for a few days and then post some comments
> in the thread you gave me the URL for.
>
> Thanks again.

PCR · External Since: Jun 21, 2004 Posts: 5941

thanatoid wrote:
| "MEB" <MEB@not@here> wrote in
| news:OPSZU7csJHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
|
| <SNIP>
|
| Today I bought a used made in Malaysia WD 80GB HD which I am
| going to factory-test - it is only 2 years old and they will
| give me my money back if the test result is not "factory new
| condition". I will make a clean install of everything, let's
| face it - 1/3 if not more of the apps I have I haven't used in
| years, so it shouldn't be THAT much trouble. Besides, I need to
| be punished for my overall bad attitude.

I wouldn't want to dissuade you from such an ambitious & computer life
renewing project-- a fresh install! Therefore, it's probably best that
no one solve your Desktop icon problem at this point & let the fresh
install do it. But I think the most likely culprit is a bad TweakUI
setting, a fault in your icon saver program, or something to do with
yours is currently a Win98Lite system. Going into Safe Mode, as rebel
suggested, might have been instructive. Too bad you refuse! But I'll
punch anyone in the nose who solves it-- including rebel & MEB!

There is a list of taboos to do with TweakUI, but I couldn't find it.
One of those taboos (I guess) might not sound like it would freeze
icons-- but may do it anyhow! You'd have to go through its many settings
for anything that sounds even slightly suspitious, & undo it. Just
uninstalling TweakUI is no solution, because its settings would persist.
I don't know your icon saver, but mine (WinTidy) can behave similarly
with icons, if I try to use it while Desktop Auto Arrange has been
checked-- but it has a warning against it! Maybe try uninstalling that
or undoing its control. Re-establish it afterwards, if desired. In your
fresh install, drop Lite (as I think you said you might). That takes
care of that possibility!

| Needless to say, the 80 GB drive will have AT LEAST 20
| partitions. I'll make a linux one and a BeOS one (if it needs
| it, I know nothing about BeOS except it seemed VERY nice). What
| the hell. You only live and compute once.

Well, you will have a second life with this fresh install. I envy you!

|> Hopefully someone will pick up on the .htt creation aspect
|> [not saying
|> that's the fix, but it does have application]. There were
|> several LONG discussions on fixes and such.
|> PCR likely has one of those saved or compiled a help
|> post...
|
| I don't even know what .htt is but may look it up...

I don't konw... maybe delete to the recycle bin any Folder.htt or
Desktop.ini that is in C:\Windows\Desktop. Here is what I post about
that, but now I seem to have only one Folder.htt (with 12 other .htt's,
such as recycle.htt) & 17 Desktop.ini's. None of them is in my Desktop
folder...

Acc. to "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston/Straub), p. 172, a Desktop.ini
is a system file created when you "View, Customize" a folder, possibly
along with a modified copy of folder.htt (HTML template). Click one and
it will open in Notepad; they are not all the same inside. Supposedly,
the ini & the htt will be deleted when you remove the customization;
that doesn't quite appear to be true, but the ini is cleared of most
data. I appear to have 23 Desktop.ini's currently, as "Find, F&F,
Desktop.ini" shows. As far as the htt, I never did see one inside a
folder, using Explorer. I saw 17 of them BOTH before and after removing
a customization, however, using "Find, F&F, *.htt". (Update: I see those
htt's after setting:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Adv
anced
ShowSuperHidden 0x00000001 (1) <--DWORD: 1.)

Acc. to "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston/Straub), p. 199, special
folders can also contain a Desktop.ini which "may have a reference to a
dynamic link library (dll) file that defines a specific set of behaviors
for the folder".

There are other ways to create them, and they are sometimes involved in
copy protection schemes. Also third party programs, such as
http://www.pcmag.com/ 's Folders creates or modifies them to store
pointers to the folder icons. I have such pointers in some
desktop.ini's, although I never did install "Folders".

Here are 2 or 3 articles dug up by glee in an ancient thread, which I
have yet to study...

Customizing a Folder's Web View:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/shellcc/platform/shell/program...sguide/

Customizing Folders with Desktop.ini
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/shell...platfor

Fine Tuning Windows 98: Preview Media Files (in Windows Explorer):
http://www.helpwithwindows.com/windows98/tune-300.html

|> I tried, sorry I couldn't spark anything.
|
| It is *most* appreciated.
|
| Regards.
|
| BTW, I installed that 95 shell update you posted the link for.
| It has not been long - so I can't say much. It didn't fix
| anything, but it didn't break anything either, and that IS
| saying something. It added a few things to my ctrl panel and it
| screwed up my PicaView file manager image view add-on, but apart
| from that everything seems OK. I am reasonably sure if I
| reinstall PicaView it will be fine.
|
| I will live with it for a few days and then post some comments
| in the thread you gave me the URL for.
|
| Thanks again.

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp DeleteThis @netzero.net

Mart · External Since: Apr 09, 2005 Posts: 1115

"PCR" wrote :-

> There is a list of taboos to do with TweakUI, but I couldn't find it.

Is this what you were looking for?

Following warnings/notes reproduced with acknowledgement to the late
KoldBear

1) Do *not* change the first icon from "My Documents" on the Desktop tab
2) Do *not* uncheck: Search Results on the Desktop tab
3) Do *not* hide the Tweak UI icon on the Control Panel tab
4) Do *not* uncheck: Show Control Panel on Start Menu on the IE tab
5) Do *not* uncheck: Shell enhancements on the IE tab
6) To move "My Documents" folder, right-click on the Folder, and click
Properties.

Mart

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

"Mart" <mart(NoSpam)@nospam.nospam> wrote in
news:uOo8KXDtJHA.3988@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:

> "PCR" wrote :-
>
>> There is a list of taboos to do with TweakUI, but I
>> couldn't find it.
>
> Is this what you were looking for?
>
> Following warnings/notes reproduced with acknowledgement to
> the late KoldBear
>
> 1) Do *not* change the first icon from "My Documents" on
> the Desktop tab 2) Do *not* uncheck: Search Results on the
> Desktop tab 3) Do *not* hide the Tweak UI icon on the
> Control Panel tab 4) Do *not* uncheck: Show Control Panel
> on Start Menu on the IE tab 5) Do *not* uncheck: Shell
> enhancements on the IE tab 6) To move "My Documents"
> folder, right-click on the Folder, and click Properties.
>
> Mart

Thanks for the add'l info.

FWIW, I have never had a "my documents" directory since 95B came
out, and any stupid program which dares to create it is promptly
uninstalled and an alternative found.

I can't remember at this point about the rest, but it ALWAYS
worked fine, in 85B and 98SELite, for YEARS, so I'll probably
never know. Still, a very useful list, thanks again.

PCR · External Since: Jun 21, 2004 Posts: 5941

Mart wrote:
| "PCR" wrote :-
|
|> There is a list of taboos to do with TweakUI, but I couldn't find it.
|
| Is this what you were looking for?
|
| Following warnings/notes reproduced with acknowledgement to the late
| KoldBear
|
| 1) Do *not* change the first icon from "My Documents" on the Desktop
| tab 2) Do *not* uncheck: Search Results on the Desktop tab
| 3) Do *not* hide the Tweak UI icon on the Control Panel tab
| 4) Do *not* uncheck: Show Control Panel on Start Menu on the IE tab
| 5) Do *not* uncheck: Shell enhancements on the IE tab
| 6) To move "My Documents" folder, right-click on the Folder, and click
| Properties.

Yep. That looks like it. Thanks. I would urge thanatoid to undo them.
But I think there are at least two other taboos, which I also can't
quite recall. One of them may deal with drive letters.

| Mart

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp DeleteThis @netzero.net

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

"PCR" <pcrrcp DeleteThis @netzero.net> wrote in
news:eAO4NkMtJHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:

> Mart wrote:

<SNIP>

> Yep. That looks like it. Thanks. I would urge thanatoid to
> undo them.

I've given up on this install. It has degenerated beyond all
hope. I am clean-installing what I need on my new drive.

> But I think there are at least two other taboos,
> which I also can't quite recall. One of them may deal with
> drive letters.
>
>| Mart
>

Speaking of which, the latest is all my virtual drives
disappeared (I did NOT delete the secondary partition!).

I have almost never used fdisk /MBR and I am a little afraid,
but I understand it restores the MBR from a backup (there are 2
copies in the HD, right?)

Sigh.

But the 98SELite (AOT regular full 98SE which did thinks you
would NOT believe) install on the new drive went relatively
painlessly, although it was not the best experience of my life,
and it is far from over.

Franc Zabkar · External Since: Sep 03, 2005 Posts: 991

On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 17:05:56 +0000 (UTC), thanatoid
<waiting.TakeThisOut@the.exit.invalid> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>Speaking of which, the latest is all my virtual drives
>disappeared (I did NOT delete the secondary partition!).
>
>I have almost never used fdisk /MBR and I am a little afraid,
>but I understand it restores the MBR from a backup (there are 2
>copies in the HD, right?)

FDISK /MBR will overwrite the master boot code in the very first
physical sector of your hard drive. AFAICS, this boot code should be
contained within the FDISK.EXE file. However, if the standard MS boot
code was replaced by your partitioning software, then you would not
want to overwrite this, as doing so may render your secondary
partitions inaccessible.

I use MBRTOOL to view my MBR:
http://www.diydatarecovery.nl/mbrtool.htm

You can capture the contents of your MBR to a text file. If you post
it, someone will tell you if it contains original MS boot code.

One more thing to note is that your partitioning software may extend
into the first track of your HD. MBRTOOL will let you see this.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

Franc Zabkar <fzabkar DeleteThis @iinternode.on.net> wrote in
news:5tjft41lennq5rln3iulp4r442uktp59hi@4ax.com:

Top-posted intro:
Thank you Franc, you are one person that can be depended on. See
what a certain Mr. Shagnasty replied to me in 24hours - all just
because I committed the apparently unforgivable crime of arguing
that partitions are good and defragging is simpler and faster
and safer with ten 60 GB partitions than with 1 600GB partition
- while forgetting that he uses Linux which apparently does NOT
fragment, although frankly I do not see how that is possible.
But that's another subject entirely which t SOME point may
become relevant (perhaps VERY soon, if you know what I mean, I
am getting really tired of this) or may not.

> FDISK /MBR will overwrite the master boot code in the very
> first physical sector of your hard drive.

With a backed-up copy stored at the beginning of the drive along
with the "in use" MBR?

> AFAICS, this boot
> code should be contained within the FDISK.EXE file.

MS "one world-one browser-one partition" boot code or the way I
set it up with fdisk, 16 partitions with 15 of them in the
extended partition, virtual drives?

> However, if the standard MS boot code was replaced by your
> partitioning software, then you would not want to overwrite
> this, as doing so may render your secondary partitions
> inaccessible.

I only used fdisk. I would assume that it stored the 1
primary/active + 5 virt. in ext. part as the MBR.

I STILL do not know whether MBR is the same on all machines, or
whether it is modified by fdisk and stored WITH a backup at the
beginning of the drive. I could NOT find that info.

> I use MBRTOOL to view my MBR:
> http://www.diydatarecovery.nl/mbrtool.htm

Will DL it now.

> You can capture the contents of your MBR to a text file. If
> you post it, someone will tell you if it contains original
> MS boot code.

Sure will.

> One more thing to note is that your partitioning software
> may extend into the first track of your HD. MBRTOOL will
> let you see this.

Unfortunately I don't know what that means but unless Partition
Magic fixes the problem (I'll be careful, I'll just see what it
says, it seems to work very well, i tried 10GB partitions but
they were too damn big so I used PM to make them 5GB) I will
post all the info you are asking for.

As usual, /many thanks/ for being this helpful.

Franc Zabkar · External Since: Sep 03, 2005 Posts: 991

On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 23:21:14 +0000 (UTC), thanatoid
<waiting.TakeThisOut@the.exit.invalid> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>Franc Zabkar <fzabkar.TakeThisOut@iinternode.on.net> wrote in
>news:5tjft41lennq5rln3iulp4r442uktp59hi@4ax.com:
>
>Top-posted intro:
>Thank you Franc, you are one person that can be depended on. See
>what a certain Mr. Shagnasty replied to me in 24hours - all just
>because I committed the apparently unforgivable crime of arguing
>that partitions are good and defragging is simpler and faster
>and safer with ten 60 GB partitions than with 1 600GB partition
>- while forgetting that he uses Linux which apparently does NOT
>fragment, although frankly I do not see how that is possible.
>But that's another subject entirely which t SOME point may
>become relevant (perhaps VERY soon, if you know what I mean, I
>am getting really tired of this) or may not.
>
>> FDISK /MBR will overwrite the master boot code in the very
>> first physical sector of your hard drive.
>
>With a backed-up copy stored at the beginning of the drive along
>with the "in use" MBR?

Not AFAIK. Third party applications (or viruses) may make such
backups. A friend used to save copies of all critical sectors (MBR,
boot sectors of logical drives, EBRs) in track 0.

MS does make backup copies of the boot sectors of each logical volume,
though. FAT file systems also have two copies of the FAT.

>> AFAICS, this boot
>> code should be contained within the FDISK.EXE file.
>
>MS "one world-one browser-one partition" boot code or the way I
>set it up with fdisk, 16 partitions with 15 of them in the
>extended partition, virtual drives?

AFAIK, all that the MS boot code is designed to do is to determine
which of the four possible entries in the partition table is bootable
(active) and then boot from it.

>> However, if the standard MS boot code was replaced by your
>> partitioning software, then you would not want to overwrite
>> this, as doing so may render your secondary partitions
>> inaccessible.
>
>I only used fdisk. I would assume that it stored the 1
>primary/active + 5 virt. in ext. part as the MBR.
>
>I STILL do not know whether MBR is the same on all machines, or
>whether it is modified by fdisk and stored WITH a backup at the
>beginning of the drive. I could NOT find that info.

AIUI, your setup would have two partition entries in the MBR -- a
primary partition (drive C Smile

and an extended partition. The extended
partition links to an EBR (extended boot record) which has two more
entries, one for the logical volume (drive D Smile

, and the second for the
next EBR in the chain. This next EBR links to drive E: and yet another
EBR, and so on ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_boot_record

It seems to me that, either the pointer to your first EBR is broken,
in which case your MBR is damaged, or the first EBR itself is damaged.
This would explain why you can't see *any* logical drives.

>> I use MBRTOOL to view my MBR:
>> http://www.diydatarecovery.nl/mbrtool.htm
>
>Will DL it now.
>
>> You can capture the contents of your MBR to a text file. If
>> you post it, someone will tell you if it contains original
>> MS boot code.
>
>Sure will.
>
>> One more thing to note is that your partitioning software
>> may extend into the first track of your HD. MBRTOOL will
>> let you see this.
>
>Unfortunately I don't know what that means but unless Partition
>Magic fixes the problem (I'll be careful, I'll just see what it
>says, it seems to work very well, i tried 10GB partitions but
>they were too damn big so I used PM to make them 5GB) I will
>post all the info you are asking for.

The way that hard drives are usually laid out is that the very first
sector (MBR) contains master boot code and a partition table with up
to four entries. Logical drive C: then starts at the 64th sector, ie
the first sector of the second logical track (track 0, head 1). The
remaining 62 sectors on the first track (track 0, head 0)) are vacant.
Therefore any partitioning software (or virus) could park some of its
code there.

Third party boot managers, whose code replaces the MS code in the MBR,
will allow you to create up to 4 (or more?) primary partitions in
sector 0. They will then present you with a menu that allows you to
choose which partition to boot from. In this way each partition can be
truly independent, and there is no need for a boot.ini file, ie you
don't need to boot XP before you can boot Win98 (AIUI).

Some boot managers provide additional features, such as hiding
partitions from each other. For example, you may want to prevent Win9x
from writing to a DOS 6.22 partition or vice versa. IIRC, one good
reason for this is that running a DOS 6.22 CHKDSK on a Win9x volume
may result in the loss of long file names.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

thanatoid · External Since: Aug 21, 2006 Posts: 355

Franc Zabkar <fzabkar.RemoveThis@iinternode.on.net> wrote in
news:1jcit4lgmtn07doo5tg9cf41jmiiiteluc@4ax.com:

<SNIP>

>>> FDISK /MBR will overwrite the master boot code in the
>>> very first physical sector of your hard drive.
>>
>>With a backed-up copy stored at the beginning of the drive
>>along with the "in use" MBR?
>
> Not AFAIK. Third party applications (or viruses) may make
> such backups. A friend used to save copies of all critical
> sectors (MBR, boot sectors of logical drives, EBRs) in
> track 0.

Well, good thing I never tried it.

> MS does make backup copies of the boot sectors of each
> logical volume, though. FAT file systems also have two
> copies of the FAT.

That's what I thought. Getting at them is another matter. Grrr.

>>> AFAICS, this boot
>>> code should be contained within the FDISK.EXE file.

Really nice of MS to explain it all so clearly. The term MBR
does not appear ONCE in the 700 or so pages of the MS-DOS 5.00
manual (the latest I could find in a used bookstore).

>>MS "one world-one browser-one partition" boot code or the
>>way I set it up with fdisk, 16 partitions with 15 of them
>>in the extended partition, virtual drives?
>
> AFAIK, all that the MS boot code is designed to do is to
> determine which of the four possible entries in the
> partition table is bootable (active) and then boot from it.

Hmm.

>>> However, if the standard MS boot code was replaced by
>>> your partitioning software, then you would not want to
>>> overwrite this, as doing so may render your secondary
>>> partitions inaccessible.

Sigh.

<SNIP stuff I can't follow>

>>> I use MBRTOOL to view my MBR:
>>> http://www.diydatarecovery.nl/mbrtool.htm
>>
>> Will DL it now.

I did. It was too hairy for me - I never studied computer
science so certain things are just beyond me.

Good news, though:

*****BUT it led me (I can't remember how, a suggestion on a
software site for "similar programs" I think, to "TestDisk", a
tiny French marvel which solved the problem in 2 minutes.*****

WHY can't ALL programs be like that? (Rhetorical cry of
despair.)

>>> You can capture the contents of your MBR to a text file.
>>> If you post it, someone will tell you if it contains
>>> original MS boot code.

>>Sure will.

I couldn't even get the mbrtool to dump the MBR to a file!
So I guess /will not/. ;-(

> Some boot managers provide additional features, such as
> hiding partitions from each other. For example, you may
> want to prevent Win9x from writing to a DOS 6.22 partition
> or vice versa. IIRC, one good reason for this is that
> running a DOS 6.22 CHKDSK on a Win9x volume may result in
> the loss of long file names.

I am afraid of boot managers - they smell a little like disc
overlays (like OnTrack Disk Manager, a major nightmare).

I probably WILL install XP for a few programs which I may HAVE
to use, and MAYBE even Linux and BeOS at some point in the
future since I have nothing better to do, but for now, the
problem is solved.

Everything works perfectly - although of course the full install
of all programs etc. has not been finished. I will make an
Acronis image tomorrow before I continue.

Thanks again for all your help, VERY much.