still confused Results


Page 3 of 15.
Results 41...60 of 291

Sponsored Links:



I installed Windows 8 on both my home and work PC dual-booting with Windows 7. It was really easy to do and helped me get over the hump on learning Win8 while still having Win7 to work on. Now that I have eliminated Win7 from both PCs, I still have stuff to clean up in BCD on both PC's.

At home, I have the Win8 partition (C set up as everything now...system, boot, active, etc. There is an empty partition (G that is a combination of the Recovery partition and the Win7 partition...removing this partition currently gives me an unbootable situation.

When I run bcdedit /enum /v ... it has an entry for Bootmgr and says it is located on the G: drive. There is nothing on that partition anymore, least of all the Bootmgr. The PC boots up into Win8 just fine. Isn't there some simple way to correct the BCD storefile so that it knows the bootmgr is on C:, which it is.

And then there is the work PC. The BCDedit entry appears mostly OK. There's one mysterious boot loader entry that has the win8 partition address and just says "identifier", but doesn't have any other descriptions and doesn't show up in the menu at all.

But I don't see that entry I have at home claiming that the bootmgr is on a separate partition. Both PCs come up fine. I don't know where that hibernate entry came from...I didn't add it. It doesn't show on the menu. So besides the general wreckage on my drives, I am wondering how to correct the BCD storefile at home to remove/correct that reference to the bootmgr being on another drive. It looks to me like dual-booting is something you want to think long and hard about doing. Easy to do, but hard to undo.

It sounds like all I had to do at home is let it go unbootable and then boot up the Win8 disk and go into repair mode to fix where it is booting from. Is that the only option?

Also, I've been using Paragon Hard Disk Manager 12 to add more space to one partition and take from the other (my Win7 partion was on the left) as I was gradually moving applications over to Win8...the last time I did this (and I still have more space to recover), I got a list of minor errors on the win7 and win8 partitions...something to do with hard links. That doesn't give me any warm fuzzy feelings. Everything is working fine, but I can't help but wonder whether I have some corruption now. The Win7 partition no longer has an OS on it all.

Work BCD: (I can add the entry for home later)

Windows Boot Loader
-------------------
identifier {323f4c97-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
device partition=C:
path Windowssystem32winload.exe
description Windows 8
locale en-US
inherit {6efb52bf-1766-41db-a6b3-0ee5eff72bd7}
recoverysequence {323f4c98-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
integrityservices Enable
recoveryenabled Yes
allowedinmemorysettings 0x15000075
osdevice partition=C:
systemroot Windows
resumeobject {323f4c96-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
nx OptIn
bootmenupolicy Standard
quietboot No

Windows Boot Loader
-------------------
identifier {323f4c98-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}

Windows Boot Loader
-------------------
identifier {d28b0fe8-7163-11e2-bedc-d4bed9a07e54}
device partition=C:
path Windowssystem32winload.exe
description Windows 8 Safe Mode
locale en-US
inherit {6efb52bf-1766-41db-a6b3-0ee5eff72bd7}
recoverysequence {323f4c98-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
integrityservices Enable
recoveryenabled Yes
allowedinmemorysettings 0x15000075
osdevice partition=C:
systemroot Windows
resumeobject {323f4c96-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
nx OptIn
safeboot Minimal
bootmenupolicy Standard
quietboot No

Windows Boot Loader
-------------------
identifier {d28b0fe9-7163-11e2-bedc-d4bed9a07e54}
device partition=C:
path Windowssystem32winload.exe
description Windows 8 Save Networking
locale en-US
inherit {6efb52bf-1766-41db-a6b3-0ee5eff72bd7}
recoverysequence {323f4c98-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
integrityservices Enable
recoveryenabled Yes
allowedinmemorysettings 0x15000075
osdevice partition=C:
systemroot Windows
resumeobject {323f4c96-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
nx OptIn
safeboot Network
bootmenupolicy Standard
quietboot No

Resume from Hibernate
---------------------
identifier {323f4c96-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
device partition=C:
path Windowssystem32winresume.exe
description Windows Resume Application
locale en-US
inherit {1afa9c49-16ab-4a5c-901b-212802da9460}
recoverysequence {323f4c98-53a5-11e2-b192-8707d0383f5b}
recoveryenabled Yes
allowedinmemorysettings 0x15000075
filedevice partition=C:
filepath hiberfil.sys
bootmenupolicy Standard
debugoptionenabled No




How about this one:

This morning I activated the AVG e-mail scanner in the AVG Control Center, and up pops an informational alert from MS AntiSpyware telling me something. I obviously has MSAS real-time protection activated (I thought I might evaluate it for some month).

Now, since my focus was on the e-mail scanner I didn't get enough time to read the message, so I went over to MSAS > Real-time Protection > View all events. Here I find MSAS telling me that a startup value for Zone Labs Client has been added to a Run-key. Very funny, since that value has been there long before MSAS was installed.

This aside, I do think there is use for this real-time protection. One month ago, when I added a site to "Trusted sites" I got amused when MSAS popped up telling me what I had done. Ah well, it's still beta.

Argus




Hi all,
I've done lots of VB/VBA and C++ programming and have just recently started to look into .Net. After reading 1-1/2 books so far on VB.Net I am still confused on a very basic question.... I know you guys can help straighten me out.

I've used earlier versions of VS before (with C++) so understand what it does, but why are there multiple s/w packages; 1) VS.Net, 2) VB.Net (or other languages), 3) Framework.

Does that mean I have to install VS, then pick the language and install that, then install Framework?

I just now installed 'VS.Net Enterprise Architect 2003 Final Beta 3' (very, very, long, tedious install) and notice that it allowed me to pick any of 4 languages to install (C++, C#, J#, VB) so that tells me that VS comes with the languages. Since this seems to be true (at least for the Enterprise Arch version) why do they sell VB.Net separately?

If you buy VB.Net on its own, can you create .exe programs with it?

I know this is such a trivial question but it's not clear to me.

Thnx, Deb




Greetings,

I'm sure this has been asked before but after reading previous posts and the
MS site I am still confused.

I wish to purchase a Dell PowerEdge 1400SC with Windows 2000 Server to host
a SharePoint Team Services site using MSDE. One company will host the site,
but users are from different companies and access the site from their
corporate network and from the internet (from home). Many users use
Netscape, so Integrated Auth is out (so I'm told).

What type of license, if any, do I need to purchase (CAL or ICL)? The Dell
comes with 5 CALS.

TIA...




Hi all, I'm not sure if this is the right category for this question but I'm looking for info on how to setup a webcam that will be available from my web site. I have been fighting with AIM for the last few days to get the live video feature to work but I give up. I see the other person for a few seconds then it disconnects. The AIM help is worthless and searches in The Lounge reveal a slurry of posts about changing ports and firewalls, all which is way too much to deal with (and totally unrealistic for anyone but super geek to do on their own).

What do I need to do to get my webcam on my web site? I've read a few articles but I'm still confused. I'd like my family to connect to my web site and few the video live. Ideally I'd like to see them through their web cam too (which is why I was hoping I could get AIM to work). If I set up my web site to show the output from my webcam, how can I also see them on their web cam? Logic tells me that's not how it works (which is why AIM and other IM programs, have Live Video).

Thnx,
Deb




Currently Active Users

There are currently 1884 users online. 24 members and 1860 guests
Most users ever online was 2,904, 2012-05-03 at 09:45.
‎Banyarola ‎curiousclive ‎doorjam ‎dreamkid ‎grits ‎highstream ‎HowardC ‎Jagworld ‎JoeP517 ‎John-O ‎jwitalka ‎mike21 ‎Mike68847 ‎mouseissue ‎relston ‎rmehmi ‎Ron M ‎royw ‎rudevincy ‎ruirib ‎satrow ‎slf ‎zeddy ‎ZigThe above is a copy/paste from several minutes ago while at the same time I was not logged in. I wasn't even aware of this little ditty until a bit ago when I just happened to scroll to bottom of main page. Then after I did log in I scrolled to that part & found my name at 1. instead of 5. as it shows here.

I had been here earlier but had X'd out to go investigate a link from a post I'd just read.

What did or didn't I do that would cause my name to be in this list of 24 when I still had to log in to be able to post?




Another newbie question with PPT 2010.

I am struggling to understand the relationship between Slide Masters, slides, and templates. I am writing a VB app that will automate creation of a presentation containing many (indeterminate number) of slides. Since we may want to have different themes for the same content, I intend to implement this with a template containing perhaps several Slide Masters.

I understand (I think!) how to use a template and the purpose of Slide Masters and slide layouts. I have created a Slide Master with the first theme, which has a few placeholders -- a couple of text boxes and a picture placeholder. However, when I created a presentation based on this template, I can't edit the shapes' content on the first slide in the presentation, which is based on the Slide Master - they seem "locked". If I select the Slide Master itself I can edit the shapes' content. I thought that the Slide Master is kind of a template itself for the slides that are based on it, so I would have expected the reverse behavior - locked Slide Master and editable slides.

If I add shapes to the slide directly I can edit those shapes, but not the ones inherited from the Slide Master.

I have searched the MS site for useful tutorials and re-read the Help tidbits many times, but have to admit I am still confused by these relationships. Any help or suggested links is greatly appreciated!




I really think creating a system image is a good idea, but every time I try to do it, I am confused by the instructions. Recently, my Dell Windows 7 system hiccuped, and apparently recovered, but that has stimulated me to try again.

I have read Fred Langa’s “Build a complete Windows 7 safety net” posted at:
http://windowssecrets.com/top-story/...-7-safety-net/
and have even tried it a couple of times, but I’m still confused both by the instructions and the results. My questions are listed below. If they have already been answered, please direct me to the correct location.

1. Fred’s article says, “A system image is...an exact digital copy...of your hard drive.” But then Fred describes a three step process where the first step is to make a DATA backup, NOT a system image. Why is that? If I want a system image, can I just make that immediately without having to make the data backup first? And doesn’t the system image INCLUDE the data? If so, why spend time making an initial data backup at all?

2. The third step in Fred’s process describes creating a bootable System Recovery Disk. But this process does not work on any of the three Dell Windows 7 PC’s that I have. On each PC, Windows 7 reports the successful creation of the System Recovery Disk, but the created disk will not boot, failing with an error code of
4001100200001012. I have tried this many times. This problem is widely reported on many websites with various solutions proposed, but no real explanation of why this problem exists.

3. The situation described in the previous paragraph obviously shakes my confidence that these procedures actually work. Since this is a backup procedure, it has to work the first time it is needed if it is to be effective. Consequently, a related question is: is it possible to test the system image created (hopefully) in step 1 to see if it works, without doing a destructive reload of the entire original disk ? If this is NOT possible, then how do I know that the system image is correctly made and usable?

Thanks in advance for any comments and direction.




Hi all,

Like most of you, I imagine, I usually benefit greatly from Susan Bradley's advice on patch Tuesday. Leaving the nasty ones and installing the needed ones is usually a no brainer after reading her great column in WS. This last column and patch chart left me shaking my head though. Susan starts out saying that we should accept all the dot net patches offered but there are a number in the 'skip' section, still, that we are not supposed to touch(?)! As if that's not confusing enough I ran Secunia PSI and 3 dot net patches are due there apparently for 2.x, 3.x & 4.x all referencing KB2539631 - one of the 'skip' patches from Susan. How can one patch be referenced for 3 different dot net versions in Secunia? I know that secunia doesn't analyze them like Susan does but what about the conflicting advice in her column? Is it all, or only a few as in the table? If I'm mis-reading things I'm more than open to being told so! Many thanks to anyone who can help me. Cheers, Brian.




Hello, I am a Linux and desktop guy with absolutely zero understanding of Windows Server licensing no matter what I am trying to read here.

A business I am helping has need for a server with seemingly simple requirements. There won't be any active directory or weird stuff -- just computers in a workgroup accessing a drive with some users remote desktoping in.

Site 1 will host the server. A software app and its data be on the server. There will be six computers at site 1, each with a drive mapped from the server. Each computer will have a local instance of the software that accesses the shared mapped drive data. None of these computers will need user access to the server. This all seems simple.

Site 2 will have 4 computers. Each computer will remote desktop to the site 1 server to run an instance of the software app.

What "flavor" of server software is needed? I'm guessing 5 CALs is what I need, but I still need remote desktop licenses too...?

Windows Remote Desktop Services(RDS) licensing — Windows Remote Desktop Services (formerly known as Windows Terminal Services) is built into Windows Server 2003 and 2008, but you will still need to get a separate Windows RDS User CAL for each client that will access Terminal Services in your organization. The RDS CAL replaces the older Terminal Services (TS) CAL. I just don't know what to get. Two kinds of licenses? One kind that I install in terminal services? Which version of server? Any input would be appreciated.




Windows 8 versions With only two versions of Windows 8 to be available to consumers, plus one for ARM devices (pre-installed only), what you get ought to be straightforward. But, as is usual with a new version of Windows, there's still room for confusion because what you get with each version overlaps slightly. Windows 8 Windows 8 (yes, just Windows 8) is the home version for x86 Intel and AMD ...

Source: Yahoo! News




I've been playing with the latest preview version of Windows 8 all weekend, and I still think it's needlessly confusing and hard to use. I'm not the only one.

Source: Yahoo! News




We still don’t have an official release date, but Microsoft has outlined its version plans for Windows 8. The good news? Unlike some earlier confusing Windows releases, there are only going to be three main versions. Here’s what you need to know. The three versions at release will be: Windows 8 is the standard edition. It includes all the major features that have been ...

Source: Yahoo! News




By Paul Thurrott
People still seemed confused about where certain user interface elements have gone in Windows 8 and why these interfaces needed to change. Here’s a quick refresher for those new to the Windows 8 Consumer Preview.

Source: Paul Thurott's SuperSite for Windows




I was reading a review of Windows 8.

Usability expert finds Windows 8 on a PC confusing - GadgetBox on NBCNews.com

In it the person says "Windows 8 is optimized for content consumption rather than content production and multitasking. Whereas content consumption can easily be done on other media (tablets and phones), production and multitasking are still best suited for PCs. Windows 8 appears to ignore that."

If that's true, then I have to ask... What would be the point of having a computer at all? Why spend all that money on something that you just... what... shop on?

They also say "There are things that you can do more easily in Windows 8. For instance, it’s easy to share a news story through email or with friends on Facebook. But, I am not sure that these are the tasks that people do most often on a PC."

And I thought Windows 7 was geared towards the Facebookers, this sounds like 8 is made exclusively for them.

I just hope I can keep buying motherboards that supports XP because I'm one of those crazy people that think computers should do more than Facebook.




The latest video release showcasing Microsoft Windows 8 benchmarks, and a quick press release by Emily Wilson at Microsoft, shows that Windows 8’s boot time capability will be superior to Windows 7. No, the system was not in hibernation; otherwise we would have seen the restore from hibernation animation after the POST. And no, we have no involvement in the design or development of these marketing pieces from Microsoft, but that still hasn’t prevented YouTubers from around the earth clamoring to claim it is an advertisement for Hewlett-Packard, a fake video created by Ms. Wilson and Microsoft to drive sales, or some other technology conspiracy.

The reality is that Windows 8 will be a revolutionary step in the right direction for Microsoft if the current circumstances give us any pause. The release of an operating system that can boot faster than Windows 7 shows that Microsoft is still committed to the streamlined policies that led them to grand success with Windows 7. We know that Windows 8 is also being designed for ARM processors, such as those found in cellphones and tablets. This is a great concept for regular computer users. It means that Microsoft has to be careful about how they allocate resources during development. When services are redesigned or updated, their impact on system usability has to be measured carefully in order to ensure that users are not plagued by an operating system riddled with slowdowns. This was the case with Windows Vista, but was not the case with 7. During Windows 7 development, it was revealed that Microsoft had developed proprietary tools that allowed them to simulate every possible scenario under which a system bottleneck would take place, using software that would run every possible system interaction at an accelerated rate. While this method was used for Windows Vista to security harden the operating system, its use in performance led to stunning results: The streamlining of the system kernel, services, and essential applications led to a reported revolt from some processor and GPU manufacturers, who, as the allegations go, wanted the operating system to actually run slower than Windows Vista in order to spur hardware sales.

As we move closer to a future release of Windows 8, Microsoft Windows users around the world have a reason to look into this technology as a constructive alternative. One element that would help many business environments would be a direct XP to 8 upgrade. And although we know such an upgrade path is unlikely to ever be developed due to the epic problems it would cause on many system set ups, it would provide businesses with a direct path to get out of the way of obsolescence. Just imagine, though, a Windows XP to Windows 8 upgrade... while technically possible the number of support incidents would generate from people on ancient hardware would create a support volcano. The reality is old systems that run WDDM as the graphics model can't even run Aero properly. And that's just the price we often have to pay for innovation.

That obsolescence is becoming more and more apparent as Windows XP users curmudgeonly complain about the superiority of an operating system that was released in October 2001. While it has stood the test of time, after 3 Service Packs, it has already been placed on life support: Microsoft extended support for the OS due to business environments being incapable of handling the task of keeping their IT infrastructure up-to-date, even when Windows 7 itself has a virtualized XP Mode.

It is not hard to see why people still like XP: RAM requirements are minimal, the OS is simple to use, and it seems “good enough”. But under-the-hood, and for those of us in the known, we are keenly aware of the kernel-level security flaws that allow buffer overrun errors, system injection exploits, and systemic problems that lead to security, and system failure. Old customers with old computers running IDE hard drives that should be dead by now (the hard disk drives, not the customers) shouldn't expect anything less than a nightmare on their hands.

These problems are embedded deeply into the operating system and the components designed around it. They are from another era. A pre-9/11 era, and a pre-"Why is my computer so slow?" tech support nightmare era. While a lot of this is only known to long-time Windows users who have either serviced other computers, worked in the IT industry firsthand, or suffered catastrophic failures due to lax security, we know these problems exist in the core of the operating system – or the kernel – and will never be patched. The only time in recent memory that Microsoft has literally replaced a Windows kernel free of charge was during the Windows Vista Service Pack 1 rollout. Under that scenario, Microsoft decided to upgrade Vista with Windows Server 2008’s revised kernel in order to add boosted reliability and to squeeze out some additional performance.

There is nothing wrong with being content with using an old or different operating system, for so long as you understand the risks involved. Many businesses, instead of upgrading their IT infrastructure, or formulating an end-of-life cycle for their hardware and software, have instead decided to attempt to security harden their systems with utilities like Symantec EndPoint. Under such conditions, Windows systems are typically managed from a centralized domain controller and EndPoint is used to deter potential threats. But from my experience, this can still lead to additional problems. Programs have begun to require more memory and hard disk space, as well as processing power. All of the security software in the world cannot do away with internal problems that can be manipulated once a computer is on a network. And certainly, as we have seen with the “fortress IT” model of doing things, systems are prone to compatibility issues, lack of driver support, and a general tendency for employees to be beguiled or confused when approached with the concept that their computer – operating with a system that is 10 years old, might actually have some serious internal problems. While the model allows businesses to save money, it also allows IT admins to lounge around looking up Dilbert cartoons.

This intrigue has led me to pursue the latest breaking updates with Windows 8. It is interesting for me to see Windows XP proponents going hog wild at the idea that the next version of Windows may actually boot at twice the speed of their 10 year old bar of gold known as Windows XP. Meanwhile, back in reality, new processors, general hardware, memory modules, and peripherals are all being designed with the NT 6.1 and 6.2 models in mind. Game studios are prepping their million dollar productions to be optimized for multi-core processors and the latest version of DirectX that will ship with Windows 8. Website developers have stopped supporting Internet Explorer 6 and 7 and have instead moved back into a position of HTML5-compliacne and W3C validation. The good old days of Windows XP may still exist for some, in theory, but increasingly, those days are numbered. This is coming from a man who entered an organization with deep, systemic problems in their infrastructure. Unpatched Windows XP machnies running in 2008 with no service packs and IE6... the scenario could not have been worse. Half of one segment of a network on one workgroup, another half on another, and another chunk on a domain controller. Meanwhile no one could figure out why they were having problems sharing files... These problems can be the norm in many environments.

With Windows 8 looking at a traditional October-November 2012 release date, one is left to wonder when, if ever, Windows XP proponents will upgrade anything.

It is not unheard of to enter a government office, a doctor’s office, a small business, or even a large enterprise and notoriously see dozens of Dell machines with the Windows XP label gleaming on the back. The dust corroded ventilation shafts on the chassis are a reminder of age. This system, released in 2001, is incapable of fundamental operations needed: not just by publishers, but soon by content consumers.

Windows 8 has a lot to offer, and the bar has been raised high, ironically, even by those individuals who still recommend Windows XP as though it is the gold standard of our era. Even by Mac OS users who prefer Apple everything. What happens if Windows 8 doesn’t just meet those stringent requirements laid out by its biggest critics? What happens if it raises the bar? Such is the case with revolutionary operating systems. When we look at Microsoft’s operating system release timetable, Windows 7 was considered a minor revision. Yet its development has led to advancements in high-end SSDs, better monitor quality, enormous improvements in video graphic card design, and computer processors that are capable of simulating 16 cores on a home computer. Take a trip back to 1985, and the only concept of computers that most residential home users had was of a fictional DeLorean time machine powered by a flux capacitor that seemed to use vacuum tubes. In Terminator 2, the T-800 was using some kind of Apple debug code whenever his infra-red eyeball view was displayed (we now know that these eyeballs were likely highly advanced Logitech web cameras... or since Cyberdyne may have been acquired by Apple, perhaps he was using the iBall or something...).

In any event, and on a more serious note, Windows 8 seems like it will raise the bar and raise standards in information technology. With it scheduled as a major release, as a opposed to a minor one like Windows 7, we can expect to see some groundbreaking features that will entice many enthusiasts to upgrade. And that may surprise a lot of people. That alone should be good enough to say “Hasta, la vista” to your old computer. After all, how long are you going to keep using a dot matrix printer and then complain it doesn’t work right?

These are just my views, but I’ve seen enough OS releases to know that this one is going to surprise a lot of Windows customers. Why fear or reject innovation? It's time to say goodbye to our friend Windows XP. We can still visit XP once in awhile: in a virtual machine where he belongs.




More food for thought...

Given the very few (and occasionally confusing) leaks around Windows 8, an update as to how things are progressing is always welcome.
In early 2011, a source of mine passed on to me what he claimed was a snapshot of the internal Windows 8 roadmap. On that roadmap snippet are a lot of alleged internal dates for Windows 8 Milestone 2, the second of what are expected to be three major internal builds of Windows 8. I showed off this roadmap during a ZDNet Webcast I did recently on Windows 8 and slates (which is available for listening as a free, on-demand file).
Here is the Windows 8 roadmap slide I showed off, for those who missed it:

(click on image above to enlarge)
What’s interesting to me is how closely this roadmap snippet seems to be mirroring the timelines and build information from a few sites and sources claiming access to leaked Win 8 builds. On February 21, there were reports that Microsoft was just about done with Win 8 Milestone 2. On the roadmap above, final M2 build candidate is slated to arrive on February 23. And according to the roadmap above, the coding for Milestone 3 (M3) is due to start a week from today, on February 28.
Milestone 2, according to the roadmap, took the Windows client team five months. If M3 takes another five months — which it might if it has to go through all the same coding/integration/fixing/lockdown steps as M2 did — that would put its completion date around the end of July. Factor in a month or so for any kind of private Community Technology Preview (CTP) testing, and a beta around the time of this year’s Professional Developers Conference — which I’m still hearing is slated for September 2011 — looks downright doable.
The Windows client team, as you might expect, isn’t commenting on any timetables, build numbers, roadmaps or anything else pertaining to Windows 8 or Windows Next. (I tried using the Microsoft-favored “Win Next” just to see if I could muster a comment. No go.)
Microsoft execs also are not commenting on an alleged Dell roadmap leak from last week, which made it appear as if Dell will have a Windows 8 tablet ready in time for January 2012. While I wondered aloud last week (as did at least one Wall Street analyst) whether that meant Microsoft might be further along with Win 8 for systems-on-a-chip (SoC) processors than many of us previously believed, I’ve heard since that probably isn’t the case. That would mean the Dell “Peju” Win 8 tablet could be nothing but a demo machine for select developers … and maybe a debut at a Consumer Electronics Show (CES) keynote (?)…
In any case, if Microsoft does follow history and deliver a Win 8 Beta 1, Beta 2 and Release Candidate before RTMing, Windows 8 is looking like a mid-2012 RTM. The Windows 8 train seems to be running on time — just like the Win 7 one did. Reference




32 vs 64 bit programs on secondary drives or partitions?

I recently built a new PC and made a major jump from WinXP to Windows 8. I have been so used to organizing things my own way on my system by partitioning two different hard drives, with each partition used for different types of programs (C was always for OS and nothing more, G drive for Games, P drive for pagefile, S drive for Music Software, etc). I have set up my new system in this same way but have since learned about the whole Program files vs Program Files (x86) sorting. Most of my programs are running just fine where I put them anyway, but I am having a couple of my most used programs crash a lot. I am not sure whether it's because they were not designed for Windows 8 usage, or if it's because I didn't put them in C:Program Files (x86). I am now attempting to slowly reconfigure my system and just accept that I cannot organize things the way I'd like.

My question before I go any further is this...
Will Windows 8 read my programs files the same way if I still use a secondary drive or partition?
Can I put my games into G:Program Files (x86) or even G:GamesProgram Files (x86) instead of C:Program Files (x86) ?

I don't need anyone to tell me that there is no need for me to use partitions or multiple drives. I understand that. It's just how I am used to keep things organized and easy to find. I just want to understand the protocol so I can properly reconfigure my system. If I have to put all my programs on C for Windows 8 to be able to properly call up system files without getting confused between 32 bit and 64 bit dll's, then I will do that, and then just use my second hard drive for files and backup data. If Windows can properly sort 32 and 64 bit programs on various drive letters if I just sort them into Program Files and Program Files (x86) per each drive letter, I would prefer to do it that way.




When I start/restart my pc it goes to the start screen, but then it immediately changes to the desktop screen by itself. I thought an application might have cause it to do this, but I disabled all the apps that automatically start up on boot and still the same result. I want it to stay on the start screen and I switch to the desktop screen myself. I'm really confuse, any ideas?




By Paul Thurrott
While it’s clear that the new Metro environment in Windows 8 and RT is a new mobile platform, many users still don’t understand the implications of this distinction. Key among the confusions is SkyDrive, which is available in both Metro app and desktop application forms on Windows 8. These two programs offer completely different but complementary capabilities.

Source: Paul Thurott's SuperSite for Windows


Page 3 of 15.
Results 41...60 of 291