I haven't actually sat down to run the software myself, but if I had to venture a guess—and I might be wrong here—I'd assume it works like this: disk clone: essentially making an exact replica of a selected drive, including all its partitions, Partition clone: just cloning one specific partition rather than the whole thing, and then there's System clone, which probably means cloning the operating system along with its essential files—or perhaps it clones the entire setup, meaning every single disk and partition across the board... though that seems a bit much, I guess.
If anyone here has actually put this through its paces, please do chime in and let us know how it holds up.
Cheers.
EDIT: I noticed the user above me was dropping links while I was typing this out, so maybe take a look at those to get the full picture.
It’s funny you mention that—it actually reminds me of an ordeal I had once, quite a long time ago, back when I was running Windows XP. I remember getting this dreaded error message right at bootup, claiming some critical system file was missing—if my memory serves me correctly, it was that specific ntoskrnl.exe file. It just refused to boot into Windows entirely. I managed to sort it out, though, by launching what I believe was called the recovery console—or maybe that wasn't the exact name, I can't quite recall, but it looked identical to a standard command prompt—and using those familiar command-line instructions to manually copy the missing ntoskrnl.exe from the Windows installation CD directly into the System32 folder on my Hard Drive. Once that was done, Windows booted up just fine...
Essentially, this means the laptop hasn't cleared all the necessary regulatory certifications—the kind that are standard for any electronic hardware. For instance, it lacks the US FCC certification for electromagnetic compatibility. Every electronic device—especially those things that generate an electromagnetic field, which includes your laptop—is supposed to have that...
So, as I was saying before, it’s clearly just a testing unit.
I suppose you could still use it normally, provided it actually works, of course; it’s just that, since it hasn't gone through those specific tests, there's no guarantee it won't cause interference with other devices nearby, and so on... because it lacks those required certifications.
What about all those 64-bit apps, though? Seriously, though? Is this really necessary?
Look, let’s be real for a second. Some government agencies and banking apps still demand both 32-bit and 64-bit support just to function properly. And honestly? Some people are stuck using 32-bit applications simply because a 64-bit version doesn't even exist yet. The world isn't exactly a perfect place where everything works flawlessly, so why should a user be forced to obsess over being "up to date" while ignoring how things actually work on the ground? Let’s be real, a lot of people don't have the luxury of being picky about what they run. They don't get to just decide whatever they want on a whim. In certain situations, that kind of stubbornness totally defeats the whole purpose of having a PC in the first place. Why bother even working if you're just sitting there twiddling your thumbs waiting for someone to port an app to 64-bit? Are you really going to refuse to use a perfectly functional 32-bit version just to prove a point?
Well, it isn't mandatory, obviously, but if a 64-bit application exists, it’s generally better to install that rather than the 32-bit version on a 64-bit system. Primarily because the application will actually be able to utilize the available memory—which isn't the case with 32-bit, creating a sort of... bottleneck, I suppose...
But if a 64-bit version isn't available, and the app is necessary, well, of course no one is stopping them from installing the 32-bit version...
Nowhere in that specific video does anyone mention some "System 12"—honestly, I have no idea where you heard or saw that—it’s clearly referring to the System32 folder.
It is common knowledge that you can block connections to certain web addresses or servers by messing with the hosts file, but the real question here is what—or rather, who—added that line to the file in the first place, assuming there even is an issue. Maybe you could try clearing your browser cookies and cache, or perhaps just see if you can access Spotify using a different browser...
If you still want to attempt whatever this video is suggesting, just follow the instructions step-by-step. It isn't particularly difficult, I suppose.
This isn't strictly related to your question—though I suppose everything is interconnected if you think about it long enough—but I noticed you have several 32-bit applications running, including Norton Security Cloud Free. Looking at your specs above, you've got 2x8GB of RAM installed... which leads me to wonder—and I might be overstepping here—whether you're actually running a 32-bit version of Windows? That would be a bit of a waste, given the memory you have available, unless it’s just a few specific apps that haven't been updated to 64-bit yet. If you are indeed on a 64-bit system, it might be wise—perhaps even necessary—to switch over to 64-bit versions for everything,
Jerry Robinson56 said:That’s your usual mantra... maybe try applying it to yourself first.🙂
It’s essentially a confirmation that the ignorant reveal themselves whenever they go public with their lack of knowledge—especially when they try to dispute basic technical facts. They provide links and explanations to counter their own empty words and lack of actual arguments. It’s quite a tragedy, really, that they aren't even capable of realizing how much damage they cause through the very incompetence you seem to be promoting. But don't worry, you aren't part of that group of ignoramuses; you just consistently fail to grasp even the things you're wrong about.
And regarding audio, you're nineteen years behind the times—if you actually bothered to read the post above, that is. I’d gladly pay for those programs instead of paying for degrees like some people do... besides, a seven-year-old could probably figure out how to use them; they’re incredibly user-friendly... Given the nature of my work, I tend to clean up whatever isn't working properly. Whether it's on the road or right here, it's the same deal.
You’re talking nonsense again. On what grounds am I "nineteen years behind" in audio?? Ha-ha-ha, give me a break. I already told you, and I won't repeat myself: those programs you mentioned—I can tear through them like a kid playing with blocks. I work in Cubase, Nuend, and a whole host of other software whenever I'm recording or producing, not to mention using professional VST plugins... I handle hardware too, not just software.
Anyway, let's just drop this. I finished dealing with you back during that discussion about Nikola Tesla, because once I saw exactly who—and what kind of "expert"—I was dealing with, I realized it's better to do something productive than to keep bickering here.
I I mean, how does this post even relate to anything we're talking about?? You included a screenshot of Steinberg WaveLab down there—I work with software like that on a daily basis and I know my way around them quite well, so you can pretty much dismiss your claim that I'm some kind of amateur. I suppose if your only response to anyone disagreeing with your opinion is to label them an idiot, then maybe you're the one who doesn't actually know what they're talking about.
Look, man, just let me be and maybe focus on improving yourself instead...
Jerry Robinson56 said:If there were no Alternative elsewhere, science itself wouldn't exist—though some people seem to view an Alternative as something monstrous... and it becomes monstrous when you can't have any quality discussions because of contrarians like Alatnicar, or rather, because of Aaron Baker7 mentioned right here... I haven't run into such an ignoramus in quite a while. You seem to think the folks over at Alternative aren't serious, yet on the PZ section of the forum, there isn't a single soul who actually understands electrical engineering. Most probably have about a freshman year of high school physics under their belts... we could write very profound things here, but then again, who would bother reading them?
Oh, so I'm the ignorant one?? Ha-ha-ha. 😂
And you—who persistently drags Nikola Tesla through the mud and attacks anyone who dares suggest otherwise—that is, anyone pointing out that Nikola Tesla was a brilliant mind and a phenomenal innovator—you just keep trying to weave falsehoods and sneakily insult people "with gloves on." For me, electrical engineering is my profession; I’ve worked on some incredibly difficult projects, believe me, and I don't mean to brag, but I possess a certain level of expertise in specific areas of electrical engineering (especially electroacoustics) where many people with even higher degrees would likely stumble. And frankly, I certainly won't have someone like you telling me what I do or don't know, because, to be perfectly honest, I couldn't care less about your opinion.
But I stepped away from that topic because it felt pointless—there's just no sense in trading barbs with someone who narcissistically believes they know everything and considers themselves a greater intellect than Nikola Tesla himself. Some people pointed out to you that this behavior is senseless and frankly shameful (since you go as far as claiming Nikola Tesla was a nobody or a fraud... etc.), but you just keep doing the same thing...
The moderators are being far too lenient, honestly, considering how obvious your trolling is...
Jerry Robinson56 said:🙂 I didn't want to come off as a "know-it-all" or anything—not that I'm trying to be—but you hit the nail on the head... we both basically assume you aren't going to go transferring sensitive data over them (a lesson I learned the hard way... just forget about 😁) Then there are those fake capacity drives out there; they seem to work fine, recording everything perfectly, until you actually open the folder and find nothing but a digital Sahara desert...
In my experience, A Data turned out to be absolute garbage—the kind of stuff you just can't trust for no particular reason. It's probably some inherent software bug or perhaps just subpar memory chips inside the drive itself. Personally, I’d definitely suggest sticking with Kingston or Verbatim, or even Toshiba. I actually have some strange "no-name" drives that plug in without any sort of "handshake" or login process... you know, the kind where the computer doesn't even acknowledge it's there immediately upon plugging it in... yet, somehow, every single operation works flawlessly in a heartbeat.
But hey, there's no need to force things—if you need more power, just grab a bigger hammer, I suppose. 🕺 One should probably save the drive and plug it in every once in a while just to give it some power, just to prevent any "self-erasing" incidents—though, granted, that might take years to happen.
Cheers 🙂
True, though if you look at me, I've been using A Data for years now—I actually have three different ones with varying capacities—and I haven't run into any massive issues. Once, one of them tried to act like it was read-only, but I managed to salvage it, and it still works perfectly fine today. Their main drawback, if I had to pick one, is that they are maddeningly slow.
Before I switched to A Data, I had this white one—can't remember the brand, honestly—that was just terrible. I think it either went read-only or simply refused to mount properly anymore; I can't quite recall, but it ended up in the trash. Then I had what I believe was a Kingston drive that also went read-only after a while; I tried everything to rescue it and restore the write attribute, but it was a lost cause...
Jerry Robinson56 said:You can pretty much yank USB sticks out whenever you want without clicking "safely remove hardware"—since the internal data pins are shorter than the power pins, you aren't going to short anything out. But pulling external hard drives? That’s a whole different story.
Well, yeah, I suppose I agree with that—assuming they're idling—but if you pull one while a data transfer is actually happening, you might just brick it. I mean, if you're "forceful" about it, you risk corruption. Then, when you plug it back into your PC, you get that dreaded error message saying the drive is corrupted (or whatever the OS calls it), and you have to run a scan or select that "repair bad sectors" option, and so on... and that's if you're lucky. If luck isn't on your side, it just stays stuck in read-only mode... I've had a few sticks go south exactly like that.
Your stick has likely flipped into read-only mode. It’s one of those things that happens—I’ve actually had it happen to me once or twice myself, I guess. Your only real shot is to try and force the write attribute back on using some sort of online fix, but if that doesn't work... well, you might just have to toss it in the trash.
QUESTION: Did you ever pull it out "physically" without properly ejecting it through the software first? You know, clicking that little icon in the system tray and selecting "Eject." If you did, there's a good chance you yanked it while it was mid-transfer or maybe while some other app on your PC was still poking at it, and then everything just got... scrambled.
William Palmer7 said:Wait, I didn't realize streaming counted toward the bill? Well, if you've got a computer and an internet connection, you're going to have to pay for it too.
From what I understand—and I could be wrong here—it's a yes. If you own any device capable of picking up a signal—whether it's terrestrial, satellite, or via streaming—you're essentially required to pay the subscription...
Christian Torres3 said:If you ask PBS directly, they'll probably say no. But if you want to stop paying the fee, just cancel it. You don't need to justify your life to anyone. My amateur advice? When you cancel, just claim you don't own any device for receiving audiovisual signals—no TV, no radio. Don't explain yourself to them for the life of you; just say you don't have anything. There's a PDF out there about the legalities of paying the fee, go read it.
😁
Well, I suspect it isn't quite that simple. Because, if one technically owns even a smartphone, they might still be liable for the fee—since a phone can pick up an FM signal, or, you know, stream content via the Internet of Things...
wearymason4 said:...or maybe they just cooked up some brand-new (Chinese) unit of measurement?
👍
Right—just like that legendary metric, P. M. P. Inc. (Peak Music Power Output). You know, where they take a pair of 20-watt speakers and slap a massive "1200W" sticker right on the box. Yeah, sure. I guess we should all just believe them. 🙄 😁
Wait—are you actually using that mixer as your audio interface, or do you have a dedicated sound card hooked up separately? It’s a bit vague in your post. If you do have a separate one, try this: plug an external USB audio interface into your computer first and run the audio through that just to see if the issues persist. Once you've done that, run the same test using that USB Yamaha unit. Whichever device starts acting up would be my prime suspect. I’d also suggest swapping out the USB cables and trying different ports—keep an eye on those USB2 vs. USB3 connections and any potential compatibility hiccups there. Also, maybe double-check all the tone controls (EQ, etc.) on the mixer itself, along with whatever software you're running—including any specific driver software for the card (like PatchMix or whatever might be included)
It is possible—though I suppose we can't be certain—that your desktop icons have simply been hidden from view. Let us try this: right-click anywhere on the empty space of your desktop, hover your cursor over View, and then check whether the option for Show desktop icons has been checked. If it isn't, you might want to click it to enable that setting. Beyond that, I am afraid I am somewhat at a loss regarding what else could be causing this... if that doesn't do the trick, perhaps you should consider asking over . You might find a few more helpful perspectives there, I imagine...
Look, there isn't much profound wisdom to be found here—it’s pretty straightforward. If a moderator or an admin decided to lock a thread for whatever reason, then it’s locked. Period. You probably shouldn't try to reopen it, mostly because you're just asking for penalty points, which I suppose is avoidable... there has to be some semblance of order, after all. However, if you truly feel like a thread was shut down unfairly, your best bet is to lodge a complaint HERE.
wearymason4 said:That last link isn't the culprit, it's working just fine. What you're looking at isn't actually an update. It’s basically just giving permission to run test add-ons for developers, plus that line right above it about sending tech data over to Mozilla—which most people already have turned off. Only those of us who actually kept that setting disabled ran into those blocked add-on issues over the last few days.
Actually, no—I've had that enabled the whole time, and yet my add-ons were still getting disabled anyway... 🙂
What part of this isn't clicking for you? To pursue means to chase or hunt someone down—and "they'd be mine" simply implies they would belong to me... I suppose.