# serious CHKDSK bug in Windows 7 RTM build



## RootbeaR

Testers claim discovery of serious CHKDSK bug in Windows 7 RTM build


----------



## JohnWill

Looks like it's not nearly as "serious" as people suggest, and in point of fact it's a design decision to use a lot of memory for performance issues.

In addition, it's only when you use the scan all sectors /R switch, which most users rarely do anyway. If I need to scan all sectors, I use the disk manufacturer's diagnostic, which does a much more through job.


----------



## RootbeaR

"According to reports, the issue only arises if CHKDSK is run on a drive or volume other than the primary boot volume, and only if the '/r' switch is used as well. The '/r' switch tells the utility to locate bad sectors and attempt to repair them and recover the data they contain."
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090807/tc_pcworld/windows7bugisnoshowstopper_1

So it is only a problem if you try to repair or recover?

What good is the utility then? Tell you that you have a problem? You probably suspected that already to be using it.


----------



## JohnWill

RootbeaR said:


> What good is the utility then? Tell you that you have a problem? You probably suspected that already to be using it.


I think you misunderstand the use of the */R* switch. It does a surface scan, the */F* or */X* switches are what you normally use to check all the index structures and MFT tables.

As I said, */R* is really not the best way to do a surface analysis anyway, the disk manufacturer diagnostic will normally do a much better job.


----------



## perfume

Dear John Will,
So, you are using Windows7 model, and i would sincerely like to know your opinion as to whether it is really worth the money and the attendent problems(if any), when a xp Pro user like me decides to shift to Win.7?


----------



## RootbeaR

perfume said:


> Dear John Will,
> So, you are using Windows7 model, and i would sincerely like to know your opinion as to whether it is really worth the money and the attendent problems(if any), when a xp Pro user like me decides to shift to Win.7?


I feel 100% confident in saying it will be better than Vista.  No I am not using it, 
but JohnWill.

I did test it for a bit in VBox though 10Q very much.


----------



## JohnWill

I have been using it full time for a couple of months, and I had the beta running and occasional use before that. I'm moving to it permanently on my two main machines. While it's certainly not perfect, it's so much better than Vista that I can finally see moving from XP. 

The Virtual XP mode is handy to resolve the occasional compatibility issue that comes up, though they have actually been minimal. I have one application that I regularly use that refuses to load on Win7, of course I run the 64 bit version too, which adds a fly in the ointment.


----------



## RootbeaR

I've seen the "R" switch recommended about 3 times in as many days here on this site.

No I am not reading every thread.


----------



## JohnWill

Care to post an example? I personally never recommend it, because it's a waste of time IMO. That scan takes forever, and doesn't do the low level scan that the manufacturer's diagnostic would do. It also doesn't reassign the spare sectors like the real diagnostic does.


----------



## valis

good god. They call that a serious bug?

Push out a hotfix, good as new. Done deal.

Sheesh. Buncha chicken littles running around out there.


----------



## valis

perfume said:


> Dear John Will,
> So, you are using Windows7 model, and i would sincerely like to know your opinion as to whether it is really worth the money and the attendent problems(if any), when a xp Pro user like me decides to shift to Win.7?


what johnwill said. I only have one box left with XP on it, and that's _purely_ for a work environment; while the name on the box is mine, all the software is my companies, so that I can remote in via their security protocols.

Once I'm gone from there, so's XP.


----------



## RootbeaR

http://forums.techguy.org/windows-nt-2000-xp/851276-there-way-get-work.html#post6865774

Post #2

Saw about three today now. Another thread where RichM (sp) said same thing.



valis said:


> good god. They call that a serious bug?


I agree, what's a BSOD when you are running MS, normal.

I do see many people claiming this isn't the case since Vista. Brainwashed.


----------



## valis

brainwashed indeed. Vista is simply a stop-gap os, just as ME was. 7 is rock solid, and IMO, the best OS they've put out with the most changes (functioning changes, that is) since 2k.


----------



## RootbeaR

valis said:


> 7 is rock solid, and IMO, the best OS they've put out with the most changes (functioning changes, that is) since 2k.


I ran it for a while in Virtual Box. Much better than Vista. :up:
Did notice quite the slowdown after installing antis to it though, so I just kept loading the snapshot I took before installing the anti-virus.

I still like the XP menu system of clicking a button and finding whatever you want. Why do I want to type to find an app?

Menu changes are my biggest beef with it for the time I used it. Other than that, it ran well, even in the virtual environment on my PC that you wouldn't want to install Vista on.
Only took an hour to install as well. Much faster than any Vista I installed.

It is what Vista should have been, was supposed to be.


----------



## valis

RootbeaR said:


> I ran it for a while in Virtual Box. Much better than Vista. :up:
> Did notice quite the slowdown after installing antis to it though, so I just kept loading the snapshot I took before installing the anti-virus.
> 
> *I still like the XP menu system of clicking a button and finding whatever you want. Why do I want to type to find an app?*
> 
> Menu changes are my biggest beef with it for the time I used it. Other than that, it ran well, even in the virtual environment on my PC that you wouldn't want to install Vista on.
> Only took an hour to install as well. Much faster than any Vista I installed.
> 
> It is what Vista should have been, was supposed to be.


what do you mean by that?


----------



## RootbeaR

valis said:


> what do you mean by that?


Click "Start" and there is menu for apps, shutdown, recently used...

7, I had problems getting back to process' and such.

I believe it was the beta as well and not the RC.

I like XPs' menu format.


----------



## valis

just click 'all programs' at the bottom, et voila.

MY biggest beef is that they have done away with the up button in windows explorer. I use a pretty complex hierarchal structure, and when I get somewhere, and I know that the next file I need is up and over one, I like to use the up button instead of the drill down option in the left pane.

c'est la vie, I guess. Most fun part is watching people gripe about how they miss their 'show desktop' icon.


----------



## JohnWill

My single biggest beef with Win7? The really screwed up the search! Let's say I want to search for a partial file name of folder on some drive on the system.

In every version of Windows prior to Win7, I could just right click on the folder and select search and enter my search arguments.

With Win7, I have to use their mouse-happy search and wade through some defaults and navigate to the folder first. That's if it even offers the option, sometimes the search just refuses to allow me to select the "See More Results" link and the window just closes! NOT COOL! 

It's hard to imagine they screw up search so badly and claim it's "vastly improved"!


----------



## LauraMJ

valis said:


> c'est la vie, I guess. Most fun part is watching people gripe about how they miss their 'show desktop' icon.


 Noooooooooooo!!!


----------



## valis

LauraMJ said:


> Noooooooooooo!!!


.

have no fear.....it's there......you just gots to find it.


----------



## Elvandil

Agent Ransack still works for searching. It's in the context menu, and it's tha fastest, non-indexed search I've found.

Personally, I like and recommend chkdsk /r. It searches for and marks bad clusters (In Vista, chkdsk /b rechecks the clusters marked by /r and unmarks then if they test OK.), it tries to move data from bad clusters to new locations, and it reports on any bad clusters found after the surface scan. And it checks the file system like /f does. So I find it a good substitute for the manufacturer's scan.


----------



## LauraMJ

So long as it's available.  I use that constantly!


----------



## valis

LauraMJ said:


> So long as it's available.  I use that constantly!


ditto. It's to the _right_ of the clock, just a small narrow bar. Took me a while to find that one.


----------



## JohnWill

Elvandil said:


> Agent Ransack still works for searching. It's in the context menu, and it's tha fastest, non-indexed search I've found.


It doesn't show up in the context menu for folders on Win7 for me, I just installed 1.7.3 and no joy.


----------



## valis

JohnWill said:


> It doesn't show up in the context menu for folders on Win7 for me, I just installed 1.7.3 and no joy.


it's a third party app.

http://www.mythicsoft.com/agentransack/


----------



## Elvandil

JohnWill said:


> It doesn't show up in the context menu for folders on Win7 for me, I just installed 1.7.3 and no joy.


Let me check it out later and let you know. I assumed that it did, but I can't swear that I actually saw it there. I know it worked in my Vista.

The extension is arshellext.dll if you want to try unregistering/reregistering.


----------



## JohnWill

valis said:


> it's a third party app.
> 
> http://www.mythicsoft.com/agentransack/


Give me a little credit, I downloaded and installed it.


----------



## JohnWill

Elvandil said:


> Let me check it out later and let you know. I assumed that it did, but I can't swear that I actually saw it there. I know it worked in my Vista.
> 
> The extension is arshellext.dll if you want to try unregistering/reregistering.


I tried registering it again, and it succeeded, but it still doesn't show up.


----------



## Elvandil

No. Not losing my mind after all. It's there and it works. This is its reg entry:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Directory\shellex\ContextMenuHandlers\AgentRansackHere]
@="{6646F704-1528-4B5C-BAB7-176FA4B5F80A}}"

Are you running 32 or 64?


----------



## Rich-M

> .
> 
> Personally, I like and recommend chkdsk /r. It searches for and marks bad clusters (In Vista, chkdsk /b rechecks the clusters marked by /r and unmarks then if they test OK.), it tries to move data from bad clusters to new locations, and it reports on any bad clusters found after the surface scan. And it checks the file system like /f does. So I find it a good substitute for the manufacturer's scan


I could not agree more. I almost always use chkdsk /r if I use checkdisk.
My only beef with Windows 7 is the loss of "Quick Launch" but have gotten by with Desktop and Links Toolbar to replace it. It also took me forever to spot the quick "show desktop" to the right of the time on tray.
But I am converting all systems to Windows 7 and have 2 done with 2 to go. One thing that really impressed me is my main unit which is a 32 bit I7 really speeded up from Vista Ultimate to 7 Ultimate but my 64 bit Penryn 9400 quad core unit, was unchanged in speed from Vista to Windows 7. So whatever it' s clean and really stable and I have liked it a lot since the beta version.


----------



## Elvandil

In place of Quick Launch, I've been using FreeLaunchBar for some time, anyway. It pops up with a mouse hover and I've made menus and submenus for all my most used apps. I actually bought the Truelaunchbar some time afterward. But it was just too much. It had far more "features" than I wanted or used, so I went back to the free one.

I have to say that getting it started and set up was a pain. At first, it is labelled and takes up too much space. And it typically has 2 entries in the Toolbar menu on the Taskbar, even though only one is checked. But once configured, it is fast and handy.


----------



## Rich-M

Thanks El I will give this a try...


----------



## Rich-M

Wow thank you so much Free Launch Bar replaces it perfectly and leaves a nice clean taskbar as well.


----------



## JohnWill

Elvandil said:


> No. Not losing my mind after all. It's there and it works. This is its reg entry:
> 
> Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
> 
> [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Directory\shellex\ContextMenuHandlers\AgentRansackHere]
> @="{6646F704-1528-4B5C-BAB7-176FA4B5F80A}}"
> 
> Are you running 32 or 64?


I'm running 64 bit, need more than 3gigs for virtual machines. 

BTW, that entry is in my registry, see.


----------



## valis

JohnWill said:


> Give me a little credit, I downloaded and installed it.


sorta figured as much, as very, very little gets past you, but just making sure.


----------

