Okay, but just to ease my conscience, stay on this thread when Glenn moves on.

The program has the drivers, because of what it needs to do to access drives, it locks up all the USB resources, and the mouse and keyboard freeze -- it isn't expecting to have the whole system run out of USB. If I don't load the USB drivers, the program works (because then the BIOS mounts the keys and mouse), but it doesn't see the drive onto which the clone is to be built. It doesn't do SATA data (says so in the manual), but can see SATA drives (through the interrupt). I'm waiting for their tech support to tell me he's seen this configuration before, but everybody seems to be surprised that the familiar stuff isn't there somewhere.

Okay, if you say so. Perhaps it's okay.

Well, I don't know for sure that it is okay, but the worst thing would be hearing all kinds of clunking and other noises coming from the drive. That's a major physical drive problem.

I'm not really following what you mean here, controllers and cables being two different things. Do you mean the systemboard has only SATA connections on it and no IDE controller at all? And which software are you talking about having trouble with SATA and USB drives? Must be the operating system, since that's the only software that gives a shit what kind of interface is being used.

Yes, there is a SATA cable connection on the motherboard, no connectors for IDE anywhere, everything but the internal hard drive and DVD drive (PATA) is USB. The software is disk recovery software, it boots off of a CD, loads a minimal OS (DOS), and ignores the BIOS and talks directly to the disk, or tries to.

I see now. You say SATA connection, meaning SATA controller. Okay, got it.

As for the software, if it is DOS based then it doesn't have drivers for USB which would explain why it isn't seeing the devices. As for SATA if it saw the drive previously then it must have a driver for accessing SATA connected drives, but since yours is problematic it now can't see it. Hmmmm ...

I wonder if using a Linux LIVE distribution of some sort would allow for mounting and seeing the drive. Probably not, seeing as it appears to be either dead or close to it. How about running a drive clone creation package like Ghost, which would allow for at least getting a byte-by-byte duplicate of the drive's contents.

You know what? It's nearly two in the morning here on the east coast and I'm getting real tired and fuzzy headed. If you're interested in talking further tomorrow we can. I can get some more details and do some basic research.

Okay, if you say so. Perhaps it's okay.

I'm not really following what you mean here, controllers and cables being two different things. Do you mean the systemboard has only SATA connections on it and no IDE controller at all? And which software are you talking about having trouble with SATA and USB drives? Must be the operating system, since that's the only software that gives a shit what kind of interface is being used.

Yes, there is a SATA cable connection on the motherboard, no connectors for IDE anywhere, everything but the internal hard drive and DVD drive (PATA) is USB. The software is disk recovery software, it boots off of a CD, loads a minimal OS (DOS), and ignores the BIOS and talks directly to the disk, or tries to.

Wait a second; I recognize that speak. You're not really technical at all - you're a product marketing manager!

Yuck! Now you're really on my shit list ...

We can agree to disagree, but computerized appliances won't have file structures you can see and future computers will have a UI neither U nor I will understand. OK that was lame.

I'll believe it when I see an actual live, functional computer appliance. Personally they have been promising radical new systems for literally decades now, and they never come about due to the need for backwards compatibility. As long as, ahem, IT Managers continue to shovel buckets of money into MS' coffers they will never really change how the dominate system operates. Instead they will offer lots of small incremental changes to keep the market churning and money flowing in.

Think about it, how is Windows Vista so much different than Windows 3.x? It really isn't in terms of how users interact with the system. Yes, it is much more stable and sexy looking, but the same basic methods used to open, save, and work with files and applications really haven't changed much.

After nearly two decades of this insanity, and with the wealth and power Microsoft has, I think this is pathetic to say the least.

People don't need to know about memory architecture, or CPU internals, or what a bus is and the different types of busses there are in a typical system. But the same way I can look into my car's engine compartment and know where the battery is at, the radiator, etc, people should know some basic fundamental info about the computer.

Funny you should put it this way. Once upon a time, I rebuilt the master directory of a RAM disk byte by byte and recovered an important document (someone's thesis). At that time, I was also a mechanic, and I fixed cars (for $8/hour 40 hours a week). Now both look strange inside to me. The computer has internals and cables and devices that require a book a piece to learn about, and a language a minute for software, and cars now have very fancy vacuum systems, and injectors and tons of valves and very sophisticated onboard computers -- not to mention up to 17 air bags (hopefully labeled).

With cars, the problem started when no one cared about what happened to the car after the sale in terms of design. With computers it is somewhat the same.

With government, no one cares about the people after the election, after the sale is made. Way earlier on this thread, Paul Dirks worried about people that just start trashing corporations -- maybe it isn't the corporations all the time, but the spread of the mentality into areas of life where it doesn't belong.

Does anyone remember a car called the Morris Minor? You could get to any part in the engine compartment, because it was designed that way. And Word Perfect, which built its success on customer service. Standing by one's product was the mark of a "reputable company". "Established in..." all integrity and reputation.

This must be what it's like to grow old.