NVME 2.0

  • SpinRite v6.1 Release #3
    The 3rd release of SpinRite v6.1 is published and may be obtained by all SpinRite v6.0 owners at the SpinRite v6.1 Pre-Release page. (SpinRite will shortly be officially updated to v6.1 so this page will be renamed.) The primary new feature, and the reason for this release, was the discovery of memory problems in some systems that were affecting SpinRite's operation. So SpinRite now incorporates a built-in test of the system's memory. For the full story, please see this page in the "Pre-Release Announcements & Feedback" forum.
  • Be sure to checkout “Tips & Tricks”
    Dear Guest Visitor → Once you register and log-in please checkout the “Tips & Tricks” page for some very handy tips!

  • BootAble – FreeDOS boot testing freeware

    To obtain direct, low-level access to a system's mass storage drives, SpinRite runs under a GRC-customized version of FreeDOS which has been modified to add compatibility with all file systems. In order to run SpinRite it must first be possible to boot FreeDOS.

    GRC's “BootAble” freeware allows anyone to easily create BIOS-bootable media in order to workout and confirm the details of getting a machine to boot FreeDOS through a BIOS. Once the means of doing that has been determined, the media created by SpinRite can be booted and run in the same way.

    The participants here, who have taken the time to share their knowledge and experience, their successes and some frustrations with booting their computers into FreeDOS, have created a valuable knowledgebase which will benefit everyone who follows.

    You may click on the image to the right to obtain your own copy of BootAble. Then use the knowledge and experience documented here to boot your computer(s) into FreeDOS. And please do not hesitate to ask questions – nowhere else can better answers be found.

    (You may permanently close this reminder with the 'X' in the upper right.)

I think 2.0 is mostly a reorganization of the documentation presenting the architecture. They always add new optional minor features with the various point releases, but they kicked it from 1.5 to 2.0 because they were doing the reorg of the documentation.
That's not just a Microsoft thing. But they have the largest and most varied user base so naturally it evokes the most *itching. The wider your user base, the more difficult it is to keep anything simple.
Well MS used to actually have a proper QA team... they made the active decision to eliminate a fair amount of them when they announced the user based "testing" initiative known as the Insider Program and the release previews and feedback hub. It's too bad they're losing so much money they can't afford to do internal QA /sarcasm
One wasn't exclusive of the other. They overlapped and still had the same issues. It's simply the nature of having such a complex product with decades worth of backward compatibility. ALL companies face these same issues to one varying degree or another, depending on their user base and product complexity.
depending on their user base and product complexity
Well in my considerable experience, it is possible for a test and verification team to be so skilled as to find most of the most impactful problems before it reaches the field. You have to invest in the team, in their training, in their tools and their skills, but it makes a huge difference in the customer's perception of your quality. (And before you ask, no I cannot and will not talk in detail about my past employment, as I am under strict confidentiality requirements. What I can say is I worked on a product line that was comprised of about 10 million lines of code, was installed in millions of locations and had a history going back many decades.)
For all I know they did discover most of the the most impactful issues? I have heard that some of the test base just wasn't "listened to" but this isn't exactly unusual with amateur testers, as opposed to professional. Amateur testers produce a lot of "noise" with low quality communications. As is said, "there is always room for improvement".

I suspect a reason the recent Windows Explorer task tray flaw got through to general release is the likelihood that too much of the user base are techies with newer equipment and displays adjusted for smaller text. Few years ago at work, no one among the IT staff understood why much of the user base was blowing up the support lines with "freezing" and slow computers. Only reason I had an opportunity to beat them to discovering the cause was the fact that I still hang on to and regularly use an ancient laptop from when I was initally hired into the enterprise. It still had an HDD while the rest of IT (and my main machine) was running on SSDs; someone accidentally told every drive in the Enterprise to decrypt.

The recent print engine patching issues I suspect were driven by the necessity to "rush to release" and the likely realization that the entire decades old print engine needs to be rearchitected. But that will take at least a couple of years since it may mean redoing all of its drivers. We just replaced a perfectly good label printer at work a couple of weeks ago because the manufacturer dropped support for it nine years ago and already said they weren't going to rewrite another. (instead pointing us to one of their newer products) But that was an exception. For the most part, we've just had some cases were we've had to remove/reinstall workstation printers. I'm thinking they may end up encapsulating/isolating/sandboxing the print engine somehow.