|
I once had a strange situation similar to that, a PC from a friend had startup problems.
Disconnecting the bunch of USB devices that were attached to the PC, and several restarts of Windows helped.
|
|
|
|
|
After updating Windows, merging all partitions of the old HDD and uninstalling the external HDD driver yesterday night, today it started working again. 
In any case, thanks for your post.
|
|
|
|
|
Check if the usb delivers enough power to the HDD.
|
|
|
|
|
After updating Windows, merging all partitions of the old HDD and uninstalling the external HDD driver yesterday night, today it started working again. 
In any case, thanks for your post.
|
|
|
|
|
Keep in mind that there is an Explorer setting to hide empty drives. If the external drive is empty, it might not show up.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
After updating Windows, merging all partitions of the old HDD and uninstalling the external HDD driver yesterday night, today it started working again.
In any case, thanks for your post.
|
|
|
|
|
You do not give enough information to diagnose quickly so let's go in slow mode 
I assume that both computers are using the same OS (either windows or linux). If not, the instructions below may not apply. Also, the instructions are ordered from the quickest to do to the hardest.
* Try different USB ports on the desktop. Use ports directly from the motherboard. Some case ports have bad cables that affect the speed and power delivery. Preferably use USB 2 ports instead of USB 3 ports. Even today, some drivers have issues with some USB 3 hardware. My current board has this problem in Linux.
* Use a Y USB cable to connect the external drive to two USB ports (if you have one). It might be under powered.
* Double check that the external box specifications are sufficient for the disk you put inside. It may be working on the laptop (due to different drivers than the desktop) but might be corrupting the disk. I had this problem once were a box appeared to work but was clipping anything above 1TB corrupting the HDD (which, to make maters worse, was a backup drive  ).
* If you made an exact copy of the disk on to the SSD and they are both on the desktop, they have the same ID which is unacceptable by the OS so only the first disk to be connected is made available. In this case you have to change the disk ID. The following links from a quick internet search might help (even if they do not present the most appropriate solution)
Linux:
https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/what-is-disk-identifier-740408/[^]
How do I change the disk ID in Linux?[^]
Windows:
How to change Hard Disk's Volume Serial Number (Volume ID) - wintips.org - Windows Tips & How-tos[^]
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
After updating Windows, merging all partitions of the old HDD and uninstalling the external HDD driver yesterday night, today it started working again.
In any case, thanks for your post.
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds more and more like a duplicate ID problem. When you merged the partitions the drive gets assigned a new ID.
Had you made an exact copy of the disks before?
Understanding what happened might help you prevent it in the future.
Either way, problem solved 
|
|
|
|
|
ElectronProgrammer wrote: Either way, problem solved
Yesssss... 
My brother inlaw did it after seeing a youtube tutorial... he used macrium reflect to make the duplicate... I would have formatted the old disk after seeing the new one worked properly to keep it empty and ready to receive music, films and other files.
ElectronProgrammer wrote: That sounds more and more like a duplicate ID problem. When you merged the partitions the drive gets assigned a new ID.
I agree you.
|
|
|
|
|
While reading the introduction to C# 10 In A Nutshell[^]
Quote .NET 6’s predecessor was .NET 5, whose predecessor was .NET Core 3. (Microsoft removed “Core” from the name, and skipped version 4). The reason for skipping a version was to avoid confusion with .NET Framework 4.x.
Then a little later…
Quote: This means that Microsoft’s renaming of .NET Core to .NET has created an unfortunate ambiguity. In this book, we’ll refer to the new .NET as .NET 5+. And to refer to .NET Core and its successors, we’ll use the phrase “.NET Core and .NET 5+.”
To add to the confusion, .NET (5+) is a framework, yet it’s very different from the .NET Framework. Hence, we’ll use the term runtime in preference to framework, where possible
If you understand that, you are Genius! 
But this book is named C# _10_ In A Nutshell?!?
Then a little further down…
Quote: C# 10 ships with Visual Studio 2022, and is used when you target .NET 6.
 
I’m not sure why you were confused. 
Happy 20th anniversary .Net!!
Or maybe it’s really 20th birthday since .Net isn’t married to anyone??
Which means .Net still not old enough to drink but drives many others to it.
modified 29-Jan-22 16:39pm.
|
|
|
|
|
.NET Framework: .NET 1.0 - 4.8
.NET (formerly .NET Core): .NET Core 1.0 - 3.0, .NET 5 and later
The framework specifier is what MS uses to differentiate them. It's confusing now but I think their goal is to make it less so going forward since now there's just the unified .NET.
|
|
|
|
|
It's still just the .net framework.
|
|
|
|
|
And if you create a .NET (the framework formerly known as .NET Core) project with:
dotnet new classlib -n "foo" -lang C#
Which is the only way I know to create a .NET (the framework formerly known as .NET Core) library project, since I was using that because I couldn't find "Class Library" as there are so many freaking templates now and I just now searched for "library" for some reason and there it is "a class library that targets .NET Standard or .NET Core"...
...anyways...
It creates a .NET 6.0 project. But if you want it compatible with .NET Core 3.1 and you change the target project, it leaves this kruft in the .csproj:
<PropertyGroup>
<TargetFramework>netcoreapp3.1</TargetFramework>
<ImplicitUsings>enable</ImplicitUsings>
<Nullable>enable</Nullable>
</PropertyGroup>
and the ImplicitUsings and Nullable are not compatible with .NET Core 3.1 so you spend an hour googling and stumble across an SO post that says, go to the .csproj and set those to "disable."
   
So many emotions because VS 2022 doesn't do this one simple thing for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: the ImplicitUsings and Nullable are not compatible with .NET Core 3.1 so you spend an hour googling and stumble across an SO post that says, go to the .csproj and set those to "disable."
That is crazy! It’s no fun being the one to discover this nutty stuff when you’re just trying to get work done.
|
|
|
|
|
So where does .NET Standard fit in?
Oh wait, that's already being deprecated...
|
|
|
|
|
That was a typo - Microsoft never meant to make it standard... not one at least...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
modified 31-Jan-22 1:07am.
|
|
|
|
|
From the next release it'll be known as .NET Standard Core 
|
|
|
|
|
.NET Standard is a specification (not another .NET framework) for APIs that are common to .NET Framework and .NET Core. If you built a library to .NET Standard, the same DLL could be used by .NET Core or .NET Framework (you do have to match versions, though, but there are charts for that).
With .NET 5 and beyond, there is only one .NET, so Standard is not needed or used.
|
|
|
|
|
I know, but good summary nonetheless
|
|
|
|
|
Haven't really settled on a version; still trying to settle on a "Point".
There's the Foundation Point: double. Drawing Point: int. Drawing PointF (float). The GeometryPoint. The GeographyPoint. Vector2. Vector3...
I'm leaning towards Vector2.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
And then, just in case things weren't confusing enough:
Using C# 9 outside .NET 5 · Discussion #47701 · dotnet/roslyn · GitHub[^]
Some C# 9/10 features work fine in .NET Framework (4.7.2 / 4.8) projects. Some features can be enabled by adding specific class definitions to your project. And some just won't work at all.
But Visual Studio won't let you select C# 9 / 10 as the language version in a .NET Framework project. You have to manually edit the project file to specify the <LangVersion>.
Which is relatively easy to do in a new "SDK-style" project - just double click the project file, and it opens within Visual Studio so you can edit it. But not so easy in the old project format, where you have to "unload project" before Visual Studio lets you edit the project file.
And although there's a command-line tool to update your projects to the new format[^], not all projects are supported. For example, ASP.NET MVC 5 / WebAPI 2 / WebForms projects can't be updated.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
with C# language improvements in last few years, it also tripped me up that new feature added, but was not clear which .net I needed
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it gets really confusing when you just want to get some new feature like string interpolation or null conditionals.
That's one very nice feature of the book, C# 10 In A Nutsshell. It lists the exact features which were added to each version of C# by version right at the beginning of the book:
What’s New in C# 10.0?
What’s New in C# 9.0?
What’s New in C# 8.0?
What’s New in C# 6.0?
What’s New in C# 5.0?
...
Going all the way back to 2.0.
it's a very nice listing that summarizes all the additions in each release.
|
|
|
|
|
It is not that hard to understand.
.NET started out as .NET Framework. It has had versions 1.0 -> 4.8
During the time when .NET 4.x was the current version, MS wanted to start building a .NET that was portable across different OSs, not just Windows. Given the vast number of APIs in the .NET Framework, it was not practical to convert all of it over to .NET to run on multiple OSs in one release. So MS created .NET Core to have the core APIs necessary for most programs. Thus, .NET Core 1.0 -> 3.1 over time, to get more and more APIs there.
But what about making library DLLs work on both Framework and Core? That is where .NET Standard comes in. Not a framework, but the common specification of what exists in .NET Framework and .NET Core. If you built your DLL to .NET Standard, then it could be used by a matching Framework or Core.
Finally, MS got close enough that the next .NET Core would have almost everything .NET Framework 4.x had. They put it into .NET 5. .NET Framework is end-of-lifed at 4.8.x. .NET Core is end-of-lifed at 3.1. .NET, which diverged with .NET Framework and .NET Core, has merged back to one .NET (5, and now 6) to support multiple OSs and CPUs. No need for .NET Standard with .NET 5 and beyond.
.NET Framework>>>>>+>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.NET
| | | |
| +>>.NET Standard>>+ |
| | | |
.NET Core>>>>>>>>>>>>>+
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
