Windows 7 Cannot install SP1 in Win-7

[kemical]

I could try RichM's suggestion to do a chkdsk /r.

This guide will show a few ways to run chkdsk although whichever method you use make sure you search for and repair broken sectors:
The How-To Geek Guide to Using Check Disk in Windows 7, 8, or 10

Once the chkdsk has completed then run the SFC as was explained above.

 

[RichM]

Excellent tutorial kemical its the one I usually use. As I know kemical gets this but it needs to be said checkdisk has quite a few different
sequences. I chose "R" because then it not only verfies integrity of the drive and files but can also looks for bad sectors at the surface and can cover over them and or actually hide them from Windows as well as reset all free space for Windows,

 

[Sandbox]

RichM for information only chkdsk /r dose not check the integrity of the drive
chkdsk /r Locates bad sectors and recovers readable information (implies /F)
wich /f Fixes errors on the disk so no were chkdsk /r dose not check verfies integrity

 

[RichM]

Sandbox, I am not meaning to be argumentative but all versions of checkdisk check volume integrity:
"CHKDSK (short for "check disk") is a system tool in DOS, OS/2 and Windows. It verifies the file system integrity of a volume and fixes logical file system errors. It is similar to the fsck command in Unix."
CHKDSK - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
F= fixes disk errors
R= Locates bad sectors and recovers readable information

 

[Sandbox]

F= fixes disk errors
R= Locates bad sectors and recovers readable information
no disrespect rich but where do you find this words in the R= AND F= (verfies integrity)
I don't understand why you'd need to put extra words into computer commands, it's a bit confusing for someone like me, when you see words that don't belong there, and also gives misconception, and I noticed that you do have that tendencyto do that, like another time when you said (incremental)
which the word belongs only after you have a complete backup, incremental is used when additional information is collected on our drive up to the date of the backup, copying new data as a grows they use the word called incremental. not to be used as incremental updates? it's just not proper I don't mean to be mean this all in good heart

 

[RichM]

In your "good heart" why are you so limited in your use of vocabulary Sandbox?
Here is "dictionary.com" definition of the adjective "incremental":
adjective
1.
increasing or adding on, especially in a regular series:
i.e. small, incremental tax hikes.

Chkkdsk R & F:
chkdsk /f /r or chkdsk /r /f?
scroll all the way down and you will see a list of all switches in checkdisk to improve your limited knowledge on this subject.
All in the spirit of your education!

 

[nmsuk]

Not more nonsense. This has to stop now. RichM Part of your post I like though is a little insulting questioning Sandboxs vocabulary.

Sandbox, mind the language please and don't insult other users. Stuff like this needs to stop and now. Getting sick of seeing stuff like this on here of late.

 

[Sandbox]

sorry for i stated facts his insulting me but im not going to get to is level i apologize for this behavior in the forum

 

[Mike]

Move on and stay on topic please.

By the way, in the case of chkdsk, /f used to have to be explicitly called, but this is no longer the case. There is a reason and history for this. It was not always possible to dismount a drive in previous versions of Windows due to the file system and technical limitations of the system. Specifically, at one point, you may recall scandisk was being used instead of the chkdsk from the command-line. Also when you use /r it implies /f and does it anyway. That will end this controversy once and for all. Please do not continue to argue over nonsense.

The original poster deserves a better reply than this madness.

 

[n2b]

Thank you all for your continued interest in my humble but persistent problem with Win7. I will go thru the chkdsk and the SFC as kemical suggested soon - after the holidays. Hopefully we will be able to whip it one of these days

 

[kemical]

Thank you all for your continued interest in my humble but persistent problem with Win7. I will go thru the chkdsk and the SFC as kemical suggested soon - after the holidays. Hopefully we will be able to whip it one of these days

Good luck!

 

[RichM]

Yes let us know how it works out please.
I just reread the whole thread and I think we may have overlooked Holdum333 excellent thought that formatting doesn't touch bad sectors on the drive and the drive being bad is a common reason why Windows installs do not complete....this is more reason than ever to run chkdsk as it might fix it but it also may not complete indicating the hard drive is in poor shape and should be replaced.
The next step after that might be to run one of those hard drive checking utilities on the drive though if checkdisk won't complete I just normally replace the hard drive.

 

[n2b]

Here is the report for the two checks kemical suggested earlier. I ran the chkdsk /r. It completed the 5 stages and at the end very quickly scrolled through the command screen and restarted the computer. I assumed that meant that it did not find any problems.
Next, I did the sfc /scannow. After completing 39% of the scan it stopped with the following message:
"Windows Resource Protection could not perform the requested operation"
What do I do now. As I mentioned earlier, It will not install the Win-7 SP1, otherwise it runs OK and installs other MS security patches etc.
Any suggestions

 

[kemical]

Hi n2b,
have you tried running SFC in safe mode? If not try that .

Suggestion
Also may I ask is there any particular reason your running in 32bit?

I would suggest you back up what you can and then use the page below as well as your activation key to obtain a copy of Windows 7 64bit (it will most likely have SP1 included).
Windows 7

This will also give you the added bonus of being able to use all of the 4GB of RAM too.

Your upgrade to Windows 10, as long as your compatible of course, should be relatively easy.

 

[RichM]

I have to agree with kemical though you might try SFC again as it often takes more than 1 try.

 

[holdum333]

I have to agree with kemical though you might try SFC again as it often takes more than 1 try.

Hi n2b,
have you tried running SFC in safe mode? If not try that .

I believe SFC was suggested to be tried in safe mode!

 

[Sandbox]

yep that's wy i tried to remove the post but could not remove it lol

 

[n2b]

As I wrote earlier I completed the chkdsk /r. It completed with no errors. Next, I did the sfc /scannow. After completing 39% of the scan it stopped with the following message:

"Windows Resource Protection could not perform the requested operation"

I followed up by repeating the scannow, once in normal mode and again in safe mode. Got the same error message at 39% as above.
So I've done everything I can think of short of formatting the whole hard drive and installing Win-7 SP1 from a disc. Which would mean having to reinstall all the applications that I have now -- which I am loath to do if possible.
Question for Kemical for his suggestion that if I have to reformat and install from a disc I might as well go for a 64 bit Win7. If I was to do that what happens to all my application software that are 32 bit. Is there any incompatibility having a 64 bit OS running 32 bit applications? Don't I loose the advantages of a 64 bit OS when the apps are not 64 bit?

 

[kemical]

Is there any incompatibility having a 64 bit OS running 32 bit applications? Don't I loose the advantages of a 64 bit OS when the apps are not 64 bit?

Some apps will only run in 32bit and you'll see that 64bit windows has two sets of Program files. One for 32bit and one for 64bit. This web page explains it far better than I:
Why Does 64-Bit Windows Need a Separate “Program Files (x86)” Folder?

Post the names of the apps and we'll have a look see.

 

[holdum333]

Hi @n2b I always like to ad my 2cent's to these kind of threads. If you run W7 without upgrading to W7SP1; you PC will be wide open to hackers, updates, and other things which will cause you much grief and will probably end up you stalling W7SP1 from the disc anyway, as @kemical has explained in this thread earlier. The old saying "Pay me now or pay me latter"