Amazon Associate’s Account Closed

Amazon just notified me in email that my Associate’s account was closed due to not being in compliance with their operating agreement:

“You are not in compliance with Participation Requirement Number 29 because purchases resulting from Special Links on your site have been used for resale or commercial use.”

I have no idea how or why this happened.

 

A couple of years ago I moved my blog from the free Blogger platform to a paid WordPress.com hosted site. About the same time I signed up for an Amazon Associate’s account, profiting from any Amazon links resulting in sales, hoping that the proceeds would cover the costs of WordPress hosting and domain registration.

A quick calculation shows Amazon payouts of $669.57 between 2 August 2012 and 30 August 2016, that is about $167.39 per year, less the $99.00 for WordPress hosting, less $36.00 for Akismet blog spam filtering, less $19.00 for domain registration, leaves a profit of $13.39. Less $99.00 for bulk domain registration fees, not really fair to charge this fee to one domain, leaves a loss of $85.61 per year.

 

I do not know why I was suddenly out of compliance, I made no changes to either my Amazon Associates or WordPress accounts, and I’ve not posted any new content in a number of months. The WordPress stats show typical traffic (ignore the last two days), but the Amazon Associates report does show a marked increase in traffic:

 

I sent an email to Amazon support to clarify the violation, and to request my account be reinstated, but based on similar reports from other low traffic users,  I do not expect a resolution.

Instead, I opted-in to use WordPress’s own WordAds advertising platform, I still need to adjust the blog theme and settings to not interfere with reading, and I have no idea what the monetization would be, but at least I no longer have to bother with making special Amazon links.

Please comment and let me know if you find the ads to be intrusive, and I’ll consider funding the site without advertising assistance.

 

[Update: 1 September 2016]

A day after sending Amazon a request asking for an explanation, I received the following in email:

“This message is to advise you that your pievilsblo-20 account and your August 2016 Advertising Fees have been reinstated. Please accept our apologies for the closure.”

Looks like my account has been reinstated, no explanation of what happened.

Looks can be deceiving

It has been almost two weeks since I switched to using Blogger’s new dynamic template.

Browsing the site with the new template works really well; it uses most of the available browser real estate, it looks good on an iPad, it feels nice and fluid, but it also has problems.

 

For some reason my AdSense integration stopped working, and the AdSense site said my account needs to be verified. AdSense was working fine in the old template, so something in the new template, or switching to the new template, must have triggered this. I’ve had AdSense for almost a year, and in that time I’ve not even made enough for Google to trigger a payment. In order to verify my account, I had to enter a PIN they mailed me on a postcard, entered the amount of a test transfer in my bank account, and entered a PIN read to me on my phone. Two days after the verification steps were completed ads started showing up again.

 

Very few widgets support the dynamic template, and the options are limited to a handful of very basic widgets.

 

One of the supported widgets is the label cloud, and as I was configuring it, I decided to do some label cleanup. In the process I noticed that the new Blogger management interface is terrible at editing labels, and that direct links to labels no longer work.

 

In the old Blogger management interface it was easy and obvious how to add and remove labels, although renaming has never been supported. In the new interface there is only an add option, and to remove a tag, you have to add the same tag again to remove it, I discovered this by accident, as all the Blogger help still refers to the old management interface. Same as the old interface, you can filter all posts that contain a certain label, and then you can select one or more of those posts, and then add, or add again to remove, labels. Now, when a post has been selected, and you change the filter, that post does not get unselected, and when you then apply a label to a visibly selected post, it also applies to any previously selected posts that are not currently in the filter view. This is just silly.

 

Since I changed some of the labels, and I know that links to labels are case sensitive, this is another silly thing I never understood as label creation and editing is case insensitive, I wanted to test a label link. When clicking a label in the cloud widget on the main blog page, the link works fine, but when you directly navigate to a label link, you get a blank page. Not good.

 

Since I was so disappointed in only making a few dollars in a year of serving AdSense ads, I decided to create an Amazon Associates account, tag my links to Amazon products, and  show some Amazon ads, hoping I can at least recover the cost of the domain registration fees. It turns out that Blogger no longer natively supports Amazon ads, seems a bit anti-competitive to me, but that’s the nature of their business. Ok, you can host Amazon ads by using HTML in your template, but, the dynamic template does not support any customization, and it does not support any HTML widgets.

That leaves me to using just tagged links to Amazon pages, that is easy enough, just a bit of re-editing old pages. A friend suggested I use Bitly to shorten my Amazon tagged links, that way I can do link tracking, and since adding Bitly I’ve had … 3 clicks, seems I’ll have to keep paying those domain fees after all.

That same friend was kind enough to remind me of my associate obligation, to make it clear to users that I’m an Amazon associate, by adding legalese to my site. Something I would normally do in the footer, but wait, you guessed it, the dynamic template does not support any customization, and all I can do is add the text directly to every post.

Since that is a hassle, here is what I need to say, so I’ll just say it here to get some coverage:

blog.insanegenius.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.

 

Reading the blog on the iPad is a pleasant experience, but, the sidebar widgets that pop out are clearly designed for a mouse, not a finger, as such it is next to impossible to get them to pop out.

 

I use Windows Live Writer to author my blog posts, it is a great app, and the integrated image posting and sizing is so much easier than any alternatives I’ve tested. Unfortunately, the WYSIWIG functionality does not work with dynamic templates. In order to retrieve the blog template, WLW will make a test post, read the template, and then delete the test post. After making the test post, WLW times out reading the post, but at least it deletes it.

There are some rumblings that WLW may be discontinued, based on its absence from the Windows 8 Metro lineup of Live apps, and in support from the user community, there is a petition to not kill WLW.

A blog subscriber notified me that he was getting some “temporary post” titled posts in his feed. I’ve seen these before in Google Reader, even from Microsoft’s own MSDN and TechNet blogs. It seems that FeedBurner is so hasty that it streams the temporary post created by WLW before WLW had a chance to delete it. No harm, it just looks odd in the stream.

 

By now I was  pretty fed up with Blogger and the dynamic template, and I started looking for alternative and free blog hosting. There really seems to be only one free and feature rich alternative, and that is WordPress.com. WordPress has an easy to use Blogger importer, that imports posts, comments, and settings. Check out my blog in WordPress format. There is one catch, the free .com version of WordPress does not allow direct advertising, they do the advertising for their own revenue. Not that it really matters as the few dollars I stand to loose is well worth it if I don’t need to deal with Blogger.

 

I am still hopeful that Google will step up to the plate and fix Blogger and dynamic templates, but at least I know there is an easy migration path to WordPress.

Zotac ZBOXHD-ID11 4GB RAM

In this post I describe my experience while upgrading the BIOS, in order to support 4GB of memory.

This is the third post in a series of posts related to the Zotac ZBOX ZBOXHD-ID11.

Summary:
– 4GB is supported after upgrading the BIOS.
– BIOS has to be updated using less than 4GB, else ID11 fails to post.

[Update: 20 May 2010]
After writing this post, the machine started bluescreen / BSOD crashing.
Mostly MEMORY_MANAGEMENT / 0x0000001A errors, with occasional 0x000000BE and 0x0000003B crashes.
When I initially installed the 4GB RAM, I ran memtest for one cycle, and the RAM tested fine. I just reran memtest, and it is reporting that the memory as bad.
I replaced the memory with a new stick, I ran memtest overnight, and everything seems back to normal.
I hope it was just a bad stick, and not the ID11 that killed the memory.

When I ordered my ID11, I also ordered a 4GB Kingston SODIM RAM stick.
When I received the ID11, the specs said 2GB only, and after contacting Zotac support, and posting in their support forum, they confirmed that 4GB is not supported.
I reverted to using a 2GB Kingston SODIM RAM stick.

I was pleasantly surprised when Zotac announced a BIOS update that added 4GB support.

The BIOS changes are described as follows:
Version 05/11/10
.Added support on 4GB memory modules
.Added CMOS selection on Logo LED

I downloaded the BIOS update, extracted the contents, and tried running the AFUWIN AMI BIOS update utility. After a warning message appeared telling me to not run other apps and not to power down, on clicking ok, nothing happened. I tried again this time running AFUWIN.exe as administrator, still nothing.

I went to the AMI site, and downloaded their latest Windows BIOS update utility. Since I was running Windows 7 Ultimate x64, I ran AFUWINx64.exe, this binary automatically UAC prompted for elevated access, and presented this warning:

I opened the A140PA19.rom file, and the information tab showed the following:

I started the flash, and got this warning:

I accepted, and the flash completed:

I rebooted, and the POST screen showed a CMOS Checksum Bad error:

I pressed F1 to enter setup, and I made the following changes:
[Exit] [Load Optimal Defaults]
[Advanced] [PC Health Monitor] [CPUFAN TargetTemp Value] = 50
[Advanced] [IDE Configuration] [Configure SATA as] = AHCI
[Advanced] [PCIPnP] [Plug & Play OS] = Yes

The two BIOS changes are visible under these sections:
[Chipset] [North Bridge Configuration] “PCI MMIO Allocation: 4GB to 3072MB”
[Chipset] [South Bridge Configuration] [LOGO LED indicator:]

I rebooted, and everything worked fine.

Next I powered down, and replaced the 2GB RAM with 4GB RAM.

On reboot the following changes were visible on the POST screen and in the BIOS:

Booting into Windows, the following 4GB related changes were visible:

So far everything appears to work fine.
One of these days I will really get to testing media playback performance.

By the way.
In my first impressions post I reported that the ID11 came with the wrong power cable. Zotac support sent me the correct replacement cables free of charge:

Hitachi Ultrastar and Seagate Barracude LP 2TB drives

In my previous post I talked about Western Digital RE4-GP 2TB drive problems.

In this post I present my test results for 2TB drives from Seagate and Hitachi.
The test setup is the same as for the RE4-GP testing, except that I only tested 4 drives from each manufacturer.
Unlike the enterprise class WD RE4-GP and Hitachi Ultrastar A7K2000 drives, the Seagate Barracuda LP drive is a desktop drive.
The equivalent should have been a Seagate Constellation ES drive, but as far as I know the 2TB drives are not yet available.
To summarize:
The Hitachi A7K2000 drives performed without issue on all three controllers, the Seagate Barracuda LP drive failed to work with the Adaptec controller.
The Hitachi Ultrastar A7K2000 outperformed the Seagate Barracuda LP drive, but this was not really a surprise given the drive specs.
The Areca ARC1680 controller produced the best and most reliable results, the Adaptec was close, but given the overheating problem, it is not reliable unless additional cooling is added.
Test hardware:
Intel S5000PSL motherboard, dual Xeon E5450, 32GB RAM, firmware BIOS-98 BMC-65 FRUSDR-48
Adaptec 51245 RAID controller, firmware 17517, driver 5.2.0.17517
Areca ARC1680ix-12 RAID controller, firmware 1.47, driver 6.20.00.16_80819
LSI 8888ELP RAID controller, firmware 11.0.1-0017 (APP-1.40.62-0665), driver 4.16.0.64
Chenbro CK12803 28-port SAS expander, firmware AA11
Drive setup:
– Boot drive, 1 x 1TB WD Caviar Black WD1001FALS, firmware 05.00K05
Simple volume, connected to onboard Intel ICH10R controller running in RAID mode
– Data drives, 4 x 2TB Hitachi Ultrastar A7K2000 HUA722020ALA330 drives, firmware JKAOA20N
1 x hot spare, 3 x drive RAID5 4TB, configured as GPT partitions, dynamic disks, and simple volumes
– Data drives, 4 x 2TB Seagate Barracuda LP ST32000542AS drives, firmware CC32
1 x hot spare, 3 x drive RAID5 4TB, configured as GPT partitions, dynamic disks, and simple volumes

I tested the drives as shipped, with no jumpers, running at SATA-II / 3Gb/s speeds.
Adaptec 51245, SATA-II / 3Gb/s:
As in my previous test I had to use an extra fan to keep the Adaptec card from overheating.
The Hitachi drives had no problems.
The Hitachi drives completed initialization in 16 hours.
The Seagate drives would not show up on the system, I tried different ports, resets, cable swaps, no go.
Adaptec, RAID5, Hitachi:

Adaptec, RAID5, WD:

Areca ARC1680ix-12, SATA-II / 3Gb/s:
The Areca had not problems with the Hitachi or Seagate drives.
The Hitachi drives completed initialization in 40 hours.
The Seagate drives completed initialization in 49 hours.
The array initialization time of the Areca is significantly longer compared to Adaptec or LSI.
Areca, RAID5, Hitachi:

Areaca, RAID5, Seagate:

Areca, RAID5, WD:

LSI 8888ELP and Chenbro CK12803, SATA-II / 3Gb/s:
The Hitachi drives reported a few “Invalid field in CDB” errors with, but it did not appear to affect the operation of the array.
The Hitachi drives completed initialization in 4 hours.
The Seagate drives reported lots of “Invalid field in CDB” and “Power on, reset, or bus device reset occurred” errors, but it did not appear to affect the operation of the array.
The Seagate drives made clicking sounds when they powered on, and occasionally during normal operation.
The Seagate drives completed initialization in 4 hours.

LSI, RAID5, Hitachi:

LSI, RAID5, Seagate:

LSI, RAID5, WD:

The Hitachi A7K2000 drives performed without issue on all three controllers, the Seagate Barracuda LP drive failed to work with the Adaptec controller.
The Hitachi A7K2000 outperformed the Seagate Barracuda LP drive, but this was not really a surprise given the drive specs.
The Areca ARC1680 controller produced the best and most reliable results, the Adaptec was close, but given the overheating problem, it is not reliable unless additional cooling is added.

I will be scaling my test up from 4 to 12 Hitachi drives, using the Areca controller, and I will expand the Areca cache from 512MB to 2GB.

Western Digital RE4-GP 2TB Drive Problems

In my previous two posts I described my research into the power saving features of various enterprise class RAID controllers.
In this post I detail the results of my testing of the Western Digital RE4-GP enterprise class “green” drives when used with hardware RAID controllers from Adaptec, Areca, and LSI.
To summarize, the RE4-GP drive fails with a variety of problems, Adaptec, Areca, and LSI acknowledge the problem and lays blame on WD, yet WD insists there are no known problems with the RE4-GP drives.
Test hardware:
Intel S5000PSL motherboard, dual Xeon E5450, 32GB RAM, firmware BIOS-98 BMC-65 FRUSDR-48
Adaptec 51245 RAID controller, firmware 17517, driver 5.2.0.17517
Areca ARC1680ix-12 RAID controller, firmware 1.47, driver 6.20.00.16_80819
LSI 8888ELP RAID controller, firmware 11.0.1-0017 (APP-1.40.62-0665), driver 4.16.0.64
Chenbro CK12803 28-port SAS expander, firmware AA11
Drive setup:
– Boot drive, 1 x 1TB WD Caviar Black WD1001FALS, firmware 05.00K05
Simple volume, connected to onboard Intel ICH10R controller running in RAID mode
– Data drives, 10 x 2TB WD RE4-GP WD2002FYPS drives, firmware 04.05G04
1 x hot spare, 3 x drive RAID5 4TB, 6 x drive RAID6 8TB, configured as GPT partitions, dynamic disks, and simple volumes
I started testing the drives as shipped, with no jumpers, running at SATA-II / 3Gb/s speeds.
Adaptec 51245, SATA-II / 3Gb/s:
The Adaptec card has 3 x internal SFF-8087 ports and 1 x external SFF-8088 port, supporting 12 internal drives.
The Adaptec card had immediate problems with the RE4-GP drives, in the ASM utility the drives would randomly drop out and in.
I could not complete testing.
Areca ARC1680ix-16, SATA-II / 3Gb/s:
The Areca card has 3 x internal SFF-8087 ports and 1 x external SFF-8088 port, supporting 12 internal drives.
Unlike the LSI and Adaptec cards that require locally installed management software, the Areca card is completely managed through a web interface from an embedded Ethernet port.
The Areca card allowed the RAID volumes to be created, but during initialization at around 7% the web interface stopped responding, requiring a cold reset.
I could not complete testing.
LSI 8888ELP and Chenbro CK12803, SATA-II / 3Gb/s:
The LSI card has 2 x internal SFF-8087 ports and 2 x external SFF-8088 port, supporting 8 internal drives.
Since I needed to host 10 drives, I used the Chenbro 28 port SAS expander.
The 8888ELP support page only lists the v3 series drivers, while W2K8R2 ships with the v4 series drivers, so I used the latest v4 drivers from the new 6Gb/s LSI cards.
The LSI and Chenbro allowed the volumes to be created, but during initialization 4 drives dropped out, and initialization failed.
I could not complete testing.
I contacted WD, Areca, Adaptec, and LSI support with my findings.
WD support said there is nothing wrong with the RE4-GP, and that they are not aware of any problems with any RAID controllers.
When I insisted that there must be something wrong, they suggested I try to force the drives to SATA-I / 1.5Gb/s speed and see if that helps.
I tested at SATA-I / 1.5Gb/s speed, and achieved some success, but I still insisted that WD acknowledge the problem.
The case was escalated to WD engineering, and I am still waiting for an update.
Adaptec support acknowledged a problem with RE4-GP drives when used with high port count controllers, and that a card hardware fix is being worked on.
I asked if the fix will be firmware or hardware, and was told hardware, and that the card will have to be swapped, but the timeframe is unknown.
Areca support acknowledged a problem between the Intel IOP348 controller and RE4-GP drives, and that Intel and WD are aware of the problem, and that running the drives at SATA-I / 1.5Gb/s speed resolves the problem.
I asked if a fix to run at SATA-II / 3Gb/s speeds will be made available, I was told this will not be possible without hardware changes, and no fix is planned.
LSI support acknowledged a problem with RE4-GP drives, and that they have multiple cases open with WD, and that my best option is to use a different drive, or to contact WD support.
I asked if a fix will become available, they said that it is unlikely that a firmware update would be able to resolve the problem, and that WD would need to provide a fix.
This is rather disappointing, WD advertises the RE4-GP as an enterprise class drive, yet 3/3 of the enterprise class RAID controllers I tested failed with the RE4-GP, and all three vendors blame WD, yet WD insists there is nothing wrong with the RE4-GP.
I continued testing, this time with the SATA-I / 1.5Gb/s jumper set.
Adaptec 51245, SATA-I / 1.5Gb/s:
This time the Adaptec card had no problems seeing the arrays, although some of the drives continue to report link errors.
A much bigger problem was that the controller and battery was overheating, the controller running at 103C / 217F.
In order to continue my testing I had to install an extra chassis fan to provide additional ventilation over the card.
The Adaptec and LSI have passive cooling, where in contrast the Areca has active cooling and only ran at around 51C / 124F.
The Areca and LSI batteries are off-board, and although a bit inconvenient to mount, they did not overheat like the Adaptec.
Initialization completed in 22 hours, compared to 52 hours for Areca and 8 hours for LSI.
The controller supports power management, and drives are spun down when not in use.
3 x Drive RAID5 4TB performance:

6 x Drive RAID6 8TB Performance:

Areca ARC1680ix-16, SATA-I / 1.5Gb/s:
This time the Areca card had no problems initializing the arrays.
Initialization completed in 52 hours, much longer compared to 22 hours for Adaptec and 8 hours for LSI.
Areca support said initialization time depends on the drive speed and controller load, and that the RE4-GP drives are known to be slow.
The controller supports power management, and drives are spun down when not in use.

3 x Drive RAID5 4TB performance:

6 x Drive RAID6 8TB Performance:

LSI 8888ELP and Chenbro CK12803, SATA-I / 1.5Gb/s:
This time only 2 drives dropped out, one out of each array, and initialization completed after I forced the drives back online.
Initialization completed in 8 hours, much quicker compared to 22 hours for Adaptec and 52 hours for Areca.

The controller only supports power management on unassigned drives, there is no support for spinning down configured but not in use drives.

3 x Drive RAID5 4TB performance:

6 x Drive RAID6 8TB Performance:

Although all three cards produced results when the RE4-GP drives were forced to SATA-I / 1.5Gb/s speeds, the results still show that the drives are unreliable.
The RE4-GP drive fails with a variety of problems, Adaptec, Areca, and LSI acknowledge the problem and lays blame on WD, yet WD insists there are no known problems with the RE4 drives-GP.
There are alternative low power drives available from Seagate and Hitachi.
I still haven’t forgiven Seagate for the endless troubles they caused with ES.2 drives and Intel IOP348 based controllers, and, like WD, also denying any problems with the drives, yet eventually releasing two firmware updates for the ES.2 drives.
I’ve always had good service from Hitachi drives, so maybe I’ll give the new Hitachi A7K2000 drives a run.
One thing is for sure, I will definately be returning the RE4-GP drives.
[Update: 11 October 2009]
I tested the Seagate Barracuda LP and Hitachi Ultrastar 2TB drives.
[Update: 24 October 2009]
WD support still has not responded to my request for the firmware.

Power Saving RAID Controller (Continued)

This post continues from my last post on power saving RAID controllers.
It turns out the Adaptec 5 series controller are not that workstation friendly.
I was testing with Western Digital drives; 1TB Caviar Black WD1001FALS, 2TB Caviar Green WD20EADS, and 1TB RE3 WD1002FBYS.
I also wanted to test with the new 2TB RE4-GP WD2002FYPS drives, but they are on backorder.
I found that the Caviar Black WD1001FALS and Caviar Green WD20EADS drives were just dropping out of the array for no apparent reason, yet they were still listed in ASM as if nothing was wrong.
I also noticed that over time ASM listed medium errors and aborted command errors for these drives.
In comparison the RE3 WD1002FBYS drives worked perfectly.
A little searching pointed me to a feature of WD drives called Time Limited Error Recovery (TLER).
You can read more about TLER here, or here, or here.
Basically the enterprise class drives have TLER enabled, and the consumer drives not, so when the RAID controller issues a command and the drive does not respond in a reasonable amount of time, the controller drops the drive out of the array.
The same drives worked perfectly in single drive, RAID-0, and RAID-1 configurations with an Intel ICH10R RAID controller, granted, the Intel chipset controller is not in the same performance league.
The Adaptec 5805 and 5445 controllers I tested did let the drives spin down, but the controller is not S3 sleep friendly.
Every time my system resumes from S3 sleep ASM would complain “The battery-backup cache device needs a new battery: controller 1.”, and when I look in ASM it tells me the battery is fine.
Whenever the system enters S3 sleep the controller does not spin down any of the drives, this means that all the drives in external enclosures, or on external power, will keep on spinning while the machine is sleeping.
This defeats the purpose of power saving and sleep.
The embedded Intel ICH10R RAID controller did correctly spin down all drives before entering sleep.
Since installing the ASM utility my system is taking a noticably longer time to shutdown.
Vista provides a convenient, although not always accurate, way to see what is impacting system performance in terms of even timing, and ASM was identified as adding 16s to every shutown.
Under [Computer Management][Event Viewer][Applications and Services Logs][Microsoft][Windows][Diagnostics-Performance][Operational], I see this for every shutdown event:
This service caused a delay in the system shutdown process:
File Name : AdaptecStorageManagerAgent
Friendly Name :
Version :
Total Time : 20002ms
Degradation Time : 16002ms
Incident Time (UTC) : 6/11/2009 3:15:57 AM
It really seems that Adaptec did not design or test the 5 series controllers for use in Workstations, this is unfortunate, for performance wise the 5 series cards really are great.
[Update: 22 August 2009]
I received several WD RE4-GP / WD2002FYPS drives.
I tested with W2K8R2 booted from a WD RE3 / WD1002FBYS drive connected to an Intel ICH10R controller on an Intel S5000PSL server board.
I tested 8 drives in RAID6 connected to a LSI 8888ELP controller, worked perfectly.
I connected the same 8 drives to an Adaptec 51245 controller, at boot only 2 out of 8 drives were recognized.
After booting, ASM showed all 8 drives, but they were continuously dropping out and back in.
I received confirmation of similar failures with the RE4 drives and Adaptec 5 series cards from a blog reader.
Adaptec support told him to temporarily run the drives at 1.5Gb/s, apparently this does work, I did not test it myself, clearly this is not a long term solution, nor acceptable.
I am still waiting to hear back from Adaptec and WD support.
[Update: 30 August 2009]
I received a reply from Adaptec support, and the news is not good, there is a hardware compatibility problem between the WD RE4-GP /WD2002FYPS drives.
“I am afraid currently these drives are not supported with this model of controller. This is due to a compatibility issue with the onboard expander on the 51245 card. We are working on a hardware solution to this problem, but I am currently not able to say in what timeframe this will come.”
[Update: 31 August 2009]
I asked support if a firmware update will fix the issue, or if a hardware change will be required.
“Correct, a hardware solution, this would mean the card would need to be swapped, not a firmeware update. I can’t tell you for sure when the solution would come as its difficult to predict the amount of time required to certify the solution but my estimate would be around the end of September.”
[Update: 6 September 2009]
I experienced similar timeouts testing an Areca ARC-1680 controller.
Areca support was very forthcoming with the problem and the solution.
“this issue had been found few weeks ago and problem had been reported to WD and Intel which are vendors for hard drive and processor on controller. because the problem is physical layer issue which Areca have no ability to fix it.
but both Intel and WD have no fix available for this issue, the only solution is recommend customer change to SATA150 mode.
and they had closed this issue by this solution.
so i do not think a fix for SATA300 mode may available, sorry for the inconvenience.”
That explains why the problem happens with the Areca and Adaptec controllers, but not the LSI, both use the Intel IOP348 processor.

Amazon Unbox on x64 Vista

While shopping on Amazon I noticed that they were offering the Pilot of the Showtime series Nurse Jackie in HD for free, so I decided to give it a try.
The install (version 2.0.1.95) went smoothly, and the 1.3GB downloaded also completed pretty quickly, and I watched the show.
Ok, now I wanted to stop the Unbox player service from running and terminate the tray icon application, I have no need to have it running all the time.
I went to [Settings][Preferences], and unchecked the [Run the Amazon Unbox service when Windows starts] option.

I then right clicked on the tray icon and selected [Exit], the tray application launched “Amazon Unbox Config.exe stop” application, requiring UAC elevation, and promptly crashed with the following message:

An unhandled exception of type ‘System.BadImageFormatException’ occurred in Unknown Module.
Additional information: Could not load file or assembly ‘ADVWindowsClientAppRoot, Version=2.0.1.95, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=091de1773ddefdbf’ or one of its dependencies. An attempt was made to load a program with an incorrect format.

I contacted Amazon support, and they provided this response:

Hello from Amazon.com.

I sincerely apologize for the trouble you’ve had using the Unbox Video Player. From your message, I understand you received an error relating to Windows being unable to load the correct file path.

I’ve researched the issue and suggest that you update the security components of your Microsoft operating system.

Please visit the Microsoft website listed below and follow Microsoft’s instructions for updating your security components. Microsoft may require you to use Internet Explorer to access all of the functions of this page and enable Active X controls in your Web browser.

http://drmlicense.one.microsoft.com/Indivsite/en/indivit.asp

If using Microsoft’s update does not resolve your playback issue, I recommend uninstalling and reinstalling your .NET Framework.

The Microsoft .NET Framework includes a large library of coded solutions to common programming problems and a virtual machine that manages the execution of programs written specifically for the framework. The .NET Framework is a key Microsoft offering and is intended to be used by most new applications created for the Windows platform.

I hope you found this information useful.

I gave them the benefit of the doubt and tried to update the DRM components, it did not work.
I suspected I know what the problem was, and this problem reminded me of a similar problem with the Google Email Uploader on Vista x64.
My suspicions were confirmed after I used CorFlags to inspect the binaries:

CorFlags.exe “C:\Program Files (x86)\Amazon\Amazon Unbox Video\Amazon Unbox Config.exe”
Microsoft (R) .NET Framework CorFlags Conversion Tool. Version 3.5.21022.8
Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Version : v2.0.50727
CLR Header: 2.5
PE : PE32
CorFlags : 9
ILONLY : 1
32BIT : 0
Signed : 1

CorFlags.exe “C:\Program Files (x86)\Amazon\Amazon Unbox Video\ADVWindowsClientAppRoot.dll”
Microsoft (R) .NET Framework CorFlags Conversion Tool. Version 3.5.21022.8
Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Version : v2.0.50727
CLR Header: 2.5
PE : PE32
CorFlags : 11
ILONLY : 1
32BIT : 1
Signed : 1

The output indicated that the EXE file was compiled to run natively on any platform, i.e. x64 on x64 and x86 on x86, but the DLL was compiled to be x86 only.
Thus the EXE runs as x64 and tries to load a x86 binary, not allowed, causing the crash.
The CorFlags output and x64 migration is discussed in this MSDN blog post:

anycpu: PE = PE32 and 32BIT = 0
x86: PE = PE32 and 32BIT = 1
64-bit: PE = PE32+ and 32BIT = 0

To fix the problem I have to change the EXE attributes to only run in 32bit:

CorFlags.exe “C:\Program Files (x86)\Amazon\Amazon Unbox Video\Amazon Unbox Config.exe” /32BIT+ /Force

The “Force” flag is required because the binary is Authenticode signed, and after the header change the Authenticode signature is now invalid.
“CorFlags” is parts of the .NET / Platform SDK and can be downloaded from Microsoft.

After I made the changes to the EXE, I repeated the original steps, and no more crash.
I replied to Amazon with my findings, and I hope they make the necessary, and easy, changes to fully support x64.