E-66

Nuhi?

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=94121 This thread already exists on the first page of the forum, no need to start a duplicate.

Just start a new nLite session, import your old settings, and select Scanners & Sound Controller this time.

I have two almost identical nLite v1.3 Final sessions that I've created and installed. In one of them I can see the Hibernate tab and in the other one it's been removed. I looked at the Last Session.ini files in a file compare utility and the only differences in their settings is that OEM Preinstall & SFC/Windows File Protection are enabled in the install that shows the Hibernate tab, and disabled in the install that removes the Hibernate tab. 'Turn off Hibernate' is selected in each install in the Unattended section. I don't use the Hibernate function, and it's turned off (unchecked) in the install that shows the Hibernate tab. I'm just trying to figure out why the tab shows in one install and is removed in the other.

I don't use IE but I also don't remove it. I prefer to set its cache to 1MB, but in v1.3 Final the minimum choice is 8 MB. Why the change?

Boot with a startup floppy and make sure smartdrv.exe is loaded. Then navigate to the D:\[XP CD contents]\i386 folder and type "winnt"

Dumb question: if you have a service set to 'manual', what does that mean exactly? I mean, how do you know when to active it/turn it on? In the directX installation example, say you have the Cryptographic Services set to manual and you try to install directX. What happens?

You can definitely run your unattended nLite install off your hard drive, I've done it a dozen or more times in the last week. I'm still tweaking my nLite setup so I don't feel like burning through a bunch of CD's that will just get thrown away so doing it off the hard drive makes more sense (and is faster). If you run setup from within windows then you use winnt32.exe. I've been running mine from DOS and use winnt.exe. If you run it from DOS you don't use the winnt.sif answer file, it has to be a text file, so rename winnt.sif to unattend.txt or whatever. In my case I run it this way after booting from a floppy and loading smartdrv.exe: winnt /s:h:\nLite\i386 /u:unattend.txt <---- "h:\nLite\i386" is the source path to the install files on my PC. And in about 10 minutes XP Pro is loaded.

Cool, glad you found the source of the issue. Yes, I know. and I've always selected it in each nLite operation I've done. Sometimes it removes it and sometimes it doesn't.

Nuhi, normally when I tick the option to remove the screen savers it removes all of them them except the 'blank' option (scrnsave.scr), and I'm fine with that because that's the one I actually use, but sometimes it will leave behind the my 'pictures slideshow' option as well (ssmypics.scr). I realize I can just delete that file manually afterwards... but could I also add it to the list of 'Additional Files To Remove' in the Component Removal section? Is the 'search for people' option related to the Windows Address Book? I don't think there's an option to remove that by itself, is there? I haven't removed Outlook Express in any of my nLited installs, but is there an address book removal option that I may have ticked before that I'm overlooking now?

I don't understand what you mean? When I said that I always nLite a fresh XP source directory I meant a fresh copy of the XP Pro CD contents, as opposed to trying to nLite an already nLited source as I've seen several people post about. The HDD gets formatted prior to install as well.

I've been installing XP a lot lately trying to get a setup I'm happy with. I always choose to have screen savers removed (which would include the 'my pictures slideshow'), and also the 'search for people' from search, and I always nLite a fresh XP source directory. For reasons I haven't been able to figure out, those two items are removed sometimes, and other times not. I realize that if they're not I can simply delete the particular .scr file and remove all registry occurences of the people search, but I was wondering if anyone had any insight into why they only get removed some of the time.

Just removing the Intel ones would give me that error. I'd still like to know why keeping Intel CPU support would clear up an AMD issue, but in the end I guess it doesn't matter since I've now removed support for both of them and replaced th AMD driver with the newer one from AMD's website.

Quick followup: I got the driver from AMD's website and then purposely reinstalled XP so I'd get the Device Manager error. Once I installed the driver everything was fine, no more error. Thanks a lot for pointing out a rather obvious but overlooked solution. As you suggested, I grabbed the driver from out of the installer packaged and saved it separately. Certainly no reason for a 3 MB installer when I only need a tiny file out of it.

Thanks for the reply, I hadn't even thought to check AMD's site for a driver update. I'll give that a go and see what happens.

I've installed XP Pro at least 10 times in the last week trying to figure out why I was getting an 'Unknown Device' error in Device Manager. I initially didn't think to look at 'Problem Devices' in System Information, but when I did I got this: ACPI\AUTHENTICAMD_-_X86_FAMILY_15_MODEL_44\_0 The drivers for this device are not installed. Of all the different combinations of nLite settings I've used for installation, the only way I've been able to avoid getting this error is to not remove Intel CPU support. Since I have an AMD CPU that just seems kind of strange to me. Why would I need Intel CPU support?

When the original poster asked if they could activate it manually without OOBE, I don't know if they meant over the internet or over the phone. So just for clarification purposes, is the answer to both of those questions "NO" ???

Anyone have any ideas on this issue? I get the same error. Anyone have an idea what it is? I never got it with nlite 1.2.1

Yeah, but 8x more efficient/better/faster?

I partitioned a HDD with a small primary FAT16 boot partition and a 3 GB NTFS logical partition for the OS (with other partitions for Data, Programs, etc). As soon as installation was complete I defragged the OS partition. Took between 2-3 minutes. After making a disk image I deleted all the partitions and zero filled the drive and started over with the same partition scheme except this time I made the OS partition FAT32 instead of NTFS. Defragged after getting the OS installed and it took between 15-20 minutes. I then repeated this test again, zero filling the drive and installing the OS on both NTFS & FAT32 partitions and got the same result - 2 to 3 minutes defrag for the 3 GB NTFS partition, but 15-20 for the same size FAT32 partition. Can someone explain why? I also took the HDD and attached it to my Win98-ME hybrid system and defragged the FAT32 partition with ME's defragger and it blew right through it in no time.

That's pure speculation on your part. All the kid said was that his dad 'played some games'.

If he only plays a few games that are several years old then it's insane to consider spending $150 on a video card. Be specific and explain exactly what he does use the PC for. If it's typical web browsing & e-mail and little else then you can get by with a sub $50 card easily.

Ok, I was kind of wondering about that. According to my video card specs its max resolution is 2048 x 1536, so since the current monitor doesn't support resolutions that high it automatically prevents those resolutions and wide screen resolutions from being available to me? Got it.After I posted earlier I unhooked my 17" Samsung and hooked up a friend's cheaper 17" Dell and it wasn't recognized during boot up. When I checked to see what resolutions were available it showed me ALL KINDS of them. The slider was only in the middle of its range and it was already showing 1280x1024. I slid it to the right and I swear one of them was 3000-something x 2000-something. I didn't attempt to use any of them though. Thanks for the answer, now I just have to decide if I want a widescreen or not.

I have a question similar to the original poster's so I'll just ask here instead of starting a new thread. When you go to adjust your screen resolution (with the slider) in your display properties, do you see every screen resolution that your video card is capable of, or do you only see what's available in the particular combination of the video card and monitor you're using? With my Radeon 9250 and Samsung 17" CRT my choices are either 4:3 or 5:4 and range from 640x480 to 1600x1200 (I use 1280x1024). If I attached a wide screen LCD would I see the same resolution choices I see now or would I see additional wide screen resolutions? I definitely want to get a 19" LCD, but I don't know if I want a widescreen model or not. The native resolution on the majority if not all of the non-widescreen 19" models is the 1280x1024 I'm currently using so that wouldn't be a problem, but on the widescreen models it's usually 1440x900 and that's why I ask if I'd see additional resolutions if I attached a widescreen monitor since that resolution isn't among the choices available to me with my current setup. Thanks.

Why don't you just use fdisk? Isn't that what you used in the past when you formatted a drive prior to installing Win9x?