[virtual machines]

Those numbers are totally innacurate (which also makes me doubt about the other previous numbers you got).

I apologise! I've previously always just thought that the taskmanager results where just a little less accurate than the 'private bytes' column of Process Explorer i.e. maybe 5%, and hence, i've never bothered with using anything other than just the taskmanager, but now i've finally read-up on this whole memory-issue, and realize that you of course is absolutely correct, so sorry about that...

Anyway, here's the revised comparison-table with actual private bytes this time...

VMware Workstation v5.0.1324:

Install-folder: 78,4mb

vmware.exe: 10.708kb

vmware-authd.ex: 1.260kb

vmnat.exe: 936kb

vmnetdhcp.exe: 512kb

VMware Workstation v6.5.2-156735:

Install-folder: 676,0mb

vmware.exe: 23.868kb

vmware-authd.exe: 3.936kb

vmnat.exe: 1.000kb

vmnetdhcp.exe: 548kb

[virtual machines]

I don't mind using newer versions of apps which uses more resources/size if they bring anything usefull to me, but since the newer VMware's don't, then i prefer to stick with latest version of v5.0.

Granted, i admit to being a simple VMware user, and only uses it to test new unattended ISOs i make, and for ppl using VMware intensively, then i fully understand that the newer versions is better for them...

I just installed the latest version of VMware Workstation, just to make a quick comparison of the install-folder sizes and commit of the 3 startup-processes:

VMware Workstation v5.0.1324:

Install-folder: 78mb

vmware-authd.exe : 2.064kb

vmnat.exe : 1.176kb

vmnetdhcp.exe : 1.560kb

VMware Workstation v6.5.2.0.156735:

Install-folder: 676mb

vmware-authd.exe : 7.932kb

vmnat.exe : 3.328kb

vmnetdhcp.exe : 9.948kb

[hey windows 2000 good ?]

At least, that's what it seems to be all about when you hear all those people who keep saying win9x and win2k are great. Most of them seem to not want to replace their 10 year old hardware (in average) either (P2's and P3's with 128MB RAM or so) or are just stuck in the past, or unable/unwilling to adapt to any changes. 2010 is right around the corner, it's not 1999 anymore.

For me personally, then i'm perfectly willing to adapt to any new changes/trends if they however fits my way of thinking, and since the newer OS'es don't, then that's why i'm using such an old OS, and certantly not because im scared of progress or anything like that... Some changes are good for some, and others aren't, that's just the way of life.. Also, when Win2k runs great on my PC which i bought 6 years ago, then why should i go out and by another box, just to be able to run an OS that i don't like??? Of course if I actually where into big bloated OS's then I would go buy another box right away...

Also marketshare-meassures has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of the OS, so such numbers are totally irelevant to me, personally...

Btw, i fully agree with what you said about asking win2k questions in a win2k related forum and i also admit to being biased in my oppenions when OSes are concerned...

CU, Martin

[Fileset 9, all done]

I just tested set-9-final in a VM, and everything seems allright, except now another file won't register from mpcodecs.inf, which then unfortunetly means that the files underneath that file in the RegisterDLLs section won't register:

Error:
Setup could not register the OLE Control C:\WINNT\system32\odbcconf.dll because of the following error:
DllRegisterServer returned error 2147500037 (80004005).


***

Warning:
NetSetup: Could not find a section for {315D2238-1BA8-4D1D-B10D-29538576C9C0}, therefore if parameters were specified for this adapter (e.g. static IP address, etc.) they will not be used.

***

Warning:
Setup was unable to initialize NetDDE because of the following error:
A routine in the NetDDE library returned failure.


***

Error:

Setup was unable to prepare for network setup.

***

Error:
Setup was unable to process some components because of the following error in section DefaultInstall of information file mpcodecs.inf:
The specified procedure could not be found.


***

Error:
Setup could not register the OLE Control C:\WINNT\system32\fdeploy.dll because of the following error:
LoadLibrary returned error 126 (7e).


***

Warning:
Setup was unable to change service entry ClipSrv because of the following error:
OpenService returned error 1060 (424).


***

Warning:
Setup was unable to change service entry NetDDE because of the following error:
OpenService returned error 1060 (424).


***

Warning:
Setup was unable to change service entry NetDDEdsdm because of the following error:
OpenService returned error 1060 (424).


***

Error:

An error occurred during the final phase of Setup.

***

Btw, there are sounds configured for several conditions(without media-files). I would guess most would want no sounds at all...

Here's some tweaks-suggestions which i run from an INF at first-logon:

;Make start-menu's control-panel link into a menu:
HKCU,"Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Advanced","CascadeControlPanel",0x0,"YES"

;Detail-view in explorer(+disable status-bar):
HKCU,"Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Streams","Settings",0x1,08,00,00,00,04,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,77,7E,13,73,35,CF,11,AE,69,08,00,2B,2E,12,62,03,00,0
0,00,01,00,00,00

;Make "My Computer" open with two panes(folder-view):
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Classes\Folder\shell","",,"explore"

;Show drive-letters first in explorer:
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer","ShowDriveLettersFirst",0x10001,04,00,00,00

;Show BSoD's instead of auto-restarting:
HKLM,"SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\CrashControl","AutoReboot",0x10001,00,00,00,00

I also hate that delete-confirmation prompt and disable that, and add some other tweaks, but i guess not everyone want's that, but the above should be pretty universal for fdv-filset users I would think...

CU, Martin

[hey windows 2000 good ?]

I use a P4 1700MHz with 256megs ram, and yes, RAM is dirt cheap, and yes, i can afford a state-of-the-art new system with vista on it, but i preffer using a sleek and light OS with lighweight apps, instead of big bloated eye-candy filled apps and comparabel OS'es... If i where into video-editing and such, then i wold need more ram ,sure - but i'm not... I am however going to upgrade my RAM to 512Megs, but that should then also be more than enough...

About Opera, well, then i couldn't disagree more Except to say that you're right in that the bittorent client isn't comparabel to e.g. utorrent, but for just doing a quick download here and there, like i do, then i think that it's great that i do not have to have yet another piece of software installed for doing just that. But of course for ppl using torrents often, then a dedicated client like utorrent cannot be beaten... The browser and mail-client however, is second to none IMHO... Yes, it does takes alittle getting used to, but after awhile, then you'll never wanna go back, or atleast thats how i feel about it

[hey windows 2000 good ?]

Personally i love Win2k and feels it's the best OS msft has ever made!

It's light and minimalistic and dosen't try to do you any favors, or needing 100's of tweaks to not look like an OS for 3 year olds, or to prevent it from throwing dogs at you, when you just wants to make a search etc. etc.

Win2k is just like the great NT4 but with some usefull updates added, but i don't see XP as a Win2k+ in any way, whatsoever, as all of the newly added items, i have zero use for and just thinks that it over-bloats the OS for no benefit at all!

In the default config, then XP uses about twice as much RAM as Win2k(43 vs. 86 megs)...

Of course XP can be nLited to h*** so that it comes to remind pretty much of the good ol' Win2k, but then i just don't understand why not just start from the beginning with a nice and sleek OS, instead of that over-bloated piece of an excuse for an OS!

@CoffeeFiend, HAHA - LOL @ your avatar! As an avid Opera enthusiast(i think it's the best browser and mail client in the world!), then i must admit that it hurts to see your avatar, but now i then can see how the IE lovers must feel when people use the "IE hatting" kinda avatars and talks bad about it here, HAHA! Anyway, nice countershoot, mate

[Windows Updates]

Appriciated! Thanks mate

[Windows Updates]

@Tom

Could you please tell me why you disagree with this note i made a month ago, please:

Wrong description: Windows2000-KB967715-x86-ENU.EXE; it's marked as junk and described as "Autorun disable...", but by reading the KB article through, then it states that the update dosen't disable autorun, and i'm not sure that it's really "Junk":

"The updates that this article describes fix a problem with the disable Autorun feature. Without these updates, Autorun for a network drive cannot be disabled"

And:

Does this update change my current Autorun settings?

No. The update does not change the current Autorun settings on your system. Instead, the update lets users correctly enforce Autorun settings.

I don't include any of the updates which you mark as junk(or 'optional', as i only want high-priority updates), but i'm just in doubt about your clasification on this specific update though...

Thanks in advance, mate!

[Windows Updates]

@Tom

Microsoft Security Advisory (969898)

Update Rollup for ActiveX Kill Bits

Published: June 9, 2009

Replaces: Microsoft Security Advisory 960715

CU, Martin

[Windows Updates]

Ohh - i'm sorry, i thought that IIS where installed by default on Win2k Pro, and didn't knew it was an optionl component...

Before your update-list where updated, then i checked the june bulletin and made a VM testrun that included the new updates, and afterwards when checking the fileversions in the installed VM of the new june updates, then all the updates was slipstreamed correctly, except that i couldn't find the file from the IIS update anywhere: Httpext.dll, and when i then looked at the INF, then i thought that it wasen't supported...

Thanks for the clarification, mate!

[virtual machines]

Hi CoffeeFiend

Sorry, i thought footprint meant "installed size", so sorry about that!

[virtual machines]

With lighter i also meant footprint(sorry, if i misused the term ), and 200+ megs on my system partition(5GB) matters to me, since i don't have any needs beyond what v5 does perfectly for me, but i fully accknowledge that others feel otherwise

[virtual machines]

I liked the "idea" of VirtualBox i.e. a slim and minimalistic alternative to VMware Workstation, but unfortunetly, then it always crashed on me when trying to test a new ISO, and now it dosen't even work on Win2k either, so i'm out then...

VMware Workstation is then also getting my vote, and just like vaska94, then i also prefer v5, as it does everything that i need, while being much much lighter than the newest versions...

I use the latest version of v5 i.e. v5.0.0.13124, and it's footprint is about 79 megs...

[Fileset 9, all done]

Thanks alot for your continued efforts, mate!

I've just reinstalled with set-8j yesterday, so i'll wait alittle, before re-installing again, but i'll test set-9-final out in a VM tomorrow or the day after, and report back...

Personally, then i love the black desktop background(and the NT4 icons from the dll you include ), but of course i can just change it...

Thanks again, mate - you rock!

[Windows Updates]

@Tom

Hi there, mate

In the Win2k-SP4 update-list, then aren't there missing:

Windows2000-KB970483-x86-ENU.EXE - MS09-020 (IIS update).

I know it isn't suported because of the [DestinationDirs] section in the INF:

IIS.Files=65601				; destination determined at runtime

But shouldn't it then not just be listed as going into 'HFSVCPACK_SW1' folder...

Thanks alot for all your contributions, mate - it's much apreciated!

Thanks in advance...

[About qfecheck.exe and hfslip'ed installs.]

On the hfslip homepage under 'Guidelines > Other important notes', then it states that hfslip support the qfecheck hotfix. That is correct, but however, just keep in mind that you cannot use qfecheck to verify the integrity of updates slipstreamed by hfslip...

Qfecheck.exe gets the list of installed updates by checking under this reg-key: 'HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Updates', and then verifies the integrity of the updates, by checking the file version information stored for each update under that key, against the file versions of the installed binaries. However, hfslip doesn't add any file version information to these keys, as that's not done by the update INF itself which hfslip runs at T-13, but by the actual update installer itself, so qfecheck.exe will think that no files are updated by the updates and hence, will just report no problems for each update referenced under that key(some updates just add new reg-keys and don't update any files)...

For verifying slipstreamed updates on a hfslip'ed install, then you can instead use e.g. HfNetChk(note it dosen't report missing updates for DirectX or OE), MBSA or WU/MU.

[folder tree in explorer and firewall question]

how do i get the folder/file tree to be default in explorer.

It is allready like that by default, so i'm guessing you mean 'My Computer' and not 'Explorer'...

Anyway, here's the tweak in INF and regfile syntax...

INF:

[Version]
Signature=$Windows NT$

[DefaultInstall]
AddReg=addreg

[addreg]
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Classes\Folder\shell","",,"explore"

Reg:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\Folder\shell]
@="explore"

[Windows Updates]

Hotfixes for XP are gonna be somewhat sporadic I think after July. I'm suprised that they (MS) keep releasing hotfixes for Win2K.

Win2k-SP4 extended support ends 13 juli 2010.

WinXP-SP3 extended support ends 08 april 2014.

So no problem there untill then, atleast

[using multi slipstreamer]

I will integrate update packs from ryanVM, so using it.

I also need nlite for some advanced features. Is it okay to use nlite to integrate RyanVM update packs?

Both nuhi and RyanVM has stated that if you're gonna use nLite anyway after having integrated the RVMPack, then also use it(nLite) for integrating the RVMPack also(and do everything in one pass too)...

[Silent install Opera Browser 9.60 in your language]

I wonder if anyone knows how to package it with things like customisations - a bit like Jonny Boy's Firefox Addon maker???? I'm getting to think Opera is pretty cool!

You just include the files for whatever customizations you've done, into your Opera install, and have them copied over after Opera is installed...

Here's my install: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=857456

[using multi slipstreamer]

If you're gonna use nLite anyway, then don't use RVMi, and also you might as well use WMP11 Slipstreamer from inside nLite. Sorry, i have no knowledge about using driverpacks, so can't help you there...

[HFSLIP no ISO created]

You can also just download cdimage.exe and boot.img from the unattended msfn guide's cdimage reference page, place them into HFTOOLS and rename boot.img to boot.bin... (boot image works for 2k,xp,2k3)...

Most easiest method, IMHO...

[Small nit on Fred's website]

Yes, msft has made an integrated sp4 iso of win2k for e.g. msdn/technet subscribers and volumelicense custommers(the volume label for the english version is ZRMPFPP_EN).

Also, FDV's site states that an unintegrated win2k source(sp0) is needed, but an integrated sp4 source can also be used. Additionally, the uniata section, should be changed to optional again now, as no filecopy errors occure now without it(commented out from txtsetup.sif/layout.inf)...

[Issue with HFGUIRUNONCE]

Hmm.... I use hfslip more then 2 years.[...]

...And still you claim that earlier versions of hfslip would copy HFGUIRUNONCE files into 'SOURCESS\I386\svcpack', which never have been true...

If what you're saying is correct, then yes, there's a bug in the beta, but still, my point was just to clarify on the above for you...

No disrespect meant whatsoever!

[Issue with HFGUIRUNONCE]

The Problem is: After hfslip finished the job, the file, located in HFGUIRUNONCE, is not in "SOURCESS\i386\SVCPACK". Only the .inf and the .cmd file are in "i386". So, after installation with a CD build from this folder i get a "missing file" message.

I copy the file from "x\HFGUIRUNONCE" to "SOURCESS\i386\SVCPACK and all work fine.

HFSLIP always copies files in 'HFGUIRUNONCE' to 'SOURCESS\I386', renames them to HFGUI(n).ext, and defines them in txtsetup.sif/dosnet.inf to be copied to '%windir%\HFSLIP' and installed from there...

Only files from HFSVCPACK[_SW1/2] are copied to 'SOURCESS\I386\svcpack' and installed from there!

Please try again, and make sure that you follow the instructions on the hfslip homesite to the letter!

Thanks...

Btw, if the .exe's you're using, are 7z-sfx-installers, made with Oleg_Sch's modified 7z-installer-module, then the error from Windows during txtmode stage, is because you need to run modifyPE.exe on the files first, to fix the headers...