Silenti

This sound scheme targets Windows XP system, therefore, with a little modification it could be used on a variety OS as well. Sound files there represent short audio excerpts taken from various Pink Floyd sound tracks. 20 audio files in total, 2.2 MB archived. Installation instruction included. http://silentir.googlepages.com/pf_sounds_en

Once again on WFP There are links to the pictures mentioned above. screenshot 1 – Just installed screenshot – SFC works screenshot 2 – DllCache after scan On a screenshot 1 ["Just installed"] is seen DllCache of installed Windows from original CD (XP Pro MCE SP2). The last file of this folder is "zoneoc.dll". SFC scan has not been performed yet. On a screenshot 2 ("DllCache after scan") this file from original installation is marked again. As scan was performed with a command sfc_/scannow and still being Windows Explorer window opened, there below this file is seen a lot of added new ones – as much as 1335 (before the scan was 2544 files and after the scan – 3879). Again, this added new portion has a big part of those mysteriuos OLDxx(x).tmp. Do temporary files, as seen by extention, are useful for WFP system? I don't think they are. This is a sign something is wrong with the system (it has to be pointed up – this is a fresh installation). Interestingly, what extent it does to? As noted above, the situation was the same, if the latest post-SP2 hotfix pack has been integrated with the original XP SP2 installation CD. It means that this Windows vulnarability is not covered by any patch. Is it new and critical to system stability? Information about such a flaw I have never found or heard before. Perhaps Microsoft could answer comprehensively. So they have been informed about it. Another strange behaviour of WFP was noticed in tests when it was randomly set size of DllCache. It is possible to do that by modifying the options through a Group Policy Editor: Start menu > Run box > type in gpedit.msc and click on the Ok button. Then go: Computer configuration > Administrative templates > System > Windows File Protection > Settings. Another way is to use XPlite. Finally, whatever way is used the same effect of adding various OLDxx(x).tmp here appears too, as described in previous post. Does bugy WFP prevent from OS disintegration? About impact to system stability... Actually, that vulnarability doesn't cause system to crash the next time you install a new program, but day after day system entropy becames worse and worse through a process of dayly routine run. There is seemingly no way to escape final crash, or system became unusable, because the system is not self-regulating properly – this means, system core is permanently degrading. And by no means could no any system cleaning application improve the situation. (It must be taken into account, those implications are accompanied with the facts from a real life including my experience, too.) Let's look at an example from nature - mountain avalanche. It starts, when only a single and even though a little stone starts to roll downhill & base is not stable enough to resist the lethal movement. Perhaps the only difference is that avalance groves exponencialy, whereas Windows stability slips down seemingly by non-linear law.

Quote: "Second, I disabled a huge amount of useless services and it made possible to free RAM considerably [~34MB] and reduce amount of running processes too." Later I decided to repeat my tests on disabled services in more exact way. Finaly, there are the results. Testing system was identical in both cases, except the recent was with advanced WiFi driver [intel v.10.5.2] that extra 50MB & 80 files added in comparison to previous used “cut” by Sony v.10.1.0.11 [without Intel control console, but this console works better than MS one]. There is needed to note that at the step of WiFi driver installation it is necessary to install driver v.10.1 first and then upgrade with driver v.10.5. If installation of driver v.10.1 is omited, then Wireless Device Switcher would not work at all. Apparently native driver v.10.1 has something added from Sony in order to fit in with utils. [i think this note is in regard to some Sony notebooks only.] So was PC: notebook Sony VGN-Fe11s, T2400, 1GB RAM, NVIDIA GF7400, XP Pro SP2 MCE OEM-preactivated original_CD. Status: freshly installed OS plus necessary drivers [13] and utilities [10], defragmented. A. Services are intact Physical memory: - Total: 1046,6 MB - Available: 780,6 MB - System cache: 117,3 MB - Used RAM [Total minus Available]: 266 MB – apparently some portion is not documented and some reserved for Video. PageFile usage: 182 MB Processes: 37 Threads: 394 Boot up: 45,1 s Shutdown: 14,3 s Services started: 49 [Auto: 40, Manual: 9] B. After useless services have been disabled Physical memory: - Total: 1046,6 MB - Available: 802,2 MB - System cache: 112,6 MB - Used RAM: 244,4 MB PageFile usage: 155 MB Processes: 30 Threads: 281 Boot up: 42,6 s Shutdown: 13,4 s Services started: 25 [Auto: 20, Manual: 5] Total number of services in both stages: 88 Results we win useless services have been disabled Physical memory: - Available: +21,6 MB - System cache: –4,7 MB - Used RAM: –21,6 MB PageFile usage: –27 MB Processes: –7 Threads: –107 Boot up: –2,5 s Shutdown: –0,9 s Services started: –24 [Auto: –20, Manual: –4] Some notes = All measurements are done after 5 minutes boot process has been finished in order to minimize impact of transient, short-time processes. = Values are based on Windows Task manager data and are typical [~ ±0,5 MB] for number of boots. = System_cache showed itself of being the most unstable parameter. For example, in some cases at the stage A it showed ~127,7 MB, while most common value is ~117,3 MB; in some cases at the stage B it showed ~116,8 MB, while most common value is ~112,6 MB. I can’t explain this phenomenon, maybe MS profies could. It is seemingly most obscured parameter in Windows Task manager [but not the only unclear point]. Common sense hints me that system stability means its parameters’ repeatability, especially, when system is freshy installed. = It was disabled only these services that has no impact on my daily PC use as Home user, e.g. keep on operating WLAN, LAN, using Bluetooth, built-in camera etc. When using LAN, there may would be needed in some environment not to disable Windows Time service [i have disabled it]. Another good step in resource cleaning is to delete or move to safe place Bluetooth Manager shotcut from Startup folder [any program placed there starts on PC boot] – doing that the amount of processes in Task manager is reduced by 4 and Bluetooth still will work when turned on. Therefore, I did not test Bluetooth functionality in more detailed way. There are needed some external devices to plug in, recently I don’t have them available. Conclusions Most representative parameters are… I can say, all of them, except System_cache that is with some dose of unpredistability and obscurity. By the way, it’s very interesting – 27% of threads are down ! I suppose, these results could be a good comparison base for notebooks with factory-installed OS [and, of course, with a variety of added staff], or even desktops that usualy have fewer OEM drivers and utilities installed. Personally I can not make such kind of comparison because I do not have any saved image of factory-made recovery OS for my notebook. Results from other users are welcome. Added: There are screenshots of W. services after unused ones have been disabled. servdisabl_1 servdisabl_2 servdisabl_3 Added 2: Included some datails concerning Wireless Device Switcher.

Strange bug, really. Likely its roots are based on a "usefull" software that comes with PC. There are a mass of posts on a net complaining about blunt staff coming with OEM PCs. The main purpose of those uselless or demo things is marketing-promoting. Usually it spoils OS and makes it operate slowler. For example, Sony's battery "improvements", OpenMG "manacle" and so on. I hint, it's a better solution not to repair damaged OS, but to re-install a fresh copy of OS, even the best is to slim it down by nLite. It is possible to find on the net a way how to make a clean installation CD from "dirty" OS_restore_CD. One of them is there. Added: If you want to install MCE, don't use a SLP found in that post, because it installs only Pro-version and no matter you inserted MCE_CD. Key you could find on your recovery CD.

Maybe this post would be helpful for you. Added: If you want to install MCE, don't use a SLP found in that post, because it installs only Pro-version and no matter you inserted MCE_CD. Your own key you'll find on your recovery CD. I used HP MCE-SLP key from HP_MCE_Recovery_CD. It's a blame to Microsoft that they have published SLP for Pro and TabletPC, but neither for Home nor MCE. I have paid for my MCE license altogether with purchase of PC. Unfortunately there have not been made any OS recovery CD from my PC before reformat of HDD, and later I spent a lot of effords to find a SLP for MCE. Does MS or OEM care for customers ? Not as much as have. It's a shame.

Hi, I previously broadly tested nLited [v.1.3RC2] XP with integrated RyanVM post-SP2 addon v.2.1.6 [rel. Jan.16, 2007]. I did not any WiFi issues noticed, no matter that I used different WiFi drivers in various cases: - 1. manufactory prescribed WiFi driver [intel v.10.1.11], - 2. update from some Sony site [intel v.10.1.13], - 3. original driver from Intel site that is non-cut by Sony, however better in use [v.10.5.2 / 10.5.1.75] I advise you to look at the newest WiFi driver. If it's from Intel, than the latest my tested works much better. Second, if you accidentaly disabled or set Manually_started whatever OS service concerning WiFi driver, it is possible to have issues in functioning. I proved it for myself. It's better to leave such services untouched as were after installation, usually Auto_start. For my Sony Vaio VGN-Fe11s those are as follows: - Intel PROSet/Wireless Event Log, - Intel PROSet/Wireless Registry Service, - Intel PROSet/Wireless Service, - Wireless Zero Configuration - this could be set even Disabled, if Intel WiFi console is used [instead of MS one - this is less confortable in use and works worse]. I didn't add IE7. Why? Because I have used Maxthon v.1 until now without any problems. It uses IE kernel, but is much safer than IE itself and is very handy to use [multiple tabs, ad-blokers, drag&drop links start etc.]. By the way, I remembered a good say: one of IT profi said that surfing with IE is walking on the mine field, but surfing with Maxthon is like walking on the same mine field with experienced mine-clearing specialist. IE7 is not so safe as claims MS [have ever they told a real truth about their products without a tremendous dose of marketing tricks?]. Despite that, IE7 has very much "fat", was designed for Vista and, of course, unstable product as it is Vista on the whole, too. I tend to hold notion that MS products after W2k & W2k3 are degrading in quality [i mean stability first of all], but lack of quality [they think (?)] compensate by iridescent bunch of colors, makerting tricks and monopolistic policy means Did you try to make nLited XP identical to that one having IE7, but instead without integration of IE7? I mean, the only difference in options would be the integration of IE7. I think the best bet would be not using IE. It's only my opinion, therefore based on facts.

Hi, Yes, nLite is an excellent program. It has some guides though unfortunately not as good as the program itself mainly due to being a bit old, for the version 0.98: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=28005 and v.1.0 RC5: http://www.nliteos.com/guides.html As it states a source disc has to be free from any patches, however could contain SPs, so I gess you are facing problems due to that point. Additions that I integrated with nLite:- RyanVM WMP10 Addon 1.3, - RyanVM DirectX 9.0c Addon 1.1, - RyanVM Post-SP upd. pack 2.1.8, - .Net 1.1 SP1 integrator, - .Net 2.0 integrator. Of course it was the latest ones at the date of nLiting. I think there is a great need of adding Net 1.1 and 2.0. Some programs are in demand of them. How to integrate? It is needed to put integrator files that are zipped files at a step of Hotfixes. I don't think there's a good idea to add Net 3.0. It consumes ~400MB on HDD, in addition I haven't yet found any info that some program demands of it use. I tend to think it is rather future technology, not recent. There is one of my last session.ini files in attachment. nLited Windows XP SP2 MCE works good. I use it on my Sony VAIO notebook. When removing components I decided not to lose main functionality, but delete undoubtedly useless components [for me, of course]. Second, I disabled a huge amount of useless services and it made possible to free RAM considerably [~34MB] and reduce amount of running processes too. And some services could be disabled only after installation, because they are not in the list on nLite. There is a good guide on Windows processes: http://www.vernalex.com/tools/services/index.shtml Another links I used: http://www.processlibrary.com/# http://www.liutilities.com/products/wintaskspro/processlibrary/system/ If you are using a desktop, not a notebook, consider not to delete so much drivers as I did, because notebook manufacturers usually implement many third party drivers that are not found on common OS installation CD - I install them after OS installation, but delete common ones with nLite. Added: Installed Net 2.0 occupies 180MB, installed Net 3.0 - 400MB, though it adds Net 2.0, too. So, Net 3.0 "pure" weight is 220MB. Is it worth to keep such amount for future [?] technology, especially in case of having notebook? Another question is about use of addons type Net + Virtual Java [these could be found on RogueSpear's and RyanVM sites]. As I know, Virtual Java is not supported after release of SP2 for Windows XP due to judicial issue with Sun Microsystems. Instead of it I install latest version of Java RE - it is a needed component for usual computer use. Added 2: There was in the attached INI file left not disabled Indexing service that usually is not in use at all, but, if needed, is used only in a specific PC employment with much search activity. I just have forgotten to turn it off after testing series. Now there I put more advanced one. Last_Session_35a.rar

Integration is possible at the stage of Hotfixes and Update Packs. But first is need to download your preferable addon [zip file] from: http://www.doitrightconsulting.net/forum/v...bd2cee6b8529b16 or from RyanVM site [there are a few except v.3]: http://tracker.ryanvm.net/ Addons as .exe files are not integrable ones. Added: I mean Net_file.exes only. SPs being .exes are integrable, of course. By the way, every Net_addon is zipped the same .exe from MS with a small added file inside.

Now finally I finished my testing work. There are results. It was used nLite v.1.3rc2, OS tested on VMWare v.5.5. Components for integration: - Windows XP MCE v3 [2004] - RyanVM WMP10 addon 3.1 - RyanVM DirectX 9.0c addon 1.1 - RyanVM Post-SP2 Update Pack 2.1.6 - RogueSpear's .Net 2.0 + V.Java 2.0 integrator addon On a fresh OS install into VMWare DllCache folder contains 2056 files in total of 380MB. If you run Windows File Protection command sfc /scannow [or /scanonce – no matter's] this folder groves in size filled with… mostly of files with common name OLDxx.tmp or OLDxxx.tmp, where x represents hex digit. About 600 files ussually is added to every sequent scan. What a focus-pocus OS is playing up ? Second, if you set limit in DllCache size, for example 250MB, further run sfc /purgecache and next run sfc /scannow with an installation_CD.iso loaded into VMWare virtual drive, it would get as much as 250MB of files. Moreover, if you hit to run scan once again, now cache folder exceedes this limit of 250MB filled mainly [but not only] with those OLDxxx. How nice WFP works! :-) By the way, it seems not caused by nLite integration. To prove that I performed another test set. 1. Folder with my installation CD files converted into boot_iso image with UltraISO. 2. Installed into VMWare. 3. Checked out DllCache folder: 494MB [compressed 318MB], 2544 files – screenshot 1. There Windows explorer window left open through all the further testing period in order to see, what new files have been added in. 4. Run sfc /scannow. [it have run very long, ~0,5 hour.] 5. Checked out DllCache folder again: 677MB, 3879 files - screenshot 2. You could see a huge amount of new files added after the last "zoneoc.dll" that represents dividing line of originally installed ones. There again, like in case with nLited OS, is a lot of those OLDxxx files mixed with system new drivers taken from CD. What conclusions could be made? It is obvious that Windows File Protection service is not working flawless. This service plays, I suppose it could not be argued, the most importand role in securing stable functioning of Windows XP. What are guarantees that this explored "hole" is the only bug in WFP routines? Hystory with Windows OSes hints some pros & cons. So, is it only an illusion for my dream to configure, set & tweak OS transforming it into stable working PC? Any opinion would be welcome WFP_test.rar

Well, every time it got existed in system32 folder, but… I simply forgot to uncheck "Hide protected operating system files" in Folder Options > View. There was obviously no bug at all. Besides I found something interesting and I will report about strange behaviour of WFP a bit later, because not all of my tests have finished yet.

Hi, Paule Consider this way. You could make a good install of OS with additional soft on one PC first, do an image of partition with this OS with Acronis True Image on second step and, finally, you could install this image on a huge amount of PC as much as you want. I keep using this method for testing OSs and for backup purpose as good. Usualy installing from an image [residing on different partition of HDD] takes ~8 minutes. Is there a difference, when installing from CD takes approx. 30-40 min.? The only requirement is that all PCs have to be identical, maybe with minor differences in hardware. If not, there maybe additional work on installing some drivers. Finally this method surelly doesn't fit, if there are HDDs with different interfaces [e.g. ATA, SATA] – I proved this on my laptops. Another issue, as I could see, is for you to make the first lited installation of OS. There are, for me personally, two of them very good: nLite and XPlite. Both serve for the same aim, but different methods use. About corporate use? I don't have info about it. I'm sure you will find the best solution in your situation. Acronis True Image [to deal with whole HDD the best is v.10, to deal with single partitions the best is v.9]: http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/ added: Acronis True Image Home [v.10] works only with whole HDD and doesn't with separate partitions – I tested it. As usually I deal with separate partitions, so I use Workstation [v.9.1]. To recover a partition first is need bootable Acronis_recovery_CD has been made and after, been booted with this CD, it's possible to clone a partition with installed OS from an image-file located on another partition [for example, D:] of the same HDD, or even from USB_HDD.

Hello, nLite is very usefull program. I welcome this program. Great thanks to Nuhi ! Now I have a few questions. Why does the switch "Remove duplicate files" that is found in a Misc section of Options tab show no inpact neihter in a size of produced ISO file nor in installed Windows [suppose, the only difference in presets is only in that switch position]? Does it work? My nLited Windows has no DllCache folder. I tried various presets, but never got that folder existed. How can I get it existed and filled, of course, with files? Maybe there's no option for that staff in the nLite... Components I dealt with: - Windows XP MCE v3 [2004] - RyanVM Post-SP2 Update Pack 2.1.6 - RogueSpear's .Net 2.0 + V.Java 2.0 integrator addon added: It was used nLite v.1.3rc2, OS tested on VMWare v.5.5. If OS installed in VMware from original XP MCE CD, then it had DllCache folder with 494MB of files in system32 directory. Two Last_session files included differ only in mentioned 'duplication' switch setting. Last_Sessions.rar