dencorso

Marathon Man surely did cross my mind, too, when I first read the OP from this thread.

You may have guessed already I don't use Win 8 either (nor do I think I'll in the foreseeable future -- I do have access to Win 7 machine, though, but use it sparingly)... Anyhow, my feelings echo those expressed by tomasz86: thank you, Tihiy, for this awesome project. You do rock!

Sure!

But... but... but if you wished to have it run with wscript.exe, which is the default mode, you could as well just have deleted the first line, and all lines from "Public Sub RunMeWithCScript()" to the end -- the result would basically be the same, in 20 lines less.

Forget the pendrive. Burn a CD and install from it.

Sure! Using microsoft's filever.exe (KB913111), newer version inside this package. Both work OK on Win 9x/ME.

@Laser98IX: Greetings from a Double Dinosaur (I run 98SE & XP)! You're much welcome here! According to the manual, your motherboard uses an Intel ICH5 southbridge, and that means SATA I and USB 2.0 hardware! It's a fair bet NUSB 3.6 will get you full USB 2.0 functionality. Do please keep us posted. @Aloha: Sure he can. And maybe I can interest him into becoming a double booter...

Fleetwood Mac - Peacekeeper

The problem with version numbers is MS starts their numbering from arbitrary points... So, while one keeps *only* to files *they* intended for a given OS, version numbers work OK (sort of...). But when we started including files they intended should be used in NT6, Win2K and now WinXP, some numbering lines began to cross. This explanation holds for most cases, but, maybe, not all.

4 kiB sectors! That makes sense! Then again, if that works for WD, there should be a way of getting it to work for any HDD, whatever the manufacturer. You've just kindled a light of hope!

Just a mild misunderstanding: the 90s should be 90...99, but I read it as the decade of 1990, which means 1981...1990, of course.

This is just a heads up, because I released this tool in the Unattended Win2k forum... To see the original release post, please do click in the curly arrow in the quotation box header. PETmStp.7z

You mean... this for instance?

A command line version of this, perhaps custom made by the author, if he can be located or by one of us, might be a worthwhile addition, too. As for split, while that repository does not have it anymore, it does contain the full package, which I downloaded. However, at least for the split in the full package, two .dlls (also contained it the full package) are also required, besides split.exe, for correct functioning. Was the original split you tested stand alone?

Perhaps this article elsewhere has at least a partial solution to the autosorting problem. @xpclient: Please test it and let us all know whether it solves it.

I doubt this may be useful, but, just in case... KB815011

The only case i know in which using 7za is bound to fail is for MS Intra-Package Deltas Aware Packages, which can only be correctly extracted by using th /X switch. None of the packages involved in submix8c's process are of this kind, however. But I think submix8c always thought of this more as an intellectual exercise than as anything more permanent... he didn't even update the script to use split.exe (at least as an alternative). Let's wait for him to chime in, before we continue discussing how to optimize the script, OK?

@tomasz86: Yes, he could've done it. But, then again, later on in the batch, he'd need something to unpack the cabs, anyway, but that could have been changed to use cabarc.exe... Except that it's 7za which is used to get to cabarc.exe, in the 1st place... so there wouldn't actually be a cabarc.exe without 7za.exe in the script. Once it has to be there, there really is no difference which means were used to extract things from among the various possibilities present, IMO. I guess the idea behind it was to use always the same method to do analogous operations throughout the batch, so as to make easier to understand for any 3rd party studying it later. Of course this is just my guesswork, on rereading the code of the script... only submix8c can really tell us what was in his mind when he coded it in the way he did. Then again, when I am the one coding, I usually strive to get things working reliably, in the 1st place, and only afterwards do I revise for clarity, and that only when I think that that's really necessary, else I simply don't.

"Combination" might mean "IDE Mode". That or "RAID On", without creating an actual RAID array, ought to do OK. That and RLoew's patch, and the OP is all set. And in case of any issue, RLoew's support and follow up is superb.

@submix8c: DDR2? Just two slots? In my reckoning that makes 8GiB! Ever heard of the KVR800D2N6/4G? They're rare birds (and out-of-production, of course), but can be found with an extra effort. On the easier side, KVR800D2N6/2G are still in production and can be bought new. Still they'd give you 4 GiB, which is not so bad. Later edit: Kingston pulled out the spec sheet for the 4 GiB modules. Although they still provide that for the 2 GiB modules, there's no telling for how long, so both are now attached to this post, for easy reference. KVR800D2N6_4G.pdf KVR800D2N6_2G.pdf

Sorry, no. The max is the ADX6400IAA6CZ Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Black Edition, it's a Windsor, so 90nm, and it's hot as hell, but is probably the last great processor from AMD. Now, if you must have 65nm, then the Brisbane ADO5400IAA5DS Athlon 64 X2 5400+ Black Edition is the way to go, although not as fast as the ADX6400IAA6CZ. And all Black Editions have unlocked multipliers, so you can go beyond the specs, although not as much as you can read over the net. But 10-15% is possible while still stable. They're findable through eBay and the like, but you'll sure need a huge fan & powersink to cope with their heat, particularly the Windsor.

Wow!

I usually buy mine from MemoryC. Yes, I know it's in Ireland... but it can give you an idea of the prices, because they certainly have almost whatever other brand you may think of.

I do like ASUS too. Do visit the RunCore site, and look at the specs.

Well, as you fully know, I hardly am the one to come to, when thinking of new hardware, since my main interest is elsewhere, but I think even 7 x64 has plenty of space in 64 GB, which is also faster to image... so, I'd like to suggest a RunCore SSD. I use them in my netbooks, and they never gave me grief. The RunCores are not exactly cheap, but they're fast and rugged. Visit their site and look at the specs. You may find faster elsewhere, but not even near as rugged (while still pretty fast).