bphlpt

This should do what you asked - Silently delete all folders and their contents in c:\temp of any arbitrary name, including allowing spaces in the name, but leaving the last modified folder in place with its contents intact. @ECHO OFF SETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONS FOR /F "tokens=* skip=1" %%G IN ('dir c:\temp /b /ad /o-d') DO rd /s /q "c:\temp\%%G" Cheers and Regards LOL - figures jaclaz would beat me to it - AND with a full explanation!! There are many good batch reference sites, but this one is easy to use - http://ss64.com/nt/

Sorry for the noob questions, but... I've never played with HTA files before so I'm confused how they are used/called. I put DefaultScript's Check Banner Result Script (Batch File) [named CheckBannerResult.cmd] and the Banner Script (HTA File) [named BannerScript.hta], with the fix from the last post, in their own folder with nothing else in there. Now what? being a noob I have no idea how to invoke the hta and get it to "work". I like this concept, if I understand it, but I'm afraid I'm very confused. Maybe someone can point me to a "HTA files for Dummies" tutorial? Cheers and Regards

@CharlesF, are you just bragging that you have a fix and we don't, or did you just forget to include a link for the patch? And I'm confused as to what CopyX.dll or KillCopy has to do with a" Send To" shortcut glitch? Cheers and Regards

Nah, I just have the tendency to look at how others did it first, then figure how I can do it better. You tend to try to figure out how to do it first, then see how someone else did it afterwards for comparison. Neither approach is wrong, just a difference in approach. Cheers and Regards

LOL You should have "read" his links first Larry, if you call looking at images "reading", since it looks like that would have given you all the elements you needed to edit the signature as you wanted to. Cheers and Regards

If you're REALLY GOOD with paint, I'm NOT, you could almost make it look like stonework, at least from afar. For adding walls, like around the garden you mentioned, yes you could use brick, then stucco over the brick, then again paint to look like stonework. You could also build out rounded extensions in front of the two gables in the front to make them look more "tower" shaped. You're right that if you squint at it just right it does kind of have a castle kind of look to it, especially from a distance. Cheers and Regards

Since Nuhi was lured away and hired by Microsoft, a couple of years ago as Kel said, both nLite and vLite have been abandoned (I would assume as a condition of his employment?) and are no longer updated or maintained in any way by anyone. Since I believe that Nuhi kept the source of his programs closed, though he made the executables freely available, I'm not aware of anyone else that really knows exactly how vLite did the job for SP1. Cheers and Regards

A Very Merry Christmas. a Prosperous New Year, and Happy Holidays to everyone! Cheers and Warmest Regards

Yes, it has now been stated many times. You can no longer set a default theme using autounattend.xml. No longer works Can't be done Permanently broken MS says NO!!!! Live with it. Cheers and Regards

Glad to see another Happy Customer! Cheers and Regards

The things I like most about TeraCopy are its stability, skipping files that exist or error without breaking the copy completely, and the verification aspects. I wish it was faster, but... With the verification aspects, if you have two folders with the same list of files, but with different versions, you can run the verification, letting it eliminate all the files that are the same, via CRC hash, then you can choose which of the remaining ones to copy based on anything from size, date, or whatever. I've also used the copy with verify, (More, Menu, Options, Always test after copy), to ensure a good copy when I was having both HD and memory troubles. Yes I know with problems in those areas that verifying wasn't a 100% guarantee, but I figured it at least improved my odds. I realize many, if not all those options are available in RoboCopy, but since RoboCopy doesn't integrate in the shell nor have a nice GUI... Cheers and Regards

And would you share your solution with us so that others could learn as well? Cheers and Regards

@bookie32, First, I have nothing at all to offer to help you with any of your issues whatsoever. But, I have definitely enjoyed reading about your adventures. I'm sure you will eventually succeed. When you do I hope you have the strength left to document a clear "how to" to help the next person. When you have done it a lot, so many things become automatic that I'm sure there are things that are left out that then make it difficult for the noobie, as you are finding out. Instructions for noobies written by a relative noobie while it is still fresh will be very helpful I'm sure. Cheers and Regards

I'd check your DNS. I use OpenDNS. If you want to switch to it, you don't have to register or anything, just use the two addresses on the very bottom of this page - http://www.opendns.com/. I've used it for years and been very pleased. Cheers and Regards

Worked fine for me just now. (Win7, x86, IRON browser) No issues or delays whatsoever. Cheers and Regards

Which I have. So, are there any duplications/problems/benefits to using it with your pack? I guess I'm also not clear on the difference to you using files from XP in your pack vs using files from ME? Why is one a problem and the other not? Or am I just confused? If that's ALL it does then I absolutely agree that it is not necessary. I also agree with these two points. While I respect PROBLEMCHYLD's view and agree that a more minimalist pack such as his is important, (dare I say necessary?), I also think there are enough people who think the way that Steven W does to make a more comprehensive pack have value as well. Or we could keep PROBLEMCHYLD's pack separate, (I see the value in a single "standard" SP), along with another pack with all the "extras". I don't think of IE, JET, MDAC, VB and VC runtimes as 3rd party apps since they are MS programs usually included with the OS after all. Again I refer back to the XP world and the availability of user_hidden's and Onepiece's packs. Both are respected and both are kept up to date. Each pack has it's followers. Users could pick their preferred approach or build their own from pieces from MS and/or MGDX Any info/comments/opinions regarding these other points? and and Thanks for the continued conversation. I'm learning a lot. Cheers and Regards

OK. I understand a little bit better now. As I see it, comparing this to the XP update pack creators, PROBLEMCHYLD is like user_hidden while Steven W is more like Onepiece. I'll confess that I probably lean more toward the Steven W approach, (I've always wanted at least the option to have it all as long as it doesn't cause problems/conflicts or slow things down too much), but I think both he and I see the tremendous value in PROBLEMCHYLD's pack as a base to be able to build a STABLE system on. I just hope we can figure out a way to minimize the number of steps required to be able to install it all quickly and safely. Maybe even resurrect the AutoPatcher project to include all of this and everything else we've learned in the last 4 years? JorgeA's needs could be met in this way as well. (It's nice to dream of an ideal solution!) Whichever approach ends up being used, I totally agree with PROBLEMCHYLD that the goals are: 1. Have everything that is needed for future installations. 2. Have a fully updated system. But regardless of whether one chooses to go the route of Steven W or the more pure/basic one of PROBLEMCHYLD, I'm still not clear whether additional things such as 98SE2ME and Revolutions Pack would add any additional value, or if parts/all of what they offer are already included in one of those two approaches. If there is additional value, what is it? I have seen that people have had different results in using KernelEX, but could someone summarize for me the pros and cons of using it? As I stated above, I like the idea of having the option to be able to install and run a wider variety of apps reliably and safely. After deciding to go either the PROBLEMCHYLD or Steven W route, what are the system limits involved, ie CPU speed, amount of memory, and disk size? I am aware that decorso addresses some of this here - http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/129027-big-hdd-48-bit-lba-thread-index/ - not to mention that rloew has patches available on his web site to address some of these issues as well. Which, if any, of these various solutions have people found to be most helpful, and under what conditions? This might be a sacrilegious question, and I'm not implying doing anything illegal or against board rules, but is there any method available, free or paid for, that allows Win98 to handle NTFS partitions? I mean Linux can do it, and it's free. Is there any way to install Win98 on an NTFS partition? If the answer to either or both questions is no, is FAT32 really able to handle today's drives efficiently? At what settings - partition size, cluster size. etc? I know it depends somewhat on what kind of data you want to store, but what are the general recommendations? With the sizes of todays drives these seem like appropriate questions. @Steven W, for your list in post #76, I assume the install order of items 1 - 6 is what you have found to be reliable? But shouldn't 12, when finished, be done first? I always thought the first step was the SP. Why did you decide to not include .NET, or were you just going to look for the newest versions of the files? If .NET is desired, where in the install process should it go? For the additional items 7 - 11, where in the process should they be installed? I would be interested in seeing your .BAT files. Besides using them, or the remote possibility of the resurrection of AutoPatcher, do you see any other way to combine all those files into fewer reliable install steps? Based on the answers I get to the other questions I've asked in this post I'll probably have additional questions of where to best include things in the install order. Sorry for broadening the scope of this thread with this barrage of questions, but this seemed as appropriate place for them as any. If a mod feels it is more appropriate elsewhere, by all means feel free to move this post. Thanks for helping an old fart get back up to speed with the current state of this OS. Though I predate even DOS, it's been awhile since I've used any version of '98. Thanks again in advance. Cheers and Regards

@PROBLEMCHYLD - Sorry to ask what is probably a dumb question, but could you please remind me why your newest pack does not include IE6 and its updates? Also, when I look at MGDX's site I get overwhelmed with all the choices, even though I appreciate having the options when necessary. That's why I really love the idea of your newest update pack project. So after using your pack, what other unofficial choices are left that you did not include and when would they be appropriate to use as well? Are there others that should NOT be used with your pack due to conflicts etc? I assume that 98SE2ME would not be appropriate, but Revolutions Pack? Is the latest KernelEX included? Can/should it be used with your pack? Sorry for the noob questions, but I've got a friend with a old system that this might be perfect for. Cheers and Regards

Some people think that Notepad++ is "heavier" than they want to load every time, and prefer Notepad2 or one of the mods for it since it is very light weight. The free version of Edit Pad is also nice, but I personally use the paid version, Edit Pad Pro. Cheers and Regards

Actually, he should be able to just delete the line with the missing ("). It seems to be a duplicate line. He also should have noticed what the problem was as soon as he read over his own post since the forum software changed the color of all the lines below it, indicating that it was "reversing" the command and parameter portions of each line. Cheers and Regards

LOL From reading a review - http://www.tomsguide.com/us/firefox-linux-bitbox-secure-web-browser,news-11203.html, BitBox is a 990 MB download that includes Oracle's VirtualBox v4.04, a Debian 6 installation, and a Linux version of Firefox 4.0.1 that is all setup to run on Windows XP/Vista/Windows 7. I can see that this should be fairly secure. BUT: So I don't see this as a method that can be adapted to run on a system such as you have described. Cheers and Regards

Your disk sounds quite useful tusk. I sent you a PM regarding it. Cheers and Regards

LOL indeed. I once used a SHARP knife to reach in and try to pry up the CPU clamp, only to dig into the motherboard and cut a trace, (or two or three), ruining the board beyond repair. And yes, been there done that on loosing data due to idiocy as well. Late nights, too little sleep, and tight schedules are not a good combination. Cheers and Regards

Since it seems that RT 7Lite is not being updated much these days, have you tried using a different tool, such as Windows 7 Toolkit? - http://www.wincert.net/forum/index.php?/topic/9056-windows-7-toolkit-v130-beta/ Cheers and Regards

I guess it just ended up being too long a command line or variable name/list then? Good to know. I've forgotten what the limits are for Win98. Cheers and Regards