codejunkie
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by codejunkie
-
-
Edit autorun.inf on the cd/dvd to look like this
[AutoRun]
open=setup.exe
icon=setup.exe,0
shell\silent=Silent Install
shell\silent\command=i386\Winnt32.exe /unattendednow when you right click on the CD there will be a second option to install Windows silently, if you do it by mistake you can still press esc to cancel the installation.
Is that what your after?
0 -
Hum, what do you get when you couple there programs together?
- Windows Server Code Name "Longhorn" Beta 3
- Mozilla Minefield 3.0a1
- DownThemAll for Mozilla Firefox
Well for some reason it desided to tell me persentages all over the place and that I had a speed of 1.33GB which did fluctuate ALOT! often minus 1000's
Well I thought it was funny anyway
0 - Windows Server Code Name "Longhorn" Beta 3
-
Novatech - Motherboard Bundles
Intel Dual Core 2 Duo 6600 - 2048MB - ATX
£418.30 inc vat
AMD AM2 Dual Core 4200 - 2048MB - ATX
£257.32 inc vat
Which one is faster (PCMark 2005 v1.1.0 - Tomshardware CPU Chart)
- Intel Dual Core 2 Duo 6600
- CPU = 6168
Mem = 4006
- CPU = 6168
Athlon64 X2 4200+
- CPU = 4525
Mem = 3352
Price to Performance (Higher is better - More points gained per £)
- Intel Dual Core 2 Duo 6600
- CPU = 14.745~ (6168 / £418.30)
Mem = 9.577~ (4006 / £418.30)
- CPU = 14.745~ (6168 / £418.30)
Athlon64 X2 4200+
- CPU = 17.585~ (4525 / £257.32)
Mem = 13.027~ (3352 / £257.32)
Yes the Athlon64 X2 isn't as fast but its by fare fast enough for what I do....being University course work, my Update Pack testing and building, 2x Virtual PCs 24/7 and that's on my Athlon64 3000+. For the sake of 2% increase in performance upgrading to DDR2, Hum I think I'll run my Athlon64 3000+ against my Turon64 TL50 both running single channel memory as the Sempron64 isn't a good comparison
0 - Intel Dual Core 2 Duo 6600
-
im also throwing out the suggestion of a C2D
Good man, the fact the thread is asking about AMD and not Intel. Don't you just love thread hijackers that change the original topic. fight for the little guy, do you want Intel to win only for prices to go straight back up? that's what will probable happen if AMD go bang
I have 4 AMD computers in this room - Benchmarks
AthlonXP 3200+ (Barton) skt A
Athlon64 3000+ (Winchester) skt 939
Sempron64 3000+ (Palermo) skt 754
Turon64 X2 TL50 (Taylor) skt S1
skt AM2 / S1
Dual Channel DDR2 - DDR2-667 maybe cheaper than DDR-400
AM3 processors will be able to run on Socket AM2 motherboard
skt 939
Supports dual channel memory DDR
Athlon64 x2's available
Possibly a cheaper alternative to a AM2 Athlon64 X2 system but still giving similar performance
AnandTech reported that Socket AM2 system performance was 0-7% faster than Socket 939 equivalents, with most applications about 2% faster [1][2], despite having over 30% greater memory bandwidth due to DDR2 support.Skt 754
Only support single channel memory DDR
only Semprons avaliable for this platform now and a Sempron 3700+ costs around £200
PCI-Express v2.0 has been released to manufacturers so depending on what you want your now system for maybe worth waiting for AMD to release its now architecture and this would also enable motherboard manufacturers to integrate PCI-Express 2 into their boards.
I hope that helps
-----Update----
Im fully aware what Intel have out at the moment, I am a regular visitor of tomshardware.com
I have no money being a student to by build a new PC.
0 -
ATI R600 vs. G80 (GeForce 8800) - the next level of ATI vs. nVidia.
http://level505.com/2006/12/30/the-full-ati-r600-test/1/
ATI’s Next-Generations R600 Chip Specifications Emerge, Possible Benchmark Results Leak.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display...0103072506.html
0 -
omfg thats huge. i wonder how much its gunna cost. ill prolly end up getting an 8900gt...
....We haven't even sin benchmarks for it yet....for all you know the reason why it was held back was to ensure they had pulled back the lead the 8800 gave NVidia and to give it an advantage too.
The difference between the 8800 & 8900 from Nvidia will probably be just like X800 to X900 and X1800 to X1900.
It will simply be a more economical revision of the G80 chip which gives Nvidia the ability to increase the clock a wee bit more.
It won't be like the massive jumps between new generations but ATi do have quite a job to catch up
0 -
I wanna see the benchmarks for the son of a gun
9.5" or go the hole hog with the 12.4"?
0 -
WU or MU are fine
Its Autoupdate that's the problem
I'll just have to remind my GF to visit http://update.microsoft.com every second Tuesday of the month
0 -
My girl friend got a new PC for Christmas loaded with Windows Media Center 2005, it was fine until you try and install all the Windows Updates it stops installing and the PC stops working properly the only way to sort it is to switch it off and load it up again but then an error message started appearing and after clicking OK it would render the PC virtually useless.
Faulting application svchost.exe, version 5.1.2600.2180, faulting module msi.dll, version 3.1.4000.2435, fault address 0x00012780.For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
I googled it and found that disabling Windows Auto Update fixes this problem and yep it shour does, but what I could like to know is are there many of you that have suffer the same problem?
Does it only affect WMC2005?
I've never seen it on Windows XP or 2003
is your affected? if so what Windows Version do you use? is it retail or OEM (Inc which OEM Provider)?
0 -
that method only works if the file was created on the PC your trying to unattended activate. cant be from another PC
Sorry I don't actually know where the file is suppose to reside as I have never tried this.
Im assuming you've got a winnt.sif in i386 which enabled the OEM state
you will need both wpa.dbl and wpa.bak
0 -
Ok, I think we have established they both have there own unique advantages. which are irrelevant to mo3adz question.
Either converting the partition to NTFS
or
spliting the partition into FAT32 and NTFS
0 -
this is awesome, been using it for a while
will you be making a 7z version? (not that it makes that much difference)
Come again?? make a 7zip version....it is already
0 -
its working again, DreamHosts have restore the bandwidth that was used by the leech
0 -
Those for you that have used RyanVMs update pack for Windows 2003 may be aware there are packs of other Windows versions, I have been making an update pack for Windows 2003 for the past year or so.
if you'd like more information check out these links
0 -
That's both good and bad news ine one post (kinda mixed feelings). I wonder if SP2 will also be for R2, since it's built more or less on top of 2003 SP1 (you install the other CD after). I'm hoping so (haven't heard much about SP2 for 2003 yet)
Bad news for WSUS though. I was hoping for a good improvement, and it's not looking like it really delivers (based on what you said). A bit like MMC 3, which didn't seem to change a whole lot so far. The only "real" improvement seems to be support for SQL Server 2005, then it's all minor things like views/filtering. Also, it seemingly runs on win2003 only (2k unsupported) - and if it needs beefy hardware like you say, then it's sounding like a fairly expensive upgrade (new hardware + win2003 license) for a free product (after all, we're using this just because it's cheap - or cheaper than SMS that is). Oh well.
SP2 will not add anything to R2, R2 is complete separate, yes it has to be compatible with it but its just like WMP, IIS. It's an optional sub component the only difference between then and WMP & IIS..ETC is that is not free and has its own SPs is some way its more like Microsoft Office or SQL Server but it just happens to be more integrated into the system
When referring to WSUS 2.0 & 3.0 (Beta 2) the specs I recommended where for optimum performance, its works on my Pentium III 933 with 768MB SDRAM and IDE66 interface but it does take along time compiling the reports and loading MMC 3.0 Plug-ins that are required for it. I preferred 2.0's take on it with the web based management but you were restricted to IE6+, I should leave some feed back on WSUS 3.0...Another time...maybe.
I ran a WSUS service from a VM PC on my Athlon64 3000+ I didn’t want it to be on a VM PC so I moved it. I didn’t really take much notice of its performance as I wasn’t generating reports I was just changing the options and Syncing my other WSUS server off it.
0 -
frankly i think any winner will be a function of the OS the person uses.
i do not use windows xp, i think it's a piece of garbage, and i think i'm being kind.
i use windows 2000 and 2003... i can understand the appeal of the ryanvm for an xp user who just got xp yesterday and they don't want to download lots of ms patches.
the interface peculiarities are so weird in that os, just figuring out how to do something simple (such as making the window controls bigger or showing the recycle bin) makes me have to stop and really concentrate on something that should be more straightforward, but i'm off on a tangent.
as for 2003, there is no unofficial pack to download... as for 2000, there is an unofficial pack for it, and no disrespect at all to the other MSFN win 2000 enthusiast who compiles it, but even though i have a high bandwidth connection, i don't want to have to re-download a 227 meg service pack a few weeks after every patch day festival. (even if i did want to, though, HFSLIP is compatable with that).
Boooggy is right seeing he maintaince one and I maintain the other.
and the has always been AutoPatcher...
LOL and where did you get the figure of 227MB? you download SP2 integrate it into the source and work from that integrating at pack that 20-40MB
0 -
sp2 is not beta...yet.
not that I am aware of, its got to Beta
http://blogs.msdn.com/msdnsubscriptions/ar.../29/651471.aspx
Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2 Technical Beta
...its the first link on google results titled MSDN Subscriptions WebLog : Windows Server 2003 SP2 Beta 1 and ...
I'd have though you of all people boooggy, would have known about it...
------------
I forgot to add that Microsoft's WSUS 3.0 Beta is OK, but I cant see much of an improvement, you still cant filter out results that are not applicable...IE Windows XP SP2 system and still shows PostSP1 updates...why? as well as 64bit updates when its an x86 system...cant filter out obsolete updates. Its incredibly CPU and HD intense, Id recommend RAID0 and Dual core CPU
Perhaps an update 'tree' with the current version at the top and the older versions within the tree
0 -
WS2k3 & XP64, are going to get an SP2 soon....
I do appreciate your effort, just wanted to mention that an offical SP was round the corner already.
Don't worry I know
I have been making this pack for over a year on and off, this is jsut the latest version"Windows Server 2003 SP2 to be released 2nd half of 2006"
a beta is out but thats it, I will be greatfull when they do release it as I will be back to nice small back again, Im glade I dnt maintain RyanVMs pack. he does a great job
0 -
Sorry I dnt watch these threads very much
Download Visual Studio 6 - SP6 Integration Pack
Now uploaded
0 -
Windows 2003 Update Pack
its a Direct Integration pack just like RyanVM's Windows XP pakc the only diffrence its for Windows 2003 (32bit)
a download link and more info can be found here
http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2769
to integrate this pack you will either need to use
RVM Integrator which can be found on RyanVMs website
or
Nlite which can be found on this forum
Any feed back would be great!
Cheers
0 -
Sorry about that, I have updated the link, though Im no longer working on the project. there was a lack of intrest as you can see and well it does what I need it to. and well Im moving on to Linux
0 -
a better why of doing this would be to put your serials in another file say an ini file and use iniread
[code]$serial = IniRead(@ScriptDir & "\" & "serials.ini", "games", "half-life", "NotFound")
if $serial = "NotFound" then
msgbox(16,"Error","Serial not found in serials.ini")
exit
endif
Send($serial)
RegWrite("HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Valve\Half-Life\Settings","Key","REG_SZ",$serial)[/code]0 -
Previous builds of... what?
As far as I know only two versions of 98 were officially released: 4.10.1998 and 4.10.2222A
Seeing he is posting in the 'Unoffical Win98 SE Service Pack' Section what do you think?
0 -
I have recently built a new AMD64 mechine...this time in a Micro ATX case...man what a squize!
Sempron 64 system
Sempron 3000+ @ 1800Mhz (Stock Cooler)
Asus Radeon X800 XT PE AGP (ATI CCC 6.2 set to Optimal Performance) Arctic Cooler
512MB of DDR333 CL2.5 (1x 512MB) - TwinMos
1x 80GB Maxtor D/max 9 7200RPM 8MB Cache
Asus A7S-MX (Bios v1.014, Single Channel Memory)
LINNCO Model HL-300K...not sure on Wattage
Sempron 64 system
OverAll = 3619
CPU = 3326
Mem = 2854
GFX = 7644
HDD = 4506
I'd try it with better memory but I cant get to the sockets verywell there hidden under the DVD-RW
.... Need some more PC3200 Elixir DDR SDRAM... I have pulled all the Matrix DDR400 from my Athlon XP and replaced it with half the memory from the Athlon64 (Elixir DDR400)...not realy tested it much but was a little unstable before0
I have been making this pack for over a year on and off, this is jsut the latest version
.... Need some more PC3200 Elixir DDR SDRAM... I have pulled all the Matrix DDR400 from my Athlon XP and replaced it with half the memory from the Athlon64 (Elixir DDR400)...not realy tested it much but was a little unstable before
Can not remove some exe files; Windows 7 or normal?
in Windows 7
Posted
That's odd, I didn't have it until I upgraded from 7000 to 7048.
It's annoying as it keeps 'locking' the exe's I'm compiling hardly convenient that I have to reboot to recompile it or give it a new name EVERY time I want to compile it.
Are you all using x64?