Jito463

That's true, jrf2027. But with a virtual machine software you can do other tasks while it's "installing" Windows.

I'm not sure where this originally came from, but it's saved me from formatting a customers computer many a times. It resets the Winsock values in 2000/XP. That sounds like your problem. http://rockent.brinkster.net/Files/WinsockXPFix.exe

Sir, you are still missing the point. It replaces AV even for those people. You will know when you have a virus or not. At some point, your machine is going to start acting funny. Most people that are not sure if they have a virus will do a search on the odd behavior that their computer is displaying, and find out that way. Also, I assume that before you install ImmE, you would have already had some form of AV software on it. If your AV software hasn't came back with any virus detections, then you can (to some degree) know if you have already been infected before installing ImmE. And if you are that paranoid, then just format your entire computer, install what you need, and then install ImmE. Case solved, no more virus, no more signature updates. Everyone is Happy...lol. PS...For those that choose to do so, they can run ImmE, with their exsisting AV software. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, you are missing the point. Short of a format/reload, those people are out of luck using your software after they're infected with a virus. With traditional AV, they at least have a chance of removing the viruses without wiping the whole system. Am I wrong? You said from the start this *REPLACES* anti-virus software. I'm saying it may complement it, but will not replace it. I fail to see how your statement refutes that.

First off, you really should update. The latest release is 1.9.5.3105 just released yesterday. Second, it should be the 2nd option you had. What I did was: /qn Reboot=ReallySuppress DRIVER0=???????? DRIVER1=???????? What the DRIVER0 and DRIVER1 options do is renames the virtual device drivers on install for anti-blacklisting. It must be something else causing your shutdown issue though, because Alcohol doesn't do a timed shutdown.exe. It just shuts down if it needs to.

Yeah, I've done that from day-one. Works like a charm.

Try this. If you've installed any of the Post-SP2 hotfixes, look for a file in your Windows\System32 called xpsp3res.dll. Then hex-edit your sysdm.cpl file and look for xpsp2res.dll and change it to xpsp3res.dll. Mind you, I have *not* tested this in any way, shape or form so if it hoses your PC I assume no responsibility. And for all I know, it may not even work, but it's worth a shot I guess if you really want to do it.

I've played with Deep Freeze. It does actually let you specify "unfrozen" sections your HDD where files can be saved after reboot. However, back to my original statements. Even AV software can still detect and sometimes remove pre-existing viruses when installed. Your software - from your own statements - cannot do this. Hence, why I say it will not truly replace AV. True, it's best not to let malicious software on your PC in the first place which is why I'm the paranoid type when it comes to security on my PC. But a lot of people don't know better and they'll happily click away without thinking first. These are the people who your software can't help because it has no way of helping them once the virus is installed.

Why don't you want SP2? There are a lot of security changes that really help to secure your PC, even if you are good at it already. I would highly recommend you reconsider. In my professional opinion, SP2 is a must for any XP machine that's on the internet. *EDIT* Actually, I forgot to mention. It won't be long before MS removes any and all support for updates on unpatched XP machines. You'll have to run at least SP1 if not SP2 to get future updates.

Another option to delete a folder that is messed up and cannot be deleted is to boot to Safe Mode with Command Prompt. Mind you, this will boot to a very minimal Safe Mode with only a command line interface and nothing else. But if you know how to use a command prompt, you can delete the offending directory/file in this way without the need for a 3rd party program. I myself have used this method in the past.

I know I said I was done with this topic, but I had to comment about some recent statements. Basically, it sounds like you just prevent anything from running that wasn't already there when IE (err?) was installed or was taken down. To sum it all up anyway. So if the machine is already infected with a virus, this software can't do squat because the virus infected file is now allowed to run. Traditional AV can sometimes (not always though admittedly) remove an existing virus from a machine. And if you take down the program and install something with a virus, then turn the program back on, you're still hosed. At least with traditional AV it will usually detect the virus after being turned back on even if the virus was already executed. In fact, I could see virus writers exploiting some of the features in your program, like deleting non-authorised programs. If a virus gets on the machine while IE is down, once back up the virus can infect as many files as it wants and let your program delete them for being "non-authorized". Please correct me if I have it wrong, but it sounds like this would not fully replace the need for a good AV. I'm very paranoid about opening files and have never had a virus, though I always keep an up-to-date AV installed as a precaution. Because no one is perfect and anyone could potentially be tricked into opening a malicious file. Please, let me know if I'm misunderstanding, but this is what I get from your comments.

Next thing I'm going to try come Tuesday (soonest I can do it) is to copy the ntldr to the boot directory (1OPX in my case) and hex-edit it to rename the I386 directory to 1OPX. If anyone else wants to try before then, please do and let us know. Otherwise, I'll try when I get back to work.

They don't use a "corporate" license, they just use a key that's tied to the BIOS and is pre-activated. On any other machine, it will not work and you'll have to activate (with a different key). But on the machine it came with, it's pre-activated and does not require the end user to activate it.

I use Opera to avoid most spyware/adware and Spybot S&D plus Ad-Aware to scan in case I do get spyware (which never happens aside from the occassional cookie).

There's one problem with your thought process. If this truly is real, I can completely understand your desire to spread the word about it. However, having said that, I've seen too many "super-great-better-than-the-rest" software come and go to believe anyone without being able to - as ^_^ put it - mashing the gas for myself. Your "demo vs. live" argument is moot. So it's not a prerecorded demo, it's still a "live demo". I can't truly get hands-on with it. Regardless, while I don't agree with those who are openly mocking you, I have to agree with what they're saying at least. I just won't believe until I can see it for myself. Or at the very least, see some major news source promote it (though I'd still have to test it before I shelled out money for it). I guess that's my final say on this matter as we're just going round in circles. I have better things to do with my time.

Michael Jackson hasn't been black in years. Oh, but of course that's a "disease", and not at all some vain attempt by him to appear white. He's not really either, though. He's just.....something....else....

As has been said above, it's not about being open-minded. It's about whether we trust someone uknown to tell us how great his software is, or whether we trust for ourselves after trying it out. Would you buy a car you'd never seen because the salesman said it was incredible and showed you a video of him driving it? No, you'd want to drive it for yourself. It's the same thing. That's the reason why every software program worth it's salt has a shareware version (heck, even Windows has a downloadable trial version) so the end-user can test it out to see if it works as advertised. Without it, no one except the most gullible would buy into it sight-unseen.

Yet another option is just to unplug all the drives you *won't* be installing Windows onto and just let setup format/repartition the drive you will be installing Windows on.

Well, if anyone had bothered to read Bink's article, this OS is only being marketed to nations with a weak economy. Those countries that can't afford to update to the latest and greatest tech but still have need for features from XP. And it's not just a slimmed-down XP, it's a hybrid XP Pro+XP Embedded. *EDIT* Sorry, that was a different article linked above. Read this one: http://bink.nu/Article4016.bink *EDIT2* Apparently, I should have re-read the article before I posted. It's being marketed to certain types of businesses too. It was some time back when I last ready it, heh. *proceeds to attempt extraction of foot from mouth*

Does it really matter? CD's are cheap enough nowadays.

Yeah, I'd say it's definitely the memory. The fact that every error came up in that one memory address indicates a bad stick. The fact it didn't find errors on every pass doesn't mean anything really, as Memtest86 requires multiple passes due to random testing (sort of). If it showed errors constantly I would say processor or MoBo, but that's a memory issue for certain.

You may not like everyone busting your chops, but the fact is none of us that are true computer geeks will ever believe some "fantastic never-before-seen super security software" exists until we can field test it for ourselves. It just won't happen. Not because we're set in our ways, but because we trust what we can measure, not what someone says they've measured for us. I'm just not that trusting of an individual.

Why would you need to? The only reason for implementing drivers in this fashion is to access drives on controllers that Windows doesn't have native support for without using a floppy. Any other devices can be loaded in other ways during setup, or even after setup.

I wouldn't use anything but NOD32. In the past I've used McAfee, Norton, Panda, AVG and even Avast (when no other was available for x64), but NOD32 is the best one I've used by far. And now that NOD32 has been released for x64 (beta, but it works great), I'm set all around.

I did a Google search to see what I could turn up about this program. I like one persons comments: "The article makes it sound like the best thing since Microsoft Bob", lol. Joking aside however, the few articles I could find on it seemed to like it, but I have my doubts about a software that hasn't been proven in the wild. Sure, they managed to trick a few people in government to approve it for use, but if it can't hold it's own in the wild on a normal users PC it's not worth squat.

Has anyone tried hex-editing the setupldr.exe (after unpacking it of course) and changing the references to i386 in there? I ask because when I opened it in the hex editor, it had the exact same i386 references in what appeared to be the same places as setupldr.bin. I probably won't get a chance to play with it until next week. We're closing our store down and moving everything to the other store, so things are a little busy atm.