CoffeeFiend

They seem to be open indeed (not that I really put much faith in that website). A quick SYN stealth scan in nmap confirms it (your IP replaced by 1.2.3.4): Discovered open port 23/tcp on 1.2.3.4 Discovered open port 21/tcp on 1.2.3.4 Discovered open port 22/tcp on 1.2.3.4 Discovered open port 80/tcp on 1.2.3.4 (the other 2 ports aren't scanned by that) The ports are opened but they don't actually send any data. For example, connecting to your port 80, the TCP handshake goes over fine (SYN, SYN ACK, ACK), then the browser sends its "GET / HTTP/1.1" request, which it ACKs, then it resets the connection (RST, ACK) without sending a single byte. As for port 21 it's much of the same. Typical TCP handshake, but immediately after (before we even have the chance of making a request) you're already sending FIN ACK and RST. So it's not like there's something running on your PC serving data and your router forwarding traffic to it. My best guess is that these ports are opened/in use by your DSL modem/router and not your PC. Those ports could also be used by your ISP to update/access the device (and not having the right IP it won't talk to me). They're the typical ports a Linux/Busybox router would have open too (ftp, ssh, telnet, http). There's no need to panic, and it's not Windows' fault either

In a very large sense, perhaps. But they're rather different technologies. Metro is a new "menu" and visual style design, not something that makes your apps magically run everywhere on everything. WinRT is how you make graphics happen on the new Windows (using XAML markup or code). It's just a common "presentation" platform. You can still compile ARM-only or x86-only apps this way. But yes, having a common UI for every device helps somewhat. That could also mean "never change anything" or "never innovate" in some ways. I'm all for change -- so long as the replacement is at least as good as what it replaced. I guess there's a fine line between "stale or outdated" and "with excess or for no good reason". Then again, especially on the developer side, MS abandons lots of reliable and proven "mature" technologies, then pushes new stuff that doesn't catch on, then changes its mind, then pushes more new stuff that makes you wonder WTF they're thinking. A couple quick examples? MS abandons C programmers (no C99 compliant compiler after over a decade and it's not planned), ditto for classic ASP (no meaningful updates since Win2k), C++11 support lagging behind GCC (yes, open source GCC supports new C++ features better than MS' flagship Visual Studio Ultimate 2010 that costs $11899) and so on. Then they push for new technologies like Silverlight and WPF which fail to gain significant adoption (only to replace them already). And now? All this brand new Win7 stuff we haven't half implemented yet (e.g. jump lists, task dialogs, etc) that you're just barely starting to use? Forget about all of it! Now learn this Win8-only WinRT stuff. Oh, and by the way, we're pushing aside the desktop, all the software you use and killing backwards compatibility as well. Multitasking is passé while cloud (Azure) is the future! And we're still supposed to be all excited about a phone touch-screen interface on our desktops now I guess, because Windows ARM tablets and WP7 phones are the future, right? I just don't see this ending well.

Perhaps he meant that Metro apps would run on both? Either ways, that video's almost a year old. Things might have changed since then. Here on Win8's blog you can read (WOA = Windows On Arm): That's pretty clear. Different CPUs with instruction sets, different architectures, etc. It probably won't even have a classic desktop to use with your apps. It might only support Metro apps. And also: ARM devices not running x86/x64 code also means that *none* of the existing drivers work. No. You can still compile native binaries for x86 and ARM CPUs (e.g. using C++) so long as you manually compile for both, or you can C#/VB which works on both (if you leave the project settings to AnyCPU obviously). But in all cases you have to use WinRT (and XAML, again, just the Metro stuff). You can't run native x86 code/apps on an ARM CPU, nor the inverse. There's also the HTML + JScript option which is basically just a web page in a fancy browser (not what developers want or expect). They leave you with only one choice (well, unless you really want to count HTML as a second?) which happens to only work on Windows 8 too. I don't even understand why someone would want an ARM tablet that runs Windows 8. Or why you'd pick that over an iPad, Android device or anything like that.

It has a few good points for sure. KDE 4 was a WTF, and GNOME 3 even more so (don't even talk about Unity). However, Win8 just takes the cake. That's yet another reason why I'm most likely getting a Mac next: Apple is the only one that hasn't screwed up yet (and still has lots of software I want and need to use).

Those must be demos based on the desktop version of Windows 8 (it still has the Phone-like touch interface), not ARM Tablets.

Lots -Windows 3.1 was little more than a pointless graphic launcher for text (DOS) apps. Win8 is little more than a pointless OS for launching a handful of Metro apps. -Both have a pretty horrible interface -Both bring very little worthwhile features over their predecessor -Both suck for developers ... And yes, big boxes everywhere too.

Same here, but MS is working hard towards that. Same here, and loving it too. Not really big on tablets either, much like you. They don't answer most of my needs, but it's probably handy for a few fun things (like most portable gadgets). I don't see Win8-on-ARM tablets being any better. Mainly the same thing, but with Metro and less apps. It won't run *any* software you already have (nor things like Flash games online), it's just as locked down, same apps marketplace idea, etc. It might have the Windows name, but it's totally unlike what you've used on the desktop. Either ways, I'm not concerned about iPads or the dead on arrival Win8 tablets (or WP7 phones that share the same fate). I'm talking about MS turning the desktop into something really awful to use, making it a real pain for developers and so on.

Oh, another somewhat reliable link that says we'll have Metro forced on us, against our will. So I guess updating is over. No more sales for MS ever. Let's hope we'll have enough years of downgrade rights to switch away or something (then again, lots of people will certainly pirate it beyond that point), and updates beyond year 2020 too. Or maybe some company's going to make a killing selling a sane shell for the new OS. Or maybe they'll fire Ballmer and Sinofsky... Or maybe someone will find an easy way to patch Win7's shell and bolt it on top of Win8's core. Who knows. But they've essentially done the unthinkable and killed Windows as far as I'm concerned. My next PC will be a Mac. Microsoft just sold me into buying a Mac They're just going to force users to other OS'es, developers to make cross-platform software (no need for Windows anymore) or to make web apps (ditto). And Windows will just slowly become irrelevant, being used mainly for legacy stuff, in VMs and terminal servers.

And there's nothing wrong with that either It's not like hieroglyphics where the drawing means a word. It's more like an easily and instantly recognizable company logo. And those aren't going out of fashion anytime soon. I find it's far quicker and so much easier to find this way. Win95's interface is also light-years ahead of Windows 8's. Either you're calculating this in a very strange way, or there's a serious problem with your install, or you're doing something completely wrong. I've had both Vista and Win7 boot under half that (no removing components or anything of the sort either). I've even seen people use Win7 on netbooks with 1GB and being happy with the performance, or even someone on this forum who reported happily using it on a machine with 512MB of RAM recently. Seriously, there's no way it the x64 version uses anywhere near 1.6GB with nothing open, unless you count the cached stuff which would make it a useless metric. Besides, on top of Vista's heavier memory footprint, its DWM is a bloated pig compared to Win7's (Win7 cut down its memory usage by 50%) which is very significant for people who multitask a lot (Vista's DWM always ran out of memory on me). Edit: Google finds tons more people happily using Win7 with 512MB of RAM. Namely, this comparison by Ed Bott which shows yet again as Vista being the worst, and where no scenario mirrors your results in any way. Either ways, they're both pretty decent OS'es, which we'll probably keep using for quite some time. I don't see myself buying a new version of Windows ever again...

Two wrongs (Metro and IE) don't make a right (yes, but three lefts do) It looks like Win8 tablets running ARM CPUs will pretty much be free from most useful software, much like I had expected (so there's no point to run Windows in the first place). MS' best solution is to open a web page in Metro IE10, which then connects to terminal services (remote desktop basically). I'm almost giggling at the idea.

It definitely is. There's a few users that share that opinion for sure. But the vast majority much prefer Win7, myself included. I used Vista for a while and I was pretty happy with it, but the taskbar is sooooo much better in Win7. That alone makes me want never to go back. For the record, I strongly disagree with most of his points (the ones I read anyway): I always turned that feature off to begin with. And it was made redundant with the new taskbar, which he doesn't seem to "get". Massive how? Besides, why does that even matter (I actually make mine bigger)? 99% of the time you just press the start key on your keyboard, type a few letters and press enter. Nevermind that pinning apps is much better than using the start menu for starting most of your common apps, or opening recent (or pinned) document so you find yourself using it a great deal less. By the clock. Just a different corner of the screen. That's serious nitpicking and it sounds like "don't you move anything!" to me. Either ways, Win+D or Win+M or Win+Space is much quicker than either. Mousing over to either one is such a huge waste of time, and just how often do you need to see your desktop anyway (unless you rely on desktop icons for everything still, Win95-style)? Does he miss outlook express too? There's better clients for free if you're into traditional mail clients, and if you want something full featured/high quality then you use Outlook anyway. And it doesn't really make much sense for MS to maintain 2 different mail clients either, and the one in the Live suite gets updated more often. Total non-issue once more. Again, they replaced a stale program that only gets security updates, for one in the Live suite that gets updated. Or maybe this guy doesn't like free updates. Yes, why did they remove a pointless CPU-sucking feature, only to show video on the desktop which you almost never see? I miss this *almost* as bad as Clippy. Nevermind it wasn't part of the standard Vista install either -- it was an *addon*, and *only* for the Ultimate edition too. The title of that section was "removes features", yet there are no features removed (not like you can't print anymore, or that they removed the start menu), it's just a couple secondary programs that get installed in a different way, not that you can't do stuff anymore. He really blows it out of proportion. Systray icons being hidden by default is a godsend as far as I'm concerned. It's a great way to solve the problem that every company thinks they must have a pointless icon there. What a pointless waste of space for stuff you never use! And if you actually do use the odd one then it's like 2 clicks to re-add it in the config dialog. It seems like he's the only guy left on earth who still uses these extensively and wants to see them all for some unknown reason. I click that arrow thing less than once a week. His WMP 12 vs WMP 11 blurb is just a matter of his personal preferences. He has no actual point here in any way... You could use the exact same words while complaining about WMP11 vs WMP12 and you'd be just as right. I guess he needed something to pad his list of non-issues. I find WMP 12 to be better, especially for streaming content (and DLNA support) and also for music shared between PCs. It also supports more formats out of the box. etc. You mean, besides everything you willingly overlook, fantastic changes you either discount or seem to actively resist (being too set in old ways), etc? Or does "better" for him means not moving anything around (like the show desktop icon or WMP layout), still having a system tray cluttered with useless tray icons -- along with the quickstart bar -- both eating in the taskbar zone (combined with the old large buttons so it's really cramped)?, and in general not really offering any changes that might change the way we work? I personally find Win7 far better all-around, even though Vista was alright too (better than XP). But if you want a list of things that are better: -The taskbar. Pinning common apps. Jump lists. Nice, big, easily recognizable icons instead of a crappy large button with text that takes too long to read and a tiny icon you can barely recognize. A million times this. This point alone is reason enough for me to upgrade to Win7. It's very much a game changer as far as I'm concerned. The day I tried it, Vista was dead to me. The rest (everything below and then some) is just icing on the cake. -Lighter on resources which is a very big deal for almost everyone who actually used both. That includes lots of significant low-level improvements, including many big changes in the video department (new driver model, improved GDI concurrency, reduced memory usage by DWM, etc) -Tamed UAC. -DirectX 11. 'nuff said. But not just for games. Direct2D/DirectWrite is great too for new 2D apps. -Aero Snap. It's a godsend when you work with multiple things open at once and also for moving windows between monitors. Even just for maximizing apps and the like. Using the Windows key + arrows mainly, but snapping Windows to the border is handy sometimes too. -Desktop slideshow. Much nicer, and far less resource hungry than Dreamscene, and it's not only for the Ultimate edition either. -SSD TRIM support, since SSDs are getting quite popular -The improved start menu, including the improved search (I can't remember the last time I went to the control panel directly to find something), seeing recent docs (jump lists) by your apps (the little arrow), being able to change the default "shutdown" action from the start menu to something else you use more often (like reboot), etc -ISO burning and other nice explorer improvements e.g. copy as path on right click, or the bar that shows how much free space left you have is now also being on USB drives -Windows XP mode (there's better solutions, but it's still an improvement over Vista's nothing) -PowerShell 2 out of the box for admins, ditto for the WMI improvements -.NET framework 3.5 out of the box (great for devs), IIS 7.5 too -Taskbar icon improvements e.g. progress bars when copying files -Improved keyboard shortcuts for those of us who use the keyboard a lot -New calculator, paint and wordpad (IE too) -Many networking advances, including new VPN tech, an improved RDP protocol, etc. And tons more low-level stuff most people wouldn't know about or understand. -the Cleartype tuner now being built-in. You mean not only programs get removed? They actually added some? Even some which Vista had removed like the "Internet" games? Oh... Nevermind countless other features that don't get used often or by not many, like Multi-touch, support newer monitors whose gamut extends over the sRGB color space, the tablet PC input panel (not just useful on tablet PCs -- it's nice to enter math formulas using my Wacom tablet too), MUI improvements, new SAPI voices if you use speech synthesis, etc. There's FAR too much stuff to even attempt to make a complete list.

You seemed to me rather serious (borderline angry), and not to be joking in any way, nor was it posted in the humour section, so...

Indeed, Olly is worthless on 64 bit systems (not that I really cared much for Olly in the first place). And it's also just a debugger. I typically do a large part of my work with a disassembler (yet again, nothing comes close to IDA), and I use the debugger to figure out certain tricky parts (e.g. setting a HW BP on memory access on some data to see where else it gets used again, or setting a BP after a custom hashing function to see what hash was generated for some hardcoded password that's used later as a key to perform symmetric encryption, etc). If you successfully patch the 32 bit DLL I should be able to patch the 64 bit DLL in a few minutes of work. The code should be quite similar (they're doing the same job, calling the same functions, etc -- larger registers and a different calling convention don't really change the big picture all that much). Even just knowing what bytes you changed, I could easily track that down in the disassembled x86 DLL, see in which function/export it is, what's being done at that point in time (things like specific strings help too), and find the same code in the x64 DLL and patch it similarly. That usually does the trick. My main problem is that I have no idea what program makes the calls, what function is called and so on (where/how the checks are being made). Not understanding how this undocumented system works and not having time to devote to researching that (I've got WAY too much work here), it's hard to just come up with a patch on my own. So yes, it would be extremely helpful if you patched the 32 bit version.

Like others said, I don't see how that solves anything. Permissions (ACLs) work the same, so that wouldn't fix anything. Fixing permissions can't be that hard really (if you do it right). If you need a step-by-step guide and are in a hurry then you may want to consider hiring a consultant locally. It's not like you can realistically expect someone to spell out all the steps in the exact order for you (especially for a server downgrade which is a rather uncommon operation)

That's be beauty of running ESXi. You'd just reinstall ESXi (it takes like 5 minutes and it's free) then copy the VM over. That's it. You're done. After living those "disaster recovery"-like migrations where everything it moved manually (and *so* much stuff goes wrong), you come to really appreciate just being able to copy the virtual machine over quickly and everything just works. It's like 99% less work, hassle and drama.

IDA Pro is great, if you can afford it. It's a fantastic disassembler (not just for x86 or x64 -- it supports lots of other architectures) but it can also make use of several debuggers (several included, plus WinDbg, GDB, Bochs...). You just put breakpoints in the disassembly then start the process or attach to an already running process. You can even debug processes on other OS'es or platforms remotely (via TCP/IP). It's pretty easy to use as well. It's a fantastic tool to use (arguably the best by a long shot) but yeah, it's expensive. Edit: as dencorso said, there's an older (from 2006) free version. It lacks a LOT of really nice and modern features (x64 support, most debuggers, support for a lot of platforms and architectures, hex-rays, new signatures, plugins, etc). But that's sadly still much better than most of the others.

There's some wisdom in there It's mainly the calling convention that's different (besides the registers being wider, obviously). It's kind of like the 32 bit fastcall in that you pass some args in registers instead of on the stack (still right to left). Except that there are more registers (rcx, rdx, r8, r9 -- it almost feels like the 32 bit MIPS arch which uses $0 to $3), FP stuff does in xmm0 to xmm3 and the rest on the stack. Oh, and the caller cleans the stack, not the callee. Otherwise it's very much the same. You'd adapt in mere minutes.

Dragon naturally speaking was the popular choice back then.

That's the part I'm trying to understand (it won't copy any modified files otherwise? even if the PE checksum is fixed?). Again, I never tried making install discs with modified files so you can call me a n00b Probably. If you just want to copy modified files, it's probably not an issue. I was thinking of the scenario where Win7 is the last usable version of Windows ever, and we want to patch stuff (much like the Win9x'ers are doing now). Patchguard would likely get in the way here. I was thinking you'd be the one to answer this I've written code that uses the SetupAPI to detect hardware and such things, but patching the entry point makes no real sense to me (it's typically the initialization code for the dll). Unless this specific DLL checks signatures of files when it's first loaded (that'd be weird really) The 64 bit setupapi.dll also references it in a few places, namely inside the pSetupIsUserTrustedInstaller export which is not very well documented: .text:000007FF79AA1989 48 8D 0D 30 B1 04 00 lea rcx, StringSid ; "S-1-5-80-956008885-3418522649-183103804"... .text:000007FF79AA1A0A 48 8D 0D AF B0 04 00 lea rcx, StringSid ; "S-1-5-80-956008885-3418522649-183103804"... then later on here: .text:000007FF79AD6337 48 8D 0D 82 67 01 00 lea rcx, StringSid ; "S-1-5-80-956008885-3418522649-183103804"... A string 6 instructions above loads the string d:\\w7rtm\\base\\subsys\\sm\\sfc\\wrpdisable\\"..., then followed by "[%ws] is not protected.\n", "Error %08d taking ownership of [%ws]\n", "Error %08d setting write privileges of ".., "Success removing protection on [%ws]\n", etc. That's quite likely the SFC protection or rather WRP which also protects a lot of stuff (it's called by the PnpRepairWindowsProtectedDriver function) And it's referenced (the trusted installer SID) in a few more places, being contained inside of other strings.

You've already asked this before. Shall we waste time answering again if you just ignore all the answers given just like last time, where you ended up using VB anyway? (I deleted my answer last time as you ignored it just like the others). Topic closed. Use the old one, if someone still wants to answer...

Probable. I just assumed that meant he had found it in both or something. Well, the entry point sure is different. 64 bit registers is one thing, but the calling convention is completely different on x64 too (how args are passed, how the stack is used, who cleans it up, etc). For the record, in the x64 DLL the entry point is at 0x000007FF79A21010 and it starts with 48 89 5C 24 08 48 89 74 24 10 57 48 83 EC 20 49 8B F8 8B DA 48 8B F1 (it takes a LOT more bytes for it to be unique, it's @ 0x610 in the file). Either ways, that would be easy to patch as well. I'm just not sure why we'd make the entry point return zero instead of patching some export that's used to check signatures. Again, not that I ever toyed with installed with invalid digital signature or whatever before. Oh, and this: a.k.a. the 2 byte NOP. Either ways, disabling the other parts might be quite involved. See this code/article for how to bypass PatchGuard

I'm trying to understand here. You want the installer not to complain only? Or does that affect the installed OS as well? I'll probably mount install.wim later (don't have the WAIK installed or anything), but those bytes definitely aren't in the installed setupapi.dll (i.e. from a Win7 install, in Windows\System32). Or is there somehow two different binaries with the same name (one for setup, one for a running install)? This is very interesting. Win7 x64 is rather well protected from tampering, and the way Win8 looks right now ( ) I feel we might be running Win7 for quite some time, so tweaks, patches and changes might come in handy later on. Edit: 7zip seemingly opens wim files. So I extracted setupapi.dll from Windows\System32\, from a Win7 x64 image with SP1 and I can't find those bytes in there either. However, the 32 bit setupapi.dll from \Windows\SysWOW64 does contain them. The matching bytes are the very first bytes of the dll entry point @ 0x734b17e7. I thought you'd be patching an exported function instead. Not that I ever peeked at the old patch or dll. Again, I'm not quite sure what functionality we're patching here, and there seems to be many layers to take care of (patchguard, sfc, signatures, etc)

Just because Apple does something wrong, they have to as well (well, at least Apple won't delete blacklisted apps from your device)? Wow. Now we have to root our Windows PCs just like iPhones if we want full control of what we paid for? Great. Oh, and I was just thinking. Not only Win32 apps won't work on ARM tablets (the CPUs have completely different instruction sets and architectures) i.e. almost anything one would want to run, but even apps that aren't tied to a specific CPU architecture (.NET apps) probably won't run either. They won't run unless they port winforms and WPF, otherwise it's ONLY going to be Metro apps. A couple other good reads from zdnet: Are Windows 8 tablets already irrelevant? You mean, a completely different UI, and none of the apps or drivers that makes Windows what it is means it's pointless? Yes. Windows 8 Metro UI and how previous attempts to revamp the desktop failed That's precisely what it is. Windows 8 design flaws Microsoft MUST address ^^^ A million times this! Making lame excuses for Microsoft's decision to drop the Start button in Windows 8 ... MS management seems to be as good as RIM's lately. At least those people eventually fired management. Let's hope MS follows suit...

I mean, who cares if everybody says it blows? Their main Windows designer -- who doesn't even use Windows but rather a Mac -- certainly knows better than all of us! Hey guys, you should totally use this thing I made, it's like way awesome. But I'm not going to use it. Right.

More angry people, coming from the "other" Windows fanboy site.