CoffeeFiend

I'm not at home right now so I can't verify, but if my memory serves me well, it's a NSIS installer and the regular /S works just fine.

Well, it's not like we can teach you networking, security, server/apps setup/management, how web servers/databases work and all that stuff in a couple posts. It takes a long time for most people to master all these to a basic level. In other words, there's no way we can really cover all this as a few forum posts, we wouldn't even know where to start. You will have to read up on a lot of very specific things, learn it and get some experience, and that will take you LOTS of time. If your company can get you some courses/training, it sure wouldn't hurt either. I really wish I could help more than this, but like I said, I don't even know where we would start.

First, you say you found a bug in ALL versions of windows 2000/xp/2003 (some virus you had) then next google has bugs? Ok! If you say so... (people could only assume it was mild humour really...) Perhaps it's the first time you used a translator. Stop seeing bugs everywhere....

It's easy to install, not much to it, and it's pretty small too. Security wise, well, I'm not sure what kind of security you need or expect. I don't know exactly in what environment/setup you want to use it either... It's definately as secure as it needs to be for me and for the place where I work.

You cannot install installshield apps from CD/DVD with just -s, you also need at the very least -f2 for the logfile, and preferably -f1 too (some days it works perfect without it for them but it's given me problems numerous times. doesn't hurt to add it too) in a batchfile it would look like this: "%CDROM%\Programvare\PhotoshopCS\setup.exe" -S -f1"%CDROM%\Programvare\PhotoshopCS\setup.iss" -f2"%SystemRoot%\Photoshop.log" it's up to you to convert to proper RunOnceEx syntax now This will work 100% all of the time. The log file will be created where -f2 points. If you got more problems, look up the error code in the logfile.

No need for active directory or anything, it's completely unrelated to that. The only catch with cloning like that is, your PC must use the same HAL (hardware abstraction layer), but even then, there's workarounds for that. Install windows and other stuff, configure, etc. Run sysprep (with template) Make an image of it clone to other PCs run mini setup on them as they boot it's all there is to it. No requirements or fancy things.

Hmmm, what did you change exactly? I'm not sure about the others but my version of kaspersky kasvc.exe reports 20300kb and kav.exe 760kb (21060kb total). That's about 2 megs less than what your site says (not that it makes a huge difference mind you) RAM usage seems to change a bit with every build of most apps.

They offer .com names and such too with their Custom DNS, but like I said, it'll cost you money... Especially if you add mail services on top of that.

ignore memory usage on the apps, a few are off, i am working to correct it, probably will be done by tommorow. Oh, I had not realized it was yours. Nice job you did there. That must have taken some time. Memory wise... Lots of the applications' reported memory under task mgr is wrong anyways. It's interesting when you do a bit of comparison or checking what some numbers really mean too... One thing for example: 28.6gb used, 60752 files, nod32 full scan time: 3M 13S. That means, it has scanned in average at nearly 150mb/sec! or around 315 files/sec. Not that longer scanning speeds are a direct indication of scanning depth/quality, but no wonder detection rate is only 82%. It definately has to cut some corners to be THAT fast. Best in detection rate (which is really the ONLY reason why we run an AV in the first place): kaspersky. Closely followed by mcaffee, which takes even more ram (well, a little worse on all specs) and about 10$ more. Also the update process for McAfee isn't the best either (download/apply DAT/SuperDAT and such, depends on versions...) I have ran (the trial of course) it on TONS of PCs friends and such bring over and usually, even if they had another AV - updated and all - it ALWAYS finds more. It also scans inside everything, updates daily and all. I haven't had time to peek at the in depth reviews yet, but I'll find sometime soon. Thanks a lot for those reviews Schadenfroh

"speel" ? Talking about spell checkers... (sorry, I really couldn't resist!)

It's VERY easy. Basically, you're not making a unattended install (well, you could always start from that), but you're just cloning PCs. The one program you're looking for is called sysprep (free, by microsoft). Make a nice template, run it and ghost away. Then after cloning that image to other PCs, on bootup, you get a mini-setup (it asks for whatever you want it to - as you entered in your .inf file)

The one big solution is microsoft exchange, but that's quite overkill for personnal use. There are dozens of others but I haven't played much with them. Some even offer webmail, filtering and much more. As for your connection going down, that's always a big concern, but there are companies (such as deerfield) that will (for $$) let you hop your incoming mail thru them, and if your server is down it will hold it for you. They can also redirect the incoming mail to a port of your choice in case your ISP blocks them. Your other concern is having your domain name and all point to your IP all the time if it's dynamic, but again, these guys can have your domain name change with your dynamic IP too if you need it.

I'm using Ultr@VNC. No complaints whatsoever.

Well, we could spend a great deal of time answering every single Q in great detail, but I won't start that (or not yet anyways). Situation is: you guys want to offer hosting, and you are completely new to this (nothing personnal). You need assistance for some very basic tasks, and you don't know yet how things will be setup/work... My Q is: don't you think it's a bit too much for just you alone, especially with no prior experience? Most commercial hosts have well trained and experienced techs, everything well planned and setup - and they still suck. Learning this along the way (and it sounds like you got a lot to learn, networking/web/database/... everything wise really) may not be a very good way of doing it either. And while you're experimenting with these things, if your hosting stops working at any point, your clients won't be exactly happy either... (Rightfully so, and then they start bad mouthing you, giving bad reviews, etc) And your setup won't be very secure either (well, most likely), and setting up things could get quite time intensive, may cost a lot more to the company than hosting will pay. I'd highly advize you think again about all this. It's not like there's huge money to be made there either with all the free hosts online, and the high amount with half decent packages at almost a couple dollars per month. It could turn into a very frustrating experience too, setting up advanced things, and trying to fix complex problems we sometimes run into. Most places have a team of dedicated, trained, skilled and experienced people for that job. (just like say, one wouldn't really bother trying to open a garage if they're still learning about basic mechanics)

Perhaps we install firefox different ways... ?

Well, that's what we've all known for a while, but the RIAA says otherwise no matter what. I could dig dozens of similar stories It's not like we don't buy new albums because all the new ones suck, and that nobody buys a 20$ remix of songs (or best of) you already have and own instead of burning it yourself, or that nobody wants to pay 15$ for a single with 3 different (and very bad) mixes of a single song that's just ok... </sarcasm> We also got "normal" radio, XM (satellite) radio, internet (IP) radio, radio on digital satellite or cable, and now, people are moving on to web stores like iTunes. There's far more reasons and explanations to this. It's just the RIAA that just wants more profit for their shareholders - even if it means suing 12 yo girls (hey, it's not like they actually care about the artists). But again, this is all old news...

Hmm, I guess my post got deleted in the database glitch we had... Like I had said, it's no bug. Lots of words have several meanings that translate to different words in another language and such. The translator doesn't always pick the right one, just like most expressions make no sense once translated... No translator is perfect (even though they're making good progress), but you can still easily fool them.

You can use any method you want to make it copy at any time... GuiRunOnce works fine. As for copying, copy or xcopy would do the job (and MD to create your destination directories and what not)

It's not stone aged by any means. I personally MUCH prefer GUIRunOnce to RunOnceEx. I'm never switching to that, no thanks.

I have it, but you'll have to wait 'till I'm back at home to check on that one. I don't recall it being anything special, meanwhile, you can try /s /S /silent /VERYSILENT and such. I bet one will work.

Could be just about anything. I'd perhaps see what processes are running, check the HKLM/HKCU \...\ Run entries, run a good AV/spyware scanner, and if that doesn't solve it, then I see no point of wasting more time than that on it when you can have a freshly reinstalled system that works fine in no time at all.

Yes, blank CDs are really cheap, cheaper than my time anyways - but i still don't like to "waste" one. @prathapml no, I was talking primarily to update firmwares, that won't work too well in VMWare (anyone tried to flash the virtual BIOS yet?)

There are many other and well known places on the web (and even suscription magazines) that do AV testing as their specialty. They test things like see if it catches every single of the last 100 wild viruses, scanning speeds, memory usage, and reports what it scans or doesn't (web/email/files/...). Also, some have very limited support for archives (like, will only scan inside zip files) whereas others can scan inside say, a .msi package inside a iso image that's RAR'ed or something like that... Benches and stats don't mean much when it comes to that. Either ways, from what I read in general, the only common thing is - don't use Norton junk (I read not long ago that some are starting to include spyware detection/removal too, but i can't remember which one that was for sure) edit: Looking at the results on the link, they don't seem too bad overall (looks like my fav -kaspersky- detects everything) but we kinda need more information about the testing procedure. NAV is known to be like the absolute total SLOWEST in terms of scanning speeds (kb/s), so I don't know what it did or didn't scan (or any of them), or perhaps he had a couple iso's on his HD that most apps scanned other than norton? We can't really tell, and things like that have a HUGE impact on scanning times. I think scanning speeds in kb/s would be a much better measurement. He says that archive scanning was off (but do all apps actually have that setting? what would it really skip? ...) Anyways, just seems like NAV is missing a digit (or 2 ) in front of it's scanning time...

I've used ebay and paypal for quite a while too (I do a big part of my shopping online too) and I never had a prob. Just play it safe and don't go for what seems too good to be true and such offers (a little common sense goes a long way).

.