jaclaz

Two semi-random thoughts: 1) Some laptops have a keyboard combo (usually FN+*something*) that switches Audio (speakers) off. 2) It is not uncommon that the actual jack/plug connector switch does not make good contact when you remove the headphone jack jaclaz

That is NOT a "C/C++ script", it is a small C++ program SOURCE CODE, which you got from here: http://www.thecrazyprogrammer.com/2013/06/cc-program-to-create-digital-stopwatch.html Normally such a Source Code needs to be COMPILED (though there are C and possibly C++ interpreters, very probably, like 99.9999% you DO NOT actually want that). Also it seems like targeted to a "pure DOS" (not Windows). Try asking what you *need* or would like to obtain (FINAL GOAL, as opposed to the way you believe you should reach that goal), right now you are slipping on a chiocolate covered banana : http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/put-down-the-chocolate-covered-banana.html jaclaz

Translated: makebt\mkisofs.exe -v <- be verbose (i.e. output more information while creating the .iso) -iso-level 4 -l -joliet-long <- a few parameters to make the inner format of the .iso correct -volid "PE3" <- the name of the .iso volume -b boot/etfsboot.com <- name of the bootsector to use -no-emul-boot <- specify that above is a NO-EMULATION bootsector image -hide boot.catalog <- optional, there is no need to have the boot.catalog visible (or hidden for that matters) -duplicates-once <- this - in case of two or more "same" files in two different paths will copy only first instance and make the rest links, think of hardlinks on NTFS -force-uppercase <- this will make all directory and file names in the .iso UPPER CASE, no matter ThE OrIgInAl CaSe On HaRdDiSk -o win7pe_x86\PE3.ISO <- this is the output .iso win7pe_x86\ISO zzz_add\x86 <- these are the folders which contents will be added to the .iso The actual PE files are inside the win7pe_x86\ISO folder and will go in the root of the .iso. The drivers are in the zzz_add\x86\Drivers and since the contents of the zzz_add\x86 directory are added they will go in \Drivers in the .iso. The folder on hard disk is called zzz_add because this way the contents will be added to the .iso AFTER the PE booting files (there might be some limitations in the booting files if they are saved into the .iso at a "too large" address). jaclaz

Well, this is "by design" in the sense that a protected mode OS does need a driver for the .iso (which came a little bit later in the game through Firadisk or WinvBlock and for some uses Imdisk besides the *need* of a booloader such as grub4dos and/or Syslinux/Memdisk, if not using the good ol' Server 2003 SP1 Ramdisk), and rest assured with Easy2boot (based on grub4dos) you can make almost *anything* boot from USB stick in a multi-boot fashion (or directly with grub4dos if you know where your towel is). Using a .iso on hard-disk-like device (such as an internal or external disk or a USB stick) is a choice which is suited to have a same object (the .iso) that can be used indifferently on the device or - if really needed - burned to CD/DVD, the "original" approach to install windows from USB used not the .iso approach, it came later as a "convenience": http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/61384-how-to-bootinstall-from-usb-key/ http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/111406-how-to-install-xp-from-usb/ The use of .iso's, particularly for the install of XP became prevalent much later in the game, see this as a reference: http://reboot.pro/topic/8944-boot-any-iso-image-or-boot-all-iso-images/ exactly because of the lack of "proper" NT drivers, whilst the "newer" OS's of the NT families provided through the use of a "real" PE as a setup environment and .wim access/deploying a much more "portable" approach to installing from "any" media. but nothing prevents you from creating a "flat" install build manually (as the mentioned USB_multiboot set of batches do), the issues you had with WinSetupFromUSB are expected when using a modified source because obviously the tool has been tested only with unmodified or very little modified sources. Still, on a multiboot stick it would make sense to boot to another capable OS (usually a PE 3.x or 4.x which you would have anyway on such multiboot device) and install the XP from hard disk after having copied the install files to the internal disk (which remains IMHO the best approach, used since the good ol'times of Winnt.exe and Winnt32.exe, as it is usually faster and the install remains with actual install files "on board" so that you don't happen to have "please insert install CD" messages if running SFC or needing an additional driver for a device). And nowadays this can be done - besides manually - through the WinNTSetup: So, all in all it is just a matter of preferences and personal likings, but we now have a lot of possibilities . jaclaz

So, basically we need to imagine your script, then debug it? Anyway, check line 42. jaclaz

Well, the issue here is that some (intelligent or otherwise) checking/modifying of the .iso (or the exact way to mount it) is vital for these setups. JFYI, there are two specific threads for Ram disk (and also non-ramdisk) XP installing from .iso: However it is EXTREMELY queer that WinSetupFromUsb did not work (at least for the 32 bit version which as said has been really widely tested) that motherboard/UEFI must have something really "queer". The HAL issue might be due to *something* that misrepresented the needed HAL OR it could be the (anticipated) possible issue with disk numbering (which might also be connected with the tons of files missing. Was the actual file missing/unable to be found? If the latter, it might be due to an incorrect configuration in BOOT.INI that should be easy to fix. jaclaz

Yep, and - to be picky (as I am) - EasyBCD is IMNSHO also "border line" (if not downright over it) as anyway re-distributes a few MS files, beside mis- or under- documenting the grub4dos and ultradefrag that is underneath (not complying with their GPL license, i.e. not providing source, etc.), and "forgetting" the PLoP altogether. Just for the record at the time there was some bickering with the Author of the tool that completely failed to make the thingy compliant : http://reboot.pro/topic/17655-boot-into-3rd-party-efi-application-via-bcd/ nothing blatant - of course - still not the kind of quality/carefulness I would expect from a (largely Commercial) initiative. jaclaz

Yep, as said it is not easy , a lot of files went through the stupid doanload.aspx or thankyou.aspx and then possibly some through to conxion.com and they were not cached by the WaybacK Machine or - more probably - they were cached but we can't find them, most of the files for which we do have an actual download link are usually cached, but in the meantime a lot of places where such direct links were posted went down, it's a mess. Additional resource (just in case) sporting many such "direct links": http://erpman1.tripod.com/archive/wnt4upd.html jaclaz

Well, to be fair, you take something totally UNdocumented (the BIOS) that empirically and through years of experience works fine (though with a few limitations) and decide to create a completely NEW "standard" (the UEFI) senselessly complicated by having it developed by a committeee and OVER-document it, and you couple it with another NEW "standard" (the GPT) also developed by a committee, but this time UNDER-documented and then use anyway a non fully compliant implementation of both and let most motherboard manufacturers have each their own (different and not fully compliant - but differently) implementation, something is about to happen before or later. Nothing can be fully compliant with more than 2,000 - two thousands - pages of (BTW unclear and often contrasting) documentation, particularly if even each member of the committee do not respect the standard. Besides the MS or the Asus guys, the people to blame are IMNSHO the ones on UEFI.org, particularly the INTEL peeps, that pushed and helped this madness. jaclaz

Well, apart the use of the WAREZ you mention for which you won't have support here, the SSD might well be part of the issue, particularly when coupled with the EasyBCD and the *whatever* (possibly flawed) ways it uses grub4dos to mount/access the .iso. Try from USB with NO OTHER device connected to the PC if not the target disk drive. Try expressly with WinsetupFromUSb: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/157-install-windows-from-usb/ http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/120444-how-to-install-windows-from-usb-winsetupfromusb-with-gui/ http://www.winsetupfromusb.com/ Try the XP 32 bit first (as the tool was developed intiially for it and there were obviously many more bugs reports and fixes for it) and remember that you might need the modified NTDETECT.COM. jaclaz

Check also here: and on the Wayback Machine: https://archive.org/ (though not everything has been cached, sometimes files can be found) Consider how a lot of this files might have been renamed, when archived on this or that FTP site (or wherever) as an example WindowsNT4-KB840315-ENU.EXE, specifically for it (and for a few later ones), looky here : ftp://piekraste.daba.lv/pub/Service_Pack/NT_4/SP6/hotfixes-postsp6a/security/ It is not at all easy to find them (if possible at all) anymore jaclaz

see also this: http://forums.pcper.com/showthread.php?444831-HOWTO-enable-AHCI-mode-after-installing-Windows jaclaz

@dencorso Naah, that is Vista or later. @Xiaonpang I am failing to follow you, if you "lack" an optical drive, on what (I won't ask why) exactly you are booting the EasyBCD stuff, another hard disk? That could be an issue as a lot of boards with the new stupid UEFI (even in CSM) have queer ways to enumerate disks, installing the XP from WinSetupFromUSB or RMPREPUSB or Rufus or - specifically in this case using a PE 3.x would be however next step. You'll need some patience, each of the methods mentioned above (and a few more you can find on the relevant section of the board) may contain *something* or *something else* that does not play well with your board so don't be put down if one of them doesn't work. Maybe you could boot from USB a PE pf some kind and check the VID/PID of the exposed controller (just to check that the BIOS compatibility mode provides the "right" ones). I am not at all familiar with UEFI based motherboards but I have read several horror stories about a same motherboard behaving differently when booted from this or that bus, you might even want to - if the size of the disk and your intended setup allow it - to actually install a PE 3 to a small partition on the disk to see what happens. jaclaz

Hmmm. XP 32 bit would not even boot without BIOS CSM in UEFI (if you prefer XP is ONLY BIOS compatible and NOT UEFI compatible), and ONLY the IA64 (Itanium processor) version of 64 bit XP used UEFI. You need to go into your UEFI and enable CSM (Compatibility Support Mode) AND (maybe/possibly) disable a bunch of other options, you might need to check Asus documentation for the BIOS. Anyway make sure that ALL ports are set to IDE, see: http://www.overclock.net/t/1072574/problem-with-xp-on-asus-m5a97-evo and try an UNtouched XP 32 bit source (it is perfectly possible that you did everything correctly but - for *any* reason - the slipstreaming of the drivers failed). For the sake of the experiment, disconnect ALL other hard disks and keep connected ONLY the disk where you wish to install XP. jaclaz

Well, lots of things are not hard to imagine, the idea was to separate tested facts from imagination. Q1. (by jaclaz) Does the "convenience roll-up package" contain or deploy any file connected to GWX or "Get Windows 10" technology? A1. (by 351387) No, or at least I could find none of them (though Diagtrack service was re-enabled) Q2. (additional question inspired by NoelC) Does the above mean that any other update (offline or online) will NEVER contain or deploy any file connected to GWX or "Get Windows 10" technology? A2. (by jaclaz) No. Q3. (by NoelC) Who could possibly say whether it has ANY "thingies" in it? A3. (by jaclaz) Noone. jaclaz

Could it be KOmondo.exe? https://web.archive.org/web/20050311231336/http://download.microsoft.com/download/ie5/IME/5.02/W9XNT4/EN-US/komondo.exe jaclaz

Just to disambiguate, the UBCD is usually a reference to this project (Ultimate Boot CD): http://www.ultimatebootcd.com/ or to this other one (Ultimate Boot CD for Windows): http://www.ubcd4win.org/ The "Unattended and Updated Boot CD for Windows 98" (IF this is what ~♥Aiko♥Chan♥is referencing) was not officially called UBCD (as a matter of fact it did include the UBCD, but that's another story), files were called Win98_UBCD ...: And I really don't think it was to be considered "warez", it was just a builder and you had to provide the files and of course the key, AFAICR, though the latest project files have not been cached AFAIK, some info is still available: https://web.archive.org/web/20070911110929/http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=53392 https://web.archive.org/web/20070912053035/http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=88008 and the earlier 35r1 version of the files can still be obtained (still through Wayback Machine): https://web.archive.org/web/20061223230206/http://www.iinet.net.au/~hiandy/code35r1.zip jaclaz

Just to disambiguate, it is correct that the convenience rollup does NOT include any of the GWX thingies? jaclaz

Good , still it seems (to me) like an overlay of complication. I mean, what is the actual issue with a "plain" .html page with links *like*: MediaPlayerClassic v1.71 for Win2K - MD5=bac8c681f6525c56091ba3ea2ae0ac4c or similar? jaclaz

If I may, I don't think that the question was about the reason why CLI was chosen over GUI, but rather about what was the reason/need to create a (seemingly very complex) Server/Client setup. I just quickly checked the github repository, but it seems to me like you are making an "engine" for a "database" of some kind, but it is not clear (at least to me) where the contents of the "database" will (hopefully) come from, who will maintain them, etc., and (still IMHO) it is not like "Just like apt-get" sounds like a "feature" to be pursued or "ideal" tool that one would want/need to emulate. I mean, isn't there the risk of falling in the classical xkcd standards trap? : https://xkcd.com/927/ jaclaz

... or use 7-zip ... jaclaz

Maybe you could experiment with WOSB: http://dennisbabkin.com/wosb/ whether different standby modes are available/work differently on your machine. jaclaz

Hey peeps, with all due respect , and if I may , lists would be more useful (for search/comparison/etc.) in a TEXT format than in some (lousy) images. And yes, I know I could pass those into some OCR software, but if you could post the list as text, it would be IMHO easier to deal with them. jaclaz

Well, whatever program one may suggest, it might result as being one among the ones you tested and you were not convinced about. Maybe you could list the several ones you tried and that did not convince you explaining why they didn't or list what in driver genius specifically is superior to the other ones or which features you actually want/need. http://alternativeto.net/software/driver-genius/?license=free jaclaz

No, or at least it wasn't. JFYI: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/11/ftc-windows-tech-support-scams-took-another-120-million-from-pc-users/ http://www.networkworld.com/article/2849636/security0/ftc-gets-federal-court-to-shut-down-120m-tech-support-scam.html https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/141119icecmpt.pdf http://www.law.com/sites/articles/2014/12/30/federal-judge-wont-stop-tech-firms-2015-product/?slreturn=20160419130334 And an idiom/proverb: http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/A+leopard+can't+change+its+spots jaclaz P.S.: Just in case some documents from the actual Court hearings are publicly available here: