jaclaz

At least you can print the Lab, only you need a HUGE 3D printer: JFYI, 3D printing houses: http://3dprinting.com/materials/sand-glue/the-story-of-enrico-dini-the-man-who-prints-houses/ http://d-shape.com/index.htm http://www.iflscience.com/technology/man-constructs-3d-printed-concrete-castle http://www.totalkustom.com/ jaclaz

I do , and I even have some practical reasons for this . Since Windows 7 it is not even possible to install to FAT32 (without quite a few tricks), JFYI: http://reboot.pro/topic/19643-winsxs-hardlinked-files/ because of the sheer number of files and the complex hard-linking. If the good MS guys would use some common sense (pretty much rare quality) in the organization of the OS, removing the bloat and the completely unneeded complexities, I bet they could have a much faster OS as a result (the difference would not be noticeable on high end machines with high speed SSD Raids, but likely it would make a whole lot of difference on the senselessly underpowered machines like phones and tablets). jaclaz

@JorgeA JFYI/for the record: https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_chrome_vs_iron.php https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_download.php http://www.srware.net/downloads/IronPortable.zip jaclaz

Hi, varun, I am actually going to buy some Fluid Mechanics Lab Equipment but I don't have knowledge in the specific field, maybe you can share with us some more tips besides these: http://www.goldentalk.com/threads/tips-for-buying-fluid-mechanics-lab-equipment.88005/ Not knowing exactly what Fluid Mechanics Lab Equipment is for, but having been tasked to build a Fluid Mechanics Lab from the ground up, I proposed a budget of 3.500.000 US$, and I am told our Board of Directors is going to approve it as soon as some dealings with a nice lady from Congo (or Nigeria, cannot recall the exact country) are done with. She has some banking money transfer issue (I don't know the exact details, but it seems she has a rather large sum of money that for some stupid export Law she cannot bring to the US) and needs some assistance with the procedure for which she is willing to give us some US$ 5.000.000. jaclaz

Dear Brandon, haven't you noticed, on this board we also assist people having issues with a number of other Operating Systems well after End of Support, including Windows 3.1/3.11, Windows 95 and 98, Windows NT4 and 2000. We even support people using Windows Me . Please don’t infer that I’m trying to prevent you from assisting someone using Windows XP; that certainly isn’t my intent. I merely wanted to add my two cents about considering the alternatives, and add my recommendation for MDT. Let's make a deal , I won't infer anything (as I haven't inferred anything till now BTW, I only faked being shocked as a response to your being shocked ) as long as you don't play the poor innocent passer-by shocked by what is perfectly normal activity on this board, particularly in the sections related to XP and other after EOS MS Operating Systems. As well, it is perfectly normal, as a MS representative, that you illustrate the current alternatives and the new Microsoft products, and it is always good to hear something directly from the mouth of the wolf :, and I have to say that - unlike some of your colleagues - you seem like wanting to interact with the board members, besides merely suggesting the use of MDT or consulting the docs of the Springboard Series, which is very good : JFYI: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/172829-im-depressed-about-windows/?p=1086835 and following few posts. jaclaz

No, there is no actual requirement that the active OS should be on C:, as a matter of fact since NT 4.00 times (actually since NT 3.1) NT OS's are designed to be installed on non-C: (in the sense not necessarily on active (first) primary partition and not necessarily on a primary partition). The automatic drive letter assignment when installing can be changed/overridden easily, while changing the drive letter of an installed OS, while doable is a complex and not necessarily successful procedure, complexity due not only to the Windows OS install but also by the installed MS or third party software and the zillion entries in the Registry linked to the drive letter/path. jaclaz

Well, actually it's an "official" setting, from the mouth of the wolf: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3080351 so I would say it is confirmed. The point remains that (as it happened in the past for similar settings in the Registry) seemingly the good MS guys have reset (through Windows Update) other user chosen settings, overriding them. So, to be on a safer side, I believe that changing permission/ownership of that key might be a needed additional step. These lately reports of the prompting for the Windows 10 update reappearing after having been hidden/disabled by the user, besides the actual practical effects (nothing that a full re-image form a proper backup cannot "fix") are IMHO a clear sign that the (long standing but unwritten) pact between MS and end users about MS respecting user preferences has been broken unilaterally ( it is a rather dramatic change between "optin" and "optout" with the added possibility of the "don't-care-what-you-opt") and I wouldn't be surprised if in the near future (as soon as the MS servers will be past the flood of the downloads of the "final" version of Windows 10 by the morons less experienced users actually wanting to upgrade) the MS guys may decide to revert that setting or override it, forcibly installing the update to all systems that are not "Enterprise" or "Embedded". jaclaz

@5eraph Sure , but that falls into the "connect knowledge" and also maybe in "connect people". jaclaz

My guess is that it is more or less perfectly "normal" . A line needs to be drawn between all versions "DOS based" (i.e. 9x/Me) and all NT versions. The former work essentially "trusting and using" the BIOS services, whilst the latter use them only for a short initial phase of booting than a HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) "kicks in", re-mapping all the hardware (including the boot device) through protected mode drivers. More or less this (for all NT versions up to Vista) is done by NTDETECT.COM, which lists the hardware and attempts to load the appropriate drivers (that additionally usually need - besides obviously to be present in the source - some specific entry in the Registry or in the correspondent ..inf file). Now it has to be seen how exactly the VirtualBox "virtual hardware" maps the (virtual) DVD drive, it is very possible that for some reasons the virtual hardware is not detected or not detected properly. Even your 9x/Me versions (from the screenshots) seem to have issues in accessing the setup and - strangely - you seem to have the same device mapped twice, maybe it is just a conflict of some kind. You should first thing try your DVD on another VM or even better on real hardware. Though cannot say if it will work properly under Windows 10, I would suggest you to try using Qemu to try your DVD "as is" first, you can use the command line version or easier if it works in your environment, Qemu Manager, which you can get through the Wayback Machine: http://reboot.pro/topic/18163-memdisk-limit-creating-bootable-dos-image/?p=167861 Converting that DVD to a USB install media is doable, but it adds a layer of complexity. Surely there are working solutions for most of the OS you listed, but I wonder if there is "previous art" for NT 4.00 (from USB) since NT 4.00 in itself has no USB support. If you want to go for the USB path, the best thing would be to create a bootable PE (in your case a PE 1.x based, i.e. using the source files or your Windows XP) and use it to prepare the "target" disk and copy to it the setup files. BTW the procedure of copying the setup files to the target and then run the setup (or winnt.exe or WINNT32.exe) is what has been traditionally done to install these Operating Systems for years, as it offers two advantages: the source "remains" on the target (and this simplifies the install or reinstall of some components, besides providing a source for WFP/SFC repairs it is (on real hardware where the CD/DVD is very slow) a much faster installSo, to sum up, provided that you followed the given tutorial to the letter, there is no reason (if not something in your VM or it in its settings) why it should not work, try it with other Virtual or Real hardware before anything else, once this is confirmed to be working (hopefully) we will talk of possible alternative ways. As well if it definitely fails, you can try using alternatives tutorials to create the source and/or approach the install differently. jaclaz

As a matter of fact while it may be in theory a position of superiority, it is in practice corresponding to a position of inferiority, the never heard/listened to minority. I am also modest, though not all over, but in spots : http://www.quotes.net/quote/39361 jaclaz

See: http://reboot.pro/topic/20595-what-is-significance-of-msr-sys-efi-partitions-for-win-81-native-boot-vhd-how/ jaclaz

That is exactly the point, very possibly we are the few. jaclaz

I think we'll never be able to ascertain that (because as you pointed out no major car manufacturer would ever put at risk the status quo by attempting to disrupt the market with some real innovation). If you prefer it is not unlike the "smartphone" business, every car looks very similar to another one in the same "market segment" or whatever it is called, has exactly the same base functionalities and as soon as one of the manufacturer includes some added gizmo (often utterly useless in practice) all the other add something similar to their cars. jaclaz

Not Ford, nor Toyota, however JFYI, these nice guys in Argentina do hand build hand crank started and no air conditioning (simply forget about power steering ) cars that in their simplicity they manage to sell for several hundred thousands US$ apiece (and I am told they have a looooong waiting queue): http://www.pursangweb.com/ http://www.carbuildindex.com/21748/pur-sang-bugatti-type-35-replica/ surely it is a niche market, but never tag an idea as absurd as it seems. Now, let's say that someone designs a new, fastish very simple two seater car for commuting use (actually making 84 MPG or 2.8 L/100km ) and delivers it to you for less than US$ 7,000, would it sound crazy? Maybe it is, however this is what is in the works: http://www.eliomotors.com/ http://gas2.org/2015/06/12/elio-motors-starts-work-on-5th-gen-prototype/ Now if (tomorrow) Ford would revamp a (slightly modernized) version of the Soybean Car: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean_car http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2013/10/17/cars-of-futures-past-fords-soybean-car/ would you really think at it as a bad idea? Maybe the real issue is that there is not someone with the capabilities, vision and drive Henry Ford had: jaclaz

Well, to be fair with gamers, they don't actually care if the *whatever* thingy runs Windows 3.1 or 10 or Direct X 9, 10, 11 or 12, what they want is just "more", more power, more speed and more frames per second (plenty of fps', more, please). The whole stuff is actually determined by video card makers (please do read as nVidia and ATI/AMD, besides Intel of course) and by video games makers, the gamers are only the customers (please read as victims) of this situation, they would buy anything that delivers "more" (power, speed, fps), just like gambling can be (often is) addictive, all the good guys I ever met (that can be considered or are "gamers") have a thirst for speed and fps that they have to quench at all costs. jaclaz

Still in "other" news, but still much related, it is likely that the ads that may (please read as will) be delivered through Windows 10 (if they will be actually delivered as "actual pop-ups" or similar, or if they will only be sneakily served as "live tiles" or they will merely be some additional ads/banners inside the browser is yet to be found out of course) or more generally in Microsoft ecosystem will be responsibility of (guess who?, putting a spoiler just to give you a couple seconds thinking at which company you would personally choose to manage it): jaclaz

http://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/ Basically, should you have a Jeep, it would be a very good idea to check if it is one of the affected models and patch the software as soon as possible. jaclaz

Some news, bocker (docker in 100 lines of bash), of course preliminary/highly experimental: https://github.com/p8952/bocker jaclaz

Corollary: Because the usefulness of mounting a .iso is not anything new, anyone in his/her right mind has used good ol' MS's own virtual CD driver Control Panel: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=38780 since the early 2000's, or used other third part utilities/driver that allow what you call "directly" mounting much in the same way Windows 8 can, so, no, nothing particularly Pro or Con. However this is a good example of how MS misinformation works, the driver has been available since the dawn of times, and notwithstanding from the above article it seems like a new release dated 2013: Version: 2.0.1.1 File Name: winxpvirtualcdcontrolpanel_21.exe Date Published: 4/23/2013 Supported Operating System: Windows 7, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows Vista, Windows XP Windows XP, Windows Vista, or Windows 7; Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, or Windows Server 2008 R2 the files inside the SFX are dated 2001 and the readme is from 2003, citing obviously only XP as "System Requirement", since: jaclaz

Dear Brandon, haven't you noticed, on this board we also assist people having issues with a number of other Operating Systems well after End of Support, including Windows 3.1/3.11, Windows 95 and 98, Windows NT4 and 2000. We even support people using Windows Me . It's a little shocking that you are a little shocked at this which is pretty much normal on msfn.org, particularly in a sub-forum titled: what did you expect to see inside it? No new threads since midnight of the 8th of April 2014? jaclaz

Read the whole thing: http://idlewords.com/talks/web_design_first_100_years.htm it is IMHO nice, interesting and - for once - a return to some sanity. jaclaz

Maybe , but you do realize that all you can get (at the most) is not an actual carrot, but rather a short piece of (hard) wood painted in light orange, don't you? jaclaz

Naaah, strangely enough , not grumpy at all I was just attempting to translate (as usual ) politically correct post by bphlpt into more layman language, while at the same time attempting to show my appreciation for the precise nailing of the issues he managed to do. jaclaz

Interestingly , but not surprisingly , just another proof of the unneeded amount of bloat the newer tools create. jaclaz

That for Windows 8 should be: install_wim_tweak.exe /o /c Adobe-Flash-For-Windows-Package /r see: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/152688-win6x-registry-tweak/ http://superuser.com/questions/559149/how-to-remove-pre-installed-flash-player-in-windows-8 You'll have to try if it works on 8.1 as well jaclaz