jcarle

The most trusted site for Longhorn information is always Paul Thurrott's site.

I just wanted to add that anyone who knows anything about programming in Windows knows that all this is just fraud. It's crap. The screenshot could have easily been done up in VB with static text boxes and the few buttons and information there is? Simple window position information, nothing concrete. There's a lot of holes in the story too... mainly, that I noticed off the bat, the contradiction that the program is supposedly independant from the OS however it runs within the OS. That in itself makes the whole principle flawed. (And also contradicts the whole safe-mode bandwagon.) Also the lack of a credible corporate presence and screenshots from "cardomain" don't help the story either. Oh and the grammar is not very fitting of a corporate leader in information technology. The only way to do OS independant protection from viruses is by developing strategies that the real corporations have already begun working on. Things such as the NoExecute extension to the new Intel processors (not sure if AMD supports NX). And I completely agree with the way the admins run this forum. They keep an organised and active board, free from spamming. And it couldn't be better any other way.

Just thought that I'd add that Microsoft has had the behaviour of naming post-servicepack updates with the conventional naming of the future to be service pack. Does not mean in any way that they actually DO plan on doing a Service Pack 3. Just means, if they DID, that those hotfixes would most likely be included in it.

Well, it IS false representation. But to get companies to change that would require a class action law suit, not something that would be easy to do. We'd have to get a LOT of people to want to do that and that's very hard to do.

Welcome to the world of computer marketing.... A 120GB hard drive means that the hard drive contains 120,000,000,000 bytes. However, real computer sizes are calculated in base 2 (binary), not in base 10 (decimal). In other compare the following: 1 Kilo in base10 = 1000 1 Kilo in base2 = 1024 1 Mega in base10 = 1000000 1 Mega in base2 = 1048576 1 Giga in base10 = 1000000000 1 Giga in base2 = 1073741824 So if you divide 120,000,000,000 by 1073741824 you get 111.76GB of REAL hard drive space. Messed, eh? Marketing. And we haven't even dipped into the world of clusters yet!

It appears that the hotfix is the same file for both the english and french version of XP. Most hotfixes have a -ENU or -FRA ending to diferentiate them, but this one does not... any ideas on how to force slipstream this update into the french version?

You'd have to make your desktop machine act as a router/hub... A simpler solution could be to simply get a Wireless bridge and connect the bridge directly into your wired hub.

Power Supplies: Enermax, Antec and PC Power & Cooling Motherboards: ASUS Memory: Kingston, Corsair Video Cards: ASUS LAN Cards: 3Com, Linksys Hard Drives: Western Digital & Seagate Optical Drives: Pioneer Acceptable cheaper alternatives: Power Supplies: Coolmax Motherboards: Foxconn Memory: Micron, Infineon Video Cards: Leadtek, PowerColor LAN Cards: SMC Hard Drives: None Optical Drives: LG Outside of that, I don't really trust anything else.

I'm trying to integrate the Windows Installer 3.1 update into my Windows XP Professional Corporate (French) distribution folder and I receive the following error: "An error has occurred while attempting to integrate this software update package. Verify that the architecture, language, and servic pack level of this software update are valid for the target distribution folder." My distribution folder has Service Pack 2 integrated into it. The command line I use is: WindowsInstaller-KB893803-v2-x86.exe /integrate:C:\WXPVOL_FR

Yea, it's called Google.

Take it you've suffered the experience first hand, eh?

The case is nice, but I wouldn't trust the power supply.

The older Maxtor harddrive were ok. The ones before they bought Quantum and started making the new slim drives. The new ones? Reliability is non-existant. I've replaced at least a dozen of them just this month. Western Digital have always been reliable up until lately, lately I'm becoming a little unsure about their quality. Seems that Seagate is becoming the new quality leader.

The thing I don't like about Windows Vista is that it will be the start of the new trend in Operating Systems where copy protection schemes will be initiated at a hardware level. I'm holding onto my copy of XP for as long as I can.

First, follow ssmokee's recommendation and do make sure you have an 80-wire IDE cable running to your harddrive. Second, make sure your BIOS is up to date by getting the latest BIOS update for your motherboard. The fact that your motherboard supports the UDMA 133 transfer mode would lead to believe that hardware compatibility is not the issue, but this would most likely be a driver issue. Make sure you get the latest version of your motherboard drivers.

for %i in (00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50) do ren 164__%i.jpg 164_%i.jpg Not the most efficient method, but this will work.

My advice is to go for a motherboard with a reliable track record, go for something that is not going to have leaked capacitors in a few months. ASUS makes some solid reliable boards as long as you don't go into the -X series. And don't, whatever you do, don't skip on the power supply. I don't know how many hundreds of PCs I've rebuilt from scratch because the person had a cheap $20 L&C or TigerPro or noname power supply that had it's capacitors jump and juiced the whole machine like a barbeque bonfire at a KKK meeting. Antec and Enermax are reliable brands that will insure your PC has a long life. Oh and Maxtor harddrives? Do you value your data? 'nuff said.

I'm going to did into my source code for compression bin and see what I can do about it. Wondering though, anyone here code in C#?

Hey everyone, Just wanted to drop a line to say Hi. I love this community and I'm hoping to be able to make enough time to exist here a little more often. Things have been kinda hectic in my personal life, so I think we all know what that can be like. Anyways, glad to be back and really glad to see that this place is still rocking! Cheers, jcarle

Hey everyone, I haven't been around in a long time, I had a lot of things to deal with in my personal life. But I'll be back around now... time to get things rolling.

Can someone explain what the difference is between adding registry entries to the five different hives would be? ie: Why HIVEDEF.INF and not HIVESFT.INF or vice-versa?

How so would that be unnecessary? It saves space! EDIT: you ARE talking about the step where the batch file removes the unnecessary files, aren't you? Yes, I'm talking about the step where the batch file removes unnecessary files CLS TITLE 2/%TotalSteps% Deleting unnecessary files... ECHO. ECHO. ECHO. ECHO 2/%TotalSteps% Deleting unnecessary files... ECHO. ECHO. DEL /F /S /Q %P%\audiodev.dll %P%\syncpl??.wpl %P%\drmupgds.exe %P%\wpd*.* %P%\wmpe*.* %P%\wmdrm*.dll %P%\msoobci.dll %P%\uWDF.exe %P%\wdf*.* %P%\wmlaunch.exe %P%\wmpsrcwp.dll %P%\wmsetsdk.exe %P%\wmvadv*.dll DEL /F /S /Q %P%\*.acm %P%\*.cat %P%\*.chm %P%\*.inf %P%\*.png %P%\*.txt %P%\*.wmz %P%\*.xml ECHO. ECHO Complete! ECHO. PAUSE You see, you're deleting files from the TEMPORARY directory which are going to be removed after the compression with makecab ANYWAY. None of the lines with makecab include any sort of wild card, so no other files other then the ones you specified for compression will be found in the i386 directory that is left at the end.

Just thought I'd mention that the step where you delete the file is absolutely unnecessary... if you remove that step out of your batchfile the result will still be exactly the same.

I errored in my description of my computer, my harddrive is a Western Digital and not a Seagate. The drive in question is a Western Digital Caviar SE, full specs are available here, on the company's site. As for overclocking, trying to overclock my board using the FSB/RAM/PCI ratio of 133:133:33 crashes by going not very high over 133... the most I've been able to overclock so far is using the 133:100:33 ratio and getting up to 150/112/37 MHz. I don't know enough about overclocking to be able to get more out of this though I'm sure I could... My Pentium III 800EB's full specs are available here, on the company's site. My ram is running on timings of 2-2-2, 5/7 and is rated for 133MHz operation. It is two 256MB double-bank DIMMs. My Asus GeForce FX 5200 128MB video card's full specs are available here, on the company's site.

Ah, the race for hardware... :| I won a bid for a faster CPU on eBay, a 1.0 GHz Pentium III (Coppermine), so maybe that'll help a bit. It's kinda sad that my FX 5200 is already outdated so badly considering how short of a time I've had it. I guess if my CPU doesn't fix this then I'll have to dig deeper and build a new system, but again, that opens up a whole new debate... Intel vs AMD... what to choose?