tomasz86

Agent Ransack? I've never liked Windows built-in search

Thank you very much for testing BlackWingCat hasn't been updating his kernel recently as often as before so there's not much to add at the moment. I've just added some small utilities like "bootsect.exe" from Windows 8 or "junction.exe" (SysInternals). I'm going to include several other utilities like "7z(a).exe", "rar.exe" and other in USP5.2. They are tiny and don't take almost any space but may often come in handy later. At the moment I'm working on a new version of the .NET Framework installer. The current one installs fine but the uninstaller has several bugs. Edit: By the way, this is important information for anyone creating / porting updates for Windows 2000 (acus?). "[ProcessesToRunAfterUninstallReboot]" in update.inf does NOT work. I don't know why but it seems to be supported only in XP/2003. If you ever find something like this: [ProcessesToRunAfterUninstallReboot] "%11%\regsvr32.exe /s rsabase.dll" then you'll have to change it to: [UninstallSections] GlobalRegistryChanges, GlobalRegistryChanges.Uninstall Add.Reg, Add.Reg.Uninstall [GlobalRegistryChanges.Uninstall] AddReg=Add.Reg [Add.Reg.Uninstall] HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce","rsabase.dll",,"%11%\regsvr32.exe /s rsabase.dll"

I've managed to install it. Now the problem is that when trying to open a website in Chrome tab I get this: I've tried to install the "Coral IE Tab v1.85" plugin manually but there's no difference. I still get the same message.

These installers usually have some switches which can be used to prevent them from installing the cr@pware. You may want to check the ELiTE's Apps forum at RyanVM.net where you can find already modified packages.

I can't see the "Chrome button"... Where is it supposed to be located exactly? The browser itself works in Win2k but some (most) of the buttons use some kind of graphics with transparent background which doesn't work properly. It's a minor issue though.

I'm still unable to make FreeFileSync start Nothing happens even after copying shell32.dll from XP's KB2691442 to the Bin folder. Does it work on your computer?

I have uploaded a new weekly version of UURollup. It's almost exactly the same as the last daily except for one fix for IE6. There was a bug in the "Save file" window (thanks ). The other difference between weekly and daily releases is that weeklies come as SFXCAB packages so you can install / slipstream them directly without repacking. I've also uploaded the modified nVIDIA Display driver (core files from 270.61 + other files from 306.81). You can find the link in the Drivers to add to USP5.2's driver.cab topic.

But this Office isn't intended to be used by fingers. It's supposed to be used in a Desktop mode with either a trackpad or a mouse and a keyboard. Of course the experience will be much worse than on a real desktop but if you compare it to all other (non-x86) tablets it's still no comparison simply because the other devices have got no real Office at all.

Is this registry entry present at all in a clean system? Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that it's not. Therefore you can safely always add the registry settings from KB2641653 when it's slipstreamed.

I suppose you mean "this topic", don't you? How about adding "Professional" at the end of the title (you can edit it when using the full editor)? I used the same extension when downloading updates which are available in the Archive. That's why timestamps of most of them are preserved

Good to see that you've managed to overcome the problems Just a few points: As you've installed USP5.1 then I'd suggest to check this post and replace the three buggy files. The modified Intel drivers are here but I myself would suggest installing either: Update Rollup 2 & UURollup (daily) (the newest version) or BlackWingCat's kernel After doing that you should be able to just use the official Intel drivers for XP. Which drivers exactly have you installed? The last version of official nVIDIA drivers to work in Win2k (without modifications) is 258.96. Check this post and the following ones for more detailed info. How much RAM have your system detected (I assume that it's Win2k Pro)? If you've installed UURollup (daily) or BWC kernel then you can enable PAE and make use of the full 4 GBs of it.

There are bad and good news to tell you today. The bad news is that Dualview is broken in all nVIDIA Graphic drivers starting from 275.33. This time the problem is not related to the registry settings. It's the driver file itself which just doesn't work correctly. To be more specific, these are the two main driver files: nv4_disp.dll nv4_mini.sys What's interesting is that if you check their description in all versions of the drivers up to 270.61 (the last where Dualview works) you can see this: nv4_disp.dll - NVIDIA Compatible Windows 2000 Display driver, Version 270.61 nv4_mini.sys - NVIDIA Compatible Windows 2000 Miniport Driver, Version 270.61 That's right, even though the installer itself doesn't accept Win2k any more, the driver files still seem to be somewhat targeted at 2K/XP. On the other hand, in drivers 275.33 and newer you've got this: nv4_disp.dll - NVIDIA Windows XP Display driver, Version 275.33 nv4_mini.sys - NVIDIA Windows XP Miniport Driver, Version 275.33 This is just a description and the newer drivers themselves do work in Win2k too but Dualview does not. The second monitor just doesn't show up in the Display Properties and there's an error when trying to enable Dualview manually. I'm 100% sure that these files are directly responsible for this because I did try to flip the installer INF files between the older and the newer drivers... but unfortunately it made no difference I also tried to mix different versions of the two files concerned but it only resulted in BSODs. The two seem to be interdependent. Now it's time for the good news. The good news is that it's possible to just take even the newest driver (306.81 at the moment) and just replace its nv4_disp.dll & nv4_mini.sys with the ones from 270.61. This way we end up using an older driver but the rest of the files (CUDA, OpenGL, etc.) are newer and also the INF installer is from the new drivers which means that all new nVIDIA graphic cards are supported! In conclusion, it seems to be possible to use the older driver to keep the Dualview compatibility and still be able to detect all new nVIDIA graphic adapters. Actually, there's also another file directly related to the two main ones called "nvcpl.dll". This file is responsible for the "NVIDIA Display Properties Extension" and its version has to be exactly the same as "nv4_disp.dll" in order to run... but the solution is pretty simple. You just need to manually change the file version and it will work even with the older drivers. I wonder if there's anyone with a fairly new nVIDIA card willing to test these drivers. Please let me know if you could test them in your system. I myself own only an older GeForce 6600. It's still supported by the new drivers so I am able to test them directly on my computer but I'd just like to be sure that such a modified driver works in case of the new graphic cards too.

No ideas? I guess I'll have to try to figure it out myself. This is something I really hate when it comes to applications (operating systems included). For some reason they know "better" than you what language you "want" to use, i.e. they just check your system locale and use the language defined there. It's not a problem when they offer options to change it later (ex. Skype, VLC) but in some cases there's no such option! I've experienced this problem not only in Windows but also in MANY of the Android applications. Same thing with these Metro apps. Most users probably don't care but I change the locale depending on my needs so it becomes really annoying if you can't just define the language in those applications once and for all.

I still haven't managed to make newer drivers work but I tried to slim 270.61 down and the result is: dbInstaller.exe nv4_disp.dll nv4_disp.inf nv4_mini.sys nvapi.dll nvcolor.exe nvcompiler.dll nvcpl.dll nvcuda.dll nvcuvenc.dll nvcuvid.dll nvdata.bin nvdisp.nvu nvdrsdb.bin nvinfo.pb nvoglnt.dll nvudisp.exe opencl.dll These seem to be the only files which are absolutely required. The rest is just bloatware If nVIDIA Graphic drivers are included in USP5.2 then it will be a slimmed down version of it.

You haven't mentioned nLite before... It's a known fact that nLite driver integration breaks a DOS based setup (WINNT.EXE). You should just try to use a completely clean source (no nLite, etc.). Just integrate SP4 (or USP51) manually and then try to do a DOS based installation. You don't need to integrate any drivers when using IDE mode. Motherboard makers don't test their hardware with Windows 2000 so there may occur some unexpected issues. Sometimes the setup won't start at all... but it doesn't mean that the system itself won't work! It's just a problem with the setup as if you install the system on another computer and then move it it can still work.

Have you tried to apply any Windows 7 theme files to Windows 8? I've tried to apply the Classic Theme but the result is kind of confusing. There seem to be some differences in how .theme files are constructed between the two systems.

This is a really detailed guide, ppgrainbow! It'd say that it's an alternative to Kurt_Aust's guide. The difference is that his is about preparing an updated Win2k source while yours focuses on updating an already installed system. Just a few points: The updates mentioned in the guide are only the ones for Windows 2000 Professional. There are several other Server only updates for Windows 2000 Server, Advanced Server and Datacenter Server. It's not really a major issue but the topic states "Guide to Installing and Updating Windows 2000" so that's why I'm writing about it. There are more ways to install Windows 2000 than just CD-ROM Even if you decide not to mention any "unofficial" ones (USB, RAM ISO, etc.) there are still at least two official supported ways, i.e. installation from DOS (WINNT.EXE) and from Windows itself (WINNT32.EXE). There are more (official) updates for .NET Framework 1.1 SP1 and 2.0 SP2 which you can apply to Win2k, including the latest ones. I don't remember the KB numbers now. That's why it's better to prepare an updated source before the actual system installation (my personal opinion ). Yes, it does also take some time to prepare everything for slipstreaming but once it's ready you can just run HFSLIP and wait until it's finished. Installing the system after that is a matter of minutes (10 minutes on my computer when the installation is executed from HDD but excluding .NET Framework). There are many more updates available for Windows 2000 than the ones installed by Windows Update. Windows 2000 Service Pack 4 Updates for HFSLIP lists almost all of them. Even if you exclude the unofficial updates there are still hundreds of HBRs and several optional updates available which you need to apply manually. As I've just mentioned the unofficial updates, I think that it's important to note that you must not use Windows Update after installing the unofficial updates. WU doesn't know about them and may want to install older files even though there are already newer versions of them present in the system. That's also why UURollup disables Automatic Updates. All official updates and HBRs are already archived and available to download from the Windows 2000 Archive. Most of the files located in the Archive do have their original timestamp

It's only now that I've looked at the motherboards' model more carefully... and realised that I had an experience to use this particular board in the past. It DOES support AHCI! As far as I know there were some legal issues with nVIDIA using the "AHCI" name in its BIOS (correct me if I'm wrong) so you can't enable it in a "normal" way. What you should do is to enable RAID. Enabling RAID equals enabling AHCI. And yes, you can use even one disk in the RAID mode on this board.

Yes, it's a huge drawback when it comes to M$ Surface which itself seems to be a decent device... but its most important advantage over all other Apple / Android tablets is this Office. If you can't make the full use of it then paying so much money for Surface RT doesn't make much sense (unless you're a student a want to use it for several years then it may be useful). Edit: It's not that bad. You can use Office RT commercially but you need to buy additional license. By the way, three Surface reviews which I found interesting: (general) (reading oriented) (hardware oriented)

I've got good news. I've managed to successfully install and enable Dualview in drivers up to 270.61. I had to modify the installer but after that it works properly, and it's even possible to uninstall them using an older uninstaller from versions below 26x. At the moment I'm stuck at 275.33. The drivers themselves can be installed using the same method but Dualview doesn't work and I don't know yet why.

What happens if you try to boot the Windows setup with no disks connected? If you still see the 0x0000007b error then it may be related to something else, ex. the USB device from which you're trying to install Windows.

I would stick to Windows 98 (SE). Windows 2000 will work but it will be slow, much slower than Win98. Couldn't you just boot to DOS throgh a floppy with a CD-ROM driver added and then just start Windows setup from there?

I've tested more versions of nVIDIA drivers and found some quite interesting facts. First of all, Dualview compatibility was first broken in 186.08 (already mentioned before). The key is here: 185.85: [nv_commonBase_addreg] HKR,,Acceleration.Level,%REG_DWORD%,0 HKR,,DevSwitchSuppressMask,%REG_DWORD%,7 HKR,,InstalledDisplayDrivers,%REG_MULTI_SZ%,"nv4_disp" HKR,,MultiFunctionSupported,%REG_DWORD%,1 HKR,,UseBestResolution,%REG_DWORD%,1 186.08 [nv_commonBase_addreg] HKR,,Acceleration.Level,%REG_DWORD%,0 HKR,,MultiFunctionSupported,%REG_DWORD%,1 HKR,,UseBestResolution,%REG_DWORD%,1 As you can see, the two reg entries are missing. Among them the one required for Dualview is: HKR,,InstalledDisplayDrivers,%REG_MULTI_SZ%,"nv4_disp" What's interesting is that Windows 2000 compatibility was brought back in 257.21: [nvdual_commonBase_addreg] HKR,,Acceleration.Level,%REG_DWORD%,0 HKR,,DevSwitchSuppressMask,%REG_DWORD%,7 HKR,,InstalledDisplayDrivers,%REG_MULTI_SZ%,"nv4_disp" HKR,,MultiFunctionSupported,%REG_DWORD%,1 HKR,,UseBestResolution,%REG_DWORD%,1 I can confirm that it indeed works. There are two key points though: Starting from one of the 19x drivers (don't remember now which version exactly) there is a problem with nVIDIA Helper Service which causes Windows to boot very slowly. The solution is pretty simple - you should just disable the service completely (services.msc). After that everything works fine. The service itself seems to be pretty useless anyway (try to google it up if you're more interested). After enabling Dualview you should restart your system several times. First - right after enabling it through the nVIDIA Control Panel it will ask you to restart. After restarting you will see Windows installing the Dualview driver. Once it's finished there won't be any messages but you should still restart the system once again. After that you will be able to enable the second monitor in Display Properties... and after doing that you should restart the system one more time! The last step is important because you may see some strange glitches when trying to view videos, etc. Once the system has been restarted then it should be ready to use. The last version of the drivers which work is 258.96 .Starting from 260.89 the structure of the nVIDIA drivers package changed and I'm now going to do more testing of them. What's also interesting is that 258.96 was released in July 2010. Everyone knows when M$ stopped supporting Win2k, right? The next version (260.89) was released in August 2010 and it does NOT support Win2k any more. The installer won't even work. Indeed it seems that nVIDIA kept supporting the system (although the support wasn't perfect but still) through its whole life cycle to the very end.

I see. I personally have got no objections to adding it so if there are no problems with it then the driver will be included in USP5.2. Does it actually work after applying the modifications from #222?

Do you mean that you ran the script and then installed "WindowsUpdateAgent30-x86.exe" but the situation is still the same. Is it right?