cluberti

Depends on the BIOS, video card, etc. Most x86 systems will show between 3 and 3.5GB, depending on BIOS reservations and the amount of RAM on the videocard.

Agreed - having to reinstall Windows over and over means the user is doing something to require it. Windows itself, once installed, doesn't change short of registering new files in hotfixes, minor registry changes, etc. I have an XP machine, now running SP3, that has been installed as-is since 2002. It works just as well today as it did 6 years ago, because I make sure of what is installed and used on it, and anything that is removed is fully removed when and if possible - and if not, I'll remove it myself (I take before and after snapshots of filesystem and registry so I know what an app did or did not do when installed, so if it doesn't change back on removal, I do it myself). Also, I defrag the system, scan it for viruses and malware, and back it up every evening - why? Because these things are important to system health, and avoiding them is not good long-term. Also, just in case (it is 6 years old) it dies, I have backups. I don't use this box much anymore except for Visual Studio work, but it was used daily until November 2006 when I upgraded to a new machine and Vista. Ultimately, it has been my experience that people who reinstall Windows every <insert timeframe here> are tweakers or installers, one or the other - either will get you an installation that is fraught with garbage.

Not sure - usually COM add-ins or corrupt registration on .dlls are the culprit, but anything is possible. Would it be possible to gather a dump of outlook.exe hanging as such, and post the .dmp file somewhere we can grab it?

Very funny . Good to see you posting more again.

Get an unlocked build and serial today only. This offer will be invalid tomorrow. http://www.codeweavers.com/

Read closely. So, I did a quick search on the Patch Management Mailing List, and sure enough, there's a blurb about NT4 being vulnerable, and that a fix can be built for any customer who has a current Premier contract, and CSA and EHSA for NT4. I find no binaries (official or otherwise) listed anywhere on the searchable net.

Post in the right location next time. Moved.

Without really trying I can get an Asus P5Q SE/R mobo, E2200 Allendale (2.2GHz) dual-core, 4GB of OCZ DDR2 1066 (5-5-5-18), and a HIS Radeon 4650 512MB DDR3 video card for $320 USD shipped. I'm sure if you look closely, you can get a better video card than that 7200 in the bundle as well, and still come in around or under $300, assuming your PSU can handle a beefier system . Good luck, what you want shouldn't be too hard.

If an organization wanted this to be patched for NT4, they would have to have a Custom Support Agreement (CSA) for NT4 with Microsoft, on top of having an Extended Hotfix Support Agreement (EHSA) with Microsoft for this platform as well. The only platforms that will receive a patch for a security issue are those in Mainstream or Extended support. NT4 exited Extended support on January 1, 2005 - therefore, ANY hotfixes (security OR bugfix) would need to be requested, and can only be requested by customers with the above 2 contracts added to their existing Premier support agreement with Microsoft. Considering Windows 2000 is vulnerable, it is highly likely NT4 is as well. If a customer wanted a patch to fix this (or any other security vulnerability found since January 2005), it would have to be requested by a customer covered under all 3 agreements (Premier Support contract, CSA, and EHSA). So unless some customer has already asked for this (and actually gotten approval to have it built, and paid for it), then it would not exist.

Edit: Issue resolved. My apologies.

I would suggest that you learn by trial and error. Otherwise, someone would have to do it for you (trust us, the unattended guide here is about as basic as you can get... so, you're gonna have to try and fail to learn ). I suggest using a VM (like Virtual PC 2007 or VirtualBox or VMWare Server) and making .iso's with your finished product(s) to test, before wasting media, if you're unsure of what you're doing. Good luck.

You will find everything you need to know, from basic installation modification to deeper-level app slipstreaming and customization of the OS in the MSFN unattended guide, also linked at the top of each and every page here.

The warning is that the binary you're running is not signed by a trusted root authority. If the app is run from the network, this is expected behavior and you would have to place the file server (\\<servername>) in the Trusted Sites list in Internet Explorer (and restart).

You only need SP1a or SP2 on your install disc before you slipstream SP3 if you want to have media that will allow you to bypass the product key insertion during setup. If you slipstream from SP0 (RTM) to SP3, your resulting media will require a product key. If, however, you slipstream from SP1a or SP2 to SP3 it will not.

I believe you have to manually install it and dependencies via servermgr: Servermanagercmd –I Telnet-Server

Hard to say for sure, but make sure you're not hiding any system or hidden files (or anything else for that matter) in Windows Explorer. 162MB of 714GB seems like about the right size for the MFT for the NTFS file system, but on an empty drive it's a little odd. I would also suggest perhaps something that scans the drive at a lower level, like spacemonger.

Sure - it's actually somewhat common. In essence, svchost.exe is just a stub binary for loading services as shared host processes, and any binary capable of running as a service that is on the system can use it if it knows how to make a quick registry entry to load under an svchost.exe binary. It's perfectly feasible to consider that this will be done by malicious software if it wants to hide (heck, I've seen HP printer drivers install services under svchost.exe binaries).

Technically, yes - even if you don't have a pagefile created, there are certain situations (usually under memory pressure in the kernel) where the Windows kernel will page out kernel paged pool memory and certain kernel executive binaries. Even if you don't have a pagefile configured, if Windows needs to do this, it will try (and create a temporary pagefile), or bugcheck. It's not a common scenario, but it can happen.Also, as previous posters have said, some apps do require a paging file or swap file, although some of those will create their own if Windows doesn't have one.

Because this is a QFE version, and this is a symptom of HFSLIP (the decision to install QFE binaries over GDR). Normally, on a regular build of Windows, you would have GDR binaries which are of a lower build number (you can see it if you look at the files updated by the hotfix on the Microsoft site, if you'd like). It's not an error, it's just stating that the binary is higher than the GDR version. I see you're not removing CAT files either, so may I suggest you try a new build, but using hfslip to install IE7 during GUILogon, and then a logon script to install IE7 hotfixes afterwards? Technically installing or slipstreaming IE7 and cumulative updates isn't supported by Microsoft precisely because the setup engine can cause breakage (like this) because you're laying IE7 down, and then immediately trying to update it's files which can cause mismatched .dll versions and failures to upgrade certain binaries, so I'm wondering if this is happening to you.

svchost.exe is a service process - this means a SERVICE (services.msc) running on your box spawned iexplore.exe. I highly doubt it's the one you closed, and that is very suspicious. I would find out first which service belongs in that svchost.exe, and if you kill that iexplore.exe (from procmon) if it comes back...

Problem is, this was written and produced for the Police Academy 2 movie, to which there is no soundtrack available. At all. It was never made, and I'm pretty sure CatDaddy or Warner Bros (or both) hold copyrights to the music (it was never on a CD she released at all, meaning chances are good she doesn't own it - or it sucks... j/k ). You're probably SOL man, unless you want to buy the DVD and rip it off the audio tracks.

. True. Although, considering they were already in use on XP for a good amount of time (engineering apps usually don't update often), I'd say it's more likely the apps weren't written to take advantage of Vista rather than some Vista flaw. Definitely a deal-breaker for a customer if these apps are everything they do, though.

It's saying that shdocvw.dll doesn't have the file version (5659) required to meet the installation of 956390 (it installs shdocvw .5659). However, it also finds that mshtml.dll is newer than the version in the hotfix - you should start to find out why mshtml.dll is 20900 (the QFE version from 956390), but shdocvw.dll is not 5659. Something during the build process is either replacing shdocvw.dll with the SP3 RTM version (.5512), or the update when integrated isn't updating all of the requisite files.

I think you might mean SetupDiCreateDeviceInfo. Anyway, sounds like it's failing outside your code, likely in the registry. If you run process monitor whilst reproducing the error, do you see any access denied or sharing violation messages in the procmon log that correlate to your repro? That'd be the first thing I would check (especially if GetLastError returns 0).

Short of removing it from the network, no.