fraquar

Isn't the point of using the WMP11 Slipstreamer so that it slipstreams it into the source to begin with?

Fault tolerance (redundancy) and speed are diametrically opposed. I can tell you what I wouldn't RAID 1 though - when in an integrated system: 1) Downloads - if you are an avid p2per (i.e you download a lot) you will have a lot of writing - which is the bane of a RAID 1 system. Lots of fragmentation can occur on these types of partitions when deleting files as well (and we all have downloaded stuff we later wondered why we downloaded it in the first place). When you know you have something you wish to keep long-term (and after you have scanned it and made sure it's clean) - then move it to the RAID. Fault tolerance on a potential virus makes absolutely no sense. Use removable media for your fault tolerance - or archive downloads on an ISO and access them from a virtual CD on the RAID drive (read only). 2) Swap File - this should be on either a dedicated drive or a drive which has minimal I/O. One which also stores archives is fine (no I/O during normal use) - one which houses virtual CD's or media files not so good - lots of reading. Having a Swap File on a RAID 1 drive with a lot of I/O is the worst possible scenario. Besides, a swap file is just temporary storage for OS memory access - which changes every time you reboot your computer - so why is fault tolerance (redundancy) even needed for this? 3) TEMP Files: Which by their very nature imply that redundancy isn't needed.

No, more like slapping the hand of a 5 year old (sometimes they get the attention they desire and it isn't always a good thing). Seriously, bumping a sticky? C'mon man, you gotta know better than that. ....slaps hand.

Wrong thread.

Here's what you do - save or redownload a couple of hotfixes and apply them manually after a fresh install - then check the logs. Seriously, if you let Windows Update go hog boar wild and try to install some 10, 20 or 50 updates at once no telling what is gonna get broke. As it is the one time I did use Automatic Updates I had to reboot my computer and re-enter Windows Update no fewer than 4 different times - because Windows Update needed this, that or the other upgraded on my system before it would even let me access the actual updates. Off to the alternative methods of patching my computer I went. I've been using Windows 2000 for 7 years - and only once did I ever have problems with a hotfix install (and that was because Microsoft 5cr3w3d the pooch with an update and had to come out with an update to fix what that update broke). Then again, (since that 1 time above) I don't let Windows Automatic Updates within a country mile of my computer - I research hotfixes and only install the ones I really need (and those are few and far between anyway). Of the 52 "Critical Updates" that the Automatic Updates says I need - I install about 8 of them - the rest are useless (to me anyway). If you research those "Critical Updates" you will find the vast majority of them are either IE/OE related, Windows Update related, some component that IE/OE relies on or deals with remote administration - many of the rest patch a component I either don't have installed or don't use anyway. As for Microsoft's love affair with remote administration (and the source for most of their exploits), ain't nobody "remotely" coming near my computer unless they knock on my door and I invite them in - Microsoft or anyone else. Sorry for going off on a tangent like that - need coffee.

Madhits45 - do you expect every software maker to completely document what each feature of his software does? I'd suggest if you just want to know how to do it manually you head over to Fred Vorck's webv site and start reading - because all the information you need to find out what is required to remove each component is there (it's just not giftwrapped). A LOT of hard work went into the nLite project. Asking Nuhi to include every single step required to remove each component is asking him to document his code - and NOBODY in their right mind asks a software developer to release their own proprietary code. Remember two things here: 1) While nLite is free for personal use - it is still proprietary software - it is not Open Source. What you are asking is equivalent to asking for source code. 2) While nLite is free for personal use - that does not mean Nuhi cannot license this software for business use (i.e make some money oiff it if businesses are willing to pay for it). Start digging into the setup fiels if you want to know what is required to remove each component.

Uhh, there is no way around sounding like a smarta5$$ with this so I'll just say it - anyone who isn't smart enough to just ASK the maker of the software (especially when it is a 1 man operation to begin with) if what he intends to do is legal probably shouldn't be running a business - or supporting that business from the tech end. If they are a tech and can't follow simple EULA's (they don't get any simpler than Nuhi's) - then the owner needs to go get himself another tech lest they be eventually left wide open to future lawsuits down the road. Random polling of software users (i.e starting a thread in an open forum) for the answer to a question that is best directed at the software developer is hardly smart - let alone the fact that it is a complete waste of resources (i.e time) - for a business entrepreneur or a lay tech - and even Nuhi, as responding to an e-mail or PM is a helluva lot easier than sifting through a forum's random threads just to find said question. You may have overlooked the best advice given in this thread - and it was in the 2nd response so rather than repeat it - I'll just quote it:

I can't speak for that pack as I use Win2K but looking at the includes list I see what you are talking about. For the one stop shop crowd it's fine but for someone customizing their own install it's probably overkill. I like FDV's take on the thing - so these IE, OE updates also update other DLL's - they are updating those DLL's with functions and procedures IE and OE needs to patch gaping holes in their software - and if IE/OE, etc are gone coompletely - why do i need the updated DLL in the first place?

Did the author understood that nlite targets Windows (NT) 5 ? And saying that there's no help file... OMG ++ You completely misunderstood what he was saying. He's actually defending the choices to omit those "bad" things (legacy support and help file). What part of the quote "but it's like asking a manual for a hammer..." didn't you understand. He's praising this software by attacking the very things that people who have never used the software would instantly complain about. Whenever someone immediately uses the word "BUT" after stating a negative - what they are really trying to say is the negative isn't all it's cracked up to be. Kudo's to the review.

Once you get comfortable with using Linux you can always dive into the deep water and build an entire system from source code Linux From Scratch. I can't swim to good yet so I'm still using a life preserver (distro). They have several forks of the primary project and even have a LiveCD with which to start: Linux From Scratch - LFS (the primary project - build a minimal working system from source code). Beyond Linux from Scratch - BLFS (build the applications to run on top of LFS from source code). Automated Linux from Scratch - ALFS (kinda like Nlite and HFSLIP for Linux - only from source code). Hardened Linux from Scratch - HLFS (build an LFS system optimized for secutity from source code). My goal is to be able to build a working system from scratch by the end of the year. The learning curve may be inevitable but it doesn't have to be without some guidance.

Guides are nice - but what I think would be as effective (or even more so) is an index to existing projects and information. One thread with a short description of what is being done - and a link to that thread - organized by which OS it applies to (i.e W2K, W2K3, XP, ALL, etc. I'm fairly new to using nlite and one of the biggest challenges is finding out the following: 1. What exactly is nlite capable of (and what features in topics have already been integrated into nlite - thus making that thread rather obsolete). 2. What projects are being worked on currently. Nlite wont cover everything and others are working on projects which can add a feature, streamline a process, etc. Finding these threads can be like bulldozing the way for the Panama Canal at times as one thread references another thread which references a third thread and so on. A consolidated index of the wealth of information on this board would IMO be of more use to the general user than a guide. Guides usually end up being targeted in a specific direction for a specific OS and task. Don't get me wrong - guides have their place but an information index would be more dynamic and serve the dynamic nature of OS customization - and it also would be easier to maintain when the landscape changes and tasks become obsolete as opposed to making changes in a number of different guides where that same information is referenced.