Nomen

For those that have absolutely zero interest in playing games, I still want to know: Does going beyond the typical GeForce 6200 / 256 mb AGP card give you better video playback for hi-res movies? How much of divx or MPG decoding is done on the card vs done by the cpu?

Today I took my base install image (which is a virgin Win-7 SP1 technet image with drivers for an old Dell Latitude rolled in) and added 958559 with RT7. That's it. Burned the resulting image on a thumb drive, took it over to the Dell and went through yet another install cycle (always format the drive first). Bingo - right off the bat, no Libraries, can't create any libraries, can't create or rename any folders without getting "Item not found" message. Connected the machine to the internet, did a windoze-update check. It wanted to download something first (which I expected) before it could _really_ check for updates. So it does the download, but then is just wasting my time after that trying to check again. I reboot. It does some re-configuration before shutdown and again after booting back up. I tell it to check again. It's checking. I'm waiting. I go and open explorer - and the Libraries are back! I can create new libraries too. But still get "Item not found" when trying to create new folders. Update list finally comes up. I think about 150+ important and over 100 optional updates. I'm going to go through that list and see how many of these are rolled into 3125574. Bottom line- there is something wrong with 958559. Don't think I'll ever need it though, not for the systems that are going to end up getting the Win-7 install image I'm perfecting. (or maybe 958559 can't be integrated properly into an install image using RT7 ?)

I've created about 20 install sources using RT7, starting with a vanilla MSDN ISO of Win-7 SP1 32-bit and incrementally adding sets of KB's downloaded by whdownloader. I got to the point where an image, with 525 installed updates, works fine with regard to the issues I mentioned above (Libraries issues and "Item not found" when creating new folders). Taking that image as the next starting point for RT7, and integrating kb958559, immediately gives a system that has the issues when the new install is performed. Now whether this issue is caused by 958559 in conjunction with one (or more) of the other 525 KB's, I don't know. On a slight tangent, I notice that one source has the number of KB's rolled into the 3125574 Convenience Rollup Package as 123. When I scan that list against my list of "bad" KB's to avoid, there are 15 matches: 2660075 2726535 2882822 2923545 2970228 2994023 2999226 3068708 3075249 3078667 3080149 3081954 3092627 3102429 3118401 My "good/working" Win-7 install image with 525 integrated kb's does not have any of the above 15 updates rolled into it. Conversely, of the 108 KB's rolled into 3125574 that are "good", I only have 39 of them integrated into my good/working install image. Now I don't know if the list of 123 KB's in 3125574 is the count for the 64-bit version, so maybe the number is different for the 32-bit version.

RT7 is working for me again today. Maybe it helped when I added 2 gb of ram to the system I'm using RT7 on to bring it from 2 gb to 4 gb of ram... In any case, I have determined which KB, when integrated into a Win-7 Ultimate 32-bit installation package created by RT7, will result in the system (a) not showing (not having) any Libraries, (b) not being able to create new libraries, and (c) giving an "Item not found" message when creating new folders or renaming existing ones. The KB responsible for that behavior is 958559.

Yes I know about ei.cfg but I don't "mess" with it when I work with RT7. I assume that RT7 knows about ei.cfg too and can easily choose to disregard it or follow it (or modify it or re-create it) as it builds the image that you want it to build. When you go through an RT7 use-cycle, where you start it, point it to a set of source files, answer the basic first-question "which version?" and then perform what-ever integration (drivers and/or KB's), and then get to the create-ISO/Boot point (where I "burn" the resulting image to a bootable thumb drive), I then exit RT7 because it really doesn't allow you to do anything else at that point except maybe burn another ISO. So when you exit RT7, your source files are now modified. Permanently. So I make a copy of the entire source directory and I point RT7 to the copy, perform integration, perform USB burn, take thumb drive to target machine and perform installation by booting thumb drive (always formatting target drive first). If I like the install, but want to do more to it, I copy the install files to a new directory, point RT7 to the new directory and continue. I did this about a dozen times over the past week. Each time I documented which KB's I was adding to each image, and which KB's were being reported as installed by wmic after installation (the numbers don't always jive). I was close to finding out which KB, when integrated by RT7, gave me an installation of Win-7 that, when trying to create a new folder in explorer, gave me the "Item not found" error. But yesterday, RT7 wasn't loading any of my previous images. I was being stonewalled by the "Please select a valid Windows 7 operating system" message.

> rt7 offers 2 things > > 1. changes to WHOLE source (all images) or > 2. change to single edition > > so beware what you choose After you point RT7 to your source files, the first question it always seems to ask is what version you are interested in (it throws up a menu window). Sometimes I get the whole list (home, home premium, ultimate, etc) and sometimes I just get a single choice (Ultimate). So I don't understand what governs that, or its implications. And yes, there is the radio-button choice to "Build current image" or "build all images". I've always chosen "Build current image" because, after all, since it asked you to choose an image at the very start, wouldn't that make the "build all images" option redundant or stupid? But at this point, as I mentioned in the other thread, I'm now getting the "Please choose a valid Windows 7 Installation" message after I point RT7 to my installation files and select my choice of Ultimate when the choice box pops up (a box that gives Ultimate as the single choice). Even a virgin set of unaltered win-7 sp1 ultimate from technet is giving the same message.

RT7 is now giving me the "Please select a valid Windows 7 operating system" error after I point it to several of my various install images. Even a "virgin" set of technet installation files. There is pretty much nothing on the net I can find about why RT7 puts up that message or how to fix it.

The sysinfo command says "Hotfix(s): 540 Hotfix(s) Installed" which matches the number I get with wmic. However, sysinfo starts to list the hotfixes by kb number, and gets to [242] which it partially prints out the kb number, and then ends the KB list output and then gives the network card info. Does the sysinfo command have a limit when printing the kb list? One other strange thing between the 2 install images: Image-1 has 525 KB's, Image-2 has 540. That's a difference of 15. But in reality, there are 3 KB's in Image-1 that are not present in Image-2. So of the 28 KB's that I added to Image-1 to create Image-2, 18 of them are showing up when Image-2 is installed. 525 + 18 - 3 = 540.

I'm comparing 2 installation images of Win-7 Ultimate SP1 x86 prepared by RT7. The difference between them should be 28 KB's (I integrated 28 KB's into the first image to create the second image). After performing trial installs using both images, I ran the wmic command to get a list of installed kb's for both images. None of the 28 kb's that were integrated into the second image were listed as being present in the first image according to wmic. But the second image, once it was installed and running, was showing only 15 additional kb's, not 28. So either: Win-7 has some ability to "de-install" or cancel some KB's at run-time that it determines it shouldn't have or has been superceeded by another KB that it has, or RT7 has some ability to know during kb integration which KB's should or shouldn't be integrated, or wmic does not show all installed KB's. The wmic command that I ran was wmic qfe list brief /format:texttablewsys > c:\updates.txt And I'm not dealing with the conveinence roll-up during these tests.

At the time I started this thread, I did not realize that RT7 made permanent changes to the 2 wim files that are, basically, the entirety of a win-7 distribution / install package. I thought that when you pointed RT7 to your source files (either the source directory or an ISO of your win-7 original CD) that it performed an integration of various items and allowed you to save your work in a config file but that it did not alter your source image. Hence my confusion as to why I was seeing wim's of different sizes. When I thought I was "going back" to my original win-7 CD image it turns out it was far from it. So I've made successive copies of various trials using RT7 to integrate various kb's in stages, starting with what I know to be an original MS distribution of Win-7 ultimate SP1 32-bit. What I have now is an image with 525 kb updates rolled in, and I am not seeing the "item not found" error when creating new folders, and the "Library" thing is fully populated with the 4 items (music, video, etc). (I would like to create a win-7 install image where libraries and control panel are totally removed from file explorer. God I hate Windoze 7.) I was using whdownloader and the pre-made lists available for it to download the kb files, and it turns out that there are at least 60 kb's that the current lists include that are *not* present or flagged by MS-update as available. So for anyone trying to use RT7 and Whdownloader to create an up-to-date win-7 install image (and bypass the "Conveinence" update which includes some "bad" kb's) then I believe there is a problem with the inventory of kb's that the whdownloader people would have you obtain and integrate into your image. My image contains all the dot-net 3.x and lower patches, plus the dot.net 4.61 distribution and all available patches for it. It also contains IE-10 offline install (I'm holding off integrating IE-11 into this image for the moment). So at this point my image, when installed and when it performs the first Update-check, comes back with this as being available: Important Updates: 3120388 security update 3075226 security update 3086255 security update (this is on the "bad" list) 3167679 security update 3138612 just "Update" for win-7 (this is on the "bad" list) optional updates: 2506928 (bad) 2545698 (bad) 2592687 (bad) 2660075 (bad) 2830477 (don't know) 2923545 (bad) 2952664 (bad) 2970228 (bad) 3021917 (bad) 3068708 (bad) 3075249 (bad) 3078667 (bad) 3080149 (bad) 3092627 (bad) 3102429 (bad) 3118401 (bad) 3140245 (too new / don't know) 3161102 (too new / don't know) 3172605 (too new / don't know)

So I've been comparing various win-7 SP1 ISO's and CD's that I have, and it does seem to be the case that they are identical except for ei.cfg. Except for a couple of files - install.wim and setup.wim. They're always different. So that puts the lie to the often-told story that Win-7 distribution media is essentially identical except for ei.cfg. I've been looking into this because I've been struggling with RT7 Lite and it's generating installation images that always leaves me with a system that (a) has no "Libraries" and (b) gives me an "item not found" message when creating new folders or renaming folders. I've now used a different source for the base win-7 SP1 image and have managed to use RT7 to generate an install image that *works* and does not have those issues. The only difference in the source images is these .wim files. I'm going to use reg shot and see if I can find a difference in the registry between the installs. Otherwise I'd like to know more about the reasons why these .wim files are different.

The reader is one of those multi-card readers that slides into a 3.5" drive-bay. It connects to the motherboard USB port via 10-pin header. It uses 2 motherboard USB ports - 1 for the card reader and 1 is a usb pass-through to a front panel USB port. In file explorer the reader shows up as 3 or 4 extra drives even if there are no cards plugged in. When clicking on the correct drive-icon associated with the SD-card slot, I get the "drive not formatted" message. There's nothing wrong with the card because (as I said) the files on it appear correctly on a win-7 laptop with integrated SD port. And let me say that this is *still* a real pain in the butt that I can find no way to render pretty much anything.microsoft.com on any browswer that I can run under win-98. Not even Opera 2.12 can render this page: https://support.microsoft.com/en-ca/kb/970685 Complete blank. But that is a description of this problem with SD card.

I've got an XP-SP3 system with the POS2009 hack and an SD-card reader that I know is compatible with SD cards at least up to 64 gb. Currently, XP doesn't recognize an SD card that it recently did recognize. It puts up a message saying the card is not formatted and asks if I want to format (I say no). I can bring the card to a laptop running win-7 with built-in card reader and it can read the files ok, and I run scandisk on the card on the laptop and it says it's fine. There seems to have been one or more XP hotfixes for SD cards (311182 and 333278) and I've obtained both of those (311182_ENU_i386_zip.exe and 333278_ENU_i386_zip.exe) from MS but they won't install - I don't remember the exact wording but I believe they thought they were incompatible with the OS, and I'm thinking that maybe the POS2009 hack might be the cause. I *believe* that the root issue is the file sdbus.sys, but I don't understand the hotfix installer well enough to create or build all the _p files in the hotfix into the actual files. Anyone seen (and solved) this issue before?

I seem to recall with Win-9x and maybe even XP that you needed to have specific install CD's or ISO's to validate with a matching product key (OEM, retail, system-builder, etc). I've got technet keys for Win-7 and I'm wondering if I need to find a matching technet downloadable ISO image - or is there just a generic ISO image for each of the various flavors of 7 that Microsoft has made available for download usable for all the various classes of keys (corporate, OEM, retail, technet, etc) that exist?

Can the indexing service (specifically, the choice to not even install this service) be playing a role here? Also, regarding the reg file being discussed above (Explorer\\FolderDescriptions\etc) yes, those registry entries are present on the system I'm working on, and manually deleting them *does nothing* to make the "item not found" error go away. Those registry entries pertain to the sub-folders in the Libraries thing, so again I don't know why there is a connection between messing with the Libraries thing and new-folder-creation or folder-renaming.

Um, yea. I've already found those reg-remove entries from other sources. Sometimes they come with other instructions, like this one: ftp://interplay.avid.com/Patches/OSHotfixes/Issue-Could_not_find_this_item.txt "Install KB980408 normally" There were reports back in June 2010 that KB980408 prevented the ability to rename folders on 64-bit Win-7. Something I'm wondering (and maybe someone can confirm) is if the problem registry entries mentioned in .reg file are specific to 64-bit Win-7 or if they apply equally to 32-bit. The Win-7 Ultimate SP1 32 bit install that I'm working with reports having 577 Security updates, regular updates and hotfixes. None of them are KB980408. Is that a pre-SP1 kb? Is that a KB that might be rolled into SP1?

I've just re-formatted and re-installed the win-7 32-bit image that I made with RT7 Lite and I'm still getting the "file not found" message when creating new or renaming existing folders. I've got over 550 updates rolled into this image, and the first time I run Windows Update (which takes only a couple minutes) I get only 2 or 3 important updates (which are on my do-not-install list). I've installed no other software on this latest install, not even any updates to IE. So this issue is coming from a kb update. Edit: I've found a reference to this issue which dates back to 2010: http://www.sevenforums.com/general-discussion/82704-item-not-found-when-moving-renaming.html According to that, the problem is the interaction with an unknown KB update and registry entries designed to remove the stupid "libraries" thing from explorer. That thread indicates that the issue was solved, but it's not clear how. Was it the application (or re-application?) of remove-libraries.reg, or was it the removal of those entries? I've just tried applying that reg file and re-starting my system, and although the libraries thing is indeed gone from explorer, I still have the folder create/rename issue. Edit: The registry entries mentioned on this page: http://web.archive.org/web/20100612015409/http://www.techjawa.com/2010/05/01/guide-fix-windows-folder-renaming-could-not-find-this-item which was mentioned on this page: http://www.sevenforums.com/software/99614-explorer-error-could-not-find-item.html and for which most people in that thread claim that it *did* fix the problem, does *not* fix the problem on my system. Someone in that thread said this: "So now I'm thinking it might be a combination of having Libraries disabled and the KB2286198 hotfix together that caused it. " edit: More references to this issue here: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-files/renaming-folders-causes-item-not-found-error-in/e2cf38c7-9e77-4256-89de-6308df53d5f9?auth=1 http://www.overclock.net/t/721973/msupdate-kb980408-warning-to-all-win7-x64-users/10 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r24158662-New-MS-Updates-today-4-27-2010 and a list of registry entries to delete. And a mention that KB980408 is involved. The date that this issue seems to have started is on (or before) April 28, 2010. I created a reg-delete file containing the suspect entries, restarted, and the issue remains. Haven't done anything yet about uninstalling / re-installing any kb's.

Since 7 was installed on the system in question a few days ago, I've just been putzing with it, haven't installed much software - but these could be the cause: NDP461-KB3102436-x86-x64-AllOS-ENU.exe (dot-net 4.61 framework, needed to install one of the following) Windows_Tweaker_5.3.1-Setup.exe ClassicShellSetup_4_2_5c.exe 7plus Version 2.5.0 netver.zip (downloaded from www.asoft.be/downloads/netver.zip) (I wanted to see what version of .net I had) install_flash_player.exe (from adobe) Also installed some old version of Firefox. As far as the fixes go, I've tried these two: http://www.vistax64.com/attachments/tutorials/7715d1225832927-new-folder-newfolderfix-reg http://tufda.net/downloads/explore/Error when renaming folder fix.reg Tried running then from an elevated command prompt as well, and they didn't solve the problem. This is what I get when renaming an existing folder: ============ Item Not Found (title bar) Cound not find this item. This is no longer located in (path). Verify the item's location and try again. (orignal file-name) Date created: (what-ever) [try again] [Cancel] ============= Creating new folders gives a similar message. Clicking "try again" always works right away.

This error, which comes up when creating a new folder or renaming an existing folder in win-7 (ultimate, sp1, 32 bit) seems to date back 5 or 6 years based on some searches I've done. The error initially says that the folder is "not found" but hitting the try-again button works and the folder is created or re-named as desired. This is on a new win-7 install that's been customized with over 500 KB updates rolled in. I've tried a few different .reg files floating around that's supposed to fix this, and none have worked. I think I came across some mention that this behavior might be caused by a specific kb update - if so I'd like to know which one. But in the mean time I'd like to correct this problem. Any ideas how?

Accessing the msfn forums with Opera 12.02 this morning and I'm logged in automatically. Strange. The last time I tried this, I wasn't logged in and couldn't get past the login screen.

I bought a couple of new motherboards about a year ago when they were on sale + rebate: Asrock 970 Extreme3 R2.0 and Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3. Which one would be more "compatible" with win-98 based on your study? The Asrock 970 has PS/2 mouse and keyboard ports (the 990FXA has a single PS/2 port).

Setting View-Page Style to No Style does make the posts more readable, but interestingly it makes the text-entry box that I'm typing this reply in only 22 characters wide, while before with the style set to Basic it was a "normal-looking" wide box.

Ah, ok, this works. I don't use noscript with FF2 - I use yes-script. So I've just added www.msfn.org to the yesscript exclusion list and bingo, I can see a text entry box at the bottom of this thread and I'm typing this into it. Edit: While I'm at it, any way I can get posts to display with more than, say, 20 characters per line in FF2?

I'm typing this on a win-7 pc because on my win-98 system (a) I can log in but not get a message editing window while running ff2, pale moon or retrozilla, and (b) when running opera 12.02 I can't even log in into my msfn.org account - opera gives me a file-download dialog after submitting user-name / pw. Opera used to perform auto-login into msfn but it no longer does this. So I'm wondering if there are users running win-98 that are actually able to log-in and post messages to msfn.org. If so, what browser are you using? (note: I have kex but I don't run any version of FF higher than 2.0.0.20 because anything higher has given me graphics issues in the past like while lines across pages while scrolling). And also note that if this post is moved to a different msfn forum (like forum/website issues) then it will probably not be seen by people who primarily or only read this win-9x forum.

Correct me if I'm wrong here (or tell me which items are right or wrong). This concerns the creation of a win-7 installation image. 1) The 3125574 roll-up *does* contain either unwanted telemetry KB's, unwanted Win-10 migration stuff, or both. 2) There are no tools or methods to extract all desirable components from the roll-up and integrate them directly into an install image created by, say, NTlite/Nlite 3) MS's Deployment Image Servicing and Management (DISM) is (or is not?) capable of directly taking the 3125574 roll-up and selectively de-selecting unwanted items to create the desired win-7 install image, but DISM is a bear to learn how to install and use. 4) The 3125574 roll-up does (or does not) contain hot patches or fixes that are (or not) otherwise easily (or publically) available. 5) The continued use of NTlite/Nlite and the manual downloading of individual KB installation files remains the only practical way to create an up-to-date installation image of Win-7.