Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

  • Country

    United States

Posts posted by jmonroe0914

  1. Perhaps you're having difficulty reading, as I never once belittled the OP... to the contrary, I gave them a compliment.

    On a side note, I could care less how many posts you've made, who you are, or your hubristic perspective... your social skills are horrendous, and I really would encourage you to research how to interact with people in an amicable fashion. By all means, you can continue to behave in this childish manor and you'll be ignored.

  2. We're all idiots and have no clue how use the Services.msc.

    Administrator Tools->Services (or Computer Management).


    WTH is wrong with you? He doesn't want to DISABLE something he did NOT choose to install. He wants to OBLITERATE it! Period.


    I say again, We are freakin' GEEKS to the MAX. Truth is, I'm running on Server2003 ATM, with extra boot options for XP Pro and Win98SE, in addition to multiple Virtual PC installations (for testing and assistnace on MSFN) and I *like* to manipulate MY INSTALLATIONS as I choose, NOT how MS wants me to.


    I repeat, we are NOT Consumers. Many come here for us to HELP, and YOU, sir, are NOT contributing, just blasting us with your "knowledge".


    PLEASE stop it and CONTRIBUTE!


    Thank you.


    Side note: This PC is my usual one (dual monitors), the one I mentioned in the PageFile thread (dual monitors) is now downloading Win10 ISO's for testing (and will soon be my NEW Server), my I521 already has Win7Pro (it sits on a shelf), TWO D530's with XP Pro, one on a shelf, the other used by my Step-son, etc etc (yeah, I have several more).



    I'd encourage you to learn how to interact with people and read up on social skills... To believe anyone is going to pay any attention to someone with the tonality in your last post is ignorant to say the least. If you're an adult, act like it... if you're a child, gain some maturity.

    One would have to choose to install CCC, as it doesn't just magically appear. If someone wants to, in your words, "obliterate it period", that's generally referred to as an uninstall. CCC is installed as it's management software for AMD graphics cards, however, editing the registry to simply prevent it from starting is going overboard. I don't remember if CCC is a required install for AMD drivers since AMD no longer uses CCC. If it is a required install, in your words, "obliterating it" will more than likely lead to issues while utilizing the discrete graphics card.

  3. That is totally not what I'm doing.


    You hold the shift key and right click desktop you get 'Open Command Window Here' on desktop or background

    OMG I manipulated the registry.

    I don't have to hit shift and its on my right click.

    Now I want Administrator cmd prompt on that and discovering them keys helps me figure out these things


    I know all about the ways to do this like Win+X and otherwise but its NOT what I want


    I repeat I will offend the registry again and again

    • That is totally not what I'm doing.

    Per your previous post, "I want to be able to delete them keys to stop Catalyst from starting up with windows 10".  There are far easier ways to do this than by editing the registry directly


    I'm confused by the rest of your post, as it's not about disabling startup entries/services, which is all I was addressing in my previous post.

  4. Can esd files be made on a personal system? If so actually tell us how.


    And you repeatedly ask if I have real world experience?  Are you sure you're not projecting?


    dism /export-image /sourceimagefile:z:\install.wim /sourceindex:1 /destinationimagefile:z:\install.esd /compress:recovery /checkintegrity


    One could also download the ESD2WIM zip file that's been on this forum for years, which includes it's own DISM folder and cmd script.

  5. Since you seem really intent on someone, as you put it, "trying to prove us idiots", expensive, in the way it was used, implied monetary cost.  Something can not be monetarily expensive when it's free.


    By all means, launch into the conspiratorial, tinfoil hat, nonsensical replies about nonexistent points... you and others are superb at it.  I however, have far more important things to do that waste time with individuals partaking in this type of nutjob absurdity.  Have a wonderful day =]


    Out of curiosity, how small of a size are you going for? Using an install.esd over an install.wim will save you ~1GB of space, and considering the unpacked install.wim/esd is ~19GB, that's a fairly substantial compression ratio.

    Around here allot of people aren't happy with that little he might want less than two gigs



    I was asking how small they wanted it in order to offer suggestions on how to ensure it's a smaller image... normally, one would construe what I asked as meaning that.


    ESD was mentioned because it has a more efficient compression ratio.

  7. The thing is though you are just spouting half read articles and not fully quoting them. My point is that (myself included) people here have multiple decades of real knowledge not just reading. MS has been proven wrong on so many occasions on their printed works that they cannot be used as a reliable source (kinda like you)

    If a manufacturer has drivers for Windows seven yet says on the front they only support Vista them they are actually supporting seven they just didn't update their front page.

    You really need to learn to think for yourself not jus read


    Until something is proven as inaccurate by Microsoft, or any company, then you must accept what is said at face value... we're not talking about something crazy or major, we're talking about the reason an update was pulled for a few hours.  Why anyone would choose to be conspiratorial about that and rant about it is beyond comprehension.  I assume members on this forum are intelligent, but choosing to argue a nonexistent point, giving in to conspiratorial ideologies and the belief that corporations are out to personally get you while wearing a tinfoil is simply absurd and ludicrous.  There are sites for that line of thinking... this is not one on them.


    Saying that a company supports something when they say they don't is absurd... let's make the assumption you're perspective is accurate.  It's simply bad business for the manufacturer, and since board manufacturers are in business to make as much of profit as possible,  to not list OSes that are supported, as it would affect profit margins.  This is another non-existent point... I don't know you, you don't know me, and as far as I know, you don't work for the board manufacturer(s).  Without some sort of evidence from a manufacturer that the information you claim to be right is indeed right, one must trust the source [the manufacturer] and not a third party [you or any other user].  To believe otherwise is simply ignorant and a recipe for disaster in life.


    Either way, it's a beautiful day and I've spent as much time as I'm going to spend on this discussion, trying to show rationale and logic where it's seriously lacking.  You will probably disagree, and that's ok... we will simply have to agree to disagree.  Best of luck to you =]

  8. Ok but go back and read my posts and actually answer ask my questions. Especially in this and the thread regarding page files. You have yet to answer one of my questions. You are only interested in proving what you half read somewhere is right. Not answering anything else


    You asked one question [in this thread], of which I repeatedly ignored due to the obvious.  If you don't understand why it was ignored, please re-read my previous post above and/or simply glance at any post I've made... the answer is in every post.

  9. So tell us what the better way is then.


    The Task Manager has the ability to disable/enable startup items.  Services.msc allows configuring the auto startup of services.  Nirsoft and Sysinternals both offer free programs to manage startup entries.


    There's no right or wrong way to disabling startup programs, and the way you're doing it isn't wrong... it's simply making more work for yourself than needs to be exerted to get what you want.

  10. That was just the second board I looked at. Look deeper like I've asked several times do you have any actual experience? You have been proven wrong at least twice here because you seem to have a reading problem. You are only seeing what you want to see and misquoting lots of information.

    Then trying to prove us idiots when you don't actually know what your taking about. The people here have actual hands on knowledge not just half read bs.


    To believe my posts are "trying to prove us idiots" really demonstrates looking at forum posts with the absolute wrong perspective.  


    How one could formulate such an opinion based on what I've written is beyond perplexing.  I'd encourage you to re-read posts I've written with a neutral perspective instead of one of hubris, believing someone, or anyone, is trying to what? embarrass you? argue their right and you're wrong? what?  I couldn't care less who's right and wrong... i care about factual information.  When I'm wrong, I have no problem admitting it... when you're wrong, you're wrong... it's really as simple as that. 


    However, to read from a perspective of hubris will lead one to respond with hubris.



    Most gigabyte and asus ones actually there is actually only one reason. Server boards typically have bigger capacity. Again do you have any real life experiences?

    Again, show me a desktop board that says a server OS is a supported OS for the board... there's a reason why there's two different boards for the two different types of OSes and it's more than just drivers.

    Edit: I've opened up 5 random desktop motherboard pages from both Asus and Gigabyte, and not a single one says it's compatible with a server OS.


    The second one I looked at has drivers for several desktop OS. http://b2b.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4468#dl

    Now answer me do you have any real experiences?


    Per the Specifications:


    OS Supported

    Windows Server 2008 SP2 (x86) & R2 (x64)

    Windows Vista SP2 (x86/x64)

    Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.6 (x86/x64)

    Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.11 (x86/x64)

    SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11.1 (x86/x64)

    VMware ESXi 5.0 / 5.1 / 5.1 U1 / 5.1 U2

    Totally misread, my mistake  :blink:

  12. Well, the point I was raising was more about the:



    (server OSes cannot generally run on PC motherboards, just as server boards can generally not run desktop OSes - Server OSes are not remotely similar to desktop OSes) .


    Actually in Windows NT systems Desktop OS and Server OS are historically EXACTLY THE SAME with just a bunch of very minor changes, mostly due to Commercial/Licensing reasons.


    It is entirely possible that the yet to be released Server 2016:


    The final release date for the server is expected to be in early 2016, that is, not released simultaneously with the client operating system Windows 10 as was the case with the last three operating system releases.

    will be not remotely similar to Windows 10, but allow me to doubt it.




    Everyone is welcome to their opinions, however, I ask again:


    Please show me a desktop board that says a server OS is a supported OS for the board... there's a reason why there's two different boards for the two different types of OSes and it's more than just drivers.

  13. Most gigabyte and asus ones actually there is actually only one reason. Server boards typically have bigger capacity. Again do you have any real life experiences?


    Again, show me a desktop board that says a server OS is a supported OS for the board... there's a reason why there's two different boards for the two different types of OSes and it's more than just drivers.

    Edit: I've opened up 5 random desktop motherboard pages from both Asus and Gigabyte, and not a single one says it's compatible with a server OS.

  14. Still full of crap except for drivers every server OS I've used at least half a dozen ran fine on pc hardware, and the Steve blade I had ran XP,2000 standard, Vista and seven


    Show me a desktop board that says a server OS is a supported OS for the board... there's a reason why there's two different boards for the two different types of OSes and it's more than just drivers.


    You can run a gas car engine on E85, even when it's not compatible with E85.  It will cause fuel injector failure over time, among other things.  Simply because one can run an OS on a board that wasn't designed for it does not mean it's a good idea and should be done. 



    (server OSes cannot run on PC motherboards, just as server boards can generally not run desktop OSes - Server OSes are not remotely similar to desktop OSes) .

    Starting when? :unsure:



    I'd like to know that too I ran server 2003 as a desktop OS for awhile.


    I missed the "generally" that should have preceded the first part:

    "server OSes cannot generally run on PC motherboards", as the last part had it included "just as server boards can generally not run desktop OSes"


    Post has been updated.

  16. It doesn't help anyone when an end user with a vendetta against something or some corporation rants about it in multiple posts...


    Right, that must be what motivates me.  It couldn't be actual experience, knowledge, or insight.


    This site has, quite wonderfully, a large collection of people on whom BS doesn't work.  Adult people, and even young ones with uncommon sense.


    I've been Microsoft's staunchest supporter throughout my near 40 year software engineering career.  Ask anyone around here - only a few short years ago I sounded a lot more like you, jmonroe, looking for the good.  Unfortunately, there isn't any to be found. 


    I have Windows 10 running like a well-oiled machine and I'll wager I know how to do that as well as or better than you do.  Guess what?  By ANY objective or subjective measure it's STILL not better than - nor arguably even as good as - its predecessors, which I ALSO have running like well-oiled machines.


    Stirring up trouble on forums can be fun, just try to stop accusing others, directly or indirectly, of being motivated by something other than reality.  Sometimes reality just bites.



    I'm not sure what it is with you and hubris and hostility... I really would encourage you to read things with a different perspective than you have been.

    Simply because someone shares information that shows your perspective and/or opinion is factually inaccurate or you're misinformed, is not a personal attack... which appears to be how you take anything that runs contrary to what you believe or write.

    One can either entertain conspiratorial ideologies and believe Microsoft is out to personally get you, or one can look at the facts of a situation and go from there. The facts are b1511, prior to being pulled, inadvertently exposed the advertising id and other personal information to third parties (i.e. app devs), even though a user may have disabled that, and other, information from being shared. This was fixed within a short period of time and b1511 was again pushed to WU servers.

    I ask again, would anyone rather they left it up and not informed users of the inadvertent privacy settings reset? My hunch is, you, and others, would be here ranting about that if it had occurred.

    You appear to be under the impression this is a who's right contest... it isn't. I couldn't care less who is right and who is wrong, I simply care about facts over opinions and ensuring accurate information is discussed. I would hope that's how any person on this forum would view conversations, seeming as this forum caters to the intelligent (a compliment, not a criticism).

  17. You're making the disabling of startup items and services far more complicated than it needs to be. There are legitimate uses for editing the registry directly... this is not one of them, mainly because you are literally making what you're trying to accomplish far more difficult than it needs to be.

  18. Letting windows waste upto sixteen gigs is bs. We've seen many times windows fill a page file and keep it full because it had always had issues cleaning it. That's a waste of space and resource.

    Have you come across this issue on Windows 10? You still appear to have a massive misunderstanding as to what the pagefile is and why it's needed. I really would encourage you to read the technet blog I linked to.
  19. Do you actually belive the crap you spout?

    The people here, including me have well over thirty years of knowledge and practice. I started during the commodore 64 age. I have used and studied every version of windows released and some not released extensively. Telling someone they actually need sixteen gigs of ram is just pure BS.

    I agree that a tiny page file can be needed on rare occasion but any more if you have enough ran to actually need a 64 bit OS you're rarely going to touch any page file at all

    Perhaps you meant to type pagefile and not RAM, as you can't seriously believe someone wouldn't need more than 16GB, or have a use for more than 16GB.

    Simply because someone is knowledgeable in their field of study does not mean they know everything, or do not have inaccurate understandings of different things. To believe otherwise is to be a fool.

  20. It's been proven many times that a small minimum large maximum page file fragments the hard drive more, a static sized drive is the optimal choice as it doesn't fragment the drive.


    Perhaps I'm missing something, but not only does fragmentation not matter with SSDs, with HDDs every file operation will cause fragmentation over a short period of time.  This is why you should have a task run once a week to defrag your HDD, much the same as you would set *nix cron jobs on a zpool to scrub the pool, run smartctl on your disks, etc.  It's common maintenance for your HDD, much the same as oil and brake changes are for your car.


    The page file is used by Windows to hold temporary data which is swapped in and out of physical memory in order to provide a larger virtual memory set.  This may help you understand what it is and why it's needed.



    The only reason for setting an "expando" page file size (i.e., where minimum and maximum are not the same) would be if you feel you really, really need the disk space and you don't want to do without the preallocated space.  Windows will thus allocate *just* enough for your maximum needs over time.  That whole idea implies disk storage has been underprovisioned to start with - that's never good.  I suggest ALWAYS overprovisioning your system disk space if you'd like to use your computer for a long time without problems.  Whatever disk you think you'll need, double it at least.




    See last sentence above.  You appear to have an factually inaccurate understanding of what virtual memory is for and why it's needed.

    As far as over-provisioning goes, while you can physically set this on SSDs (it's a requirement for the health of the drive), on HDDs it's common knowledge to not fill the drive beyond 90% capacity. I'm not aware of anything that allows you to physically set over provisioning on an HDD, however I'd be interested to learn of a way if you're aware of any that exist.


    I've always kept mine at two gigs for the past decade. Even when doing crazy stuff like running two VMware installs, SharePoint designer, a video, Web browsing and word I've never had a issue.

    What issue are you implying you would or would not have? You also appear to have an factually inaccurate understanding of what virtual memory is for and why it's needed.

  • Create New...