Stead

personally i'd just install it into a diffrent directory to test, and once you've got ti right then format it and do a nice clean install not sure if its recommeneded, but its what i do!

Terminal services may be important, i think,

i noticed it also said for win 9x/me systems, Not being funny or anything (well B) ) but i don't recall nlite working for other than NT5 +? i'm guessing for older computers with less memory its actually quite a good thing, most people i know who play games are people who don't know much about computers, and get scared when i open regedit and delete things that startup with the computer, poor souls, i've almost been attacked by (i'll not say who incase they figured out how to use internet explorer yet!) parents (well, farther) before when they asked me if i could speed it up, and then they replied with 'NO DON'T DO THAT YOU FOOL IT WILL NEVER WORK AGAIN!' (well more colourful langage but still i learned my lesson, never try and explain things to people who 'know' about computers, i did almost think about trying to explain to him that a 2gig connection wasn't what 2mb adsl ment, but he was very adiment about this, he also believed downloading sp2 ment it was a whole new os) anyway my point was, that a nice program that claims to do this even if it can all be done manually easier, is better for people who believe they know everything, and those who are to scared to do it themselves another good one was with a ex girlfriend, they had an old P75 running NT4, and i was defragging the drive, and her mother gave me a huge row insisting you could not defrag it, luckily i have a lot of patience or the keyboard would of been snapped over her head, very very very stubborn woman she was. yes so now i've done a huge rant! wohaaay!!! sorry! but i feel a lot better now

Right, well i download bootvis, run it, and this is the problem i'm having, well its not really a problem, it made one hell of a difference showing the welcome screen and logging on to desktop, takes a couple of seconds if that But, when i clicked optimize in bootvis, my technical way of seeing how fast windows xp loads is counting how many bars are used, during the time it monitors the boot to optimize it, it doesn't even get to finish one bar, however when its finished, and before i did it for that matter, it took 3 and half bars, what does it do different when it monitors it to optimize it? it wouldn't of bothered me before but now i know it can boot that quick, i want to know why it doesn't! its not a real problem, i'm just curious

what would be nice i think is if someone was able to borrow a few xp features, i'm sure a lot will disagree with me, but i really like system restore, and the picture preview program. those are about the only 2 things i prefer in xp, and i miss them in 2000 wonder if its possible to take out the security centre and those other nifty sp2 things, well, ok, just the popup stopped and activex stopper thing and put them as unoffical sp5, i thought ie for 2000 and xp was the same? not that i'm telling anyone to do, just i think it would be neat, if i had hte patience i'd look into it myself, but ware do you get information on these things from?

Hi, by using that nifty guide i got system restore in 2003 (downloaded the demo, what can i say i'm curious, i know it only last 6 months but i find this type of thing all terribly interesting ) but, i noticed upnp isn't there, which seems to make things very slow for some programs over the internet, i'm impressed with halo, it seems to run a lot smoother, which higher frame rates, although i can't seem to get the ping as low, on average 30 higher than with xp not sure if those 2 things are related. anywho the system restore is just from xp? could the same thing be done with uPnP do you think? as i'm convinced there isn't much difference between xp and 2003, to me they seem to of left out xp, gone back to 2000 added most the xp features but done it without slowing everything down, although i noticed the dropshadow text on the desktop icons doesn't seem to work on mine. i've just tried it over the past few days, and apart from the lack of uPnP support, ( i think thats causing it anyway) it seems supirior to xp, on my computer it takes about the same amount of time to load, but over all it seems faster and more responsive, and uses considerably less memory using 170mb at the mo with a few programs opened up including virus scanner msn, those things u'd normally find at home, xp would be using over 200mb just starting up with the same programs loaded in the backgrund. oh, there was one problem, i installed virtual pc trial from microsoft, to test some installations using nlite see to see what happens, and when you open hte installer it states cannot be installed on this version of windows, then just carries on, runs fine tho.

i have to say, i believe the P4 extreme addition would be the best processer, although a bit unrealistic cuz of its price. i myself have a P4 2.8 with a radeon 9800, that runs everything fine need more memory tho 512mb, a couple of years ago i would of laughed if i knew someone who had that much memory and said thats whatt sslowing it down, i tired ma friends doom 3, memory shot up to 980mb on extreme graphics settings! i couldn't get over that this motherboard is a Aopen 865 chipset thing, second hand as it didn't have 2 sata cables the customer returned it, i got it half price and it had never been used! motherboard was still in its sealed bag thing! also i then bought my cpu roughly 60% off the bran new price as the person i bought it off decided they was too rich and bought a 3.2 chip a week after buying the 2.8 decent P4 motherboard and excellent P4 chip for £150 (that was a lot 6 months ago assuming its cheaper now ) after months of putting off getting a new video card i got the 9800 for £120 off some site that was doing a special offer on them i have to say, anyone who still insists P4's are rubbish compared to amd after using a HT chip needs help, i can't get over the difference the HT makes, its amazing! although saying thati've never used an athlon 64, but the price is way to much for me. (ps, 2000 run painfully slow with HT enabled, but after reading up thats due to the way it finds logical processors or something wierd, but its great in xp!) if your loaded/won the lottery buy at least 4 machines, 2 P4 extreme editions one with a top end nvidia, then one with the top end ati, then do the same with the top end amd 64. (that way no one can get angry at you )

i think its because of all those people who 'know' everything about computers, and if they see you are using a computer and it starts up saying XP Home, they insist your an id*** for using the home edition as its useless (Even tho all this person uses the computer for is word processing and occasional hardcore spider solitare, and they haven't even heard of the internet!) Although probably not, i'm sticking to it for my reason

hope i don't seem like the 'noob' i am at this forum but it seems to me that if you did get it working, windows wouldn't be able to install as the usb hd wouldn't be found again until windows has finished installing? i did get windows xp to install itself before, can't remember i just rea lots of stuff, anyways i had it so you put the hd in and it would install itself, i thought it was pretty neat praps you could use bart's PE builder to make a bootable portable windows on that drive, have a batch or just manually copy all the files over, then remove the usb drive and let the computer install itself i suggested the bart pe as that would be able to read ntfs partitions! this method probably isn't the most conventional, but i'm guessing once its setup probably the simplest to run

cool thought that it was odd how there was no update showing with xpcreate but windows clearly had tons when it was done! thanks a lot ! i notice is currently downloading wmp10? i thoguht i just read a huge article on howtoslipstream it only that it'll do it anyway? thanks again