w2k4eva

I had initially tried adjusting permissions on just those 4 files. It reduced, but did not completely eliminate the event log errors for my system. For me the problem did not completely resolve until I also adjusted the rest of the folders as indicated. YMMV.

Do you connect your system to a domain controller? If so does the setting revert after you disconnect from the domain controller? I assume you have installed KB967715 and KB971029? Finding the relevant details in the pile of MS documentation can be problematic. But KB967715 has this to say: So you may need to change the key you are setting to be HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\policies\Explorer\NoDriveTypeAutorun 0xFF and I can't figure out why MS has so many articles describing use of the wrong key! There is also the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\policies\Explorer\HonorAutorunSetting 0x01 that is described later in the same article. You might need to repeat the steps in https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/437944/how-to-disable-autorun/#entry2556075 for each USB stick you own, kinda tedious, and what about new sticks you do not yet own or haven't gotten around to adjusting settings for? So much for the MS way. A more interesting approach is at https://www.esecurityplanet.com/views/article.php/3848951/Two-Approaches-to-Securing-Autorun-and-AutoPlay-in-Windows.htm

That original version is the only one I know of. FWIW, dencorso's linked KB article is still available from MS at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926185 That USB drive, are you using it for backups from a backup type program, or is it something you use to make manual copies with? Do you write to it from both W7 and XP, or only from W7 and just do reads from XP? If XP usage is going to be read-only, you could try setting the volume mount for the USB drive in XP to be read-only rather than the default read-write mount. IIRC there was a regedit or something to make this change, I don't have it handy right now but maybe someone else remembers it? That might keep XP from destroying the W7 shadow copies there. You might want to change the settings for System Restore in both XP and W7 to not monitor that USB drive, maybe even delete the restore points stored on it (if any), at least that should avoid creating new ones that would corrupt the shadow copies. Another possibility is to tell W7 to store the shadow copies for the USB drive elsewhere, like maybe on the W7 system drive (hopefully XP will not have access to that so can't delete them). See https://ccm.net/faq/2679-how-to-turn-off-volume-shadow-copy#how-to-edit-the-disk-space-allocated-to-shadow-copy for instructions. Do you also use Previous Versions on XP? I think it did not come by default (at least on Home) but have seen some people claim it can be installed there, from https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=16220. While XP does have a copy of vssadmin.exe, it is older than the W7 version and I'm not clear if it is able to do the same thing and move its snapshots of the USB drive to the XP system drive (where hopefully W7 will not delete them), but if it is able you could try that too. I don't know whether installing the volume shadow service SDK on XP would help or not, but it is available at https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=23490 if you want to check that out. You probably don't want to disable the driver for volsnap.sys since it would be needed by the shadow copy service that runs by default. If you want to stop the service itself there are also instructions for that a bit earlier in the above ccm.net link, this should be the same for both XP and W7. In that case you might also want to turn off the Microsoft Software Shadow Copy Provider service, similar method but different name. Both of these services can be typically called by backup programs including MS Backup and also System Restore so if you use those this might not be a good idea. More info about these services is at http://www.blackviper.com/windows-services/volume-shadow-copy/ and http://www.blackviper.com/windows-services/microsoft-software-shadow-copy-provider/ . Back in 2006 https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2006/07/14/how-restore-points-and-other-recovery-features-in-windows-vista-are-affected-when-you-dual-boot-with-windows-xp said: Why this fix is not trivial for Windows XP: Backporting volsnap.sys to Windows XP would require significant development and testing time. The entire Volume Shadowcopy Service (VSS) subsystem in Windows Server 2003, Windows Vista, and Windows Server “Longhorn” would need to be backported to Windows XP and would likely break a number of third-party backup applications that rely on the current version of volsnap.sys in Windows XP. for whatever THAT may be worth.

For the file itself, you could visit https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/975599/stop-error-when-you-put-a-computer-that-is-running-windows-7-or-window then look near the top of the page for the link text "Hotfix Download Available", click that; there will be a page where you can mark the checkbox for the version you want (x86), then give an email address. The site will then email you a download link to click. When you have the download you can use 7-zip or similar to extract the file. As for the custom installer, you would have to ask Dibya, you could try sending him a PM.

I still haven't figured out where my files came from but turned up some possible MS sources for yours (apart from 3rd party stuff like cellphone packages, tablet packages, GPS packages, etc) . At https://ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9200 there is some discussion and mention of KB971286. The KB article still exists and mentions the relevant files/versions but the package (WINUSB_UPDATE_XP-SRV03.exe) has been pulled from the update catalog, it is not on wayback, and apparently nobody posted it to thehotfixshare either. In the last post of the thread there are non-MS download links. It also gave me a lead to KB970159 which at one time was thought to be a prerequisite. Again the KB article still exists but the package (Microsoft Kernel-Mode Driver Framework Install-v1.9-Win2k-WinXP-Win2k3.exe) has been pulled from the update catalog. On https://msfn.org/board/topic/175487-standalone-winusb-installer-for-xp-kb971286/ cdob points out the android sdk which has a link to latest_usb_driver_windows.zip where he describes getting the winusb package out of the winusbcoinstaller2.dll. What he doesn't mention is that alongside this the zip also has wdfcoinstaller01009.dll, and packaged inside that is the kernel mode framework package that went missing from KB970159. Also in this thread blackwingcat mentioned kb975559 which MS intended for W7 but it contains a newer winusb.sys 6.1.7600.16421 and Dibya says he uses it in his custom installer. This too has the KB article still available but the package is not in the update catalog. At least for this one there is a hotfix download available, though it is intended for W7 so it might not install to XP from this package even if the file inside could work (this may be why Dibya did his custom installer for it).

My \Windows\System32 folder has a winusb.dll, size 24136 bytes created/modified 02 Nov 2006 7:00:10AM, version 6.0.6000.16386, with valid MS signature. This is the only version of this file that I have anywhere on the system, no second copy in dllcache, drivers, any of the windows update uninstall folders, etc. I can't find any reference to such a file in my notes about updates that I added so I'm guessing it came preinstalled, I don't know exactly what it does. The properties sheet description says Windows USB Driver User Library"Windows USB Driver User Library". The version number would suggest mine came from a package released for Vista (despite the date being too early), while yours looks like something released for W7rtm. That file is NOT mentioned in dencorso's thread about usb updates at https://msfn.org/board/topic/162733-usb-functional-patches-for-win-xp-after-sp3/ , nor at https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/usbcoreblog/2009/11/13/list-of-the-latest-usb-hotfixes-for-each-windows-version/ I do NOT have the item in Add/Remove Windows Components, but Add/Remove Programs does have "Microsoft WinUsb 1.0". Unlike the other program entries there is no information about size, frequency of use, last used date, etc.

@glnz - Yes, try what Dencorso suggests to scrub any traces of the new version. It sounds to me like when you reinstalled it got the new version again. Like so many other security apps these days it may immediately "phone home" to check for newer versions and "help" you by fetching the newer version to replace the "old" one. If there are no install options to avoid this you may need to use the trick I use to keep old versions of Avast running. (And yes I do still put Avast *6* on my new builds of XP, and it does not refuse to install the old version for me.) Are you using the same old installer from before? If you can't find it, visit https://filehippo.com/download_malwarebytes_anti_exploit/ and try looking at the list of versions on the right side of the page for the one you want to use. When you are ready to install, first disconnect your ethernet cable or other internet access. Second, look at the signature date on the installer file. (Right click, Properties, select tab Digital Signatures, move the scroll bar to see the timestamp.) Adjust your system date/time to when that version was freshly released, then install. Go through the settings to disable auto update features, at least for program version updates. For Avast I would now manually insert a previously obtained license key, I don't know if MBAE uses one or not. Reboot if needed. Once all settings are okay, adjust system date/time back to the present, optionally reboot once more, and re-establish your internet connection.

I am as usual a bit behind on my updating... but has anyone else noticed that the KB and bulletin referenced by the summary and even by the update catalog itself no longer exist? Even tried both Wayback and Google cache, no luck on either, nor any of the other sites that usually replicate such content - does anybody know what was the issue this update addresses? Or any place to find the missing KB and/or bulletin?

You may just be outta luck, the i810 chipset was a quirky thing in terms of memory. I have an old Dell Dimension L500c based on this chipset, it is specced to take 2x 256MB for total 512MB, but I have never been able to make that work. Two identical sticks, either can run perfectly in either slot (checked with multi-day runs of Memtest86+) but when both sticks are used together all heck breaks loose. Swapping them between slots did not help for me. Not likely the wifi card as I never had one in mine but still have the same problem. I had a similar situation whether running W98SE, or when I temporarily had XP installed, which due to greater memory needs would get into trouble even faster. Mine had plenty of HDD space/swap space so not that either. I didn't use OpenGL so can't speak to that. I did note some oddities in the pattern of errors in Memtest86+ with both sticks that made me think there is a defect in the cache, but I don't have any way to change any of that. About the only workable (non)solution I found was to use just a single stick.

My best/favorite machine is running W2K. It is hardware capable to run XP, Vista, W7, 8 or 10 but I like W2K. Yes there are other newer machines in the house running XP or W7 but they are not as good. It has been down twice for power supply issues, once for HDD failure, and a few shorter outages for power failures, but otherwise has been running W2K continuously since its initial build in 2007. I have a couple others that also run W2K although they are older and do not see daily use any more.

ImgBurn will do everything ISO Recorder does plus a whole lot more - like DVDs and BluRays, authoring, etc, at whatever speed your hardware can support. It is compatible up to W8 (not sure about W10) and even all the way back to W95! I prefer version 2.5.7 (only one version back from current) moreso than the latest since it does not come packaged with the OpenCandy adware. Just scroll a little farther down the page for the older versions. Watch out for checkboxes to be cleared during install, to avoid the toolbars. Way better than buggy old Nero, and free, too. http://www.imgburn.com/

For me what it comes down to is this. Website operators know that users will see those warnings if they don't renew their certs on time, and reputable sites want to keep their reputation for integrity. If they are cutting corners on renewals despite the public embarrassment of being caught at it in this visible area, what else are they not being diligent about that we cannot see, like what they do with their private keys or our credit card numbers? It does raise the question of whether sloppy practice in one area spills over into sloppiness elsewhere and whether they really are serious about protecting the security of their customers - do we really want to do business with such careless firms? Using PaleMoon will cover your browsing by using its own cert store rather than the one managed by Windows. But it will not cover the other uses of certificates - for instance secure email, secure FTP, codesigning, etc. You might be using webmail rather than Outlook Express, or Thunderbird which also uses its own cert store. Maybe you don't use FTP at all whether secured or not. But you will likely still install programs and/or updates or device drivers, so codesigning will be important for those things. And that means needing to keep the cert revocation list up to date for those other uses.

I hate it when "experts" advocate "cleaning" and get a little too delete-happy! First, just because a cert is old or has expired doesn't mean it is useless. If it was used to sign something important during the time it was valid, you may need to keep it. In particular, https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/293781 describes some that expired in 1999 but are still required for W2K, XP and W2K3. Second, for the cases where you really do want to avoid using certain certs, such as some of those foreign CAs you never heard of, or a situation like DigiNotar, deleting them is NOT the best way to go. It not only doesn't solve the problem, but even worse, it leaves many users with a false sense of "security" that they have "dealt with it" when they really haven't. Next time you browse or do something that requires that cert, it will just get re-downloaded in the background and re-installed, similar to downloaded javascript or activex stuff. A much better way to deal with these is to move them to the untrusted store instead. The mmc snapin can let you do this, you probably want to use an admin account to have the choice of "local computer" rather than "current user". It is generally a good idea to backup your existing certs before making changes. Expand the relevant plus signs in the tree pane and click the "Trusted Root Certification Authorities" (or whichever other list) on the left pane then either "Registry" or "Third-Party", right-click and select All Tasks->Export Store, save the file somewhere. Then do the other location. Look through the list of certs in the right pane to find the one you want to un-trust and highlight it, right-click and select "cut". Then highlight Certificates under Untrusted Certificates-Registry from the left pane (the list that appears in the right pane should include DigiNotar and similar entries already un-trusted), right click, Paste. Third, I am a bit dubious of phil3's blanket claim that problems will result from having more than 200 certs in the trusted root store. I have never seen a system with so few and it does not seem to cause problems! The system I am using to type this post has 422 and there is no trouble searching for any of them. (At least for client skus - not many home users run a SSL/TLS server. If you do then KB933430 and/or KB2801679 may be interesting. Microsoft does not say the issue is a limit of 200 certs but rather that the list being sent by the server needs to fit within 16kb.) In any case his concern about KB2661254 is ancient history, that update was issued on Aug 2012 and reissued on 9 Oct 2012, so those old 1024bit certs should have long since been flushed out and replaced by now. Even back then it was only a concern for those in corporate environments that were depending on internally used certs that were not going to be changed out in a timely manner, not really an issue for home users. Now as to whether anyone needs to manually cleanup certificate stores... in theory we should have been able to rely on Microsoft to be cancelling those bad certs through the automatic update system. But as a practical matter it can take way too long for these things to get discovered, and afterward even longer before an update was generated and released, then for the next patch tuesday to roll around, and still longer for users to eventually apply those patches, which is probably why Vista and up default to using the automatic update-on-the-fly method. But now that W2K3 support is ended, the only reason Microsoft has left to generate those updates is for use in disconnected environments that can't use the newer system... but since disconnected networks are considered to be less at risk, those updates might now be generated less often than when they were being used by the older no longer supported OSs. So we may see more situations in the future where we hear about known bad certs but the relevant update is not immediately forthcoming from Microsoft. In those cases manual cleanouts (preferably, un-trusting rather than deleting) could be useful. Even worse, Microsoft is not likely to cancel many of the foreign government certs unless there is evidence of abuse, and maybe not even then, if the perps appear to be part of some state agency. But that doesn't mean we all want the government of Pakistan to decide what websites we here in the US will trust by default. I'd be really skeptical of any tool that claims to clean them out for you. The basic problem is that someone else's idea of what is an undesireable cert may not match your needs - can you really trust someone else to decide for you what is trustworthy? This is one area I would not want to outsource my thinking!

If you are willing to navigate using keyboard shortcuts (arrow keys, Alt-Tab, etc) then the mouse class driver can go too. Especially if you go so far as to replace the shell and eliminate Explorer.

I am also using SeaMonkey 2.33.1 (although on WinXP using en-us), but do not have this issue so it wouldn't be a IPB bug. Maybe something specific to W7 and/or a language specific problem?

I generally remove other languages that I would never use anyway, and maybe get rid of Messenger, for me that is about it. Quicker can be had by disabling unwanted services and startup items, but this doesn't really require NLite. As for safer, you would get some of that by using some other browser that is not IE and does not use ActiveX stuff, there are many to choose from. The missing parts would include Add/RemovePrograms, WindowsUpdate, HTML Help, but these have workarounds so aren't critical. Whether these are considered "ill effects" is debatable and likely depends on who the intended user is. You could use either NLite or HFSLIP but it would be best not to try to mix the two methods. FDV has a fileset to help with the removal. I haven't actually done this myself. You may also want to read http://www.vorck.com/windows/ and-or http://www.vorck.com/windows/xpsp4.html edit - looks like jaclaz typed a little faster than I did...

Well, I finally solved it. Turns out there are TWO settings that needed to be enabled but the error message only mentioned one of them (userdata persistence). The other one is on the same property sheet - "Internet Options" -> Security tab -> Trusted Zone (assuming you have put the MS update website addresses in that zone), click Custom Level. Scroll to the section for ActiveX controls & plugins, find the one for "Binary & script behaviors", click Enable, then OK. Didn't even need to restart IE, just revisit the page and now it loads correctly.

Oh, it looks like there's a few things I didn't get before... By "boot drive", do you mean C: and is that where you have the dualbooted W98 install - and did you say your W2K is on D: ? Sounds like a REALLY bad installer if it hardcodes drive letters even when the OS is installed on some other partition! The main problem may be about simply running out of space - 36MB just isn't enough for really, anything! Any possibility of clearing out more space? One biggie could be to NOT allow swap to use that partition, instead redirect it to some other partition with more space available. Sometimes this can free up as much as 3GB. Also perhaps move "temp" and/or "tmp" as well (both for your own username and for system, they are generally different), this can be a pretty large amount of space consumed... and, yeah, clean them out first! A tool like CCleaner - or even just Disk Cleanup that is packaged with Windows - might help here. Of course you'll need to be sure there is plenty of space on whatever partitions you redirect these items to. My personal method is after the above are moved, to also move "My Documents" to somewhere else than where the OS is installed since this one folder invariably dwarfs the entire combined other contents of that partition. And yes, even W98SE lets you move those items, at least if you have another FAT32 (or FAT16) partition to move them to. I'm a little confused now - are you installing the Intel drivers? I thought you said it was a DLink adapter? I wouldn't expect the drivers to be interchangeable if the underlying chips don't match. Hmm, that sounds like the service component is the only thing left, so that must be what is hosing the works. The only other thing I can think of to try would be, after install and turning off the startup folder stuff and the startup entries, to also disable the service. Start->Run, type "services.msc" without quotes, and press Enter. Then scroll through the list looking for whatever just got installed, right click it and choose Properties. On the General tab, set the Startup type to Disabled. If that lets you boot, it would confirm that it is the service that is the problem. You could then try re-enabling the other items to see if you can still boot properly without the service. But since the service will be needed to actually use the device, I'm not sure how useful this information will be unless someone else can find more clues. They might, the only way to know is to try them. What router(s) are you using? If it is not a DLink there may also be other clients to try. If the card really is supported under W2K then UURollup shouldn't be needed for this. As for defeating the purpose, there may be another path - have you got a driver for plain old wired ethernet? That might let you DL the rest of the drivers. The other question is whether this whole sequence is backwards. It would be MUCH safer to use some other system to do those downloads, then copy the files onto a CD, DVD, or USB stick, then to the target system. I would NEVER connect a new (or even old!) build to the internet until after drivers are installed, things are updated, and a good firewall is installed and properly configured. If you have not got all your drivers in order that could be part of your problem. Especially important would be motherboard chipset drivers, and anything related to USB. There are also a bunch of USB related updates for W2K that might be needed. I'm not sure from your post whether you are using ONLY the SP4 and official UR1 packages from MS, or something else like the Gurgelmeyer package (which installs only MS files. It includes SP4, UR1, plus hundreds of other updates). If you haven't somehow included them already you may need to add KB843503, KB838417 and/or others. KB890188 - ignore the title, what matters is that it replaces Wzcsvc.dll, Wzcdlg.dll, Wzcsapi.dll, and Wzcsetup.exe KB904711 may be relevant as it replaces winlogon.exe Did you used to use it on this system, or was it on a different one? What motherboard is this? Does it use one of those older VIA-based USB controllers that MS refused to support? If so you may need to disable that and use an adapter card in a PCI slot to have working USB. Maybe previously the drivers and updates were squared away first? It's a bit hit-or-miss, but sometimes people give them away on either freecycle or craigslist free stuff (pick a location, then under "for sale", click "free"), if you have the patience to watch and wait for something to turn up.

This isn't needed. MS does (somewhat - sometimes there are errors) give the bulletin number and supercedence info. Do the search, then simply click on any of those results. The popup window has 4 tabs. The Overview tab will have the "MSRC Number" (at least if there is one) and the Package Details tab will have the replacement info (if any).

My how time flies...my favorite browser addon is now more than 10 years old. Noscript goes a long way toward solving this. Having found it so long ago I simply refuse to surf without it. Makes it possible for even a 16 year old laptop running W98SE with only 256MB RAM to surf comfortably on modern webpages once the bloatware is removed from them. Might also work for PaleMoon but IE users are outta luck. It can also be helpful to supplement this with RequestPolicyContinued. I am using 0.5.29 (the last non-beta version) which works in SeaMonkey and older FireFox and maybe also PaleMoon. But it will have issues with FF versions after 40 when Mozilla starts to enforce the walled garden/jail. In line with this they have (prematurely) pulled 0.5.29 from the addons site, but it can still be had at requestpolicy-0.5.29.xpi Pages definitely load faster with these extensions installed than without either. How much faster varies by site and depends on how much bloat you choose to allow, which is easily adjusted on the fly. A nice side bonus is that those annoying flashcookies and whatnot don't need to do their tracking thing, and malware has a harder time creeping in.

MS is not very consistent or helpful in noting supercedence on these. Here's what compares to my own rather incomplete notes. I do need to eventually get those more up to date so there probably are more replacements beyond these. The first entry KB2656353 listed as "MS12-035" is actually MS11-100 as correctly noted in the second list, it is obsolete but ended up in both lists. I'm not clear that MS10-041 KB979906 is required anymore once XP SP3 is installed. I've never had Windows Update offer this unless SP3 is missing. This could also be down to my habit of also installing KB979904 at that point. MS11-044 KB2518864 is replaced by MS12-035 KB2604092, it also ended up in both lists. MS14-009 KB2898856 is replaced by MS14-053 KB2972214. MS13-004 KB2756918 is replaced by MS14-053 KB2973115. MS14-009 KB2898855 is replaced by MS14-053 KB2972215. MS14-009 KB2901110 is replaced by SA2905247 KB2894842. Missing items: I have KB976576 and KB977354 as a combined substitute for KB982524. SA2905247 KB2894845 .NET 1.1 SP1 update MS12-074 KB2729450 .NET 2.0 SP2 update KB2789643 v2 .NET 2.0 SP2 update KB958481 .NET Framework 3.5 Family update for XP - Application Compatibility Update for the .NET Framework 2.0 Service Pack 2 SA2905247 KB2894843 .NET 2.0 SP2 update (this is not replaced by ms14-009 kb2901111 despite being older chronologically) SA2905247 KB2894842 .NET 4 update There's also the whole bunch for .NET 1.0 - if anyone is using Tablet Edition these are required, the .NET 1.1 will NOT substitute in this case. I think the same may also be true for Media Center Edition but haven't actually used that myself. There are of course MANY more .NET updates issued from May 2014 onward that apply to XP without any modification. They did not stop with XP EOL - had you really meant to skip them for some reason?

A little googling shows you aren't the only one having issues with this card. Maybe try to divide and conquer. Can you separate the driver installation from the client manager portion? I'd try using the latest driver loaded by navigating to the INF file but not installing the client yet, see if that much can reboot. If so, then try the full install, but before rebooting, adjust your startup entries to not autoload the client at boot, see if the error persists, or if not can you launch the client manually when needed rather than every boot no matter what. Another alternative would be use the latest drivers but a different client. There are a couple threads that have links to some potential targets: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/173922-need-a-wireless-client-for-windows-2000/ http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/144280-wpa-client-software/ In particular, the Buffalo client can work with other cards provided it is connecting to a Buffalo router. Maybe try one from the manufacturer of your router and see if they are similarly tolerant of other makers' cards? I guess if it is a DLink router that puts you back where you started... One thing to note, in post #21, so you may have to turn off the WPA2 option in the router if your card is uncooperative.

But there IS such an option - you just have to add each one to the exceptions list.

Actually it is the "net stop cisvc" that turns it off - the regkey sets the service startup type to "disabled" so it will not restart at next boot. Not sure about adding it to winnt.sif but a simpler way might be to add the key at T-12 via cmdlines.txt as described at http://unattended.msfn.org/unattended.xp/view/web/14/ - they even show an example of using a *.reg file there (which is a handy thing to have - you can just add more keys/tweaks all in one convenient place without mucking around in winnt.sif at all). Oh, almost forgot - are you using HFSLIP? If so you can toss that same *.reg file into the HFSVCPACK folder, where it will be run at T-13 and not bother with $OEM$ or cmdlines.txt either.

You do not need NLite for this, I've actually never used it. HFSLIP works for adding SATA drivers to W2K or XP install CDs, at least for US English. I haven't tried Czech so don't know of any special issues there but lots of people have used HFSLIP for this in other non-english languages generally. Might the missing file complaint have been about 4 files OEMBIOS.DAT, .SIG, .CAT, .BIN? If these were not right that could cause issues with license keys if the source CD was OEM. But this is a separate issue than SATA drivers. Nor do you need the FDV fileset if you don't otherwise want it, though Fred Vorck's guide was rather informative and helpful for me. And yes, his general outline works with drivers having more than one file too. Other interesting threads: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/84572-integrating-sata-and-raid-drivers-with-hfslip/ http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/63302-integrating-drivers-with-hfslip/ I think the latest version of HFSLIP is likely to be on thomasz86' site: http://windows2000.tk/new/ I think it was Vista and up that finally allowed media other than floppies. For XP and W2K Microsoft hardcoded their install images as floppies ONLY, which is why this was so problematic - the need for SATA drivers came out around the time that system box manufacturers were doing away with floppies so people had no way to add drivers, precisely on the only systems that needed them. This is THE issue that made many people learn about slipstreaming.