submix8c

Hmmm... Um, sorry, but if you have an AIO, then you either made it yourself (which is fine ) or you downloaded a torrent (warez ). IOW, if -you- made it then you should understand "how it works". Indeed, AFAIK, there are NO x86/x64 -legal- AIO's, so... this conversation stops right here.

I do not know wht the "numbers" mean, however I can assure you just adding that folder will do no good. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc766191%28v=ws.10%29.aspx http://www.lingoes.net/en/translator/langcode.htm The folder can't just be "populated". Your original XML had this <!--This answer file generated by RT Seven Lite-->This progam is no longer maintained and we have no clue what your DVD (ISO/FlatFiles?) is but, rest assured it's Greek-Only. Take a look at the contents of that folder. In order to use Multi-Language, the MUI needs to be inserted.Here is more info on add/remove languages - http://technet.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/dd799306%28v=ws.10%29.aspx Here's a bit of info (scroll down to post #73) that -appears- to explain a bit about "the number". Notice that MSFN doesn't endorse links to said forum but sometimes reference it for information-only. Also go to the first post. Bottom line, change the XML to read "el-GR" and put the original LANG.INI back and remove the "en-US" folder until you actually HAVE the English Launguage Pack inserted/integrated, otherwise pointless. (And seeing the RT7Lite thingy makes it seem a bit "fishy".) HTH Addendum - Guess we should have asked the Language or Volume Label. Also, there are legit links to individual language (single language only) ISO files.

From your link - http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windowsserver/en-US/9074d5da-847e-489e-9b5a-0347341a2ed6/unattended-wds-client-setup-languagelocale-page-is-still-displayed?forum=winserversetup So, did you use what I provided? It has UserID/PWD settings and indicates Home Group. The intent of linking you to my XML was USE it except for changing certain items ONLY as I had stated in the previous post. IOW, my XML does EXACTLY what the qotes say and is EXACTLY what you seem to be having a problem with, no?

Yes, it is. I have -no clue- whether this one will work for you. Open the "spoiler" and copy/paste the contents. http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/170809-multiple-windows-7-versions-on-same-iso-unattended-product-key/#entry1065445 Bear in mind two three things - 1 - It is completely Hands-Off (fully unattended). 2 - There's a line(s) for loading Firadisk in order to load the ISO. This XML was created specifically to install from USB using a Mounted Unaltered ISO. 3 - It -very- specifically defines the Partition Scheme and that part did -not- work unless I specifically "cleaned" the HDD (with diskpart) before running. In your case, you've (I think?) specified that you want to pick where to install with <InstallToAvailablePartition>false</InstallToAvailablePartition>Beyond that I'm unsure since I haven't used your method (WinPE Boot), however realize that Boot from ISO/DVD (my "method" is similar) kicks off WinPE, so I might -assume- it should work for you. HTH

No, it will not. Here is a -potential- registry fix if you really need it. Be aware that it's the SERVER causing the problem and the fix you indicate is for encryption changes. Blame that on the particular Servers. http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums/vstudio/en-US/d63c142c-c408-43be-9ffc-8096d1aff3cb/decrypt-failed-with-error-0x80090326 Read also this (particularly post#6) - http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1891 This is the KB article link - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/948963 The attachment listing fixes (etc) in this SP4 is in post#1 and doesn't mention it since it's not available. HTH edit - Note that it -appears- that the x64 Win2003 version is also for the x64 WinXP. I have absolutely no clue as to whether fudging in the x86 Win2003 would "cure" the "problem" since all of the version fixes are of "5.2.3790".

Well you might ask this here - ...but I don't think anyone here knows the answer. Ask Google® instead.

Try adding this in the indicated (first line) Pass <settings pass="oobeSystem"> <component name="Microsoft-Windows-International-Core" processorArchitecture="x86" publicKeyToken="31bf3856ad364e35" language="neutral" versionScope="nonSxS" xmlns:wcm="http://schemas.microsoft.com/WMIConfig/2002/State" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"> <InputLocale>0409:00000409</InputLocale> <SystemLocale>en-US</SystemLocale> <UILanguage>en-US</UILanguage> <UserLocale>en-US</UserLocale> </component>HTH

Let me get this straight. You didn't read everything and did not follow my suggestion. 1 - I asked - WHY - you did NOT answer. <=Please Answer 2 - I suggested changing (for whatever reason - see #1) the Default <=Have you looked into this?

Hmmm... may have a look at it. However, others have also taken on this project. Your reference is to this (nitro322) - http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/143862-uniextract-161-in-development-info-requested/ ?Wonder if this is the V1.6 (also)? http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4399&sid=1f472346b3b73371f18097ef64daf271 Here are a couple of links to other "versions" (gora-modified) - http://www.wincert.net/forum/topic/9785-repak-universal-extractor-17995g-gora-mod/ http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9771 You may want to take a look at the above. This could get messy if there's not a convergence of versions.

Yes, you do seem to "forget" a lot! HP ElitePad (Win8.1) - http://www8.hp.com/us/en/ad/elitepad/specs.html How "odd" that you can't "remember" a password even with the hint. Are these yours or from "elsewhere"? Google password "windows 8"I (and maybe WE) really have no desire to provide you with direct info on how to hack into PC's that -may- not be yours. HTH

1 - Why are you doing that since it's created in the Default User Profile? Why would you want to duplicate it? 2 - Read these - http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/13280/How-to-display-Windows-Explorer-objects-in-one-com http://docs.rainmeter.net/tips/launching-windows-special-folders 3 - Go into your Registry and search some of those NameSpace values. edit - Also note that's a "Classic View" value that 2K does NOT have -and- that XP does -not- by default use/set that (diring Install) but -another- one (Category View - ref above links). Try finding out how to set "classic view" in the Default one instead.

Yup! "Media Player 11" (e.g.) no longer (ATM) requires Genuine Check. Although (an afterthought) one might wonder if a "hacked" (not genuine) XP would allow its execution (since a validation cjeck still runs). Maybe this is Phase One of the "activation issue"? After all, it -appears- that the market share is way up there -and- many businesses just -can't- upgrade ($$ ref this - http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171814-posready-2009-updates-ported-to-windows-xp-sp3-enu/?p=1079062 ).

Well, yeah.... For reference to the post before mine...

No! Don't misunderstand. These are "unofficial" that are being discussed. Read these - http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftservices/support.aspx http://www.landesk.com/migrate/xp-support.html The (apparently) "tested" ones are "custom" ones, which -may- (at least some/most of them, depending on what the "fix" is) be exactly the same as the Win2k3/POSReady ones. There -may- be other "fixes" that aren't made public. Too late for "the deal"... http://www.techradar.com/us/news/software/operating-systems/microsoft-is-paying-windows-xp-users-50-to-jump-ship-to-newer-machines-1234115 edit - also notice the "custom" part of the filename for the XP fixes for KB2964358.

It -appears- that the OP is using OUTLOOKdotCOM... http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171709-outlookcom-will-not-allow-me-to-open-pictures-in-emails/ The above topic was never replied to. I believe the OP may be confused. That's (AFAIK) a "cloud" application. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook-com/ http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook-help/how-to-use-outlook-and-outlook-com-together-HA104118828.aspx Unless the OP actually has MS-Office Outlook installedhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/ ...and has tried to "connect" the two?

CCleaner is just fine. I add the UserID\TEMP folders to be emptied and never use the RegistryCleaner part without -first- knowing -exactly- what I'm removing (af anything). I haven't used the "regseeker" jaclaz mentioned but it's -probably- just fine to use (he's -usually- right ) to determine -if- an entry should be "cleaned". I also don't delete LOG files and -only- clear "old prefetch" entries (they may get rebuilt anyway). Other than that, agreed that -do not- use random RegCleaners (many will screw you up). Also be aware that CCLeaner allows to back up the entries anyway (safety net). I can's say about Win8, however. HTH

Aw, gee... no mention of Vista at all. Let me get this straight... An MS Security Bulletin is issued, naming the exact problem. A fix is issued that coincides with Server2k3/POSReady (and more than likely Vista/7/8 and Servers maybe). Being that both are "built upon XP" then they "won't work", so don't upgrade to Vista just jump directly to 7/8 (no upgrade path from XP, mind you ). And how much would you be willing to bet that a hex compare of the "supported" prev->fixed would yield the exact same "patch" that (would have been) applied to XP.

What "driver" is it installing"? SOME sort of "permissions" is interrupting it.

??? I may buy the TZ (strictly registry), but Certs are in the Certificate Store. The RVKROOTS "INF" runs the "UpdRoots.exe" against the "DisallowedCert.sst". Maybe I don't understand Certificates as well as I should. http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/sag_cmuncertstor.mspx?mfr=true So... an Add-On (in either case) would probably work (anyway)... edit - never mind... https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/forums/html/topic?id=77777777-0000-0000-0000-000014749610#77777777-0000-0000-0000-000014749621 Further, Root Certs should only be applied to non-WSUS Servers (2K3 only?) otherwise stuff "breaks". http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2801679 Latest RootCerts here (only Clients listed) - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931125 Note these are not included in UDC (for whatever reason...). DOH! "Optional" (can't remember)? ---- apologies for this going (semi-)off-topic ---- (below is quote from above IBM link)

Hmmm... you have BOTH installed... There -may- be some sort of conflict http://forum.imgburn.com/index.php?/topic/20817-access-denied-as-restricted-user/ ...regardless of "restricted" or "administrator".

You haven't by chance Shared the DVD Drive? Did you Exit CDBurner? https://cdburnerxp.se/en/home Side note: I -never- allow my Burner Software to do the "eject" as this "takes control" of it. I always manually eject. edit - An alternative is IMGBURN, which should work just fine. http://www.imgburn.com/

Not a very good answer, pointertovoid... Stick to the subject. Delerious, there should be no reason why it shouldn't. You DO have your Windows 2000 up-to-date, right? This topic dates back to 2010. http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/261125-32-burning-sftware-windows-2000 Exactly what -kind- of DVD did you burn? If it's not Data, then it very well might not play. Exactly what do you mean by "not recognized"? Can you at least provide/describe the -symptoms-? Side Note - your last visit here was nearly 1-1/2 years ago... http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/160205-windows-7-sp1-doesnt-include-a-bunch-of-updates/ ...and you never came back until now.

@monroe - You are misunderstanding. The "out-of-band" one still applies, thus the May 1, 2014 "updated" UDC (scoll down to bottom uf the Updates list -and- the Change Log at the bottom). This was the only one that MS has provided (thus far) after EOS specifically for XP (and others) since it was a BIIIIG issue applying to also IE6 and XP users screamed bloody murder. Use it! http://technet.microsoft.com/security/bulletin/ms14-021 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2964358 Now, as for the -others- (TZ and rvkroots), it may be up for debate. Note that 98SE had to have "Unofficial TZ Updates" and there is -no- "Unofficial RVKROOTS" at -all-. Anything else beyond what -X- has listed will undoubtedly (if ever) be "Unofficial" - AND have to be built (again!->) "on-the-fly" (as with the Windows Update Agent/WUA) and would -probably- have to be scripted as "optional" for the ease-of-comfort of the user of the UDC. HTH Note - in M$ eyes, EOS is... EOL (End-Of-Line...) so don't count on anything but "unofficial" (beyond May 1 fix).

Maybe this? I don't know since I haven't tried it yet (the KernelEX)... http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/149233-kernelex-for-win2000/ Um... nope! Go to (Page 5?) starting at post#106. Seems the neither KernelEX for Win9x nor the one for Win2k will work.

@all - We may want to note Tripredacus' warnings. However, it -appears- (so far) that the two coincide (POS2009<->2K3). Note that the comment says "crashes" when the -reverse- is done... Also note the comment by dencorso here - added by dencorso:http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?act=findpost&pid=1078606These could very well be the reason -X- has reservations about the "unofficial" ones at this time -and- the fact that UDC will have to "build on-the-fly" post-EOS Updates using methods discussed. Note the girations to obtain the "latest" WUA file and the notations about "additional work" (dencorso) for modifying the INF's to correctly function on post-EOS (not-yet) "unofficial". We are, after all, in the "testing" phase. (errr... having a bit of trouble correctly giving/editing post links. ) (sigh...) Just a reminder about specific post links: 1 - Right-Click Post# (upper-right of the post) and Copy Link Location 2 - Past "somewhere" in you post 3 - Edit the "page-n#entryn" to read as "?view=findpost&p=n" Example of above (that I 'somehow" kept getting the -wrong- post#) Old (what I get when 1+2 above) New Although the -first- one I gave "somehow" screwed up (pointing to "another" post) initially -but- when copy/pasted in a new tab/window does work.OY!!!