Tripredacus

And what about bootdisk.com They have a bunch of them.

Did you see the Unattend Guide link above this forum? Here is a link too: http://unattended.msfn.org/unattended.xp/view/web/7/

I haven't turned mine on in awhile, but here is the latest pic of mine running Windowblinds and transparencies.

I have seen on some sites that GPT Disks are not supported in DOS and Win9x. Is there some technical limitation in those OSes that cannot be patched to support GPT?

I didn't want to point out this quote so much in Wikipedia (it should have a citation needed tag for sure) but it may have something to do with all of this. I couldn't find any sort of documentation to confirm the facts about these two statements.

You came to the right place then! We have an nLite forum too: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/89-nlite/

First a quick guide on how to build a PE. This one by Iceman is one of the best:

Things seem to get messy when you mix Linux with Windows. I've had a little experience with it, but so far I can use PXELinux to boot to WDS or (start) to install an OS sitting on IIS website... And the syntax for it was different than your example.

Yeah sorry I usually link to the Vista definition on TechNet. For some reason it always comes up first on the search results, but it only links to the Vista info. That's why Win7 didn't appear in the matrix. But Vista and 7 use 98% of the same Unattend values, I just keep it simple on myself. Check here for a starter on Gadgets.

Maybe UXTheme? I've used custom themes before and never had to rely on the uxtheme patch, but I see a lot of people on the boards talk about it.

Reference to limitation: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/78346 Even wikipedia lays out the structure of an INI file: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INI_file So a "section" is the part inside the brackets [] for example: [SectionName] data=data 32-64k of data=the most I can put in here. [Section2] limit=supposedly I can put 32-64k in here too? [Section3] really=some more data? Here's some more. http://www.gmccomb.com/vault/edge/ini.html#_1_7 So this limit is in the Windows API only? If you read an INI file with AutoIT, will it have the same problems? Are XML files a viable option for win9x?

You should look into Setupcomplete.cmd for Vista/7 but for XP I do not know how to make it install programs.

Have you tried DisableSR?

WSIM should have given you errors on your unattend.xml. You should remove the empty elements such as "UserAgent", etc. For MAK you need to put your product key on both XMLs. Your unattend.xml is fine (except for the empty elements) but also put the key in the WDSClientUnattend.xml, for example: <component name="Microsoft-Windows-Setup" processorArchitecture="amd64" publicKeyToken="31bf3856ad364e35" language="neutral" versionScope="nonSxS" xmlns:wcm="http://schemas.microsoft.com/WMIConfig/2002/State" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"> <UserData> <ProductKey> <Key>XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX</Key> <WillShowUI>OnError</WillShowUI> </ProductKey> <AcceptEula>true</AcceptEula> </UserData> </component> Use the same product key that is in your unattend.xml for this. I have sucessfully deployed Windows 7 Pro this way. Obviously your XML already has a Microsoft-Windows-Setup element, so just add the UserData/ object into it.

Here are two rules: 1. You cannot provide autounattend.xml on install or recovery media if it contains CopyProfile. 2. Only ARs are allowed to create recovery or install media. So if you want to be able to provide your customers with install or recovery media, you will need to work with an AR. I do not know what the prices to create a one-off would be, but I do know that for Vista it was about $15 per disc for 1500 discs. Whether or not you actually follow the rules is a risk you will have to decide on your own.

This is happening because Windows isn't setting a priority to drawing the screen besides whatever else it is doing. Have you rebooted since making these changes? 1. What is this "patch" you are referring to? 2. I see your Firefox has a custom theme on it. Does this happen in other browsers, or have you also tried resetting to the default theme? 3. Have you tried updating video drivers?

Can you post the KB and name of this hotfix (if it has one) in case someone else has this problem and tries to use the forum search?

Sister Sledge - He's the Greatest Dancer

Thanks for the report.

We also need to remember that Microsoft is calling both their next mobile offering AND their desktop offering "Windows 8." If we take that into effect, we already can guess to about 7 OS versions for Windows 8 that will come out THIS YEAR and then next year. Where do I come up with 7? How about this: 1-4. MS confirmed they are building Windows 8 versions for the entire ARM CPU line. ARM has 4 different CPUs that are NOT cross-compatible. This means, 4 Windows 8 for ARM. 5. We can probably presume that there will be NO Windows 8 for Itanium CPUs, however that market space is likely to be replaced by the "Tablet" or x86 mobile platform that most cellphones and tablets run on. 6. Windows 8 for x64 for Desktops. This is a given but look for that 2012 date for this one. 7. Windows 8 for x86 or x128? One of these will get made. We already heard that Windows 7 was going to be the last x86 Desktop OS (Server OS stopped x86 in 2008) and those rumors of 128bit Windows 8 showed up a couple years ago. It could be a misforcast of the market, especially since Windows 7 came out and ran at lower requirements than Vista, meaning people weren't moving into 4GB+ RAM territory as much as was thought. This means x64 isn't ready for market (or even next year) even tho x64 numbers are way up. So besides parallel systems, I'm not seeing a big push for 128bit Windows 8, and who do you know has 2 exabytes (sic) or RAM anyways? I'll expect either seeing an x86 Windows 8 show up, or this will be replaced by something else. And those OSes I listed above are not the standard "flavors" like Pro or Home Premium. I'm talking strictly architecture level differences. Oh PS: one of the ARM Windows 8 versions to be showcased early June 2011 (that's coming up!)

There are a lot of things to take into consideration, such as the OS and RAM on both the client and the server? Also what are the RAID Controllers? What about the network topology? What NICs are in each system and what kind of switches are you using? And to answer your other question, you shouldn't be mixing up drive types in a RAID configuration. The main reason besides poor performance is the increased possibility to an instable array. I always recommend RAID Edition drives (or server class for other companies besides WD). I wouldn't necessarily compare network transfer rates to local ones. The fact that your copy speed is normal on the server only points out that your array isn't in something other than a Healthy state. Besides, if there was something wrong with it, the RAID software would have been telling you so... you did install that right?

What would this do? label PE1 BOOT /folder1/boot/etfsboot.com label PE2 BOOT /folder2/boot/etfsboot.com

First you need to run setup /r to record the setup.iss file. You did this already I presume? And what do you mean by "downloaded InstallShield" ?

What operating system are we talking about here?

Its good to know you want to follow the rules, but why stop there? The reason about the CopyProfile option is because it is not supported. Alas, only an Authorized Replicator (AR) is allowed to create Windows install media.