Tripredacus

This setup requires the Common Controls for Vista, this is specified in the manifest. It may require .net Framework 1.1, 2.0 or 4.0. Also the setup does not contain the installation files. There must be a different file that can be opened, or an archive that is included. It is safe to remove those attachments now.

Microsoft hasn't had an official WinPE distribution program since 2011, and as such any links to a WinPE posted on MSFN cannot be posted. If anyone has information regarding the resumption of a redistribution policy, you can send it to me for review.

That wouldn't be a good idea.

Is the split files complete? The forum only shows 6-9. Perhaps do not put this .tmp file onto the forum at all and put it somewhere else like a Google/OneDrive. See if you can get the insides using Innounp: http://innounp.sourceforge.net/ Note: can't force https on that link. With the .iss file you have, you can see exactly what the setup is going to do, and so you can modify it. For example, you may want to remove everything except the last line in [Run] section and everything except "createdesktopicon" in [Tasks]. For the MinVersion, XP should be set to 5.0. My reference .iss file is for a setup that is for XP and that is what it has. Example from that file: Source: "{app}\setup.exe"; DestDir: "{app}"; MinVersion: 0.0,5.0; Flags: ignoreversion Since you have the .iss file, and can extract the files from the archive, you can repackage it using a modified .iss file if you wanted to create an XP installer.

It has nothing to do with what we think, rather the governments for the countries our users and the website is in. I was not around when rule 1 came into being, so I cannot say whether is was just decided on or if it came into being due to a reaction for something. The redistribution portion certainly did come in as a reaction to something. Xper decided it is better to just not allow unauthorized redistribution rather than having to constantly deal with other companies' legal departments.

Is the setup within the setup also an Inno package, or something else? The original package built with Inno, should have an .iss file, which is the script file that inno uses to install the package. An OS version can be specified in there. Also, either program's manifest can be blocking the install.

Ok the board has 3 mechanical x16 slots but two of them are 4x electrical. The video card should be installed in the slot closest to the CPU. I do not think that the card being a PCIX 4.0 in the 3.0 electrical 16x slot would cause the issues you describe. You wouldn't be able to get everything out of the card while it is in that board, but it shouldn't be unusable. As for the TDP, it may be that with Win 10/Linux Turbo Boost isn't being used at idle, while in Win7 it is. May be due to settings, drivers or lack of drivers.

Things change, new ideas come about, people like to relive old times, etc. Not closing topic.

Gigabyte makes at least 3 video cards with that chip and you didn't post your motherboard make/model.

Since you still haven't posted specs, I can only ask: is there any mechanical vs electrical considerations with the motherboard?

I'd take the route of calling the bank to complain about it. I would hate it if my bank went that route. I do not have anything on my phone connected to financials in any way and prefer to keep it that way.

When you say "install" do you mean only using setup.exe? Because you can image an XP install onto the disk without issue. You could even put DOS on it if you wanted. But for XP 32bit it might be an issue, you may need to only be looking at XP 64bit for this type of device. The first step is to make sure you can find a storage driver to use, since if you can't find one, then it isn't going to boot.

It can be hard to find out, but it is possible your video card does not have a UEFI BIOS or support GOP. Post the model of your video card if you can't find out if it does. I use a Sapphire RX 580, which I had to get because it has a BIOS switch between legacy and UEFI, and I am still using a legacy system. At the time, it was the only 8 GB video card I could find that supported legacy. Of course, having the switch means that I could use it on UEFI if/when I decide to go that route.

OK I was just looking at the console output in your screenshot. Looking at it again, it is not blocking the ads, or at least the adsbygoogle.js that is on googlesyndication. To figure out where the issue lies, you'll need to figure out why the console is showing you that SyntaxError. I believe that is what is causing the issue. Here is what you can do. If you can get a page to do this thing where the posts don't show up. Then go into the inspector and view the console and verify the SyntaxError is present. Then on the page again, choose to view page source instead of inspect. Select all and copypasta it into a .txt file. Then PM me the text file. Just to make sure we aren't wasting any time, I do not want a .txt file if the error console doesn't show that Syntax Error message.

All of the things that are monitored are from within the shell. Start Menu, apps, search/cortana, browsers. All either part of the shell or launched from the shell. If you were to replace the shell with a browser, does the same amount of monitoring occur? I am inclined to think not, but it would be interesting to know if that was the case.

To my knowledge, it doesn't change what Windows Update does.

The blocking of the ads shouldn't be what is causing it, as shown in your picture. Unless, the process used to do the block (which would be to not put the affected code in the rendered code, or the browser putting a comment on it) is what is causing the problem. Notice that Syntax error at the end. If the blocking method is also removing part of the page code outside of the ad object, it could be what is the actual issue. On a page with this security enabled, do an inspect on the stars for rate this topic. Then with the security disabled, repeat. I wonder if the browser security is commenting out a portion of code it shouldn't, and with tags being "missing" causes the page content to not appear.

The OS itself is fine, it is just the shell that is a nightmare. I only personally use the Enterprise versions for work and home computers. If you read in this section, there are plenty of threads about personal experience, such as this thread: https://msfn.org/board/topic/174896-official-windows-10-worst-crap-ever/

A good explanation of the boot process by our old friend: https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-performance/sudden-slow-reboot/7e4d38c2-8c2e-4e19-a2aa-c60bb5b62b75?auth=1 Using a spinning disk or SSD? I come to think of boot time as being important only if uptime is not important.

A different resolution needs to be posted. That particular video contains content not allowed per rule 1.

Corporate world is like that.

I will believe it. If you search for drivers on the catalog, it is super complicated to find the correct one. Especially since the catalog likes to sometimes put internal or code names for releases in the OS version column. Just yesterday I ran into a problem finding a Broadcom WLAN driver. I downloaded the most recent one for Windows 10 current version, went to install it and it wouldn't take it. Then I look into the INF and it has XP to 8.1 specific install sections, not a Win 10 section or even one of those generic amd64 sections. So if the catalog has Windows XP drivers marked as Windows 10 drivers, you can be sure that Windows Update probably was doing the same thing... which might explain some of the issues people have with drivers from WU in the first place.

It must be pointed out that modifying your Windows 7 installation to be able to install updates from other SKUs does not grant you additional support. It invalidates your support. Support is granted from Microsoft to the software. Support is not: you can install updates. The only way to get actual support for Windows 7 or POSReady is to subscribe to the ESU program. This is a paid program between a client and Microsoft. This being the case, discussion of how to trick the update servers into thinking your computer is an ESU verified device is against the forum rules.

Forum arrangement is not up for community vote. Edit: topic was in the Windows 7 section.

I've never used that option. I always just search for drivers manually in the update catalog. Although i should point out that nearly all of my Windows 10 usage is done with integration in mind, and on a network with no internet access.