Tripredacus

I have been unable to replicate this "feature". I had tried multiple ways to do it. I did this to test upgrading possibilities before deciding to get Vista myself. I have tried upgrading, replacing and removing hardware. Nothing I was able to do trigger activation. Here is my best attempt which failed to de-activate: I started with just a hard drive and a motherboard. Installed Vista Business RTM and activated it. Then added a video card, tv capture card, a serial card, a cd drive, a floppy drive. No change. I reimaged the machine as is, activated Windows and then removed all those things, and disabled a bunch of the onboard devices in the BIOS. No change. I'll believe this when I see it, to say the least.

If you get the "this program has experienced a problem and needs to close" message, then it should log the actual error in Event Viewer. It is possible that one of your components is causing the problem.

Check the Application section of Event Viewer to see if there is any error relating to this.

The local admin account can still be blocked based on a couple of factors. Those are: Local Group Policy, Domain Group Policy, Local Ownership rights, NTFS permissions, inherited group permissions, file use restrictions. As for which it could be, you'll need to post additional information. Try these questions to start: 1. Are you on a domain, workgroup (LAN) or stand-alone? 2. Is the local admin user created after installation (aka not the default Administrator account)? 3. Is the local admin account a member of any other groups besides Administrators? 4. Are there any other local users? 5. What distribution of Vista are you using? I just tried on a system here, and I have no problems accessing this option. Although, I am running Vista in the Audit pass. There is an easier way to get to it is Computer Properties, Advanced tab.

It may fall under the same rules as regular shortcuts. Since whatever setting your Extensions option is on, shortcuts will still not ever show filename.lnk.

One option is to backup (or rename) the original Defrag program. Then put in your other defrag program into system32, and rename it to the name of the Vista one. That would at least fool Vista into opening your program instead, since it only opens a file and doesn't check anything else.

You system might be configured to look for a SUS instead of the Windows Update website. Check out this thread to see if any of it helps: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums...e-90309cf13367/

So you're suggesting that we keep the masses in the dark, and never move on to the benefits of 64-bit computing? I recommend that all my friends use 64-bit Vista if their computers can support it and they can find the drivers for them. Software isn't really a big deal - I haven't found any common 32-bit software that won't run on Vista x64 yet, and 64-bit drivers are just like 32-bit drivers... everything is just categorized for the architechture these days. Education goes a long way with most people. If my father can understand the benefits of 64-bit computing, anyone can. No I totally agree. We should be moved more into 64bit. Microsoft even wants to do a total shift into that area as well. My problem is that 64bit software development is seen as an optional thing. There needs to be more incentive to creating 64bit apps, as this will make the transition easier. Microsoft always has a way of plopping stuff into our laps and then we have to struggle to adapt to it. I imagine a larger outcry than the Vista transition when 64bit becomes the requirement. The Vista transition may have been a lot easier if Microsoft distributed dev-betas to software companies, so that they can prepare for the next OS release. MS does this for hardware companies, but the usual outcry about their operating systems is based on software woes. Right now, 64bit is a specialised option for people and companies to use. Some engineering applications are written for it, but the reason most people use it is for higher reliability in storage and server platforms. The market share for 64bit is much lower than 32bit, and I would imagine that 64bit Windows releases are lower even than Linux or Mac. The thing is that we are seeing it from the "Power User" or corporate environment angle, and not from the regular every day user angle. Regular people do not understand system requirements. They do not know that some program they have that requires Windows 98 or higher is not likely to work properly on XP, Vista or a 64bit OS. A lot of customer education will be required for 64bit integration, unless the leading software makers get on board before that transition takes place. Otherwise, we are just going to have another Vista, or more likely, another Windows 2000. I have found a few programs that do not work in 64bit so far.

Let's first consider the fact that I failed science already in 8th grade, but passed it a second time lol.

This may be possible, although I wouldn't recommend it. You can boot to WinPE and could use XCACLS (or CACLS) to change the permissions so that Windows cannot write to the folder! Then you can use attrib to -R +A -S -H and delete the files in there. Then again Windows might give you some big time errors or even a Blue Screen perhaps and create system instability! Why would you want to do this? Get a bigger hard drive!

Using x64 Vista is a thing I wouldn't recommend to just anyone. It requires you to keep track of what programs/drivers you have installed and what you want to install. For compatibility reasons of course. I wouldn't trust OEM loaded x64 (ala HP) unless you purchased the OS on the side and had the OEM put just that media on the hard drive. 64bit to the masses isn't going to work because most people do not understand what they are getting themselves into. Its like when Sony started selling VAIOs with RAID on them. I was with Sony at that time (for the second time) and many users called up to complain. Most of them did stupid things like changing their BIOS settings which would blow away the array on them. Also, I have noticed, with the advent of 2008 Server, that even on a base install, the OS is not configured properly and will generate errors out of the box. Its an annoying process, especially when you find a lot of errors (like in my case, Kerberos related ones) are false negatives and can be ignored. If there was a way to hide these types of errors then I would think that would be better.

I agree, this is a good place. And it has many fields of discussion, and helpful to those of us who have to work with MS technologies or go for certifications.

I refuse to use RapidShare. To start, I am not willing to pay to download files. RapidShare isn't like Newsgroups here. Second, even if I would use the free service (the 1 file per 24 hours) it usually is a waste because so many people upload files in many peices. And in addition, most files on RapidShare are warez and seems to be a popular site to host such files.

as it has some security features to restrict access to some operations. Site is down, get it here: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://member...4/dos/moo31.zip jaclaz I tried about 7 different ones. Some weren't user friendly, and the 2 I did get to work didn't like launching Intel's BIOS updaters. Usually exited with a file not found error. MOO ended up working just fine. I'll be using that one!

So far, only MSI and Intel (from boards I've use) have 16 bit Flash updaters and AOpen is the only 32bit flash app. Does Intel at least make a Windows flash update program?

Thanks for the info. I already have used the 9550SX and 9650SE in Server 2008, so I know those work fine. 2008 actually has native support for the 9550 but you need a driver for the 9650. I have also talked about this with a guy here and I've come to the better idea of just running a couple large drives JBOD, but leaving open the option of building an additional storage server. That would cut down the cost of drives if I only need to get 2 RE drives for the OS and standard drives for data. EDIT: I wanted to clarify my 2008 experiences. Server 2008 standard 32bit and 64 bit have built in support for 9550, only tried 64bit with the 9650, not 32bit.

Check and see which HAL you are using. In Device Manager, under computer, if it says ACPI Uniprocessor, that would explain why Task Manager only shows one core. Possible reasons for this (if it happens to be the case) that these machines originally had Pentium 4 or Celeron CPUs and were upgraded after Windows was installed. Also possible this was done prior to installing SP2 (for XP).

I am responsible for updating our universal USB drives. I got this responsibility because we used to have a bunch of floppies and USB drives for different BIOS updates and GHost methods. I decided to take all of these and build a single USB drive to handle everything. These devices we call Super Ghost. They can do BIOS updates for 30+ boards, load Ghost for a dozen different NICs, has DOS tools like Format, Attrib, etc and also has a mode to support NTFS in DOS. Originally I used "Windows 98" DOS files which are created when you do a bootable format with Windows 2003 or XP. At some point we came across the inability to load an NDIS driver for the Realtek 8111 series NIC, and this was because it required DOS 7.1 files. I had rebuilt the entire system using DOS 7.1. The menu system is primarily driven by the CONFIG.SYS (in order to be able to load different drivers) and batch files. While the CONFIG.SYS menu option supports submenus, the batch files menus are driven by using CHOICE.COM, which has a maximum limit of 9 choices. For example, if we want to update the BIOS for an Intel board, we go to that menu, but there is a maximum of 9 options. If a new board is to be added, we drop off one of the boards that isn't in production anymore. Normally this is a fine enough but now there is a problem. We have 11 Intel boards in production! In an effort to make these USB Keys user friendly, I need to rebuild it once again to handle these extra choices. I suppose one option is to redo the entire thing using the CONFIG.SYS supermenu options, but then I remember old DOS GUI programs. Are these any of these programs out there that I can use to build a menu with? Or any tutorials on how to create a GUI in DOS? I suppose again that a further option could be to put WFW on these things... that would be really weird... Any ideas?

A Generalize doesn't always remove everything tho. If I install all the drivers for a machine, then generalize, capture and redeploy on another machine, it installs all the drivers on the new system automatically, except video. Can't figure out why video is special.

Right well the "2nd" startup sound can't be assigned (or unassigned) from the Sound cpl, unless you chose the No Sounds scheme.

At least on the PC, since Fallout 3 was based on Oblivion, is it modder friendly? Has any mods been made for it yet?

I got 25 out of 69. The thing at the top said no expansions, such as Sega CD, 32x, etc. Virtual Boy is on there, but Wonderswan wasn't. Neither was Neo Geo Pocket, CD System, etc. Pretty fun game tho. I forgot about the 3DO...

I wanted to update on this thread. I had opened an SR with Microsoft regarding the Server 2008 and its upload speed. After much testing and debugging and uploading ginormous files, the issue has been resolved. The resolution was as follows: Change the following registry keys to 0 from 1: HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\Lanmanserver\parameters\EnableSecuritySignature HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\Lanmanserver\parameters\RequireSecuritySignature Overall network speed seemed to have been increased by this as well. Even transfers up and down to the file server are much faster.

I am now at the stage, when determining what to do with my next computer, that I am thinking about RAID options. I usually like the idea of RAID1 for OS and RAID5 for storage. My next OS will be Vista Business, and I have questions regarding 32bit vs 64bit. The motherboard I've settled on is the DP35DP, which has onboard RAID support. I would use the onboard for RAID1 for the OS, but I am concerned about the driver support for Vista. Also I would like to look into a card to do RAID5 and yet again more concerns about drivers. The RAID card that I would be interested in getting would be a 3ware, but I do not understand their definition of connectors, being Discrete or Multi-Lane. Are these typical server board slots? For example, here at work I use the 9550SX and 9650 but they are 64bit cards (using 64bit slots in Intel server boards). I know that the motherboard I am going with does not have these slots. Also, 3ware's cards do not seem to have Vista driver support, but do have Server 2008 32 and 64bit driver support. Can these be used in Vista? Then again, I may not even use RAID for storage at all if this becomes too troublesome. Perhaps instead I can put together a low cost server to run as a NAS instead. The ability to use 64bit Vista will determine wholly on driver support. I might not even make that jump as of yet, and deal with 3.2GB RAM in Vista 32 for a while. Tell me your thoughts on this.

Ah this is true. But not all functions of a 32bit app will work properly in 64bit, even if running under the wow64. Is there a way (in those OSes) to force an app to run with just the 64bit system and not use the 32bit system?