johnhc Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Kurt_Aust, I just DLed what I thought was CIS 507, but it turned out to be 509. It installs and seems to run OK on my VM. See here.Specifics:Size: 73.7 MB (77,369,632 bytes) - Size on DL site is wrong!MD5: 70db4a9cae82387c0e23cfeffe34d62bSHA1: 82490b8dc390cc76d8a2c59581cc127ebebd516eIt's supposed to fix BSODs. Enjoy, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt_Aust Posted May 16, 2009 Author Share Posted May 16, 2009 JohnHC:Yeah, I noticed that they updated it last night when I was trying to get a BSOD minidump to submit.However I'll hold off updating the main post for now as CIS (and its predecessor CFP) has a history of being a bit wobbly after a major update, quick fire bugfix releases for the next couple of weeks are quite likely.Also the download page still links to the *.507 version, for a company whose main business is selling web products, its website sucks (no option to download older versions, no link to the forums, forums poorly laid out with substandard search function). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhc Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Kurt_Aust, I agree with your delay. I certainly will not install it on my real machine. I also agree with all your other comments! Do like their product, though. Enjoy, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt_Aust Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share Posted June 13, 2009 June updates, migrated guide to IE8Deletions:Hotfix\ 020-IE7-WindowsServer2003-x64-enu.exe\Hotfix\180-IE7-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB938127-x64-ENU.exeHotfix\210-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB933729-x64-ENU.exeHotfix\730-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB958690-x64-ENU.exeHotfix\810-IE7-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB963027-x64-ENU.exeRunOnce\IE8-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB969497-x64-ENU.exeRunOnce\WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB960715-x64-ENU.exeAdditions:\Hotfix@ . . . 810-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB969898-x64-ENU.exe [672,128]@ . . . 820-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB961501-x64-ENU.exe [1,051,520]@ ▼ 830-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB968537-x64-ENU.exe [4,319,624]@ . . . 840-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB970238-x64-ENU.exe [2,443,120]@ . . . 850-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB970483-x64-ENU.exe [1,010,032]\RunOnce, Internet Explorer 8 & updates# ▼ IE8-WindowsServer2003-x64-ENU.exe [33,972,080]# ▼ IE8-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB969897-x64-ENU.exe [37,902,192]@ . . . IE8-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB971180-x64-ENU.exe [686,448] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhc Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Thanks, Kurt_Aust for all your work! I am really glad you moved to IE8! Have fun, John.EDIT: I am curious. Have you considered going to 5eraph's IE8 Real AddOn? I use it, then place all the IE8 updates into the hot fix section. Edited June 13, 2009 by johnhc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt_Aust Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share Posted June 13, 2009 Thanks, Kurt_Aust for all your work! I am really glad you moved to IE8! Have fun, John.EDIT: I am curious. Have you considered going to 5eraph's IE8 Real AddOn? I use it, then place all the IE8 updates into the hot fix section.IE8 support has been there for the last 2 months, the only real change has been that (due to the poll results) IE8 components have been included in the 7-Zip archives and torent rather than IE7 components.5eraph's IE8 AddOn works perfectly fine as far as I can tell, however using it involves accepting some tweaks, which inevitably won't suit everyone. As 5eraph keeps it fully up to date, you shouldn't need to add any IE8 updates to \Hotfix.Mind you I'm still unimpressed with the fact that the cumulative update (even the very first one) is larger than the original IE8 installer, why not just release an updated installer and be done with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 I could change the addon to disable all tweaks by default if you believe it would be best, Kurt_Aust. Leaving them active was another case of laziness on my part. I've had no feedback concerning them as yet, so I don't know what anybody else thinks about them.Most IE 7/8 tweaks must be applied per user, which requires a special method which is implemented in this addon and those made by others for other platforms. So far I've been using a simple addon to reenable the tweaks currently disabled by default in the IE8 addon. It wouldn't be difficult to change this behavior slightly for public release of the enabling addon and a revised IE8 addon.Please, let me know what you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt_Aust Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share Posted June 13, 2009 5eraph, I don't think I can answer that question as I can't know what the majority of users prefer. I'd suggest adding a poll to see if there's some sort of consensus view on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhc Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 5eraph and Kurt_Aust, this is what I would like to see:An IE8 AddOn with no updates. I will get my updates as I see fit from the Kurt_Aust list.I personally like the tweaks that are currently present in your AddOn, 5eraph. But I would agree with an AddOn with only the original installer, as long as you will give us a method to include your tweaks. Perhaps a separate AddOn of your tweaks and I could add my own. I was unaware that you, 5eraph, were including newly released updates into the AddOn. This would mean that I would need to get me a new copy of your AddOn each time updates are released. I would rather have one place for my updates (Kurt_Aust) and only update the IE8 AddOn for 5eraph's possible corrections (probably low at this time). Thanks to both of you for you work. Enjoy, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Actually, KB969897 can be slipstreamed with nLite on top of addon v2009-05_3 (I've tested ). Any compatibility view list updates newer than KB971180 can also be slipstreamed when they're released. But there's still the matter of the tweaks, which is valid.Give me some time to determine the most efficient method of dealing with the tweaks. In the meantime, 5erIE8.inf can be edited to change the existing tweaks or add your own by scrolling to the very end of the file and making the necessary changes anywhere after the [Tweaks.Addreg] section marker.However, I will continue to release up-to-date IE8 addons for RVMi users. It will remain your choice to download fully updated versions or roll your own updates into a clean, untweaked version to be released shortly. Edited June 13, 2009 by 5eraph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhc Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 5eraph, thanks, I really appreciate your willingness to respond to requests. Enjoy, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 Request filled, johnhc. Read the Notes section for details on modifying tweaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhc Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 5eraph, thanks much! I have DLed both the unpatched/untweaked AddOn and the .ini for your tweaks. I have a couple of questions. When I finish modify the .ini do I just compress it with 7-Zip and place it into my hot fix section? I notice that many of your tweaks are identical to mine. Mine are in the form of .reg files I run out of WPI. If I define the same search providers as you do, will that cause a problem? Thanks again. Enjoy, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 (edited) You're welcome. There's no need to compress the INI, nLite 1.4.9.1 and RVMi will integrate it as is, but nLite sometimes has problems with uncompressed entries*.ini files. Compress the file for use with nLite.I'd suggest choosing one set of search providers and deleting the other; whichever works best for you. Edited June 17, 2009 by 5eraph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhc Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 5eraph, great, thanks. Enjoy, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now