nlite SP3 Slipstream v Manual SP3 Slipstream?

[*John*]

Hey! I'm looking to update my Windows XP Professional SP2 CD to include SP3.

Now, the two methods i'm aware of are nlite, and the manual method such as the one Paul Thurrott is advocating here: http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/xpsp3_slipstream.asp

Apologies if this is a stupid question, but what's the difference? Is there a difference?

using nlite seems the most simplest solution, but i'm worried that there will be an increased chance of creating a "bad CD", where everything appears to work, yet windows is a little bit more unstable as a result, with more bsod's etc...

So, which is best? Is nlite safe to use to slipstream sp3, or should I do it manually to avoid all problems?

Thanks for the help!

[Anonymo]

I think you get the same result, nLite being the simpler process/method.

Take a look on the right ride column on the site you linked to where it says:

Slipstreaming Alternative

I document this method of slipstreaming because it uses Microsoft's own tools. But if you're looking for a more automated method or simply can't get this to work, you might take a look at a freeware utility called nLite instead.

[*John*]

Thanks for the reply! Although i've read somewhere that nlite won't delete duplicate files, but microsofts method will? Is there any truth to this?

Or does nlite actually use the /integrate command, and thus do exactly the same thing as microsoft's manual method?

[mazmorbid]

I would recommend the "/integrate" method .. no offense to nLite .. but I gave up with it a long time ago ..

[Guest]

I believe nLite uses the /integrate switch. There's evidence to support this: x64 service packs require an x64 environment to slipstream, whether you use nLite or the /integrate switch on the original EXE.

[*John*]

Really? That's very helpful if it's true? Is it definate that nlite uses microsoft's /integrate method to slipstream service packs?