tain Posted March 19, 2006 Share Posted March 19, 2006 Always good to hear from you, FDV Gosh was a she, BTW. To be sorta sexist (maybe?), female contributors on MSFN are rare to be sure.Its funny how most Americans are naturally sexist; we usually bias towards males. I was in class the other night and my instructor, a PHD-seeking female, kept referring to third parties with male pronouns.I have cruised Oleg_II's site and have not heard from him since like February.OlegII has a site? URL please? From his profile:Last Active 12th February 2006 - 03:15 AMHome Page No InformationI'm glad to hear that you are making progress on 2k3. I, for one, will be clamoring for it in a year or so whenever some killer-app comes out that won't run on 2k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdv Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 Oleg_II's site is here: http://kitaist.com/about future apps for windows. maybe this is too much speculation... but i read (and i do not have the url handy) that Win FX is just add-on to Vista, and so is Framework... meaning no part of Vista is written natively in Framework or Win FX. anyone know if this is true? if so, it would mean that most apps will probably continue to be written in the same nt 5.1 API as 2003 and xp apps, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomcat76 Posted March 20, 2006 Author Share Posted March 20, 2006 For those using the test builds...A problem was introduced yesterday that prevents subdirectories of HFEXPERT\WIN\SYSTEM32 (eg, DRIVERS) from being processed. That's fixed in 60319a. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tain Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 (edited) Oleg_II's site is here: http://kitaist.com/Doh! In Russky. This version says it is a commerce site.about future apps for windows. maybe this is too much speculation... but i read (and i do not have the url handy) that Win FX is just add-on to Vista, and so is Framework... meaning no part of Vista is written natively in Framework or Win FX. anyone know if this is true?Wikipedia says that WinFX is integral. Perhaps you are referring to WinFS, which was to be integral but was recently dropped. I heard that it will be an addon. Edited March 20, 2006 by TAiN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tain Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 For those using the test builds...A problem was introduced yesterday that prevents subdirectories of HFEXPERT\WIN\SYSTEM32 (eg, DRIVERS) from being processed. That's fixed in 60319a.processed = copied over, right? No other processing (like CODECS)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomcat76 Posted March 20, 2006 Author Share Posted March 20, 2006 Just so we're on the same level...HFEXPERT\CODECS = copied over; txtsetup.sif & dosnet.inf updated; all files except exe and cpl registeredHFEXPERT\WIN = copied over; txtsetup.sif & dosnet.inf updatedHFEXPERT\APPREPLACEMENT = copied overI'm gonna add *.CPI to the list of files not to be registered in the HFEXPERT\CODECS section just in case people still put those files in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super-Magician Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 (edited) fdv, your page on HFSLIP for XP/2003 now says "updated on March 20, 2005", but it is 2006 .By the way, what did you update on that page? Edited March 20, 2006 by Super-Magician Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tain Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 Just so we're on the same level...HFEXPERT\CODECS = copied over; txtsetup.sif & dosnet.inf updated; all files except exe and cpl registeredHFEXPERT\WIN = copied over; txtsetup.sif & dosnet.inf updatedHFEXPERT\APPREPLACEMENT = copied overYeah, my last post was still vague How about this for even more fidelity:HFEXPERT\CODECS\ = copied over; txtsetup.sif & dosnet.inf updated; all files except exe and cpl registeredHFEXPERT\WIN\* = copied over; txtsetup.sif & dosnet.inf updatedHFEXPERT\APPREPLACEMENT\ = copied overHFEXPERT\WIN\ is the only one that will use subfolders, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomcat76 Posted March 20, 2006 Author Share Posted March 20, 2006 (edited) @Super-Magician: He finally changed "Windows Server 2002" to "Windows Server 2003"...@TAiN: Right now, yes. I was thinking of asking TommyP to allow subfolders in APPREPLACEMENT. Edited March 20, 2006 by Tomcat76 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tain Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 @TAiN: Right now, yes. I was thinking of asking TommyP to allow subfolders in APPREPLACEMENT.Hmmm...how would that be used? Where would the folders go? 'program files'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomcat76 Posted March 20, 2006 Author Share Posted March 20, 2006 Haha... I wish... No. Currently, files in APPREPLACEMENT are copied over into I386. I guess it could be expanded to allow replacing files in subfolders of the I386 folder (though I can't think of a practical use for that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdv Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 Super-Magician: fdv, your page on HFSLIP for XP/2003 now says "updated on March 20, 2005", but it is 2006By the way, what did you update on that page?thanks for the alert, boy did that look foolish. i updated instructions for modifying 2003's SETUPAPI.DLL as well as a note about HFAAO.Tomcat76: He finally changed "Windows Server 2002" to "Windows Server 2003"...? i don't know what this means Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super-Magician Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 (edited) FDV: Do you think you could change the link to Tomcat's XP page to http://users.telenet.be/tc76/winup/_winxp.html? Right now, you have to click twice to reach it.[question removed; script for removing Windows Messenger reposted below]-- Super-Magician Edited March 20, 2006 by Super-Magician Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommyp Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 Windows messenger in 2000? Nope, it's not part of 2000. Windows messenger is bloatware/worthlessware (if there is such a word) that comes prebundled with xp and newer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super-Magician Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 (edited) Oh, OK then. Didn't realize that. Time to scrap that idea !Windows messenger is bloatware/worthlesswareOf course, that's why I'm removing it .Hmmm...this thread seems to be getting quite long ...-- Super-Magician Edited March 20, 2006 by Super-Magician Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now