I figure the following ideas would suit being handled by Gape's Win98SE service packs in future and thought to mention them now if only to give Gape some idea as to how well they and other ideas like them might be received.

Windows uses the "favorites" directory to store internet shortcuts and, by default at least, also uses the "links" subdirectory for essentially the same purpose. What I do after any Windows install is to delete all internet shortcuts from "links" and instead populate it with Windows shortcuts to local folders (creating a clear distinction between the two, favorites being for the Internet Explorer, links for Windows Explorer). I then move the links toolbar to the right of the Explorer window so only the title is showing, ie. Links >>; clicking on the >> gives access to the shortcuts from a drop down menu. Many who's systems I've applied the above change to never used "links" at all in the past (one friend even thought it was a special feature reserved for advertising ) but have since found it a very useful feature. (I don't know how to go about automating all that via a batch or inf file [without using third-party tools] - my current post-install batch file just copies pre-created shortcuts from my install partition to the links directory, and I haven't a clue how to activate/reposition the links toolbar via the registry so I just do that bit manually. Any help here for my personal use would be much appreciated.)

Some other simple changes that I typically apply which have been well received include moving 'Startup' from "...\start menu\programs\accessories" to the top of the 'Start Menu', along with a directory named 'Startup (disabled)' (to serve as a storage place for shortcuts to programs that the user might temporarily want to disable but keep on hand) and a shortcut 'Add-Remove Programs', and adding an 'Internet Options' shortcut to quicklaunch (on IE based systems).

All simple additions in theory. What's your thoughts.

personally, this sounds messy.

What's messy, my post

The idea on top is done with two lines of DOS code (when copying the shortcuts, and I imagine the moving part is a few lines of reg code) and the changes below require four lines of code. Messy? Typically "My Computer", "Desktop", "Temp", "Program Files", "Windows", "System", and "IE Cache" get linked (on other peoples systems, I have submenus happening myself), say an extra line for each or a small inf file. How do you gain quick access to those directories using explorer? Small work given the benefits gained, but like I said, just seeing what others think.

thats alot of work just for that,i always was crap with dos

That's precisely why I started by saying that I thought the ideas "would suit being handled by Gape's Win98SE service packs". The suggestion was for Gape, who isn't cr@p at DOS, to consider to spending the very small amount of time that it'll no doubt take him to integrate that process into a service pack for those who like me would much prefer not to do it by hand each time they installed Win98SE (I generally install his service packs only at that time). It's exactly the same reason why I appreciate Gape's work with the service packs; I'm cr@p at sorting through the minefield I consider Windows98SE patching to be (especially when it comes to interpreting "only install this patch if you have x/y problem, otherwise don't" that confuses the patches issue - Gape has obviously done a fine job with the testing required,) and I'm way too lazy to go through that reboot/run SFC 50 plus times type cr@p that the manual method requires.

soldier1st, let's suppose you meant "thats alot of work" as an opinion rather than a point of fact (I wrote the batch file I use to do it with *once*, and in less time that it used to take me to create even those shortcuts I listed *every* time I installed my system) did you actually try the "just for that" bit out and have any meaningful comment about what you thought of the idea itself? Even if you didn't, hearing whether or not you actually use 'links', and if so how, is at least meaningful.

Does anyone do *any* of the actions I described manually? Are there similar types of procedures that are common to enough of us, and that most do manually now, that might warrant their consideration in a service pack. That's what I was prompting feedback on.

** edit ** I see you there soldier1st - greets!

wouldnt this be something that can b done using the quicklauch bar?

the quicklaunch bar has it's uses
the links folder i delete and make my own

Sheez, I *almost* squeezed an opinion out of both of you. And now I'm going to sound like I'm trying to sell my ideas rather than offer them.

The quicklaunch toolbar is on the taskbar, and, if you enable it (via a right click on explorer toolbar area), the links toolbar is on every open Explorer window. The specific suggestions weren't interchangable. Both in my opinion are *much* easier to use if you compact them (to get shortcut names).

With quicklaunch it'll leave you with a minimum of four icons on the toolbar and any more will show up, with text, on a popup menu accessed via when you click the >>. Typically it's used to launch programs - if you click on any folder shortcut you happen to put in quicklaunch it'll open a Windows Explorer window and no amount of clicking on anything but the next, previous, and parent gadgets will help you show different parts of your system in *that* Explorer window. Except shortcuts in the links toolbar (or folder shortcuts in the favorites menu). When you select a folder shortcut from the links toolbar that folder will be displayed in that Explorer window, not open up another. Unless you compact it you're left with what I reckon is an ugly, unweildy line of icons followed by text, or a set of same looking icons (whether url or folder lnk) that you have to hover over to see what they do, and that type of messing around WILL lessen it's appeal. But so far no-one seems to even *get it* much less use it, so there goes that idea. (I'm still no closer on how to automate the toolbar repositioning but just scored some info on how to create the shortcuts on the fly. So I'm a bit happier at least.)

soldier1st, I don't quite know what you mean about deleting then recreating 'links' but what do you put into the directory (url I'm guessing) and how do you access the contents (from where)

Re quickbar. Along with about thirty other shortcuts (including a few sub menus) I have a cascading control panel. Does anyone else do that? Regedit? DOSbox? DOSBox /Z?, Display Settings?, Device Manager?,... Many of those wouldn't appeal to others, I just thought the one I did mentioned might be a common choice and get the ball rolling for more ideas.

And zoem, honest I tried but I still can't find a way to make my posts look any prettier using my Quicklaunch bar. No need to duck buddy.

i delete links from favorites menu,to prevent it from comming back i use tweakui,i make a folder say offline viewableUrls within favorites to organize them cuzz i have over 1000 urls,close to 2000 actualy
nil your posts are fine,if some1 don't like it there problem that is all

can't all this be done using the win98batch program? or at least the creation or deletion of them. unless u are wanting to do it for a computer that has window already installed.

diesel_98a, sure it can all be done via 98batch or any time after an install (and I do, and do enough checks in my batch file to allow it to be done any time after install without problems on other people's systems), but your comments equally apply to a number of the (optional) additions and changes made by the service packs, most of which can be done manually.

An example of that is "DOS prompt here". I understand it's benefits for some and think its inclusion as an option is a great idea, especially for those who don't know how to manually modify the registry entry for themselves (or even know that it was possible). I personally use quite a few menu extensions and find "DOS prompt here" just adds to context menu clutter so I don't use it (I have a DOSBox shortcut in quicklaunch so just drag and drop folders when I need to, and the frequency of needing to doesn't outweigh the negatives of having it around on my system). It's for much the same reason that I'm glad the service packs no longer add "Copy To" and "Move To" on the context menus by default (they were also basically redundant on my system because I use the Microsoft Powertoy "Sent to Anyfolder").

I do appreciate all the comments and aren't bothered in the slightest if people don't like the ideas (** says nil wiping tears from his eyes ** ). I was interested in hearing what people thought of the ideas themselves, and of hearing about similar ideas that (simple as they might be) might enhance the usability of Windows98 in ways that might not be obvious to others. Any comments on that aspect?

Cut the crap boys,

A service pack is for security updates, system updates and system improvments and not for making something that you are too lazy to do it by yourself.

So pls no more stupid ideeas.

Something usefull to be added in this service pack would be the NTFS support.

here! here!


This mite b stupid to ask but is a recently new discovery to me. but how many ppl know of windows 98's capability of viewing image files as thumbnails in folders? i hav recently discovered this was possible by checking "thumbnail view" in the folder's properties, and then opening the folder and clicking "view as thumnails" or whateva.

i didnt say ur post was messy, i sed ur IDEA sounded messy. ever seen an internet explorer browser opened and ppl hav like 2 or 3 additional toolbars in conjunction with a rearranged IE toolbar? its SCARY ok! ive lost count of the computers in the past i have fixed where ive had to use internet explorer and the browser looks unfriendly and uninviting. this is kinda how ur idea comes accross to me. im an advanced user n i hav no prob finding my way in IE, but not everyone has that ability..believe it or not.

personally i am serial SHIFT holderer when i click links on webpages so mulitple windows dusnt botha me. i hate to be steered away from a site i want to keep open so i open a new IE window (plz dnt start on firefox and tabs i beg of u..). afterall windows is a multitasking operating system. but wen it comes to using win95 it s***s me.

everyone has their own likes n dislikes. so if u find ur idea to b useful then use it. dont let us flame u for it. but sorry i cannot agree to liking it.

a simple idea that would be great to include would be to delete the MSN 5 Setup program on the dekstop as well as from program files and Online Services if found on the system after installation. seriously, its 2004 does anyone seriously need these?

I absolutely agree with most of your first two lines MasterT. I thought I was suggesting "system improvements". I'm not too lazy to do it myself, neither am I too lazy to fire up regedit and do many of the changes already done by the service pack, or to download and install an NTFS reader that I have no use for, or MSI 3.0 for that matter. Some might be, though its more a question of convenience not laziness. Thanks for your well thought out and friendly opinions though.

There, there, zoem, I was just having a dig about the messy part mate. I'm not suprised you found the idea messy - none of my ideas had *anything* at all to do with changing IE, it was WINDOWS explorer I was mentioning (not trying to have anyone agree with). I totally agree with the scary IE toolbars bit by the way. Your last suggestion was just the type of thing I was getting at. Cheers.

adding NTFS read/write support to the service pack would be a very helpful thing,like if you had NTFS drives on your comp and you could read em,but maybe the sp would add it if it sees or detects NTFS partitions
right now it won't be added but it will bei bet for v 2.1 of the sp
also MS Installer 3 is not compatible with windows 98 se
also 98lite can remove that msn and online service thingy

all u have to do is say u don't like the idea, plz don't belittle some idea cause someone else would like to see it added. i have made many suggestions & ideas around this forumn, most have been used but others have not been. and i have yet to have someone call my ideas stupid. besides if u make the service pac and don't like it, then don't added it. not only that i thought the idea of the topic was "ideas for future service pacs", maybe i am wrong but that is what the topic title says.

also the ntfs support is a great idea, i have yet to see anyone call that stupid.

@soldier1st and zoem. My "attitude" in previous posts here was hardly worth thinking much less writing (and I deal with flames pretty well - I even laugh when they're witty, more so when they're warranted ) Probably excuses in part what MasterT went off about. My apologies. Peace. I think NTFS reader is a fine idea.

Some other ideas:

* Something like the 'Super Scandisk Wrapper' to workaround the use of DOS scandisk after an improper shutdown.
* Microsoft's standalone Excel Viewer?

might as well as add all the other viewers to, just an idea. if anybody doesn't have office, regardless of which version. might be simpler to create and msi & install that way.

is write support even possible?

not everyone has a licence for 98lite, and not everyone would pay $25 or whateva to delete files, lol.

ive never heard of "super scandisk wrapper", idea so i dont get what your saying. if your saying to use the dos scandisk to do a scan of disks outside of windows by default, im all for the idea. its a lot faster and dusnt require you to disable resident programs whilst scanning so you avoid the "contents changed...restarting scandisk" message.

and i dont believe i was flaming you.

these additional viewers should be made an optional componant rather than included in the mainstream install. i, as well as many others use office packages which open the content of these files.

just in writing that, an idea sprung into my head...not sure if its possible. but an installation system where you can have a BASE service pack and you can download the OPTIONAL componants seperately as wanted and put the OPTIONAL componants into the same folder as the BASE service pack where the setup will detect the OPTIONAL componants and install them also?

I use a method that lets me take one fully setup 98se and install it multiple times, even on other computers with different hardware (atleast thats what I think you asking for). All it essentially involves is 3 main steps.

The first step ofcourse being is to setup a new 98se installation and get all the basic patches, software, tweaks/modifications you want (this part takes me 2-3 hours, which is why I have spent considerable time testing it).

The second step involves using imaging software (like norton ghost) in order to image the newly setup 98se installation. Once you have the image, copy the image file over onto a secondary PC (I did this by creating a DOS bootable cd with the image file and the ghost.exe executable on it). After you have the image file accessible from the secondary PC, restore the image to its hard drive.

The third step is the most important and must be done if the secondary PCs hardware differs from the primary PC. If its the hardware is the same then this step can be ignored. On the secondary PCs first boot after restoring the image, hit F8 and boot into safe mode. Run regedit and delete the "HKLM\Enum" key, then reboot and all hardware will be redected.

There are additional steps I do, but those steps just boil down to personal preference and arent needed. Ive tested this on seven different white box/DIY computers and it work perfectly. The only problems I ran into were on OEM machines; one Compaq, one IBM.

i've always had problems with ghost images or hd images and i did it right

What OS were you trying to clone and what was the problem you encountered?

good luck cloning an NT platform. *KERNEL PANIC*

How about 'reg.exe' from the Win98 Resource Kit, to overcome Regedit's inability to delete single keys via a registry file. (I've only just been made aware of reg.exe, was using 'Regdel.exe' by Florian Balmer http://www.flos-freeware.ch before now.)

@ssmokee - both my idea of hijacking 'links' and my reasons for suggesting it in the first place seem to have been misinterpreted by some. The idea itself is much like adding a (dialog box) "placebar" to every Windows Explorer window. I didn't suggest it for my benefit; I already know it "works" for me and others, I do it already without Gape's help, and I know how to automate (most of) the process via Gape's service packs (if I happened to want to do it from there rather than use my current method). I created this thread because there didn't seem to be one dedicated to thrashing out ideas for future service pack releases. Just thought I'd clear up that point.

As an aside ssmokee, I don't use imaged installations on other people's systems unless the hardware is identical. My general install approach is to create (at least) two partitions (Ranish from a floppy/usb disk is nice), install Windows from the users original CD (noting their preferences during the install to add to msbatch.inf later), then dump all the cab files, and applicable patches/upgrades and third-party software/drivers/batch files from a general install CD, to a non-boot partition and finish customising the system via DOS scripts or by hand. Backing up the system partition at that point is smart to allow quick reinstalls on that hardware but a benefit of leaving (and adding to) the install partition is that it allows the user to easily reinstall the OS after major hardware upgrades (eg. a hard disk transfer to a new hardware setup) by booting to DOS, wiping c:, then starting a batch file to begin the install process. I'm just getting the hang of how to do more with inf instead of batch files, and searching MSFN has been heaps of help in working on ways to improve the reinstall process. (The forums here have been highly educational and with one notable exception have been friendly to boot. A blanket thanks to all. )


@diesel_98a - I considered suggesting some of the other MS viewers though I figured only Word and Excel files would be common enough to justify their inclusion, and a lot of editors (even Wordpad) can at least partially read Word files already.


@zoem - your optional components idea sounds very do-able and likable. The idea could be extended (albeit with a fair amount of work) to serve as a way to make hybrid OS service packs happen without needing to distribute actual files - if the install process finds ME CAB files for example it might allow for the option to add ME components to 98.

I meant to add a link to "Super Scandisk" but forgot. here it is: http://www.hyperlinx.cz/lsg/other/ssc10.zip. It's almost the opposite of what you say, it makes Windows Scandisk rather than the DOS version run after an improper shutdown, just like it's done with Windows ME. You learn to appreciate the idea after DOS scandisk renames your files with short file names.


@Gape - re. the suggestions I sent, as I'm sure you know changing the default .bat action from open to edit isn't a flash idea (unlike the others .bat files are likely to be started as commands). Good luck with your service packs.

That in itself I would say is a good idea, but the hard part is getting everyone to agree on what links should or should not go in there.



As I mentioned this isnt a problem from my tests. Ive tried this on systems with VIA, Intel, and SIS chipsets, different video and network cards, all with good results (except from the two OEM machines). In the next updated version I make Im just going to set a .reg file on the desktop that will delete the "HKLM\Enum" key to speed things up.

Personally I wouldnt dream of doing it any other way. A hard disk with two or more partitions just has way too many advantages over the single drive single partition setup.



It wouldnt make a difference if you use your win98se cd or someone elses really. If its the product key your worried about...not wanting to hand over your personal 98se product key over to other people, then that I understand and I have found a way around that to using a cdkey finder/changer. What Im going to do in my next version is just plunk it on the desktop so all I have to do after I built a system is just change the key, the delete the key finder executable from the desktop.

The tweaks and programs (yup the CAB files are all there to) that I put on my base image and setup are suitable for all computers, and take a significant amount of time setup and cant be accomplished by a script...though it would be nice if installer executables accepted arguments that would let me do that. Any necessary customizations to suit the user after that are quite trivial.

The basic idea behind what Ive done is just take out all the crap that MUST be done each and every install, and totally eliminate it. This lets me get right to the stuff that matters (office apps, email client, drivers, etc.).

I know about the 'Thumbnails' folder view capability in 98, zoem.
The Thumbnails view option in Win2000, ME, XP & 2003 is already
available for ALL folders in those versions of Windows.

>> The second step involves using imaging software (like norton ghost)

Is there a good freeware alternative to this?

I found a dos program called "savepart" but have not tried it yet.

Well there is Partimage on the linux side, which comes with the SystemRescueCD. I have not tried Partimage yet...its on my to-do list. I actually had no idea partsave even existed on the DOS side...I will check it out.

i had problems cloning windows 2000
none of the other comps run 98 anymore or the win 9x/me oses,only 2000,xp

Just seems to me like its a hidden feature.

Ive cloned 2000 quite a bit on a number of machines and never ran into a problem. I have not done any testing porting to different hardware configs except with 98se, so when Im talking about 2000/XP I mean restoring it to the same computer from which the computer was initially made.

I did run into a problem with XP where it would fail shortly after the windows boot process started. I found a thread describing a few weeks ago describing the exact symptoms I ran into and aparently it was the system restore of XP that was causing the problem, and the fix was to disable system restore before imaging the drive.

well a simple fix for xp is to remove system restore not just disable it
norton goback is kinda like system restore

Actually nil, the Copy To and Move To context menus are slightly better than
the SendTo AnyFolder powertoy. You have to go through an extra menu to
access the SendTo AnyFolder, whereas the Copy To and Move To context menus
are already available by just right-clicking on a file. Also the Copy To and Move
To dialog boxes allow creating a New Folder from those dialog boxes and
the SendTo AnyFolder dialog box does not have the option to create a new folder
from there.

I'd like to see the Copy To and Move To context menus added in future SPs.

Goback is actually better than system restore. Goback used to be owned
by Roxio but looks like it's now owned by Symantec/Norton.

I wouldn't dare to un-install/remove SR under XP. bad idea. Ok to turn it
off from the System Restore tab of the System Properties control panel app.
NOT OK to remove the XP system restore files. that can make things worse.
Turn off SR and use Goback instead. Note that before upgrading from a 9x
version of Windows to XP, you MUST disable or remove Goback or any system
recovery program. Otherwise you may encounter a blue screen error during
XP setup as I looked up this problem mentioned in MS article 330134:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/330134

Goback can restore a complete hard disk, including document files and can
save you from major PC crashes, unlike system restore.

i remove system restore and if neebee i put goback on since i own it

It was a 'hidden feature', sort of; back in the time of
Win95/NT4 + IE4 w/ Active Desktop, before Win98 came out.

I think if you copy certain registry settings from Win2000, ME or XP
and input them in Win98's registry editor tool, you'll be able
to have the Thumbnails view option without having to enable
the option from the Folder properties dialog box. I just have to
figure out which registry settings to copy & then test them on
a Win98 PC.

Enabling Thumbnail view on a folder enables the option on that
folder only and NOT including the subfolders within that folder.

I don't mind removing the system restore files in ME, but in XP
NO WAY do I do that. The windows file protection feature [WFP]
of XP may restore the system restore files. To shut off System
Restore completely in XP, I just set the 'System Restore Service'
from the Services MMC dialog box to Disable.

to make it simpler i use xplite to turn wfp off,a simple click and thats it

XPLite is not freeware, and I don't like the idea of disabling WFP under XP.
Guys, if you're going to run a Win9x OS along with a Win2k or XP OS on
separate hard drive partitions, make sure that BOTH partitions are using FAT32.
Win9x systems can NOT recognize NTFS partitions. Perhaps that's why
ssmokee had problems getting a Win98 OS to work and only Win2k/XP OS.

well ntfs is the best for large drives under 2000/xp
ntfs is better for these oses,i don't need win98 to see the other oses,i would like to but i'm not switching from ntfs just for that,if i need something i boot under those oses,transfer what i need to win 98 and thats simple,fat32 under 2000/xp is too slow
erpdude8:you should buy it or find it,it's only 50 bucks,i got mine for free,i disable wfp cuzz i don't need it,if i change an important file it nags me to replace it with the original and i change my system files 24/7 to the best ones around=no problems.
i have windows 98 se,xp sp1,xpsp2,w2ksp3 running all on one drive=not a problem,maybe he doing it wrong or sumthin,if you install 98 after xp u need a 3rd party boot app*winks cuzz i already got one*if install 98 then xp then no problem

Huh? I wasnt having any problems with win98...and all my partitions are FAT32.

It is probably a better idea to say that win98 cannot natively recognize NTFS, because most people know by now that additional software is available for that functionality.

Hey, NOT everyone can use XPLite, soldier1st. I DONT need it anyway.
Disabling WFP in XP makes is LESS reliable because some 3rd party programs
that use older setup installers can overwrite some XP system files with
older versions and can potentially break XP.

I'm not sure why I made a big deal whether to remove or disable System
Restore, it actually makes NO difference doing either one. For XP users that
use XPlite and want to remove system restore, go ahead. For XP users that
DON'T have XPlite disabling system restore is good enough.

Thanks for clarifying what I said of Win98 not having 'native' NTFS support,
ssmokee. ALL 9X versions of Windows including Win95 and WinME do not
have native NTFS support.

NTFS is definitely better than FAT32 for Win2k/XP systems.
Only Win2000 Pro & WinXP Pro support EFS [encrypting file system], which
has native file & folder encryption on NTFS partitions. XP Home edition
doesn't have EFS.

there are apps that can allow windows 98 to see ntfs partitions
also i disable wfp cuzz some of the apps i use bring warnings and there annoying,sides i watch what i install

Yes, there are tools that can see NTFS partitions for Win9x/ME systems.
It's just that you can't 'boot' from an NTFS partition when using Win9x/ME.
The apps that recognize NTFS in Win9x/ME load AFTER a Win9x/ME OS starts up.

Reason why I don't remove system restore in XP is because I may need it
in certain situations such as testing out demo software or trialware. I enable
SR before installing demoware, then whenever I'm done testing the demoware
I use SR to restore my XP system to a time before I installed the demoware.

I don't replace certain XP system files. That can risk breaking XP and I don't
want to end up seeing any blue screen errors on my system. FAT32 too slow
on W2k/XP systems? Not true if using at least a superfast 1Ghz computer with lots
of RAM installed and using a large hard drive. Again, the goal is to achieve
a 'balance' of speed and stability, which I said earlier at this forum. Large capacity
hard drives are not only huge, but also fast. There are several ways to improve
performance on a computer without sacrificing reliability.

assuming you know what your doing that is

If only! Unfortunately ssmokee the hardest part seems to be scripting the enabling and (re)positioning of the links toolbar itself as it requires changing numerous bytes within two rather long registry binary strings, and I'm not sure that the position or value of those bytes (or even the keys used) are constant for all Win98SE installs. We're in the fast food age now, so despite only requiring a couple of clicks and a shove to do manually I figure unless this bit gets automated it's unlikely to be used. As to shortcuts, while I reckon there's a number of easy choices as to which could be included by default (like Temp, Quicklaunch, Send To, Links, Start Menu, My Computer, My Documents, Windows, Program Files, System, Fonts, TIF, Favourites, Desktop, Media, Control Panel...) even "best guess" shortcuts would probably be ok as it's the shortcut creation itself that's the off-putting part of the process; it's easier to modify an existing shortcut than to create the shortcut in the first place. A good example of that would be a shortcut to a "Downloads" directory, a directory which most people are likely to have and access fairly frequently. Many seem to use "c:\Downloads" so that would be a reasonable default path to use, though if "c:\Downloads" doesn't exist it's simple enough for the user to either "browse" to the correct directory when the shortcut is first used, or to rename the shortcut and point it to another directory if they don't have a downloads directory. Or of course to simply delete the shortcut. The ordering of the links is likely to be a more difficult choice as the shortcuts are sorted by date. (BTW, as I mentioned previously I've worked out how to create new shortcuts using an .inf file but I haven't yet found a "magic number" for 'Links' [or 'Favorites'] to have them created directly in the 'Links' directory. Unfortunately, while it's possible to use an absolute pathname in "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Toolbar\LinksFolderName" by default it just reads "Links", consequently the only way I can think of to make certain of the destination is to first check "HKCU\...\LinksFolderName" to see if 'Links' has been relocated or renamed, and if needed [very likely] to then check "HKCU\...\User Shell Folders" for the 'Favorites' path. That all seems like a rather inelegant way to handle the issue; maybe 'if not exist "%windir%\favorites\links\nul" echo Sorry!' is the way to go...)


Nice idea, I hadn't considered taking that approach. I'd be interested to know how well it works. To date I've been too lazy to work out how to set up a "hardware neutral" image and so I do clean installs primarily to bypass the possible need to clean out conflicting/foreign hardware related system entries and files. (As to my use of someone's original Windows CD, its an ownership issue more then anything else. Thanks for the link all the same though - awsome site name!) I currently have the "pleasant" task of installing 98SE on a little Aptiva E3Q (Win98) for my sister. She wanted to install XP on that 450MHz "chat box" simply to allow the family to use the latest and greatest chat software. I think the cost of XP swayed her more than any argument I came up with. You can choose your friends,...



azagahl, as I alluded to earlier I use Ranish Partition Manager to handle many of my partition related chores. While I haven't personally used it to do so it has the ability to clone one partition to another (via GUI or commandline) and may well suit your needs. At the least I suggest it might be worth checking out it's home site (www.ranish.com) as it includes a number of useful links to related utilities, sites, and articles.




erpdude8, "better", as far as usage goes, is a subjective thing, though I accept 'Copy/Move To' may well be functionally more appealing than 'Send To Anyfolder' to most people and I agree with you regarding their inclusion in future service packs. I simply hope that they are made optional, or, if they're enabled by default, that the SP allows for some way to "uninstall" them (mainly for the benefit of those who tremble at the thought of using regedit). 'Copy/Move To' (and 'DOS prompt here' for that matter) are especially suited to the service packs as they can be implemented by a simple registry change (unlike SendToX) and are popular enough to warrant adding. The service pack's front-end (INFEX.EXE) can currently handle more than enough individual options (150, unfortunately no description lines as yet) so the only issues with making things optional is that of running the risk of overwhelming the user (esp. the novice) with too many options (if it gets to that point they may as well run X-setup or the like instead) and the need for a separate .inf file for each option (unless [win9x] inf files can be passed parameters - anyone know if that's possible? I know you can do some pretty nasty scripting within "NT" .inf files but I couldn't manage to get any to work under 9x).


Apparently there's a number of decent third party alternatives to be had for those willing to Google hard enough - if I recall rightly there's even one listed at tinyapps.org. I say apparently as I haven't tried any myself - I don't own XP or use any NTFS formatted drives, or know anyone willing to let me tinker well enough with theirs (and I get busted when I even look sideways at the XP systems at work ).


Here's a few more suggestions for future SP (including .reg snippets).

Maximise the speed of the system menus. The only downside to making this change is that you can't prevent (sub)menus from opening as you move the mouse towards the menu you intend to access (which some may not like) but the net result is a far more responsive menu system:

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop]
"MenuShowDelay"="0"

Enable logging of software faults/system crashes. Saves searching for pen and paper when you want to record the specifics of errors that occur, and having a history of errors to refer to helps to track down future problems. This is low priority as it's do-able via TweakUI (included in SESP 2.0b2). I personally use c:\Faultlog.txt as it makes it easier for me to find the file, but I've also seen some horribly cluttered root directories in my time so the accepted TweakUI default of "c:\Windows\Faultlog.txt" might serve better:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Fault]
"LogFile"="C:\\FAULTLOG.TXT"

An option to increase the size of the icon cache (SESP 2.0 b2 currently [re]sets it to 1024 as a performance tweak), or implementing something like Robert Schumacher's 'Folder Options' icon cache hack (see the PCForrest site for an example):

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\explorer]
"Max Cached Icons"="2048"

I hope the silly season treated you all kindly. My heartfelt condolences and warm thoughts go out to those not so fortunate.

Well I typed out the simple .reg file and tried it out...worked perfectly the first time. Once the final SP2 is out Im going to rebuild the whole image with this .reg file on the desktop.

post those handy reg files here i luv them.

yeah that would be helpful