prathapml

win2k hotstream - topic continued

123 posts in this topic

Yeap no problem. :)

Good night,

Will

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All will be in ONE download - which will not be significantly larger than the current USP 5.0 SR1. My guess is <250 MB.

@ gurglemeyer...

you sayd an 'ALL-IN-One' download right???

so whats upt with that? wil it be an iso-file, that has more than one installer (but nog compiled to an exe.

or wil it be a (custom made) installer with options to choce what version youd like.

tell me, im quite curious..

@anyone who might know-

Is it likely that Nlite will stil be able to remove IE/OE from a USP5.1 CD???

Edited by -I-
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@-I- I'm not sure myself. I could make a regular crosslinked iso without the exe-packaging. (I wouldl include a 'stub' w2ksp5.exe instead then). I'm doing everything possible to remain compatible with nLite btw. So there's a good chance that you may use nLite to remove IE6 too :lol:

Best regards,

Gurgelmeyer B)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Over at the Neowin forums i ran into this topic

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=305221

they suggested replacing the nt boot loader of 2k with that of xp to speed up the booting process.

after some looking on the web i was able to do it. it does help. it does boot faster than it did before, as in getting to the logo faster. the two files I replaced are ntdetect.com and ntldr

i would say about a 5 seconds faster. Try it out on your test machines and let me know if it works for you and how much faster it boots :)

Would this be a nice 'add one' to the extreme edition?? 'd like to try it LOL.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi :)

It DOES work - I did this myself about a year ago. I've often wondered what the 2K loader does differently - maybe the XP loader skips MCA and EISA checks. Does anyone know?

I think I'll start an "Extreme Edition" thread... one moment ;)

Best regards,

Gurgelmeyer B)

Edited by Gurgelmeyer
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

il have to try this on my laptop machine tommorrow its runne sp5 [build 11]

and i could use a bit of a speed-up LOL

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmz have to get that one at my work's - dont have a copy @ home lol, (i think)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using a bootloader from a different OS might be illegal in MS' view.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@prathapml - This is my major concern actually. There's plenty of stuff which could be added from other OS'es, but that wouldn't be legal. Nor would it be fair to MS, since those features are selling points for their later OS'es. I believe that Gape's 1.x USP's for 98SE had some Me components, which he had to remove in later versions (correct me if I'm wrong here), so the only way of doing this would be to somehow change the existing OS loader to behave like the NT 5.1+ versions.

Best regards,

Gurgelmeyer B)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The boot loader from 2k3 works a little better, tried it myself

I can confirm that. Using it on my notebook

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@prathapml - This is my major concern actually. There's plenty of stuff which could be added from other OS'es, but that wouldn't be legal. Nor would it be fair to MS, since those features are selling points for their later OS'es. I believe that Gape's 1.x USP's for 98SE had some Me components, which he had to remove in later versions (correct me if I'm wrong here), so the only way of doing this would be to somehow change the existing OS loader to behave like the NT 5.1+ versions.

Best regards,

Gurgelmeyer B)

Then let's just stick with what's legal. That means using only stock Windows 2000 stuff, straight from M$ website (and the updates you've gotten that aren't available for public download. You had the right idea to begin with -- having a fully-updated W2K.

There are plenty of other projects on MSFN which allow people to add goodies and so forth, but yours is not one of them, and has never been one of them, which is a god thing, in my opinion. Your project has always been about producing a fully and completely updated Windows 2000 with all options included, not a modification of the OS.

When you first started, your goal was a fully-updated W2K - not a customized/hacked W2K setup. I mean no disrespect, but the Extreme Edition seems like it should be just W2K with ALL optional updates included (as you originally planned) -- no mods, hacks, or anything that might deviate from plain-jane W2K. The regular edition is just all "essential" or "required" updates, as it has been.

I just want to say thanks again for all of your hard work. :) Can you believe you've been at this nearly a year now? :thumbup

Edited by slippykillsticks
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Using a bootloader from a different OS might be illegal in MS' view.
Yep - entirely TRUE.
so the only way of doing this would be to somehow change the existing OS loader to behave like the NT 5.1+ versions.
Then let's just stick with what's legal. That means using only stock Windows 2000 stuff,

Nope, because:

  • Changing (hacking into) MS's files is also considered illigal,
  • As wel as redistributing MS's files without prior written 'concent' (is that actualy the right word?)
  • Another illigal thing is to publicly release 'beta-hotfixes'. and 'non-public hotfixes'
  • And besides the 3 prior reasons, there might be dozens more to think of.

So the questiong here, should probebly NOT be, is this ligal (because it already isn't),

but rather, how far do we want to go here, and how mutch will MS alow us to stredge thair, EULA?

in my opinion it goes about somthing like this.

For a while now, MS has introduced a new windows update site with the 'genuime windows check', right???

That means that you should have a valid windows machine at the time of downloading the optional windows xp files. ntdlr and stuf. so lets stick to that part, (not in any way, release xp files),

but since for now, USP5 only contains windows 2k files, and it is released on serveral mayor websites, i think it is safe to say, that MS wont mind it to mutch, (or they would have contacted you already),

so lets stick to JUST windows 2k files.

So how to get the XP files into our USP5-EE?

here is 1 option, lets build some sort of batch file, or wizard that completely explains how to get it done.

the next wil be an example of what it could look like...

13sy.th.png 22gj.th.png

37zp.th.png 47kj.th.png

Edited by -I-
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So how to get the XP files into our USP5-EE?

here is 1 option, lets build some sort of batch file, or wizard that completely explains how to get it done.

the next wil be an example of what it could look like...

13sy.th.png 22gj.th.png

37zp.th.png 47kj.th.png

I TOTALLY AGREE. Except perhaps one thing. U specified an URL that would be given to end user so he could DL such componants. I thing MS wouldn't like that very much since he would have no way of knowing whether the end user uses genuine software or not. I would just say that the updated files should be taken of the END-USER CD.

ex:

Want to update Win2k with XP bootloader?

Simple just put your WinXP CD in and USP will extract the neccessary files nedeed.

IMHO M$ won't mind that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes the would.....

using a link like: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...&displaylang=en

would enable them to require genuine check.

[EDIT]

this would btw, require windows XP (or 2003) te be installed on a machine, when creating our win2k sp5 [extreme] cd, to be able to download the required hotfixed, but you could of course also manualy extract the files from your windows cdrom (what ever you chose,

In that case, the wizzard should probebly also indicate the files, that you'd have to extract to your c:\hoxfixes folder (instead of the extracted hotfixes (like shown in the example).

Edited by -I-
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.