|
VorLonUK
Ace
Posts: 3,760
Join Date: Nov, 2002
|
 |
« Reply #75 on: February 28, 2008, 06:08:15 PM » |
|
Safe mode with networking loads up more than just an extra network driver. Thats all i was trying to say.
Sounds like MS have built that in by design Ash. They've effectively allowed a "backdoor" to a "locked" PC albeit in Safe Mode only and that's as far as they are going to go (which is fair enough). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
hydran
Ace
Posts: 4,168
Join Date: Aug, 2005
|
|
« Reply #76 on: February 28, 2008, 07:01:58 PM » |
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Intuit
Ace
Posts: 10,355
Join Date: Oct, 2002
|
|
« Reply #77 on: February 28, 2008, 07:10:29 PM » |
|
Be aware that Bootcamp (naturally) doesn't properly support Vista64. You can install it, but you may not be able to get back into your HPFS partition without resetting the PRAM/OptionRAM. Once back in, bootcamp will require that you delete the original partition rather than ever-so-simply reestablish the dual-boot. In other words, you'll go in an apparently endless cycle trying to install Vista64. There has to be a way to get it to work, I just haven't taken the time to figure a work-around.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
hydran
Ace
Posts: 4,168
Join Date: Aug, 2005
|
|
« Reply #78 on: February 28, 2008, 07:19:28 PM » |
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reflex
Ace
Posts: 11,331
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #79 on: February 28, 2008, 09:22:16 PM » |
|
....since I buy legit copies of my software I really do not ever have an unactivated system for very long. Hello Reflex, Don't you work for MS? If so: Why would you pay for the tools of your employer? If not: I'm misinformed.....again. OD 1) I am a contractor, not a regular employee, so I still have to buy my software like anyone else 2) When I used to be a regular employee I still had to buy software that was for personal use, but I got a discounted rate through the company store. One benefit I have is that I get to keep that rate and store access even now when I am no longer a regular employee(MS has a few lifetime benefits like that). But I still have to buy my stuff, and I'm at the mercy of what the store has in stock(I still buy plenty of OEM MS stuff). I also have spending limits and cannot use my discounted rates for commercial purposes(ie: when I build/sell a PC to a client, I can't use a company store copy of Windows on it, I buy regular OEM from Newegg like everyone else). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OldDummy
Sudhian Forum Moderator
Posts: 2,542
Join Date: Jun, 2005
Hey, thats not me.
|
|
« Reply #80 on: February 28, 2008, 10:33:56 PM » |
|
1) I am a contractor, not a regular employee...
Ohh....I've read about that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stebesplace
Ace
Posts: 1,591
Join Date: Feb, 2004
|
|
« Reply #81 on: February 28, 2008, 11:29:43 PM » |
|
So I bought a Lenovo R61 and had it shipped with Vista Home Baisc. I did this because I wanted to upgrade to Vista Ultimate x64 for cheaper than what Lenovo would have charged. Well I worked with Home Basic for a couple of weeks, and while honestly, it did everything I needed, it had a lot of Lenovo bloatware, etc., that was slowing everything down. I also really wanted the full Aero theme, and other little bits of Windows that Home Basic didn't have to offer. I really don't need Ultimate, but figured why not?
Well, after I did my usual Vista tweaks, after installing clean Vista Ultimate, I can say the computer is running a lot faster. I have 3 GB of ram, sadly an 80 Gb HDD that is causing bottlenecks, the NVS 140M vid card (works fairly well), and the 2.5 GHz Penryn. So Vista is running very well right now. I don't have a lot of stuff installed, as I only need 2 or 3 apps for this machine.
Running very stable right now. Vista Home Basic only gave me one BSOD, related to an application I installed that probobly had a 16 bit installer. Regardless, under 64 now for a week, no issues, BSOD's, etc. I don't do a lot of experimenting here, so i can only mention my regular routines which provide no problems.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reflex
Ace
Posts: 11,331
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #82 on: February 28, 2008, 11:46:06 PM » |
|
16bit installer should simply fail, so there was something else going on there, very odd.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stebesplace
Ace
Posts: 1,591
Join Date: Feb, 2004
|
|
« Reply #83 on: February 28, 2008, 11:47:31 PM » |
|
16bit installer should simply fail, so there was something else going on there, very odd. Agreed, except it would BSOD when I went into the add/remove programs. I thought I read something about 16 bit installers crapping out under Vista. I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mefistofeles
Ace
Posts: 2,051
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #84 on: February 29, 2008, 12:12:46 AM » |
|
Running very stable right now. Vista Home Basic only gave me one BSOD, related to an application I installed that probobly had a 16 bit installer. Regardless, under 64 now for a week, no issues, BSOD’s, etc. I don’t do a lot of experimenting here, so i can only mention my regular routines which provide no problems. Lol I only got two BSODs: 1. When I tried to overclock my Q6600 to 3.6 GHZ (the computer wasn't very happy) 2. When I attempted my initial install with 4 sticks of RAMM. Strangely enough this wasn't an issue with Vista Business 32 but it was an issue with Ultimate 64. 1) I am a contractor, not a regular employee, so I still have to buy my software like anyone else Blackwater! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reflex
Ace
Posts: 11,331
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #85 on: February 29, 2008, 02:14:01 AM » |
|
16bit installer should simply fail, so there was something else going on there, very odd. Agreed, except it would BSOD when I went into the add/remove programs. I thought I read something about 16 bit installers crapping out under Vista. I could be wrong. Well they do fail, but the error is that they are not a valid Windows executable, they don't bluescreen. So thats fairly extreme there, its tough to BS Vista, so I'm wondering what went catastrophically wrong there. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stebesplace
Ace
Posts: 1,591
Join Date: Feb, 2004
|
|
« Reply #86 on: February 29, 2008, 03:23:18 AM » |
|
16bit installer should simply fail, so there was something else going on there, very odd. Agreed, except it would BSOD when I went into the add/remove programs. I thought I read something about 16 bit installers crapping out under Vista. I could be wrong. Well they do fail, but the error is that they are not a valid Windows executable, they don't bluescreen. So thats fairly extreme there, its tough to BS Vista, so I'm wondering what went catastrophically wrong there. True. Who knows what happened there. Working fine under Vista Ultimate 64 right now. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
VorLonUK
Ace
Posts: 3,760
Join Date: Nov, 2002
|
|
« Reply #87 on: February 29, 2008, 04:23:48 AM » |
|
Running very stable right now. Vista Home Basic only gave me one BSOD, related to an application I installed that probobly had a 16 bit installer. Regardless, under 64 now for a week, no issues, BSOD’s, etc. I don’t do a lot of experimenting here, so i can only mention my regular routines which provide no problems. Lol I only got two BSODs: 1. When I tried to overclock my Q6600 to 3.6 GHZ (the computer wasn't very happy) 2. When I attempted my initial install with 4 sticks of RAMM. Strangely enough this wasn't an issue with Vista Business 32 but it was an issue with Ultimate 64. 1) I am a contractor, not a regular employee, so I still have to buy my software like anyone else Blackwater! Mist that should read  1) I am a contractor, not a regular employee, so I still have to buy my Gun like anyone else Blackwater! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OldDummy
Sudhian Forum Moderator
Posts: 2,542
Join Date: Jun, 2005
Hey, thats not me.
|
|
« Reply #88 on: February 29, 2008, 04:26:20 AM » |
|
The only time I recall blue screening Vista 64 was when I was running an app as adimin.
So that was my fault. Other than that it's been just about flawless.
Who would have thunk it.
OD
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MrbLOB9000
Ace
Posts: 12,896
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #89 on: February 29, 2008, 10:57:54 AM » |
|
The only problem I've had with vista is trying to find the folders I knew exactly where they were in XP but with Vista they're randomly moved. Also, I hate that the built in search thing in the windows explorer window doesn't search system or hidden files so it's of no use to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mefistofeles
Ace
Posts: 2,051
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #90 on: February 29, 2008, 01:36:05 PM » |
|
The only problem I’ve had with vista is trying to find the folders I knew exactly where they were in XP but with Vista they’re randomly moved. Also, I hate that the built in search thing in the windows explorer window doesn’t search system or hidden files so it’s of no use to me. Just go the CONTROL PANEL. Select APPEARANCE AND PERSONALIZAION Select FOLDER OPTIONS From there you can view system and hidden files. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
hydran
Ace
Posts: 4,168
Join Date: Aug, 2005
|
|
« Reply #91 on: February 29, 2008, 02:35:33 PM » |
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
VorLonUK
Ace
Posts: 3,760
Join Date: Nov, 2002
|
|
« Reply #92 on: February 29, 2008, 05:53:16 PM » |
|
The only problem I've had with vista is trying to find the folders I knew exactly where they were in XP but with Vista they're randomly moved. Also, I hate that the built in search thing in the windows explorer window doesn't search system or hidden files so it's of no use to me. I have the same trouble, I hate Vista for that. Even the Vista Window explorer is clumbsy compared to the XP (or previous) windows explorers. Also i find Windows explorer locks up on my Laptop randomly when i try to manipulate a file (ie copy delete etc). Often, not always you right hand click and the hour glass will appear. Finally an end process box will appear which you can use to stop the lock up. Then if you retry manipulating the file again, it might work or you might go through the same process again. I tend to think this is because I disabled the indexing feature, as I was fed up with my hard drive thrashing around forever. Hopefully they will address this on SP1. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
hydran
Ace
Posts: 4,168
Join Date: Aug, 2005
|
|
« Reply #93 on: February 29, 2008, 06:21:38 PM » |
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Connor
Ace
Posts: 3,192
Join Date: Nov, 2002
|
|
« Reply #94 on: February 29, 2008, 06:53:21 PM » |
|
Clumbsy Clusmy to the level it becomes humorous see Clumbsy the Clown: http://www.clumbsytheclown.com/ May also be a redefinition based on Clumbersome Clumbersome Clumsy to the point of being cumbersome to others; extremely physically awkward |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
hydran
Ace
Posts: 4,168
Join Date: Aug, 2005
|
|
« Reply #95 on: February 29, 2008, 07:16:38 PM » |
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Intuit
Ace
Posts: 10,355
Join Date: Oct, 2002
|
|
« Reply #96 on: March 02, 2008, 09:15:27 PM » |
|
you just hold down OPT when you boot...
i needed Vista 64 to take advantage of the C2D in bootcamp, as the apple hardware drivers are not written for XP 64 That was the first thing I had tried and the system ignored it and booted the NTFS partition anyway. Had to reset OptionRAM/PRAM. This was on an iMac, not iBook though. (shouldn't make a difference but never know) Shortly after posting another possible work-around did occur to me though. Install 64-bit, set it up then reset OptionRAM/PRAM to get back into HPFS partition. Create a 3rd large partition and install 32-bit then run BootCamp to complete the process. Boot Linux with a stable NTFS plugin, move all files from the 64-bit installation to the 32-bit installation. If the Linux plugin doesn't support or copy the permissions correctly (which it likely won't) then it will be necessary to accomplish the same by removing the drive and performing the transfer from a windows system using special filecopy software available from various different places. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MrbLOB9000
Ace
Posts: 12,896
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #97 on: March 03, 2008, 01:55:59 AM » |
|
The only problem I’ve had with vista is trying to find the folders I knew exactly where they were in XP but with Vista they’re randomly moved. Also, I hate that the built in search thing in the windows explorer window doesn’t search system or hidden files so it’s of no use to me. Just go the CONTROL PANEL. Select APPEARANCE AND PERSONALIZAION Select FOLDER OPTIONS From there you can view system and hidden files. but can you make them searchable? nope, did that as soon as it was installed. That doesn't change what it searches. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
hydran
Ace
Posts: 4,168
Join Date: Aug, 2005
|
|
« Reply #98 on: March 03, 2008, 02:09:53 AM » |
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MrbLOB9000
Ace
Posts: 12,896
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #99 on: March 03, 2008, 03:08:25 AM » |
|
huh? What question are you talking about? I answered that that wasn't a fix. You can click advanced and then do the search but ya, I can't figure out how to make it default to always search hidden and system files.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
