BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Database Screenshots Gallery Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 21d, 11h, 49m | CPU: 21% | MEM: 5733MB of 11332MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Forum rules


Any off topic discussions should go in this forum. Post count is not increased by posting here.
FTP Access status is required to post in this forum. Find out how to get it


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 81 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 2:40 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am

Posts
1915

Location
New Zealand
i think it just ends up being a trial version


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:32 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:03 am

Posts
386

Location
Australia

Favourite OS
Windows 7 Ultimate
cooled wrote:
the billgates release itself is nuked with 5840 +5744 files.

So basically i shouldn't be downloading this build right because it isn't really RTM?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:41 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am

Posts
1915

Location
New Zealand
there is a patch to change it, but i haven't tried it


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:50 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:00 pm

Posts
66
i myself wouldnt try the patch since another group has a better iso. also that other group has leaked x64 in a aio. the billgates release itself is very messed up so dont bother with it.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:51 am 
Reply with quote
Administrator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am

Posts
12564

Location
Merseyside, United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64
cooled wrote:
i myself wouldnt try the patch since another group has a better iso. also that other group has leaked x64 in a aio. the billgates release itself is very messed up so dont bother with it.


And that build was released earlier in the combined dvd.

_________________
Image

BetaArchive Discord: https://discord.gg/epK3r6A


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:52 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:00 pm

Posts
66
it was by none other than winbeta. they did a great job there and its got the full wims from both isos.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:22 am 
Reply with quote
Is it possible to run the installer with only 256MB RAM?


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:42 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:06 pm

Posts
2393
Commodore-Freak wrote:
Is it possible to run the installer with only 256MB RAM?


Not by default (it fails with a message saying 512 is recommended) - unless there's a way round it like there is with the previous versions of Windows, but I haven't heard of one (it was always a command switch for XP and before, but you can't start the Vista installer from DOS).

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:51 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Posts
3557
I think the reason the Vista install won't work with less than 512MB of RAM is that it loads Windows PE 2.0 to run the installation from, and this Windows PE image is completely loaded into RAM. With less than 512MB it won't fit, so there's no way to run the installation program, then. A possible solution I could think of would be to create a custom WinPE image that boots from CD-ROM (or is small enough to fit in 256MB RAM) and then to start the Vista install manually from the WinPE command line. Vista can run with 256MB. I might try to work out a solution. Now thatwe have the final Vista AIK, messing around with WinPE is no problem anymore. Maybe i's also possible to use an older version of WinPE (made from XP/2003) to start the Vista install. That method would require two optical drives, though.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:47 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:06 pm

Posts
2393
empireum wrote:
I think the reason the Vista install won't work with less than 512MB of RAM is that it loads Windows PE 2.0 to run the installation from, and this Windows PE image is completely loaded into RAM. With less than 512MB it won't fit, so there's no way to run the installation program, then.


If you boot with less than 256 it doesn't boot into PE and gives a Boot Manager error saying it couldn't fit the PE into Ram. However, with 256 it reaches the screen with the Aurora-type background and the language selection, and then gives the error after thinking for a few seconds after you've chosen your language and tried to start the installation (before the product key screen). That would suggest the PE has loaded, unless more loads after you click "Install Now"?

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 12:48 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Posts
3557
Vista Ultimate R2 wrote:
empireum wrote:
I think the reason the Vista install won't work with less than 512MB of RAM is that it loads Windows PE 2.0 to run the installation from, and this Windows PE image is completely loaded into RAM. With less than 512MB it won't fit, so there's no way to run the installation program, then.


If you boot with less than 256 it doesn't boot into PE and gives a Boot Manager error saying it couldn't fit the PE into Ram. However, with 256 it reaches the screen with the Aurora-type background and the language selection, and then gives the error after thinking for a few seconds after you've chosen your language and tried to start the installation (before the product key screen). That would suggest the PE has loaded, unless more loads after you click "Install Now"?

Hmm... Then, modifying/tinkering around with the WinPE image as I have thought may not help. :(


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:08 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:53 pm

Posts
342

Location
Saint-Henri, Montréal, Québec

Favourite OS
Chicago (hometown pride)
leaked already...
I am not to enthusiastic about Vista, it is XP in fancy clothes.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:14 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am

Posts
1915

Location
New Zealand
AnDrEwP182 wrote:
leaked already...
I am not to enthusiastic about Vista, it is XP in fancy clothes.

o rly?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:20 am 
Reply with quote
windows vista is still too new for me, i still run WINXP lol


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:23 am 
Reply with quote
Administrator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am

Posts
12564

Location
Merseyside, United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64
hc2995 wrote:
windows vista is still too new for me, i still run WINXP lol


I tend to agree that XP is better than Vista as it currently stands. At least XP works out of the box pretty much buglessly.

_________________
Image

BetaArchive Discord: https://discord.gg/epK3r6A


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:34 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:53 pm

Posts
342

Location
Saint-Henri, Montréal, Québec

Favourite OS
Chicago (hometown pride)
Win XP? I am still running HYDRA!


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:28 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am

Posts
1915

Location
New Zealand
Andy wrote:
hc2995 wrote:
windows vista is still too new for me, i still run WINXP lol


I tend to agree that XP is better than Vista as it currently stands. At least XP works out of the box pretty much buglessly.

give vista a bit longer and it will (unless it becomes ME version 2)


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:15 am 
Reply with quote
yea i tend to wait for a bit before i update OS (lets them get the big bugs out ;) )


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:54 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:53 pm

Posts
342

Location
Saint-Henri, Montréal, Québec

Favourite OS
Chicago (hometown pride)
ME2 brings back those dissappointed people when they head "Tiger" would be stopped.

Actually, I plan to do Vista, but i will delay it to RC2


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 7:23 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:21 am

Posts
112
RC2 already arrived, but it was removed, if my info is correct.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:18 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:09 am

Posts
361

Location
China

Favourite OS
Win2000
hc2995 wrote:
windows vista is still too new for me, i still run WINXP lol


You know, newer M$ software/OS usually means a new disaster :lol:
btw I still use Win2000 :)


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 10:20 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Posts
3557
tpemail wrote:
hc2995 wrote:
windows vista is still too new for me, i still run WINXP lol


You know, newer M$ software/OS usually means a new disaster :lol:
btw I still use Win2000 :)

Yeah, Win2k is my preferred MS OS as well – besides Win2k3 which has the Win2k look&feel but the newer and improved kernel. :) I remember a sentence I'd heard some time ago: "Never install an NT before the third service pack has been released" :wink:


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 6:54 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am

Posts
1915

Location
New Zealand
windows 2000 reminded me too much of win95


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 7:06 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Posts
3557
___ wrote:
windows 2000 reminded me too much of win95

You mean due to the Look&Feel? I'm a diehard fan of the Classic look and I absolutely hate XP's eyecandy. Vista's is better, but I still prefer the good old Classic mode.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 7:30 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am

Posts
1915

Location
New Zealand
I never really used 2000 (besides at school) and i don't really like the felling of being in an office or something. At least with XP you can change the themes (with a bit of modding)


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 81 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  

All views expressed in these forums are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the BetaArchive site owner.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Copyright © 2006-2019

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS