BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Screenshots Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 21d, 20h, 21m | CPU: 49% | MEM: 6063MB of 12227MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ] 

What do you want to see the most in a NT4 self-installing ISO?
Stability 5%  5%  [ 3 ]
Functionality 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
Security 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Stability and Security 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
Stability, Functionality and Security 7%  7%  [ 4 ]
Drivers 7%  7%  [ 4 ]
All of the above 10%  10%  [ 6 ]
All of the above & Graphics 61%  61%  [ 36 ]
Only a graphic update (see: NT4VU) 5%  5%  [ 3 ]
Total votes : 59
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:48 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:09 pm

Posts
184
Hey.

I see that everyone is working on mods of Windows 98, 2000, XP, 2003, Longhorn/Vista, Neptune, or mixes thereof, but i've noticed an extreme lack of people modding Win3.11/95.

Other than that, i only know one person that modded Windows NT4. That is awergh (NT4VU).

I plan to make a collection of NT4 fixes and drivers and tools and stuff to make the ultimate experience while:

1) install still fits on a CD-R
2) NT4 doesn't get too bloated
3) It's stable

I'm sure to integrate (by cmdlines):
- NT4 SP6
- SRP
- A ton of MS fixes
- Some MDGx fixes

If you want to propose anything else, feel free to give me ideas!
I may also add WIM installing.

So, tell me if you want WIM installing, of course! Though it'll be easier for me to use the standard method (changing components and the like), it depends on you!


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:15 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
The .WIM format doesn't work for NT4.

Maybe 2000 but certainly not NT4.

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:47 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:52 am

Posts
538

Favourite OS
xboxkrnld.15574
Thlump wrote:
~snip~
(Mods if this post is inappropriate please delete)


Is this in a public (don't need 10 posts) forum? if it is I'd remove that quickly :P


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 9:20 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:09 pm

Posts
184
Leon wrote:
Thlump wrote:
~snip~

(Mods if this post is inappropriate please delete)


Is this in a public (don't need 10 posts) forum? if it is I'd remove that quickly :P


Leon, Andy game me the FTP's filelist two months ago.
Also, that's illegal, Thlump. So i think this post is inappropiate.

And... I don't quite want graphics past Windows 2000's. So if you want XP/Vista graphics, do it yourself and submit the result to me, I may include it in the Shell Selection screen (if i make one).
So you can expect Win2k icons from me, nothing more.

And i see everyone wants shiny graphics. For that, i'd recommend you to see NT4VU and Lupus. This project isn't cenetered about graphics, it's the same old 2000 look. Maybe if you really want NT4VU integration, I'll do it, but don't expect anything.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:10 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
I think it is best that was kept outside of the public forums ;)

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:29 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:09 pm

Posts
184
Part 1: Making a cmdlines.txt file installing every fix and update I can find: 85-90%
Part 2: Adding command-line tools and better generic drivers: 0%

Bad news: I can't do any more progress other than these two until i have ideas on what you want.
Good news: I already did a mod containing a lot of these updates, some cmd-line tools and generic drivers, so I can base on that. Speeds up deving a lot.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:10 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:26 pm

Posts
327

Location
USA

Favourite OS
Windows 2000 SP4
Alright for security you should definitely base this on 95C and remove the old Internet Explorer all together using IERadicator, it's made by the same people who made 98lite and Xplite and (Vlite I think..)

http://www.litepc.com/ieradicator.html

Definitely check it out, remove that old security hole IE and put in an older build of firefox or something.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:24 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat May 24, 2008 10:05 am

Posts
2045
nookupeous wrote:
Alright for security you should definitely base this on 95C and remove the old Internet Explorer all together using IERadicator, it's made by the same people who made 98lite and Xplite and (Vlite I think..)

http://www.litepc.com/ieradicator.html

Definitely check it out, remove that old security hole IE and put in an older build of firefox or something.

No offense, but that site looks like a dodgy google ads result.
Its definatley not from the people (Dino Nuhagic) who made vLite & nLite.
And even if the program does work, and is not spyware, it says on the page:

Quote:
IEradicator is a tiny, script that uses the Windows setup engine to surgically remove Internet Explorer versions 3 through 6.0 from Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows Millennium and Windows 2000(sr1).

There is no guarantee it will work on NT4.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 1:16 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
LitePC are fairly reputable, though you are right in saying they didn't make nLite or vLite.

As for the suggestion of basing it on 95C instead, why the hell would you want to? The NT Kernel is so much better than the 9x kernel.

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:25 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:26 pm

Posts
327

Location
USA

Favourite OS
Windows 2000 SP4
hounsell wrote:
LitePC are fairly reputable, though you are right in saying they didn't make nLite or vLite.

As for the suggestion of basing it on 95C instead, why the hell would you want to? The NT Kernel is so much better than the 9x kernel.


I misunderstood his post I thought he said he was basing it on Win95A.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:46 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:09 pm

Posts
184
Updates: No updates! :evil:

Responses:

everybody - Removing IE from WinNT4 is easy as pie. Or cake. No, not cake. The cake is a lie. Just modify the .INF and remove the useless files.

hounsell: Agreed, the kernel is the whole point of NT 4.9!

nookuepos: an ABC for you, shall we?
A) I will add an option for the NT 4.9 installer to allow you to select the browser.
B) I didn't say 95A [ANYWHERE] in my post.
C) Ok, I said (...extreme lack of people modding Win3.11/95...). Oh well. Scratch the B) then..


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:12 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am

Posts
1114

Location
Brisbane, Queensland

Favourite OS
OS/2 Wrp 3.0
An NT4 sp7 slipstreamed tape is discussed here. The actual tape is not released per se, but i have seen and commented on early versions of it.

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=109439

You can easily put the NT4 sp0 i386, the sp6a and later fixes, the resource kit, themes, drivers, zak, and some other vintage nt4 stuff onto the same disk, since nt4 stuff is largely spread across four platforms. Such disks i have made as a work releif project.

Its rather hard to slipstream, if you do not get hold of the 'private fixes'. The problem is that NT4 changes the FAT to NT5 style, but supports only a limited portion. Without the aid of the private fixes, you must install NT4, and then install SP6A. SP6a is not partial to things like the NT5 loaders, but it can introduce these later on.

It's possible to merge the fixes into a rollup, so that only SP6A and the rollup needs to be installed. Later fixes are in the rollup. In fact, my experiments about pre-installing files into NT4 have been limited to only a handful. Others have had more success.

There's no real difference in the NT4 code, for server vs workstation, but the few files needed can be added into the install tape. The NT4 setup file is hidden in one of the setup files, but you can replace this.

NT3/4 does not have HIVE*.INF files, which is why many of the 2k/xp/xp3 proggies do not touch it. Instead, you need to load the registry hives into memory, and use reg commands on it. For this reason, i would be tempted to use vintage NT3/4 to do this work.

Look out for bearwindows, who has done some interesting things with NT3/4, including doing things like fat32 drivers for these.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:15 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am

Posts
1114

Location
Brisbane, Queensland

Favourite OS
OS/2 Wrp 3.0
P,S, Tragically, Windows 4.9 is Windows ME. Using this number might bring some unsavoury comments: try 4.3 (matches office) or 4.5 instead!


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 8:39 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:09 pm

Posts
184
4.8 :P

Anyway, good notes. But... tape? :|


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 3:26 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am

Posts
1114

Location
Brisbane, Queensland

Favourite OS
OS/2 Wrp 3.0
I would have been tempted to go for 4.7, since this is the OS + supposed version pack.

It should be recalled that things like TAR is 'tape-archive-record', and that the older folk tend to recall storing things on punched paper tape, at 120 bytes to the foot. Still, the actual tapes are electronic ISO files, rinning between 109 and 197 thousand Kib, The Kib being 1024 bytes, or eight feet, six and one half inches (nearly).

The later versions contain things like MSIE 6 SP1, which account for as much as the source files tape itself.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re:        Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:12 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:45 pm

Posts
1432

Location
UK

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
os2fan2 wrote:
P,S, Tragically, Windows 4.9 is Windows ME. Using this number might bring some unsavoury comments: try 4.3 (matches office) or 4.5 instead!

Well, Windows 4.0 is Windows 95 but noone mistakes it with Windows NT 4.0. Also, noone mistakes Windows 3.10 and Windows NT 3.10...
I don't know why anyone would mistake Windows ME and Windows NT 4.9...


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:25 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am

Posts
1114

Location
Brisbane, Queensland

Favourite OS
OS/2 Wrp 3.0
When I did the NT4 build, i managed to get by on the service pack and one fix pack. However, i believe that the manner that fdv did is the way to go: slipstream. It's been a while, though.

Still, there are things you need to look for. There's a fix that goes with sp4, that has revised winnt.exe etc. You need this to slipstream, apparently.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:47 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sun Sep 06, 2009 11:47 am

Posts
64

Favourite OS
WinNT, 2k, XP, 2k3, 7, 8 chk
And is there possibility to add in Windows NT 4 DIRECTX 9 ? :o


Top  Profile  ICQ
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:51 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:37 pm

Posts
490

Favourite OS
LH 4074
Roden Croft wrote:
And is there possibility to add in Windows NT 4 DIRECTX 9 ? :o

As far as I'm aware, NT4 doesn't have directx support as back in its days, it wasn't intended for multimedia purposes/the average user. If directx would have worked, there would have been games made for NT4 (or at least NT4 would've figured on the requirements for such stuff).


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:55 pm 
Reply with quote
Staff
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm

Posts
2607

Location
Germany, Earth

Favourite OS
Windows 10
Windows NT 4.0 was shipped with DirectX 2.0a and SP3 installed DirectX 3.0a (which was the last DirectX version for NT4)...

_________________
MS vNext: Windows 10 ESD Database - Windows 10 Build Labs - Windows 10 Update Archive - Office 2016 Version Tracker - Office Downloader


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:07 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Wed Jun 17, 2009 4:25 am

Posts
121
Some time ago, someone made a dx5 package that worked well on NT.
I'm sure I have it buried somewhere.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows NT 4.9        Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 3:06 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:13 pm

Posts
130

Location
France
Are you talking about dx5nt.exe ?
I've got it some year ago but i haven't tested it yet


Top  Profile  WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ] 




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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

Search for:
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 © 2006-2018

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS