29 Jul 11
Originally posted by sonhouseYes.
Would that actually be a working copy of XP then?
Take into account though, lets say you have a hard drive with a good working copy of XP installed on it.
That installation will be set up for that motherboard and all the other devices, if you try to use that hard drive on a different motherboard, it won't work.
Ghosting the hard drive is perfect for keeping a clean install of windows for when you need to re-install.
As an example, once you have a good working copy set up with all your programs installed, make an image and then re-install it once a month (store any personal data/programs/cookies or whatever on a different drive).
With Jimslyp69's problem, he could make an image of his IDE or (PATA) drive and then try loading it onto the SATA drive.
I will have a go later just to have a wee look.
29 Jul 11
Originally posted by WoodgieReally? I've never had an OEM OS from a 'big' company. I always build from scratch and get the retail copy of Windows - because I've had trouble before when re-installing OEM Windows on client machines - but issues always only arose at activation.
That is not strictly true and is probably the problem, the OEM version will deliberately be tailored for the machine it is going into to prevent possible piracy.
A good way to confirm all the hardware would be to try and install a free version of Linux (Ubuntu would be a good all rounder with plenty of drivers), this would then isolate the problem to the ...[text shortened]... d on it).
Edit: You could also try "Ghosting" an image onto it, if you have the patience.
The Linux idea is good. Damn, I should have thought of that!
29 Jul 11
Well in the other scenario where I was trying to install XP on my friend's PC, it too was an OEM version. The thing I can't understanfd though is why let me install it on an IDE drive but not SATA? Does an OEM version have a built in hardware specification that it will install on, and anything outside of that it refuses to work?
29 Jul 11
Originally posted by jimslyp69Well, if it's a very 'strict' OEM build, then it may be a case of the installer checking if the hardware has dramatically changed since the PC left the assembly line, and if so the OEM licence 'expires'.
Well in the other scenario where I was trying to install XP on my friend's PC, it too was an OEM version. The thing I can't understanfd though is why let me install it on an IDE drive but not SATA? Does an OEM version have a built in hardware specification that it will install on, and anything outside of that it refuses to work?
29 Jul 11
Originally posted by CrowleyYeah, sadly the big manufacturers will do anything to make sure you buy a new machine at the end of the hardware's life, and this is why they condition the OS so much.
Really? I've never had an OEM OS from a 'big' company. I always build from scratch and get the retail copy of Windows - because I've had trouble before when re-installing OEM Windows on client machines - but issues always only arose at activation.
The Linux idea is good. Damn, I should have thought of that!
And let's be honest most techies would build their own base unit rather than buy an over priced unit (which the manufacturers take advantage of with the not-so knowledgeable).
Anybody who buys a big name machine either has to (corporate/customer roll out), has no real idea about the internal workings or doesn't have the time to build one.
The case with laptops is different of course and this is where it might be a bit harder to brute force install an OEM OS.
Go retail every time.
29 Jul 11
1 edit
Originally posted by WoodgieHow do
That is not strictly true and is probably the problem, the OEM version will deliberately be tailored for the machine it is going into to prevent possible piracy.
A good way to confirm all the hardware would be to try and install a free version of Linux (Ubuntu would be a good all rounder with plenty of drivers), this would then isolate the problem to the d on it).
Edit: You could also try "Ghosting" an image onto it, if you have the patience.
Yes I've tried creating a SATA drivers disk from the mobo CD and also tried integrating the drivers into windows by using Nlite. All no go. 🙁
Another explanation is that I'm a complete 'tard who can't anything right but I doubt that anyone here would agree with that! 🙂
29 Jul 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jimslyp69To answer your question would be a breach of the EULA and God forbid anybody would want to do that.
How do
Yes I've tried creating a SATA drivers disk from the mobo CD and also tried integrating the drivers into windows by using Nlite. All no go. 🙁
Another explanation is that I'm a complete 'tard who can't anything right but I doubt that anyone here would agree with that! 🙂
Edit: Out of interest what Motherboard are you using?
30 Jul 11
Originally posted by WoodgieBut you would think the system would be biased against IDE drives and try to force you to use SATA drives. This is the other way round.
Yeah, sadly the big manufacturers will do anything to make sure you buy a new machine at the end of the hardware's life, and this is why they condition the OS so much.
And let's be honest most techies would build their own base unit rather than buy an over priced unit (which the manufacturers take advantage of with the not-so knowledgeable).
Anybody who ...[text shortened]... is where it might be a bit harder to brute force install an OEM OS.
Go retail every time.
01 Aug 11
Originally posted by WoodgieMicrosoft needs to seriously rethink their Windows licensing, because this is exactly why so many people just pirate copy the OS and - to a lesser degree - why more people are just moving to Linux (and probably Apple too).
Yeah, sadly the big manufacturers will do anything to make sure you buy a new machine at the end of the hardware's life, and this is why they condition the OS so much.
And let's be honest most techies would build their own base unit rather than buy an over priced unit (which the manufacturers take advantage of with the not-so knowledgeable).
Anybody who ...[text shortened]... is where it might be a bit harder to brute force install an OEM OS.
Go retail every time.
01 Aug 11
Originally posted by CrowleyI think the problem starts in school and other institutions, if the OS used in these places was Linux, Windows would be obsolete by now.
Microsoft needs to seriously rethink their Windows licensing, because this is exactly why so many people just pirate copy the OS and - to a lesser degree - why more people are just moving to Linux (and probably Apple too).
It is no harder to use or even learn Linux than Windows.
Granted a few years ago it may have been harder, but that is no longer the case.
The World hates open source or so sellers would make you think.
I cannot remember the last time I bought any software.
02 Aug 11
Originally posted by WoodgieWell, I don't think Windows would be obsolete, but MS definitely wouldn't have close to 90% marketshare. There's nothing inherently 'wrong' with Windows, if they had just baked in better security like *nix did from the start.
I think the problem starts in school and other institutions, if the OS used in these places was Linux, Windows would be obsolete by now.
It is no harder to use or even learn Linux than Windows.
Granted a few years ago it may have been harder, but that is no longer the case.
The World hates open source or so sellers would make you think.
I cannot remember the last time I bought any software.
I'm sure they would have done so had the likes of *nix secured more of the MS pie in the consumer market.
If I didn't need to do contract work that needed VBA functionality in MSOffice or other software only released for Windows, I would be using Linux exclusively.
Going off track a little about the last point here - MSOffice still is the best 'office' suite around by a long shot, until Libre- or OpenOffice closes the gap properly.
I haven't used the latest versions of these, so maybe they have improved markedly, but both early version 3.0's were just not there yet. These days Office 2007/2010 for their great automation/integration functionality and Google Docs for quick collaboration work suit me just fine.
Personally I think MSOffice will stick around for many more years still and will drag Windows with it, because I can't see MS releasing it for native *nix execution, meaning Linux will not get that foothold in the corporate environment.
02 Aug 11
Originally posted by Crowleylooking at the bigger picture of computing, unix wasn't any more secure, it just had 30 years more time to weed out the biggest problems. unix is Old. when windows was launched it was already older than windows is now. the history of cracking is pretty much the history of unix, only the latest chapters deal with windows.
Well, I don't think Windows would be obsolete, but MS definitely wouldn't have close to 90% marketshare. There's nothing inherently 'wrong' with Windows, if they had just baked in better security like *nix did from the start.
I'm sure they would have done so had the likes of *nix secured more of the MS pie in the consumer market.
If I didn't need to do ...[text shortened]... ix execution, meaning Linux will not get that foothold in the corporate environment.
I don't think any 'GUI revamp' will make *x systems ever grow bigger. if there's gonna be changes in the status quo, it's gonna be something completely new. a whole new way of doing mainstream computing. it's not gonna be any kind of windows or unix variant, no matter how much bells and whistles they keep adding.
02 Aug 11
Originally posted by CrowleyVery good points.
Well, I don't think Windows would be obsolete, but MS definitely wouldn't have close to 90% marketshare. There's nothing inherently 'wrong' with Windows, if they had just baked in better security like *nix did from the start.
I'm sure they would have done so had the likes of *nix secured more of the MS pie in the consumer market.
If I didn't need to do ...[text shortened]... ix execution, meaning Linux will not get that foothold in the corporate environment.
I am probably on the flip side of the coin to you, not being able to use the MS product suite and from an open source perspective.
To accomplish what you are trying to do I would go down the route of:
http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/project/ooo2gd
and
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Python
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Python_as_a_macro_language
Of course getting stuck into the above requires patience and determination but will definitely pay off, because once you have a good grasp on Python the possibilities for adding further extensions are limitless.
As an example, I have just finished a screen scraper that collates the data into OO Writer and Calc so a researching firm only has to analyse the data (I appreciate these products are already available, but when you have to provide a bespoke set up, sometimes it just easier nailing your own stuff together. In the above example the customer also required certain bits of aggregated data sent to handheld devices and a presentation automatically generated, the joy of regular expressions).
The immediate beauty of all of the above is the end project does not have to involve any licence costs.
I love Python, it is just a pity it took so long to get to the stage it is now.
And, the above works just as well on an MS OS as it does Linux based.
02 Aug 11
Originally posted by wormwoodTrue. Chrome OS maybe?
I don't think any 'GUI revamp' will make *x systems ever grow bigger. if there's gonna be changes in the status quo, it's gonna be something completely new. a whole new way of doing mainstream computing. it's not gonna be any kind of windows or unix variant, no matter how much bells and whistles they keep adding.
Maybe we'll all just have iPad 6's embedded everywhere...
Maybe MS Surface will actually become economically viable...
Probably we'll just be using super-super-smartphones though.