Modified versions of windows

[pcslookout]

Why do people run modified versions of windows with their store bought windows key like for Vista and XP ? How do they know they can trust the release the person made doesn't have viruses or malware ? Wouldn't it be more safe to just do it yourself, even if you don't know how, learn how to ?

 

[pcgeek11]

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Why do people run modified versions of windows with their store bought windows key like for Vista and XP ? How do they know they can trust the release the person made doesn't have viruses or malware ? Wouldn't it be more safe to just do it yourself, even if you don't know how, learn how to ?

Stupid is, as Stupid does.....

Ya just can't explain away stupid. I'm glad they do it gives me money....

pcgeek11

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: pcgeek11

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Why do people run modified versions of windows with their store bought windows key like for Vista and XP ? How do they know they can trust the release the person made doesn't have viruses or malware ? Wouldn't it be more safe to just do it yourself, even if you don't know how, learn how to ?

Stupid is, as Stupid does.....

Ya just can't explain away stupid. I'm glad they do it gives me money....

pcgeek11

lol

 

[Aluvus]

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Why do people run modified versions of windows with their store bought windows key like for Vista and XP ?

To get rid of things (like WGA) that they don't like. Flipside: some people run hacked versions of MacOS so that they can run it on plain x86 hardware.

How do they know they can trust the release the person made doesn't have viruses or malware ?

They don't.

Wouldn't it be more safe to just do it yourself, even if you don't know how, learn how to ?

Yes.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: Aluvus

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Why do people run modified versions of windows with their store bought windows key like for Vista and XP ?

To get rid of things (like WGA) that they don't like. Flipside: some people run hacked versions of MacOS so that they can run it on plain x86 hardware.

How do they know they can trust the release the person made doesn't have viruses or malware ?

They don't.

Wouldn't it be more safe to just do it yourself, even if you don't know how, learn how to ?

Yes.

So the best way to go about using a slimmer version of windows, if you really must, is to do it yourself! I know it could break things and most of the time I see it as more trouble than it is worth because you may get rid of something that down the road you may need for like a latest Service Pack, etc!

 

[shortylickens]

Before I got Win 7 I was digging around, trying to find ways to make my own modified Win XP disc so I can make settings the way I want them while its installing, and also automatically install some of my most loved programs right off the bat.
I actually did find a few programs to do exactly this, but never felt like trying them out.

Now that I am in virgin territory, I dont wanna mess around just yet.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: shortylickens
Before I got Win 7 I was digging around, trying to find ways to make my own modified Win XP disc so I can make settings the way I want them while its installing, and also automatically install some of my most loved programs right off the bat.
I actually did find a few programs to do exactly this, but never felt like trying them out.

Now that I am in virgin territory, I dont wanna mess around just yet.

Yeah I really don't feel like taking out of my windows where down the road I need it for a new game, program, etc that requires it just to work. Thats the biggest problem of getting rid of Internet Explorer you can't way to many programs depend on it. Example Steam. There is no way to force Steam to use a different browser.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: pcslookout

Originally posted by: shortylickens
Before I got Win 7 I was digging around, trying to find ways to make my own modified Win XP disc so I can make settings the way I want them while its installing, and also automatically install some of my most loved programs right off the bat.
I actually did find a few programs to do exactly this, but never felt like trying them out.

Now that I am in virgin territory, I dont wanna mess around just yet.

Yeah I really don't feel like taking out of my windows where down the road I need it for a new game, program, etc that requires it just to work. Thats the biggest problem of getting rid of Internet Explorer you can't way to many programs depend on it. Example Steam. There is no way to force Steam to use a different browser.

Ummmmm, its impossible to be "rid" of Internet Explorer because its basically the same program that Windows Explorer is. You wouldnt have Windows without Explorer. As for disabling it, yeah I suppose if I didnt like IE I'd want to be able to avoid it entirely and use just Chrome or FireFox, but you are correct. Too many other programs & websites require it to be used.

As an example, I believe Netflix streaming requires IE. I dont think you can use the Silverlight plugin with other browsers (yet). I wouldn't know for sure. I use Chrome where I can and IE where I have to. Would be nice to put Chrome, Avira, and a handful of other essential utilities right on the Windows disc. ACDsee as well.
And Nero.
And Corel Photo Paint.

Fuck it. Next gen I am using linux.

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: pcslookout

Originally posted by: shortylickens
Before I got Win 7 I was digging around, trying to find ways to make my own modified Win XP disc so I can make settings the way I want them while its installing, and also automatically install some of my most loved programs right off the bat.
I actually did find a few programs to do exactly this, but never felt like trying them out.

Now that I am in virgin territory, I dont wanna mess around just yet.

Yeah I really don't feel like taking out of my windows where down the road I need it for a new game, program, etc that requires it just to work. Thats the biggest problem of getting rid of Internet Explorer you can't way to many programs depend on it. Example Steam. There is no way to force Steam to use a different browser.

Ummmmm, its impossible to be "rid" of Internet Explorer because its basically the same program that Windows Explorer is. You wouldnt have Windows without Explorer. As for disabling it, yeah I suppose if I didnt like IE I'd want to be able to avoid it entirely and use just Chrome or FireFox, but you are correct. Too many other programs & websites require it to be used.

As an example, I believe Netflix streaming requires IE. I dont think you can use the Silverlight plugin with other browsers (yet). I wouldn't know for sure. I use Chrome where I can and IE where I have to. Would be nice to put Chrome, Avira, and a handful of other essential utilities right on the Windows disc. ACDsee as well.
And Nero.
And Corel Photo Paint.

Fuck it. Next gen I am using linux.

Netflix works perfectly in FF for me.

 

[lxskllr]

I like my O/Ss fat. The more that's packed in there, the better afaic. I could see stripping Windows down for a special purpose, perhaps a netbook with a small SSD, but disk space is too cheap to worry about it otherwise.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: lxskllr
I like my O/Ss fat. The more that's packed in there, the better afaic. I could see stripping Windows down for a special purpose, perhaps a netbook with a small SSD, but disk space is too cheap to worry about it otherwise.

Yeah that is how I feel as well for the most part unless like you said the OS is being installed on a super expensive SSD hard drive or slower/older pc.

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: pcslookout
...or slower/older pc.

I don't even know about the slower/older part. Stripping the O/S can get you faster boot times, and less HD space used, but I doubt it does much for performance once you're in Windows. I've never benched it, but I bet the performance gains would be negligible to non existent.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: pcslookout
...or slower/older pc.

I don't even know about the slower/older part. Stripping the O/S can get you faster boot times, and less HD space used, but I doubt it does much for performance once you're in Windows. I've never benched it, but I bet the performance gains would be negligible to non existent.

Yeah I guess the only time it would really matter is if you like to open a lot of programs at once on the older machine. Having less services run could help a little.

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: pcslookout

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: pcslookout
...or slower/older pc.

I don't even know about the slower/older part. Stripping the O/S can get you faster boot times, and less HD space used, but I doubt it does much for performance once you're in Windows. I've never benched it, but I bet the performance gains would be negligible to non existent.

Yeah I guess the only time it would really matter is if you like to open a lot of programs at once on the older machine. Having less services run could help a little.

Services are generally paged out, and even if you kept them in memory it wouldn't take a huge amount of ram. To each his own, but if disabling services is the difference between having a usable computer, and a lead weight, the choice of O/S seriously needs to be reconsidered. There's better lightweight choices from Linux that'll give you features without bulk.

I may try Nliteing a copy of XP, and bench it next to a virgin copy and see what the differences are. I'm betting it isn't enough to matter.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: pcslookout

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: pcslookout
...or slower/older pc.

I don't even know about the slower/older part. Stripping the O/S can get you faster boot times, and less HD space used, but I doubt it does much for performance once you're in Windows. I've never benched it, but I bet the performance gains would be negligible to non existent.

Yeah I guess the only time it would really matter is if you like to open a lot of programs at once on the older machine. Having less services run could help a little.

Services are generally paged out, and even if you kept them in memory it wouldn't take a huge amount of ram. To each his own, but if disabling services is the difference between having a usable computer, and a lead weight, the choice of O/S seriously needs to be reconsidered. There's better lightweight choices from Linux that'll give you features without bulk.

I may try Nliteing a copy of XP, and bench it next to a virgin copy and see what the differences are. I'm betting it isn't enough to matter.

Yeah linux would be better with older systems sense you can sometimes load the whole OS into ram and such.

I don't think there would be a huge enough difference either to make it worth it. At least from what I have found.

 

[ImDonly1]

Just use nLite or vLite to slim down your XP/Vista install if you are that picky. They are programs that allow you to choose what you want Windows to install. It isn't that hard and I am sure they have quite a few guides on what to remove on the forums at their website.

 

[Nothinman]

Ummmmm, its impossible to be "rid" of Internet Explorer because its basically the same program that Windows Explorer is. You wouldnt have Windows without Explorer.

They're separate binaries, you can have one without the other. However, iexplorer.exe is just a thin wrapper around MSHTML and MSHTML is needed by other parts of the system so you can't really remove the core engine itself, just the iexplore.exe binary.

I like my O/Ss fat. The more that's packed in there, the better afaic.

I would agree except that Windows is fat without much substance. A default Linux install is thinner and yet has more functionality out of the box.

Just use nLite or vLite to slim down your XP/Vista install if you are that picky. They are programs that allow you to choose what you want Windows to install. It isn't that hard and I am sure they have quite a few guides on what to remove on the forums at their website.

Except that some parts of Windows are difficult or impossible to add back in after the fact, so if you get over zealous and remove too much you may be suck doing a reinstall a few months later when you realize you can't do something. If MS had real package management it wouldn't be an issue, but until they expand MSI to cover everything in the OS it will be. Just look at Windows Server, once you do a Core install you can't convert it to a full install without a reload for the same reasons.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

I may try Nliteing a copy of XP, and bench it next to a virgin copy and see what the differences are. I'm betting it isn't enough to matter.

I agree with this. The only thing I ever used nLite for was to add stuff, not remove it. Specifically, slipstreaming SPs and RAID drivers so I didn't have to do the F6 + floppy load.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: lxskllr

I may try Nliteing a copy of XP, and bench it next to a virgin copy and see what the differences are. I'm betting it isn't enough to matter.

I agree with this. The only thing I ever used nLite for was to add stuff, not remove it. Specifically, slipstreaming SPs and RAID drivers so I didn't have to do the F6 + floppy load.

Thats if you use a older OS as well only too. Vista and 7 you don't have to do this I don't think.