A good tool to work with NLite

[Bozo]

http://www.vorck.com/hfslip-info.html

I am just starting to play with this tool, but it looks promising. I am trying to slipstream DX9 and IE6 into Win2K.

Bozo :joker:

 

[mubs]

Thanks, Bozo! I have been wishing for a RyanVM type thingie for W2k, and it looks like this is it. Let us know how it went.

 

[mubs]

How did it go, Bozo?

 

[Bozo]

Actually, I got side tracked and didn't get a chance to try it.

I got side tracked by this: http://www.driverpacks.net/

I've been trying to combine Driverpacks with NLite. So far I managed to make a DVD (869+meg) and get it to load. But during the install process it says it can't find some files but it loads anyway. Strange.

Bozo :joker:

 

[sechs]

Doesn't nLite already slip drivers?

 

[mubs]

Thanks Bozo. I wish damn MS would release an SP5 for W2k.

Has anybody tried to slipstream post-SP4 hotfixes in W2k and been successful??

 

[Bozo]

Doesn't nLite already slip drivers?

If you check that site, you will find that every driver known to man is listed....well, almost. :-D I just tried to use his driver files with NLite.
That's why the disk I made was over 800Meg in size.

Bozo :joker:

 

[sechs]

I'd think you'd be better off just with the drivers you need....

 

[Mercutio]

You might as well put as much stuff as possible on the install disc. You never know what you're going to run into out in the world, and I certainly do hate having to go looking for that RTL8139 or Agere WinModem driver for the hundred-millionth time.

 

[sechs]

The problem is that every driver that you add makes install take longer, as Windows setup goes through each one checking if it needs it. You'd be better off with a disk of all of these drivers, rather than adding them to the Windows installation process.

 

[Mercutio]

Balance the size of the driver database against the system install time when Windows 2000 or Windows XP first came out, against the improvements of today's hardware. If the hardware is worth your time to work on, I'll bet it's still faster than the install-time estimates by at least 15 minutes.

 

[sechs]

The fundamental limit on the install speed of Windows is how fast you can get the data off the media. The read speed of CDs hasn't and won't change. DVDs are faster, but we've already hit their limit, as well. Adding more files to read (even if they're not installed) does not make it faster.

 

[ddrueding]

I'd argue that the CD is only reading at 100% about 50% of the time during an install. Formatting, device detection, network setup, and user interaction would be the rest. Considering the next 15 minutes or so after the install is complete is me installing drivers, being able to save that time is valuable, too. On top of that, if the NIC isn't automatically detected, you have a real PITA on your hands (thumbdrive to another machine, downloads, etc.).

 

[sechs]

Device detection is the problem. As you add drivers, Windows install spends more time doing this. If the number of added drivers is small, then, yes, over a number of installs, time may be saved.

I cannot see how this could be case for a nonspecific disk with thousands of drivers.