|
Microsoft got around to releasing Remote Desktop 7 updates for Vista and XP. Most of the updates are there, but the major ones like Aero glass, remote app task scheduler and such are still 7 only. MS page with links to XP SP3, Vista 32 and 64 bit SP1/2 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/969084
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2009 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 05:51 |
|
|
Xenomorph posted:I recommend staying away from Upgrades and even upgrade licenses. Maybe if you did it the default way, but unless it's checking the key before formatting the partition via the manager on the CD it's not invalidating keys. I held out on installing until a week before the release, took the RTM, booted from the CD, formatted and installed without a key and put it in a week later after I received the upgrade CD and it went fine. I figured I would had to do the registry trick but didn't. I believe the invalidation bit came into being because, well yes, just because you upgraded does not mean that your old license is now usable elsewhere. It's a matter of legality, not that the old key is permanently banned.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2009 20:16
|
|
|
It's just a matter of choice. Personally I like clone drive because I feel its lighter. I don't care about the other formats that daemon tools supports, and times where some program balked because Daemon was installed VCD worked. I'm sure there's people out there who hate both and prefer MagicDisc as well. It's just a preference.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2009 02:33
|
|
|
LoonyLeif posted:The key that I got from Digital River is apparently only an upgrade key. Once I get into Windows 7 Pro with a clean install from the upgrade media, I can validate? http://www.winsupersite.com/win7/clean_install_upgrade_media.asp One of those ways will take care of you. Either way you still have a valid license as you do have upgrade media. Edit: see the link too, Pumpkinhead.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2009 00:47
|
|
|
m2pt5 posted:%AppData%\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch\User Pinned\TaskBar I think this is a good thing. Just about everyone started using quicklaunch as a standard icon location basically cluttering it for no reason. I could see programs installing a ebay taskbar icon to get a quick buck if they left it open as an example.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2009 11:13
|
|
|
If you just installed 7, and it didn't pick up your graphics card, then its going to default to non-aero, even if you immediately install a proper driver. You have to go into properties to choose the aero version of windows default. Some drivers will do this for you but ATI does not.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2009 17:02
|
|
|
Have you tried displayfusion? The Pro version can do that I believe. At least it does allow you to transition wallpaper at intervals.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2009 19:11
|
|
|
kapinga posted:You can use a upgrade media to make a clean install from 2000, XP, or a non supported version of Vista. You can only make an in place upgrade from a supported version of Vista from the same architecture. I don't even think the activated portion is accurate. When I installed my upgrade version I booted from the DVD and used it to format the drive. Since it was around two weeks before I would actually received the key I installed without a key and it took it fine without the registry edits in the link. Granted the old OS was activated but unless it checks before formatting the partition all it's concerned about is if a windows OS was installed before.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2009 19:23
|
|
|
I may have found one of the potential causes of the 'black screen of death' that some people claim to have after that Prevx scare, and to no surprise it may be Nvidia drivers. I just finished setting up a Geforce 8300 mainboard with a Geforce 8500GT to enable geforce boost (all things I had sitting around the house) It seemed to go over well until I started installing software, then occasionally the entire screen would black out when a program triggered a elevation prompt. By black, I mean can't see poo poo, not just darkened. After this happening a couple of times I started troubleshooting and figured out that it has something to do with the initialization of the VGA port. If it goes black and you remove the VGA cable and then put it back then the display will return, often without aero, but clicking anywhere will bring it back. Remove the 8500GT and it works fine. If anyone here is still having the problem, are you running cards in SLI? Try the trick and see if it works, and maybe we can actually see if this is real or not.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2009 06:33
|
|
|
mobn posted:How can I get Stepmania running in XP mode? I need to run it in XP mode because there's no driver for my Playstation->USB adapter for Windows 7, and no working 64 bit driver at all. I was able to get it going in Vista 64 with the 64 bit XP driver, but that's not working on 7. May have to use virtualbox instead which does support hardware acceleration of sound and video. I do not know it's performance however.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2009 16:53
|
|
|
I recently installed Ultimate 64 bit on a Athlon II 630 on a Gigabyte GA-790XTA-UD4 with 4gb of memory. Runs circles around my old Opteron 175, but one thing is bugging me about this system which is it takes almost a minute and a half to boot. I've disabled esata, raid, serial ports, usb 3 and haven't gained a second. Is this just a byproduct of x64, or am I just missing something else I can tweak to get this quicker?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2010 04:29
|
|
|
Yep. It was ACPI. Disabled it and it's booting in 20 seconds. Thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2010 05:45
|
|
|
Anmitzcuaca posted:Are there any apps that will move the close/maximise/minimise buttons to the left hand side? I've found one called LeftSider but it doesn't work with 7. Windowblinds with an appropriate skin. the posted:If I'm listed as an administrator by Windows, why do I always have to be prompted to make changes to the system? Just, you know, loving install the poo poo I run. Because you still aren't the official administrator. The real administrator account is hidden. If you really want to enable it, http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/507-built-administrator-account-enable-disable.html But realize that doing so will make a large part of UAC useless as it won't be able to halt anything.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2010 17:08
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:I didn't know you could choose to not make an account when you installed Win7. I had to mak the one I'm on atm, and give it a password. UAC was annoying at first but if it's half as good at providing security against poo poo installing itself as the claims for it are, it's more than worth it. The way that UAC works is that the standard account that you make is basically a semi administrator account. When a UAC prompt is allowed what actually executes the transaction is the hidden administrator account, so when the OP made the hidden account the standard account he basically disabled UAC from being able to do anything. He might as well as turned it off.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2010 13:46
|
|
|
mobn posted:The new corporate version of Symantec (Symantec endpoint protection) is actually really loving kickass and has saved us a lot of headaches with dumbass students. As long as you are dealing with standard viruses then yes its fine. But it's heuristics suck for anything modified and I have yet to hear of it stopping any dangerous spyware. Only thing I can give them is that they are quick in updates once you give them a sample. Work wants to drop them so bad but there isn't really an alternative.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2010 01:20
|
|
|
JustFrakkingDoIt posted:See the unpatched Java vulnerability found by Tavis Ormandy. If you run as a normal user you might get prompted when it tries to run a program in your background. No prompt if you're an admin so that's real convenient I guess. Update 20 is supposed to take care of it. Almost everyone has missed that it's available. Allegedly Tavis advised them of the issue in December and didn't release the info until it was patched last Wednesday.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2010 02:24
|
|
|
ibroxmassive posted:Downloaded the installer for IE9 beta, Windows 7 is completely up to date, nothing left in the queue from Windows. I had the same issue. Ended up that the version of 7 I was running was one build behind the final version. check the following registry location and make sure your build number is 16385 (it's the second number after 7600) HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion. Look for BuildLabEx edit: for the record, I didn't try just changing the number, I just decided to buy a new harddrive I wanted anyways and do a fresh install with a image I made off a modified upgrade disc I had for another computer.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2010 02:08
|
|
|
fishmech posted:The final version will require SP1 for install. Dunno if the beta is supposed to. It does not. If you have the full version it will download the prerequisites, otherwise you need kb2028551, 2028560, 2120976 and 2259539 installed first.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2010 02:12
|
|
|
Landerig posted:How does the Sound recorder accessory not pick up any sound even with a working microphone attached? I do not know on changing the device, but there is a fix it troubleshooting wizard in help. As for saving in WAV, you have to start it with a special parameter, such as soundrecorder /file outputfile.wav
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2010 01:08
|
|
|
papa horny michael posted:I use it, but amn't happy with it's clunky UI and viewing modes. You may like Xnview which is a bit more flexible and has a better UI. Unfortunately it does not properly support uuencoded directories (directories where some of the folders are in a foreign language) but there are early betas with that support in their forum.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2010 11:17
|
|
|
Lblitzer posted:I think my main drive is on its way out the door. Performance has been slipping lately, bootups much longer, programs lag, and I'd just like a bigger drive in there. Is there any way to backup all the important poo poo like windows files and import it to another disc rather than having to start clean? Type in backup in the start menu, and choose create system image on the side.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2010 19:24
|
|
|
Kilometers Davis posted:I just finished up building a new pc and am in the process of installing W7 64. I started the install just fine and turned my monitor off so I could go workout and burn some time. When I came back the pc wasn't recognizing my monitor. Is that normal during some parts of the install? It hasn't worked for around 8 minutes. There's a option in Windows 7 and Vista called TMM (Transient Multimon Manager) that's located in task scheduler that likely caused this. It's supposed to automatically adjust the screen for the appropriate resolution needed on the monitor, but often if the monitor is off when it checks, it just will ignore it until you reboot. I used to go in and disable this option on my htpc as it never would enable the monitor if I forgot to turn the TV on before the computer, or it wasn't in the right mode to respond, but 7 seems to be much better at at least periodically checking to make sure a new monitor is available and initializing the screen. If it keeps happening its under Microsoft, windows, MobilePC in task scheduler.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2010 14:55
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:I did try rebooting and that didn't do anything. I'm familiar with that feature in older versions of Windows, and with them it's pretty obvious what program is using them. Here not so much. What was meant by AV or explorer is that when you select the files Antirirus or explorer is taking it's time inspecting the files but you are renaming or moving the file at the same time. You can tell your AV to not scan files of that type, but the culprit is likely explorer's file preview feature. To make this change, click the Organize button on any folder, and choose Folder and Search Options from the menu. Click the View tab, and then check the Always show icons, never thumbnails checkbox.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2010 14:02
|
|
|
Infinite Monkeys posted:Does this mean I need to have the original non-OEM XP disc and the Win7 upgrade disc, and install XP then run the update? Or can I legally install the upgrade without installing XP first by double-installing as long as I own a non-OEM version of XP? As long as the copy of XP you have is a retail copy you are legal, and you can install 7 upgrade any way you want. Be it, double install, install and changing a registry key, taking a disk from a old machine, formatting and installing 7 instead or whatever. The only thing he was saying was that you can't take a license from a old Dell and transfer it to a brand new machine, even if that old machine is out of service or is otherwise destroyed.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2011 17:10
|
|
|
if you don't have the disc, install it twice or change the registry key (google paul thurrott windows 7 upgrade if you don't know how) The only thing we are saying is that if your old XP copy is from a OEM machine this won't be legal if this concerns you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2011 19:00
|
|
|
I have a friend who didn't follow my instructions and make a backup first thing when he got his laptop, who now possibly has a virus that trashed his install. Since it then dawned on him to make the restore disks he then decided to make them and then format. Now the only thing he can get into is safe mode and all other accounts are locked. anyhow, since he's 100 miles away and it's a blizzard, I rather just send him a iso of a OEM copy of windows, but unfortunately I don't have access to anything other than a upgrade copy with the ei.cfg file removed. Is there any way I can further modify this disc to make it OEM so he can properly format and reinstall?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
I did some research and according to a MVP a retail copy can use a OEM key, only that this will force you to call in the number so I'm sending him a iso to try now. But now it looks like a hardware problem since he said that he can't get XP to install either.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2011 01:21
|
|
|
True. If it was me I wouldn't have tried, but it's all he has. Its under warranty still so I'm just going to try to get him to call Toshiba on it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2011 01:30
|
|
|
http://www.winsupersite.com/article/windows-7/Sneak-Peek-A-Quick-Look-at-Windows-7-Service-Pack-1.aspx Per Paul Thurott it's near final, but that's not it. I've never seen them go from release to oem to the street this quickly anyways.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2011 20:12
|
|
|
rolleyes posted:CoreAVC supports CUDA so actually it'll still be more efficient for the parts which don't run on the graphics card, and I'm willing to bet their graphics-card assisted implementation is better than most. Depends on the content. Sometimes it's better than DXVA, other times it's not. The only real advantage it has is that sometimes it can accelerate content that's incompatible for DXVA acceleration, but that rarely happens these days now that more people are using truly compliant versions of x264 to encode.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2011 01:22
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:I eventually installed the currently released version. Nothing has blown up, become non-genuine or grown an evaluation date. You won't really know until months from now, probably when IE9 is released. I know I was burned by that build of 7 that everyone reported to be the final, but was actually two or three builds behind what the final was. I got updates for months, but slowly I stopped receiving them but I didn't think anything of it. The only time it affected me was when IE9 beta was released and it wouldn't install because it was a unknown version of windows.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 15:51
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:http://www.codenamewindows.com/?p=1481 Reading up on how AVX is basically useless for speeding up x264 just makes me think this will end up like badaboom or AMD's video encoding technology, ok if you are in a pinch but worthless for people looking for quality. Hell, the way some of them talk x264 could be tweaked to be even faster than AVX if you threw quality to the wind like it does.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 16:01
|
|
|
Tellara posted:Yep, and the development of IE9 resulted in a bunch of improvements to the Windows 7 graphics subsystem, too. If you recall, installing the beta required you to install several hotfixes for Windows 7 that touched the DWM among other things. Microsoft still has some advantages however. Look at some of the benchmarks they have added to the testdrive site, even with their competitors using hardware acceleration IE9 is still worlds faster. This is probably what the IEblog was talking about that their acceleration is complete while Firefox's was still partial. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/09/10/the-architecture-of-full-hardware-acceleration-of-all-web-page-content.aspx
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 16:32
|
|
|
HenryEx posted:Hey there. Using Win7 for a month by now and i'm pretty happy with it. Went for the 64 bit edition for the first time. Pretty gravy, so far. Just recently hit some dead ends that made me wish for a 32 bit OS again. All other PCs with 32 bit OSes nearby are either broken or off-limits to me, though. By activating with one key, they mean your key can activate a single 32-bit or 64-bit version, not that you can run a 64-bit os, and use the same key for a 32-bit machine or a 32-bit vm on the same hardware.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2011 19:47
|
|
|
Karthe posted:Is anyone else having issues installing Internet Explorer 9 on Windows 7? Whenever I try to install it via Windows Update or the dedicated installer, it errors out with an unhelpful Code 3712 error. I did install IE9 RC a few months ago, but there doesn't appear to be a way to uninstall it - I'm guessing that's not the issue, but I figured I'd mention it nonetheless. In add remove programs click view installed updates on the sidebar and you'll IE9 in the list. That will probably take care of your problem.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2011 00:07
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:Is there a utility to clean up the service pack rollback files like we had on Vista's compcln.exe? dism /online /cleanup-image /spsuperseded will cleanup the backup files, but keep in mind you won't be able to uninstall once you've ran it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2011 00:14
|
|
|
But there was a legit amount of programs that would have worked fine otherwise that refused to run or install on Vista just because it saw Windows 6.0 instead of 5.1. Yes you can do things like mess with compatibility to make it work but stuff like that is why a lot of people still think that Vista wasn't compatible with anything. UAC alone should be enough to show how people will ignore what Microsoft tells them on how things should be done until it's well too late.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2011 16:41
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:DVD's are less likely to die. Depends on the quality of the disc. If you go cheap you may not get two years, even if you do the normal archiving precautions.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2011 14:54
|
|
|
quadratic posted:Is there any reason to expect problems installing IE9 before SP1? Shouldn't be. You don't even have to get rid of the beta or RC before installing the final.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2011 20:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 05:51 |
|
|
flink posted:I don't know what the hell is going on with my install of Windows 7, but I'm getting some annoying issues. Could you install ie9? If not, then chances are the version of windows you have isn't the final build. I ran into that a while back when the first preview of 9 came out
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2011 12:30
|
|