bphlpt

Someone added a spam comment, so this thread was resurrected, and for whatever reason remained on top, even after I deleted the spam.
I'm still with Hostwinds with all my domains, and intend to remain. There hasn't been a single outage in more than five years now. (At least none caused by hosting. I think I did cause some minor outages by playing with the configuration if I remember right...)
Customer support is fast, efficient and knowlegable, and prices are competitive. They're not super cheap though, but from my experience, super cheap providers tend to mess things up regularly.
Last Friday, the server was migrated to CloudLinux and SSD drive. Down time was only one hour. And the server is super fast now.
 
I don't like to keep my domain names with a web host though. That keeps things more flexible. I used to host my domains with NameBargain.com, but since they've been bought by Register.com, prices have exploded. So I transferred all domains to dynadot. Also great prices and great service. They have a refer-a-friend program through which new customers receive $5 initial credit for domain registrations. http://www.dynadot.com/?s8n8T6C7j8S8R6K8l (disclaimer: I'll receive the same credit.)

There are some very, very slight differences. The code at https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/repack-directx-end-user-runtime-june-2010.84785/ is now mostly the same as the installer created by DXCB, which he referenced in his code comments. abbodi1406 added XAudio2_9redist.dll, did a more correct implementation of DirectX for Managed Code which added some missing registry references, and even made the code slightly smaller. I don't think that most people will notice the differences in practice, but YMMV.  As @mooms stated, the end result is essentially the same.
Cheers and Regards

There are some very, very slight differences. The code at https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/repack-directx-end-user-runtime-june-2010.84785/ is now mostly the same as the installer created by DXCB, which he referenced in his code comments. abbodi1406 added XAudio2_9redist.dll, did a more correct implementation of DirectX for Managed Code which added some missing registry references, and even made the code slightly smaller. I don't think that most people will notice the differences in practice, but YMMV.  As @mooms stated, the end result is essentially the same.
Cheers and Regards

update

The links are still pointing to RuntimePack.13.10.21.Silent.Install.rar
Cheers and Regards

I'm glad to see you haven't changed in the last 8 years, Rick. I hope you are well, my friend.
Cheers and Regards

You have to create it.  See here and here and here, for example.
 
Cheers and Regards

Yes.
 
Cheers and Regards

To help you a little bit with silent installers, let's get a bit more basic first.
 
When you install an app, any app,the default behavior is usually to do as you implied above - click Install, Next, Next, change any options you want, Next, ..., Finish, and sometimes Restart.  All very interactive, with maybe the chance to change options, etc.  All well and good, but there are two main problems folks have with that method: [1] Even if you were willing to accept all the default options you still had to do all of that darn clicking which was annoying and took extra time and raised the slight possibility for you to click the wrong thing in your haste, and [2] If you wanted to install applications during an OS install then you had to physically be there to do all that clicking which kind of defeated the whole "unattended" approach that you might want so you could have it all done for you while you were at lunch or something.  If you get rid of the need for the clicking, then the installation of the app is considered "unattended", but that doesn't mean it is necessarily silent.  You could still have progress screens show which would let you know how things are going with the install and so you could figure out about how much time is left with the app install IF you were familiar with that particular app's install process.  Some people like to see that.  Depending on the circumstances it gives sort of a sense of comfort that things are progressing normally.  If you get rid of the need to do the clicking and you also get rid of any display or interaction with the user whatsoever, then the installation is considered "silent".  If an app is silent it is automatically also unattended, but if it is unattended that does not necessarily mean it is silent, understand?
 
For an app to be able to be installed either unattended or silently, it can be given that option by the app creator or by someone else who repacks it.  As I said above, the normal way to install an app is to click on "install" or "setup".  For an app to be installed either unattended or silently it usually has to be invoked through the command line, not by clicking on something.  These days, there are enough folks who want to install apps either unattended or silently, such as in a business situation installing many computers, that many app creators build those options in, but not all do.  Some apps do not have those options built in, and for those apps there is no tool, not even Win Toolkit, that can install that app as it is silently.  That is one reason why someone else might repack an app.  Another reason to repack an app is to slim it down by removing undesired toolbars, or desktop shortcuts, or unneeded runtimes, etc.  there are other reasons but that's enough for now.  Some apps are relatively easy to repack and others are a real bear to do, if they can be done at all.
 
Anyway, just because an app can be installed unattended or silently does not mean that the commands to do so are exactly the same.  Just look at the first post and throughout this thread to see the different syntax and options necessary for the various apps to be installed silently.  IF the version of the app that you want to install can be installed silently, and IF the commands, or switches, to do so are known, and IF Lego has that information, and IF he has added it to the current version of Win Toolkit, then and only then will you probably be able to install that version of the app easily and silently using Win Toolkit's Silent Installers tab.  If you know the switches then you can manually add them even if Win Toolkit doesn't already know them, but that's one more thing you have to do manually.  And if the app does not have the option available then you're out of luck.  It will probably be easier and more reliable to install those apps manually after the OS is installed.
 
That's a simplification of the situation, but I hope you now see that just because you want to install an app silently doesn't mean you can necessarily do so using Win Toolkit or any other tool.
 
I'll let others respond to your particular questions.
 
By the way, many folks still like to install apps silently even after the OS is installed just to avoid all of the darn clicking.
 
Cheers and Regards

I hope everyone has a safe and happy holiday season!
 
Cheers and Regards

No problem. I plan this days an upgrade to Windows 10 to get the free upgrade. Than I'll install back Windows 7 from scratch since this install is from 30.11.2013.
Than we'll see if there it's something botched in my system now. I'll keep you informed.

@nonspin,
The tone in your post is uncalled for.
While your point that it would always be better to use paths such as %windir% rather than absolute paths like "C:\Windows\" is valid, taking such an antagonistic tone will do nothing but get you banned if it continues.  abbodi1406 is an extremely well respected member of this and many other technical forums and he has many abilities and a willingness to help others.  Every application author, including MS I'm sure, has published product using absolute paths at one time or another.  It would have been much better if you had merely asked whether there was a particular reason why absolute paths were used and whether it would be possible to rewrite the addon to use paths such as %windir% instead.  In any case, I'm sure that abbodi1406 will respond when he sees these posts.
Cheers and Regards

I assume you mean the images on the "More Info" page - http://www.wincert.net/forum/index.php?/files/file/5-win-toolkit/?  Liam will have to redo those links, unless someone else has copied them and can share?
Cheers and Regards

@nonspin,
The tone in your post is uncalled for.
While your point that it would always be better to use paths such as %windir% rather than absolute paths like "C:\Windows\" is valid, taking such an antagonistic tone will do nothing but get you banned if it continues.  abbodi1406 is an extremely well respected member of this and many other technical forums and he has many abilities and a willingness to help others.  Every application author, including MS I'm sure, has published product using absolute paths at one time or another.  It would have been much better if you had merely asked whether there was a particular reason why absolute paths were used and whether it would be possible to rewrite the addon to use paths such as %windir% instead.  In any case, I'm sure that abbodi1406 will respond when he sees these posts.
Cheers and Regards

@nonspin,
The tone in your post is uncalled for.
While your point that it would always be better to use paths such as %windir% rather than absolute paths like "C:\Windows\" is valid, taking such an antagonistic tone will do nothing but get you banned if it continues.  abbodi1406 is an extremely well respected member of this and many other technical forums and he has many abilities and a willingness to help others.  Every application author, including MS I'm sure, has published product using absolute paths at one time or another.  It would have been much better if you had merely asked whether there was a particular reason why absolute paths were used and whether it would be possible to rewrite the addon to use paths such as %windir% instead.  In any case, I'm sure that abbodi1406 will respond when he sees these posts.
Cheers and Regards

eureka! Looks good. completed 6/22/16 classic home premium_64 ISO. passes sfc. minimal amount of updates present after install. all my personal files, silents, tweaks, nfw 4.61 are installed. no kb3136000 lurking. If I had to pinpoint the problem its either I "had" to do the classic update integration separately OR something in the component removal module caused an issue. The only other thing I can think of is I put the kb's in the silent list AHEAD of my personal silent. In any event she's perfect. Now I await the new July UL list and want to see if I can update this iso with the latest updates. Once again thanks to all who contributed to this endeavor!
regards...

Lego made a brief appearance about a week ago.  Best we understand, he plans to be more available in about a month.  That's all I know.
Cheers and Regards

Good question.  We have to wait for Lego. We can only hope that he is just busy with school.
Cheers and Regards

Good question.  We have to wait for Lego. We can only hope that he is just busy with school.
Cheers and Regards

Thanks,  niT3_RiDeR_Pr0, but I'm a little confused.  In your first paragraph, before "Let's begin", you mention Win10 several times.  Did you mean to say Win7?
Cheers and Regards

@Oshimaida, While I understand, respect, and agree with your belief that spammers should be banned, I'm afraid that I don't agree that Adfly qualifies as a spam site that justifies such punishment as you suggest.  Yes, it is an ad site, but, in my experience, it does not cause anything to be downloaded onto your machine, nor does it open any popup windows, nor does it cause any further ads to appear in your browsing experience, nor does it cause you to receive any unwanted emails, if you do not click on any of the ads presented.  Not only that, but it is very easy to avoid the ads completely if you have an ad blocker installed in your browser, as I personally believe that everyone should have for their safety and to make their browsing experience more pleasant.  Even if you choose not to have an ad blocker, you merely have to wait about 5 seconds and then click the "Skip Ad" button and you will be promptly redirected to the page you were trying to view.
I also understand your opinion that if someone wants to make a little bit of money that it is more up front to sell their product rather than use an ad site like Adfly, but not everyone agrees with that approach.  I don't know the true percentages, but while I know you are not alone, I would imagine that you are in the minority.
Unfortunately, ads are a fact of life in this materialistic world of ours.  From print ads, telemarketing mailers and calls, radio and TV ads (Wasn't cable TV originally marketed as a way to avoid at least some ads by paying for the service up front?), billboards, ads embedded in YouTube videos, ads plastered on web pages taking up more room than the content, ads included on web search pages, and even ads included in this, and many. many other forums.  So while I agree with your opinion that they are greedy [censored] (this forum being an exception, of course), I'm afraid we are stuck with ads.  For your web browsing sanity, I strongly suggest getting an ad blocker.
So, you can avoid "abusers" that use sites such as Adfly, you can tolerate the brief ad for 5 seconds if you wish to support the "abuser" (I believe that they receive some very small fraction of a cent per each ad viewed), or you can use an ad blocker and merely have to wait the 5 seconds with a blank screen (and I think the "abuser" receives nothing).  It is your choice.  It is a very small annoying inconvenience, but I don't think it is spam.
Others are encouraged to voice their opinion.
Cheers and Regards

Using the "Downloads" from inside of your WinToolkit application to access - let's say ISO's,
-> in an unregistered state -> ad.fly redirection is enabled.
Once you have registered your copy of WinToolkit - those ad.fly redirects go away.

However, ad.fly is just a 5 second advertising placeholder (watch the countdown at the top-right of your page).
Once it hits "0" - you can proceed to the initial target.

This is common practice and has nothing to do with malware or infected code.

 

Here, the whole pack: https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=E5ED5473010BDF2D!34741&authkey=!AKbMXE0EFOvaBrw&ithint=file%2czip

@pedilover, while your curiosity and concern as to the future of Win Toolkit is valid, and all of us who have any interest at all in Win toolkit would love to have the completed product now or at least know when we can expect it, the point that mooms, dareckibmw, and Kel are trying to make is that it is completely pointless for you to post the question.  None of us know what the situation really is.  If any of us knew, I can assure you that we would post the status.  We have no reason to withhold such information from any of the WinCert members.
 
The only one who knows what is going on is Liam.  His activity level here has gone up and down several times over the last few years as his personal and school demands have ebbed and flowed.  So far, he has always come back, eventually.  As we understand it, his future school degree currently depends on the work experience and knowledge he gains through the continuing development of Win Toolkit, so we have no reason to believe that he would abandon it.  Even if his plans change, he has been honest enough in his dealings with us over the years that we feel sure he would tell us if that was the case.
 
While you might have just been wondering out loud what is going on and hoping that Liam is OK, the way you stated it -- 'Is "wintoolkit" dead?' -- comes across as pessimistic, and we would prefer to be optimistic, and patiently wait.  If you were hoping that Liam is indeed watching the thread and would respond to your query, he might have thought the way you stated it was slightly insulting, though I assume you didn't mean it that way.  He also might have interpreted your post as spreading FUD, as I think Kel did.  But again, i don't think you meant it that way.
 
I choose to believe that you you were merely asking if anyone knew anything.  If any of us ever hear any status update for Win Toolkit we will be sure to post it here so everyone will know.  Please be patient and keep the faith.
 
Cheers and Regards

Hey gang. Sorry for not being on here much. I decided to do an internship which took up pretty much all my time. I wanted the experience and more things to put on my CV/Resume. At the moment I'm just updating the exclusive downloads
 
Hope you're all well