Jump to content

bphlpt

Ultimate Sponsor
  • Posts

    1,403
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    64

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from alfreire in Windows AiO Runtime Pack x86 x64   
    AFAIK, this should be:
    - Microsoft DirectX End-User Runtimes (June 2010) including DirectX for Managed Code
    Support For Windows Xp & above
    Cheers and Regards
  2. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from StopLooking in Repack installer request?   
    No problem.  I've never tried Windows 8.x+, and have never known anyone who has run DXCB on Windows 8.x+, so I'm glad you were able to get it to work for you.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  3. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from StopLooking in Repack installer request?   
    It seems MS has changed the structure of the download page, so neither of the included downloaders currently work.  But, no problem.  Go here - http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=56511&clcid=0x409 - and manually download the latest DirectX End-User Runtimes (June 2010). The file should be "directx_Jun2010_redist.exe".  Place the file in the same folder where "DXCB.cmd" is located.  I just ran it that way myself, so it should work for you, too.  If you don't enter any options, when you then run "DXCB.cmd" it should produce these files as output, which will include DirectX for managed code, and should be located in the same folder as "DXCB.cmd":
     
    ----------------------------------
     
    DirectXRuntimes-201006-AddOn-32.7z -- (13,676,451 bytes) -- 32-bit addon
    DirectXRuntimes-201006-AddOn-64.7z -- (29,363,280 bytes) -- 64-bit addon which includes the 32-bit addon as well
     
    DirectXRuntimes-201006-Switchless-32.exe -- (13,676,076 bytes) -- 32-bit switchless installer -\
    DirectXRuntimes-201006-Switchless-64.exe -- (15,686,796 bytes) -- 64-bit switchless installer --\ for 64-bit use you need to use both 32-bit and 64-bit
     
    DXUnInst.cmd -- (15,803 bytes) -- Uninstaller which should uninstall DirectX completely from any Windows OS no matter how it was installed
     
    ----------------------------------
     
    So since directx_Jun2010_redist.exe is (100,271,992 bytes), you can see how much smaller any of these options are, and yet they will install the same files as the original redist.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  4. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from niTe_RiDeR_Pr0 in Repack installer request?   
    You can make your own using this - DXCB - DirectX file Collector and addon Builder - and you can leave out anything you don't want/need.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  5. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from alfreire in Internet Download Manager (IDM) v6.25 Build 21 [RePack v3.0] with Silent Install Switch   
    I have no idea what that means.
     

    I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree.
    As to comparing one developer to another, they all have different backgrounds, experiences and abilities, they all have to start somewhere, and it takes time and effort for them to develop their craft. If you are not able to politely offer meaningful and constructive criticism, then please just sit back and quietly wait until the installer has evolved to the point at which you are willing to use it.
    niTe_RiDeR_Pro has made it clear that he currently does not plan to allow his installers to be extracted. If that is a deal-breaker for you then I guess we are at a standoff (aka deadlock):
     



    Cheers and Regards
  6. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from alfreire in Internet Download Manager (IDM) v6.25 Build 21 [RePack v3.0] with Silent Install Switch   
    It better not be.  At WinCert we only support, promote, distribute, and encourage free, (preferably), or trial versions of apps. Distribution of "activated" or registered versions of commercial or shareware apps are considered to be warez, and we do not support that here.  Or did I misunderstand you?
     
    Cheers and Regards
  7. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from niTe_RiDeR_Pr0 in Internet Download Manager (IDM) v6.25 Build 21 [RePack v3.0] with Silent Install Switch   
    It better not be.  At WinCert we only support, promote, distribute, and encourage free, (preferably), or trial versions of apps. Distribution of "activated" or registered versions of commercial or shareware apps are considered to be warez, and we do not support that here.  Or did I misunderstand you?
     
    Cheers and Regards
  8. Like
    bphlpt reacted to Legolash2o in wintoolkit & live system   
    Already planned and sorta implemented
  9. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from StopLooking in Looking for Win Toolkit?   
    To better keep the Win Toolkit discussions together, as its capabilities have grown to include Windows 7, Windows 8.x, and beyond, Win Toolkit has been moved to it's own sub-forum in the WinCert Member Projects section.  You can find it here - Win Toolkit.
     
    See you there!
     
    Cheers and Regards
  10. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from niTe_RiDeR_Pr0 in Win Toolkit doesn't support the latest 8.1 ISOs?   
    @niTe_RiDeR_Pro, the problem as I see it, is that currently the Win Toolkit section is located in the Windows 7 sub-forum, and this was a Windows 8 question.  In my opinion, what should probably happen is the entire Win Toolkit forum should be moved to the WinCert Member Projects sub-forum. It would then be up to Liam whether separate Win7 and Win8 sections are also created.

    Cheers and Regards
  11. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from alfreire in Silent Install Switches   
    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
  12. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from iamsuperuser in Silent Install Switches   
    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
  13. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from alfreire in Win7 ISO with SP1 U (Media Refresh) not available anymore   
    MS has taken these down before and restored them after a few days.  While I don't doubt that MS would want to force folks to jump through hoops since regular support has ended for Win 7 as yet another boneheaded decision MS has made, the official status is only a guess by heidoc.net:
     
    (emphasis mine)

    I guess we'll have to wait and see if it sticks this time, or if there is a more official announcement.
     
    In the meantime, you should probably be sure you have a valid source for future use tucked away for safe keeping, regardless what you need to do to obtain it, just in case.  Not that we can officially encourage or support any underhanded, illegal behavior, of course.

    There are other officially sanctioned ways to obtain a valid source disk, all of which will usually cost the user some amount of money.  MS might "send you a replacement disk instead. This will happen at a small processing fee, and also requires you to enter the product key of course." "Windows 7 is available from Amazon in three different editions: Windows 7 Home Premium, Windows 7 Professional and Windows 7 Ultimate", but I don't know in what languages. You can also usually find different versions available on ebay or other such sites. Or if you are desperate, willing and able you "can still buy a new or second hand Windows 7 system, and receive a fresh disk with it. If you have an existing key, you can of course use it with the purchased disk as well, and hence equip two computers with Windows."  Expensive I know, but as a last resort...
     
    Remember, you always had to have an official product key anyway in order to legally use Windows 7 for longer than the 30 day trial period, which you were able to reset 3 times for a total of 120 days.
     
    But none of the above options are as inexpensive, quick and easy as being able to download the source from an official MS site.  Let's hope MS comes to their senses and restores this ability for at least as long as Win 7 is in extended support.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  14. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from niTe_RiDeR_Pr0 in Internet Download Manager (IDM) v6.25 Build 21 [RePack v3.0] with Silent Install Switch   
    @Forseti, there was no reason for you to have attempted to post that image. That went too far. Remember the forum rules, in this case:
     

    @niTe_RiDeR_Pro, you didn't help matters when you egged him on referring to his posts as "nonsense" and saying that he was a "strange person". I have edited your posts to remove those statements.
     
     
    Let us all please remember to treat all members of the board with the same respect that we want them to treat us.
     
    So instead of criticizing the way the addon creator chose to make an addon:
     

    Cheers and Regards
  15. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from niTe_RiDeR_Pr0 in Internet Download Manager (IDM) v6.25 Build 21 [RePack v3.0] with Silent Install Switch   
    @Forseti,
     
    The app is made with Inno as both niTe_RiDeR_Pro and Escorpiom have confirmed.  Just because you are not able to unpack an installer to satisfy your curiosity as to how it works does not make an app a security risk nor does it make it a "bad installer"..  There are many apps, both free, like this one, and commercial whose developers have chosen to prevent the apps from being unpacked, and those developers are within their rights to do so and they do not have to justify their decision.  As Escorpiom has also mentioned, we are aware that the IDM installers that niTe_RiDeR_Pro is working on in his free time to provide for all of the members here at WinCert for their convenience have some issues which niTe_RiDeR_Pro is working on to resolve.  If you have some specific issues that this installer is causing and you have some suggestions on how to fix those issues, or you have some specific requests on how the app can be improved, then by all means please help by politely posting those here and explain your reasoning for the benefit of all of our readers.  If your only reason for posting is that you do not want to install any app that you are not able to unpack, then you have made your point and you do not need to post again.
     
    Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  16. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from Noob3 in Wintoolkit for Windows 8.1   
    For a productive Win 8.x, I might suggest checking out some of the posts by NoelC over at MSFN such as this one.  He does most, if not all, of his setup manually, but he avoids interacting with "Metro" at all costs and strives to make his Win 8.x system look and act as much like Win 7 as possible.  He even wrote an e-book about how to set up such a system yourself that you can find mentioned here.  At US $20 it's less than half what NTlite costs so maybe that might appeal to you more.  Just a thought.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  17. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from Noob3 in Wintoolkit for Windows 8.1   
    The reply wasn't meant to be sarcastic.

    It appears you are correct that NTlite does seem to be able to remove most of "Metro", at least more than what I thought it did. Not quite all, but effectively it does since there are no more "Metro" apps left to run:
     

    Since I choose not to remove any system components, (I just disable what I don't need), and I'm very happy with Win 7 and have chosen not to downgrade to any version of Win 8.x (that was sarcastic ), I'll let someone else that is more familiar with Win Toolkit's component removal capabilities respond to you if they wish to.

    Cheers and Regards
  18. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from Noob3 in Wintoolkit for Windows 8.1   
    If you are trying to remove ALL of the "Metro" 'crap', then I think you are out of luck.  Win Toolkit does not, and has no plans to that I am aware of, remove all of "Metro".  I'm also not not aware of any other tool that can remove all of "Metro".  "Metro" is too much of an entrenched part of the OS now.  Do you know of any such tool capable of that?  But just because "Metro" is there doesn't mean you have to use any of it.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  19. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from niTe_RiDeR_Pr0 in Internet Download Manager (IDM) - v6.21 Build 19 [Switchless Silent SFX]   
    Please edit the previous post instead of making multiple posts in a short time.  Especially when the posts are related in their topic and there have not been any intervening posts by anyone else.  It'll keep the board looking neater.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  20. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from alfreire in Internet Download Manager (IDM) v6.25 Build 21 [RePack v3.0] with Silent Install Switch   
    Thank you.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  21. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from alfreire in [INDEX] Complete RePacks List [Updated on 17-4-2017]   
    Thank you very much.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  22. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from alfreire in [INDEX] Complete RePacks List [Updated on 17-4-2017]   
    Thanks, the list is a good idea, but any chance of sorting the list, maybe alphabetically, to make it easier to see what is there?
     
    Cheers and Regards
  23. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from boscru6469 in Question on Component Removal   
    From what I understand, the way that Win Toolkit removes components doesn't actually remove them from the install source, it just prevents the "removed" components from being installed.  So the install source does get any smaller, (though I don't know why it got bigger for you), but the installed OS is smaller.
     
    Cheers and Regards
  24. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from niTe_RiDeR_Pr0 in [INDEX] Complete RePacks List [Updated on 17-4-2017]   
    Thanks, the list is a good idea, but any chance of sorting the list, maybe alphabetically, to make it easier to see what is there?
     
    Cheers and Regards
  25. Like
    bphlpt got a reaction from Kormann in 7-Zip - v9.35 Beta   
    Thanks for understanding.
     
    You are right that there is not a "rule" about if, but it is rather board/net etiquette or courtesy.  If the original Addon maker is no longer active on the board, or if he gives you prior permission, or he asks for help when he is having a problem either with the Addon or in RL, then those would all change the situation.  Other boards or even other Addon makers might react differently to the "competition", but not here in this case.  Another situation where I think it is perfectly appropriate to post an alternate solution is if there is a difference in application, in other words if one is a Switchless Installer and the other is an Addon.  But even then I would hope the two developers would talk and cooperate with each other to make sure they both understand what the other's intentions are, and different threads should be used.  Or if substantial suggestions are made in the thread about ways to modify/improve the Addon and the original Addon maker specifically declines to incorporate the changes for his own reasons, then I think it is appropriate to start a new thread with the alternate solution and let the community decide which version they prefer.  But remember, hopefully you will be prepared to support your version for an extended period of time, especially if the original Addon maker decides to withdraw his version.
     
    Cheers and Regards
×
×
  • Create New...