Talk:Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 14:04, 2 August 2009

Latest revision as of 11:15, 16 August 2025

(31 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{talkheader}}

{{WikiProject Computingbanner shell|class=Start}}|1=

{{WikiProject MicrosoftComputing Windows|class=start|importance=midLow}}

{{WikiProject Microsoft Windows |importance=High}}

}}

==Differences from Windows XP altogether==

Installation is handled by a PE, can be used for command prompt and remote desktop as well. Allows complete customisation within the installation, including removal of Internet Explorer (parts of it most likely) and Windows Media Player. The only part selected by default is IE. Partitioning is handled graphically rather than the Windows NT pre-Vista blue screen interface. Supports an "Unattended" XML file, rather than XP's INI-style unattended file.

Line 10 ⟶ 13:

[[User:Tatsh|Tatsh]] ([[User talk:Tatsh|talk]]) 18:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

The Installation is WIM Image based,nearly exactly the way Vista is deployed to pcs. Instead of copying files like the usual XP setup does, it copies a hard drive image of the OS to your HD. This Image can be configured with the setup assistent ( which creates an xml file behind the scene ), wher you can choose between a minimal, a "typical", full or custom installation.

A Custom Install lets you remove via checkboxes :

Internet Explorer 6SP1 ,DirectX9, Mediaplayer 10,Messenger 4.7.3001, the complete XPSP2 Driver.cab, all Help Files, "Local management ( mmc, gpedit, secpol ) and complex lannguage support BEFORE the image is copied, so these features will never reach your PC.

The Downside is : you can by no way re-install what you have not installed. In "Add/Remove Programs" there is no tab for Windows Components.So if you end with no IE6, and thus making installatin of a lot of apps that rely on MSHTML impossible by doing so, you will have to re-install the OS with the option IE included.

What is missing everytime and not included is for example Outlook Express and Netmeeting,Paint and Windows Movie Maker.

Replacements that do work :

Windows Live Mail,Thunderbird.. MovieMaker 2.0 can be found as a standalone download from various pc-magazine websites ( MS does no longer offer it) and can be installed like a standalone application ( but it relies on installed WMP ) .If you install the .NEt Framework 2.0 you can use Paint.NET as a replacement for paint.

In the case for paint and others ( tiny apps in XP ) in most cases one can copy the exe files from a full XP over and it will also work.

Office XP and Office 2003 both install and work like expected. ( Access not tested )

I use Avast Antirus 4.7 and 4.8 plus Spybot S&D for security and have not found any issues.

Line 31 ⟶ 34:

If IE6 was included you will be offered IE7 via automatic updates and as of WMP10 included you can upgrade to 11 that way too. But these two will decrease the experience a lot because the requirements for the newer apps are double that of the included.

Sp3 for Xp cannot be installed onto this OS. Sidenote : if you visit WU website and search for updates you will be offered SP3, which intends to install and then fails with the note that you need a special version . SO the OS seems to identify itself falsely as a standard XP SP2 and not as a special OS. (Note that the embedded version of SP3 will install, but you have to manually download it, and it's not particularly easy to find via web searches.)

Overall MS has done a good job with this. The performance on such old hardware like Pentium 2 with typically 128 MB Ram is very good. A standard full XP with SP2 would slow such a pc down.

When it comes to "unique Design" there is a mixed feeling :

The overall appeareance is XP with Luna theme ( enabled by default ), excluding wallpaper and screensavers. The icons are the same as XP, only the screensaver, the Aboutbox and the System-properties will tell you "windows Fundamentals for legacy PCs 2006". Help and Supportcenter falsely says "XP Professional" ( a known bug - see the MS Knowledgebase ) and the Bootscreen is XPs.

Line 44 ⟶ 46:

nearly all XP Internet and lightweight applications are supported. because the Appcompat engine of XP is included, one can also run Win 9x and older Software. I really like this OS from setup to using it. It feels a lot better and snappier than XP.

On new hardware it will fly, and on old hardware it does exactly what it offers :

bring XP features and NT stability to windows 9x machines, thus securing them ( Security Center and Firewall is included / Windows Defender can be downloaded and works ) I think if they would sell this officially oem or retail, they would wonder how many people actually would choose this over xp standard or any vista.

Line 50 ⟶ 52:

[[Special:Contributions/82.119.7.20|82.119.7.20]] ([[User talk:82.119.7.20|talk]]) 08:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

:: To address the SP3 problem up there, the SP3 for FLP is a separate download. It's slightly different from the XP SP3. It is available here: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=38764 <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.48.173.224|173.48.173.224]] ([[User talk:173.48.173.224|talk]]) 14:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==Limitation?==

Why is the lack of full windows XP features a "limitation"? The whole design philosophy is to make it work as a thin client. You may as well write that Mini's have the "limitation" of not having a V8 engine and the ability to tow boats. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Retroguy90|Retroguy90]] ([[User talk:Retroguy90|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Retroguy90|contribs]]) 10:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Does anyone know whether there is an 'upper-limit' on this version of windows? I have installed it on an old AMD k6-II 500mhz box with no problem, but it flat out rejects two newer boxes, one 800mhzEB PIII PC and a 1Ghz Packard Bell PIII Laptop. Perhaps it doesnt like hardware which is 'too new'? the problem on the 800mhz box may have been the same as described elsewhere, 'IRQ_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL' BSoD. Furthermore, having the CD in the drive during boot on a WinXP SP3 box seems to have copied the root folder to the desktop in such a way that the files cannot be removed from the desktop. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/78.86.166.40|78.86.166.40]] ([[User talk:78.86.166.40|talk]]) 14:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::There is no "upper limit" on the kinds of systems it may run on. Out of the box, it has an 80-90MB RAM footprint in my VMs. It's spectacularly good at getting out of the way and running your programs. People rant and rave about W2K, but there are programs that will not even install in W2K after snagging DLLs from XP, but will install just fine in FLP, like the WordPerfect suite. I have compared this to Windows Thin Client (the supposedly de-goobered 7) and it runs rings around Thin Client. Microsoft downplays FLP's usefulness because it clearly shows that you don't need a half-gig RAM footprint (like that seen in Vista and above). It will happily see all 4 cores of a 4 core processor. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.48.173.224|173.48.173.224]] ([[User talk:173.48.173.224|talk]]) 14:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::I deleted the part where it was said it doesn't have Task Manager because it DOES HAVE!!! ;D <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/165.125.176.9|165.125.176.9]] ([[User talk:165.125.176.9|talk]]) 17:01, 2 November 2012‎ (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP -->

It works fine at Core2 Duo E8400 overclocked to 3.6 Ghz, with 4Gb of Ram, Asus P5Q, HD4870.

==Hibernate==

The article reads that hibernate is not supported/can't be enabled. This is not true. I'm running FLP on several machines and provided you have enough free space (atleast 1x the RAM size) you can enable and hibernate just fine, I have tested this and it works. Please see the screen shot of my [http://www.xpize.net/ XPize'd] WinFLP install with working hibernation support [http://img301.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hibernatefundamentalsyz7.png here]. I have edited the original article to reflect the reality e.g. hibernation being functional. Maybe others running WinFLP can confirm this. Thank you.

[[Special:Contributions/219.95.10.143|219.95.10.143]] ([[User talk:219.95.10.143|talk]]) 04:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

-- I've tested WinFLP on two laptops and had no luck, however on my desktops I was able to get Hibernate to work. I wonder if it don't work with laptops? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/65.185.10.190|65.185.10.190]] ([[User talk:65.185.10.190|talk]]) 01:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Line 71 ⟶ 80:

==Games==

Question : is that true that Windows Fundamentals (WinFLP) does supports games, as suggested in the article ? Many sources say it does not, so it is unclear.

By "Games", i'm not referring to card solitary games, but rather to full fledged and graphic-hungry DirectX9.0c games, such as UT2004, Oblivion and so on... <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:81.65.70.192|81.65.70.192]] ([[User talk:81.65.70.192|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/81.65.70.192|contribs]]) 16:57, 9 January 2007</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:Yes it supports DX9.0c, but if your hardware is ancient, the game won't magically play just because you install this. Also, if you want to use the Joystick calibration applet, you have to acquire joy.cpl from elsewhere. - [[User:WeniWidiWiki|WeniWidiWiki]] 23:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

::I think the reason he is asking is because he is considering it for the memory/ram usage savings, for gaming. [[Special:Contributions/66.215.12.70|66.215.12.70]] ([[User talk:66.215.12.70|talk]]) 01:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

:::I have FLP installed on my computer, and can play new games just fine (Oblivion etc). --[[Special:Contributions/83.248.146.115|83.248.146.115]] ([[User talk:83.248.146.115|talk]]) 05:35, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

==Obtaining WinFLP==

Question : how does one obtain this operating system? there seems to be no opportunity to purchase or download WFLPC anywhere.<small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Magic.dominic|Magic.dominic]] ([[User talk:Magic.dominic|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Magic.dominic|contribs]]) 00:22, 3 April 2007</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:Per the article: "It is exclusively available to [[Software Assurance]] customers." I suspect we might want to make the article clearer on this point. —[[User:DragonHawk|DragonHawk]] <small>([[User talk:DragonHawk|talk]])</small> 18:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

:It was leaked on P2P networks three weeks after its official release. But be aware that it is illegal to get it from there.--[[User:87.122.10.198|87.122.10.198]] 08:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

::"But be aware that it is illegal to get it from " -- "If they're going to steal, we want them to steal ours" - Bill Gates circa 1998. Microsoft's greatest fear is that you try alternatives like Linux and like them. Note that this doesn't mean I am saying that you should steal FLP, but Microsoft's view is that "at least you're not using that other stuff." Microsoft is well aware that copyright infringement distorts the market in favor of the incumbents. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.48.173.224|173.48.173.224]] ([[User talk:173.48.173.224|talk]]) 14:12, 29 August 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== NULL.SYS ==

Line 93 ⟶ 104:

:[[WP:TPG|Talk pages]] are not intended to be used for tech support. You might try the [[WP:RD|reference desk]]. —<small>[[User:DragonHawk|DragonHawk]] ([[User talk:DragonHawk|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/DragonHawk|hist]])</small> 20:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

-Anyone have any objections to this completely out of place request for tech advice to be deleted??? [[User:Retroguy90|Retroguy90]] ([[User talk:Retroguy90|talk]]) 10:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)retroguy90

-I think it may be worth noting on the actual article that NULL.SYS, and as such, the NUL device, isn't present. It's the analog of *nixen /dev/null and is used by a number of programs. Cygwin/MinGW applications and *nix ports tend to use it, as does Visual Studio, so its absence disables the use of a large number of applications. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/188.221.38.195|188.221.38.195]] ([[User talk:188.221.38.195|talk]]) 17:33, 16 December 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Solution is documented at http://www.cynosurex.com/Forums/DisplayComments.php?file=Batch/NUL_Missing_on_WinFLP

It involves copying a null.sys driver and adding some reg entries:

<pre>

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

; http://www.cynosurex.com/Forums/DisplayComments.php?file=Batch/NUL_Missing_on_WinFLP

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Class\{8ECC055D-047F-11D1-A537-0000F8753ED1}]

"Class"="LegacyDriver"

@="Non-Plug and Play Drivers"

"NoDisplayClass"="1"

"SilentInstall"="1"

"NoInstallClass"="1"

"EnumPropPages32"="SysSetup.Dll,LegacyDriverPropPageProvider"

"Icon"="-19"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Enum\Root\LEGACY_NULL]

"NextInstance"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Enum\Root\LEGACY_NULL\0000]

"Service"="Null"

"Legacy"=dword:00000001

"ConfigFlags"=dword:00000020

"Class"="LegacyDriver"

"ClassGUID"="{8ECC055D-047F-11D1-A537-0000F8753ED1}"

"DeviceDesc"="Null"

"Capabilities"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Enum\Root\LEGACY_NULL\0000\LogConf]

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Enum\Root\LEGACY_NULL\0000\Control]

"ActiveService"="Null"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Null]

"ErrorControl"=dword:00000001

"Group"="Base"

"Start"=dword:00000001

"Tag"=dword:00000001

"Type"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Null\Enum]

"0"="Root\\LEGACY_NULL\\0000"

"Count"=dword:00000001

"NextInstance"=dword:00000001

</pre>

==Fair use rationale for Image:Flp logo.png==

Line 107 ⟶ 167:

Can Windows fundamentals be installed alongside WinXP as a separate operating system, available upon boot?

Also, do we have any benchmarks on the relative performance of FLP, compared to XP? It is all well and good claiming to have "cut the bloat" and "slimmed the os down", but shouldn't we have palpable evidence to that effect? What kind of improvement can we expect for system boot-up over XP. Or for typical Office2003 usage? Web surfing, etc? Hasn't anyone benchmarked FLP (on modern and legacy systems alike) to discover whether the hype holds? [[Special:Contributions/84.254.12.174|84.254.12.174]] ([[User talk:84.254.12.174|talk]]) 14:24, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

:I believe that you can install WinFLP alongside other versions of Windows, although you can only buy it through [[Software Assurance]]. The system requirements are "similar to Windows XP", so I doubt that you'd see a huge performance gain. —&nbsp;'''[[User:Wenli|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#009900;">Wen</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle="color:#992222;">li</fontspan>]]'''&nbsp;^{([[User talk:Wenli|reply here]])} 18:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

== Hardware Requirements ==

Line 116 ⟶ 176:

##

Microsofts own PDF Flyer for WinFLP says the minimum is lower than XP :

"Pentium compatible 133 Mhz and 64 MB of Ram ( recommended 128 MB of Ram )"

For harddrive Space MS says 1.5 GB, but tht differs on what you install and what not. The 1.5 Gb will be needed if you install everything. The smallest configuration would go around 550 MB of Space( For the Multilanguage pack you will also need space ).

Old Laptops with HDs of about 5-10 GB ( common in the late 90s ) can run this very well if small "portable"applications be used.

I can also assure you this OS is way faster than XP on the same hardware and without any further tweaking, even with eyecandy turned on and background applications like virus software and Messenger running.

Line 150 ⟶ 210:

When installing Windows FLP on a system whose storage controller requires drivers that are not included in Windows, the installation procedure is different from Windows XP. The drivers need to be supplied in two distinct ways during installation: 1) During the first startup of the installation, the F6 button must be pressed at the appropriate prompt and a floppy disk with the drivers must be supplied; 2) The drivers must be included on the installation CD. In addition, the utility InfImporter.exe (included with the Windows FLP package) is used to create an XML file named driverinstall.xml that is parsed during a later part of the installation.--[[User:Alban|Alban]] ([[User talk:Alban|talk]]) 22:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

== Major Application Support ==

This article reads that WinFLP does not have support for such major Windows applications such as .NET Framework 3.5. This is untrue. I have been able to install .NET Framework 3.5 on all of the machines I have running WinFLP (which is quite a few) and have been able to use such programs as Paint.NET and even Visual basic 2008-created programs using .NET with no problems.

The article also reads that WinFLP includes DirectX. Although this is true, it is a crippled version from 2005. it should be noted someplace about this, and that users are urged to upgrade to the latest stable version (currently at the time of this writing, the August 2009 release)as soon as possible.

As a longtime user of FLP, I can also safely say that there isn't much of a difference between the application support on a standard Windows XP machine as there is on WinFLP. you just need to add in the few files Microsoft took out (I.E. Null.sys, mspaint.exe, joy.cpl to name a few) and you should be alright. These can be, as has been explained in the SP3 discussion topic above, found mostly in the i386 folder in the mentioned directory after the SP3 install. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.81.245.197|68.81.245.197]] ([[User talk:68.81.245.197|talk]]) 06:27, 19 October 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Alternative "Software Remastering" methods: nLite ==

[[nLite]] should be mentioned in the article as an alternative to FLP. It can be used to decrease the size and memory requirements of any NT 5 family OS, including XP, deploying images containing only the needed features, and potentially achieving more compact systems than FLP if using Windows 2000 as the base, which does not contain as many UI graphics, such as icons, that cannot be fully unloaded from memory. -- [[User:J7n|J7n]] ([[User talk:J7n|talk]]) 12:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

:'''Strong oppose''': Hi. Mentioning nLite is against Wikipedia policy of [[WP:NOTADVERT]]. (They only case in which it is possible is when several [[WP:IS|independent sources]] have compared them. nLite can become a "See also" item.) That aside, mentioning nLite in this article is like mentioning Spacecraft in Tomato article. Best regards, [[User:Codename Lisa|Codename Lisa]] ([[User talk:Codename Lisa|talk]]) 13:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)