Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 1305697344 by 2600:6C42:4F00:2F11:D8A3:90F0:4B96:3EBA (talk) undoing possible vandalism by the same user that vandalized the Windows Server 2025 article |
|||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1=
{{WikiProject Computing
{{WikiProject Microsoft Windows
}}
Line 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?==
Line 57 ⟶ 59:
: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 -->
Line 86 ⟶ 90:
: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 101 ⟶ 106:
-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 115 ⟶ 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. — '''[[User:Wenli|<
== Hardware Requirements ==
Line 170 ⟶ 222:
== 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)
| |||