RogueSpear has ceased development of AutoImage. 
He's jumping the M$ ship and moving to Linux. I saw this coming a while ago and I hardly blame him.
It's possible he'll release the source code and some enterprising soul will pick up where he left off. 
2,976 2009-03-15 02:00:30
Re: RIS input (11 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
2,977 2009-03-14 18:19:44
Re: Can I install DriverPacks with nLite? (7 replies, posted in Frequently Asked Questions)
Stickied! 
2,978 2009-03-14 08:54:25
Re: A quick question (2 replies, posted in Software)
Sigh...
Do NOT use nlite for drivers!
Read the tutorial. It's for an older version of DriverPacks BASE, but it'll point you in the right direction.
http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=1449
2,979 2009-03-14 03:15:23
Re: DPInst with DriverPacks on network repository (130 replies, posted in Universal Imaging)
kickarse wrote:
Ian, you can change one number in the reg binary of the msoobe registry key and call the msoobe activation and it will ask for a new number.
Unfortunately, that only works for VLK licenses. Not OEM pre-activation.
Microsoft wrote:
Warning The steps in the article are effective only on Volume License media. If you try these steps on OEM media or on retail media, you will not change the product key.
2,980 2009-03-13 17:03:11
Re: DPInst with DriverPacks on network repository (130 replies, posted in Universal Imaging)
OK, looks like I have some studying to do. Just downloaded OSP1.10.0.3 so I'm going to go off and play. If I find something useful, I'll post back here.
No promises though.
Now, back to the thread topic...
2,981 2009-03-13 09:44:12
Re: DPInst with DriverPacks on network repository (130 replies, posted in Universal Imaging)
I don't see why not. My addon just runs a batch script that can be run at any time prior to OOBE to pre-activate the OS. Once the OS asks for a product key, it's too late to pre-activate.
Let me know what I can do to make my addon better or more compatible to your needs.
2,982 2009-03-13 09:39:55
Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms (101 replies, posted in Feature Requests)
Well we never determined that XP-64 was a viable platform to devote our time; considering (from our perspective) it doesn't have a significant foothold in the professional community anymore since Vista x64 was released two years ago. In my organization, we have well over 1000 client workstations (half of which are 64-bit CPUs) and they are ALL humming merrily along with XP-32 until our ongoing migration to Vista-32 (which I'm opposing, but losing). Even our servers were running Server 2003R2 until they got updated to Server 2008. XP-64 just had too many problems and compatibility issues to deploy broadly.
I'm certain though that some of you will disagree with me. That's fine. I've been defending the right to voice your opinion for almost 22 years on active duty (although since MeOW appears to be from the Netherlands, not directly). Irrelevant.
You have your opinion, I have mine, we have ours. This is still an open forum.
MeOW, If you want to start your own XP-64 DriverPacks, feel free to do so, and we may help you in your endeavors. Many here have a wide expertise in different fields and hold the keys to unlock several OS 'secrets'.
But don't expect us to jump up and be your personal 'code monkeys' just because you're raising your voice at us. I don't react too well to openly negative (and unwarranted) criticism. Being nice about it would have carried you much further here.
Be nice.
Don't be rude.
Learn from us as well as teach us.
Good night.
2,983 2009-03-12 07:42:53
Re: REQUEST: Printer Driver Pack (3 replies, posted in Other)
You won't.
At least not until printer manufacturers start releasing 'unified' drivers for their entire range.
2,984 2009-03-11 17:03:59
Re: REQUEST: Printer Driver Pack (3 replies, posted in Other)
Check the 3rd party DriverPacks area in these forums.
Welcome to DriverPacks.net!
2,985 2009-03-11 16:58:33
Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms (101 replies, posted in Feature Requests)
BigBrit wrote:
Are you using 32 or 64 bit Win 7 ??? What CPU/Memory etc.
On the notebook I'm running 32-bit Win7. 1.4GHz Pentium M maxed with 1GB RAM.
Boot times on the notebook (cold boot to usable desktop, launch Firefox):
Vista32: 3:20
XP32: 2:19
Win7x86: 1:29
I've been hammering on 64-bit on my Q6600 tower. Both have been rock stable.
2,986 2009-03-11 08:40:49
Re: The .ini file for DriverPack not found is invalid: (3 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
ygor.almeida wrote:
2009-03-10 15:59:03 : <INIT> Found .ini file for DriverPack CPU! ("C:\DriverPack_CPU_wnt5_x86-32.ini")
2009-03-10 15:59:03 : <INIT> Importing exceptions for this driver because the directory "C:\D\\CPU" did exist.
2009-03-10 15:59:03 : <CRIT> The .ini file for DriverPack not found is invalid: the entry [DriverPack]\name is not found!
The fault is in your DriverPack CPU. What version did you integrate?
Strange that there's an extra backslash C:\D\\CPU
2,987 2009-03-11 08:30:15
Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms (101 replies, posted in Feature Requests)
Well, the DriverPacks themselves wouldn't be difficult to create (dpms is a nightmare regardless). The DriverPacks Finisher would probably work fine without modification. The main problem would be DriverPacks BASE since it only works with 32-bit install platform folder structure and file mods. As far as I'm concerned, XP-64 is a dead platform. Useful in it's day, but dead nonetheless.
I for one refuse to even touch an XP-64 machine (I've built a few in my time) and I always recommend to my clients to upgrade to Vista x64 as quickly as possible. Now with Win7 only months away from release, I'm telling them to hold off until then. Win7 is AWESOME! I've been running the latest 7048 build on my 4-yr old Gateway notebook and it's flawless! Much faster than XP or Vista.
The King is dead! Long live the King!
2,988 2009-03-11 05:38:15
Re: RIS Install and method 2 (32 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
Ummmmm...waffles...
2,989 2009-03-11 05:36:27
Re: Graphics B x86 (36 replies, posted in Vista / 7 DriverPack Graphics B)
Ack! You beat me to it! I just got home and was about to upload.
Guess I need to be quicker next time!
2,990 2009-03-11 05:36:19
Re: Graphics B x64 (41 replies, posted in Vista / 7 DriverPack Graphics B)
Ack! You beat me to it! I just got home and was about to upload.
Guess I need to be quicker next time!
2,991 2009-03-10 03:56:49
Re: make a CD with just the drivers (12 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
LOL,
Seriously though, just run DriverPacks BASE and select the "Stand Alone Drivers" option.
2,992 2009-03-09 16:54:41
Re: Had you released a dps_massStorage_901 which size above 6M? (6 replies, posted in DriverPack Mass Storage)
That's wrong. The filesize should be: 5.58 MB (5,854,427 bytes)
File: DP_MassStorage_wnt5_x86-32_901.7z
CRC-32: 94c678e5
MD4: d0b16a9f1891805d48f04b7f6742d098
MD5: f2e76226613aa8ce09f8ddfba695f373
SHA-1: 6b35c80b1c456c38d485d8750ee3403e93425a26
2,993 2009-03-07 03:27:23
Re: NVIDIA geforece 9800 GT driver issue. (3 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
OK, can you test this nightly DriverPack Graphics A?
If that doesn't work, post your HWIDs and relevant log files
2,994 2009-03-06 04:36:10
Re: NVIDIA geforece 9800 GT driver issue. (3 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
I suppose that could happen if your remote desktop visual settings were for an unsupported resolution/size. To be honest, I've never tried it.
Typically you'd want to use the lowest resolution to increase response time over the network.
2,995 2009-03-04 07:02:16
Re: Intel 82865G video missed in Dimension 7100 (1 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
That driver is not signed in DriverPack Graphics B. Have you tried the latest nightly? You are on the testing team...
2,996 2009-03-03 04:23:53
Re: [SLVD] nForce BSOD (14 replies, posted in DriverPack Chipset)
Problem solved!
Closed thread...
2,997 2009-03-02 05:19:26
Re: Potential bug with driver signing repression v2 (10 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
To be honest, KTD is just a waste of space. I never use it.
It causes too many problems in my experience.
SAD on the other hand is just awesome! Not perfect, but getting there.
2,998 2009-03-02 05:17:53
Re: Toshiba Satellite P105-S9337 downgraded from Vista to XP (3 replies, posted in DriverPack Sound)
If Toshiba offers the Vista->XP downgrade option, then the drivers you need are provided by Toshiba.
Many times, the Vista drivers that come with the system restore discs are XP/Vista compatible.
2,999 2009-03-02 03:33:17
Re: Potential bug with driver signing repression v2 (10 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
OverFlow wrote:
Don't enable KTD... it is not needed and has been replaced by SAD
Geez, didn't I just say that?
http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic. … 661#p29661
3,000 2009-03-01 19:09:47
Re: [IMPL] Intel GMA driver package 6.14.10.5404 (Z7x/B77/H77support) (54 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
Wow, adding 4 HWIDs but dropping 12?
1 step forward, 3 steps back.
*Edit
Updated DriverPack Graphics B to 902n4
I1\
Updated to DriverVer 02/03/2009,6.14.10.5035 (14.38.0.5035) driver signing intact
I3\
DriverVer 02/15/2008,6.14.10.4926 (14.32.4.4926) (Driver signing RESTORED!)