Search options (Page 25 of 213)

@mr_smartepants... I feel your pain too, But, regarding the "for you to DEMAND" comment, he did say please.

I worked for the phone company. The desktop support group was a unit of several dozen people who supported over 5k desktops, and we were admins, However, we did not have full access to the network, that was a different department, and I can assure you they would not have allowed us torrent downloads... period. On the other hand they could easily afford to pay the bill for us to provide the direct downloads year in and year out. They may have even supplied the server to use for this at no cost to the project. In that situation it would be a good investment to support us. The cost of supporting us would be far less than the increased cost of supporting 5000 desktops without us.

If not having direct downloads gets you fired up, do something about it. Sounds like you work for an organization that has the resources to be able to help. So rather than complaining and compounding the problem, become part of the solution.

Our bandwidth routinely exceeds 10TB a month... no free options to handle that kind of bandwidth.
We are considering a pay for option for our users that would have CDN downloads. We haven't had much interest expressed in that option to date. As always everyone wants something for nothing... Ask for a little money and people act like you ran over their cat. Torrents cost very little and that is what our user base is willing to pay. If you would be interested in or willing to donate for direct downloads this is your opportunity to say so .

Direct downloads would cost us well over 1000 USD a month based on 10~20 TB, We were fortunate in the past to have that donated, but we can not expect that to always be an option. Direct downloads are preferred by us as well as you but we simply can't, our revenue stream does not exist. The cost of one month of direct downloads would far exceed the combined total of all donations received over the past two years .

the short version is:
10~20 terabytes of traffic a month costs a huge amount of money...
Nobody ever donates any money.
Torrents are free, and that is what we can afford based on the donations we receive.

Thanks for being such a big fan of our project. We like that .

Thanks for taking the time to post and welcome to DriverPacks.net forum. 

summary, Does this get you fired up? Then do something about it... The ball is in your court.

all the driverpacks is vague... do you mean

All main NT5 and NT6 (x86 and x64?)
OR
all main and 3rd party DriverPack for both NT5 and NT6... (x86 and x64?)

which versions will you use?

In any event it's a lot... and it is subjective...
IE 999 out of 1000 people would never need or include LAN RIS
Perhaps you don't need the printer pack, ETC....

it's easy to find out... each download page lists the extracted and compressed sizes. Simply add up the extracted sizes of the ones you want.

http://driverpacks.net/driverpacks/wind … cs-a/11.07

File details

    File size
185.92 MB (194,947,500 bytes)
    Original size
385.85 MB (404,594,295 bytes)
    Compression ratio
2.08:1
    MD5 checksum
203EAFBFDD3783C95323AFF268750F6E

extracted that pack is 386 MB... or 405 million bytes (listed as 'original size')

We can't answer that question for you... At least not accurately / precisely. There are simply too many variables. IE what is your cluster size? This will directly effect the actual space required on the media.
The info is available to you, and without you having to actually extract them

Woot!

the driver that supports your HWID.  mr_smartepants is not the only joker around here.

It was likely updated to a newer version. sometimes new versions drop HWIDs. Sometimes newer versions require a newer firmware version. There are lots of reasons, too many to list. Suffice it to say it happens, and it happens often. If this crud were easy we would not need to be here

Well yeah... That is kinda the point of us providing the DriverPacks

Reporting the HWIDs of a failed driver install is a HUGE help towards making the DriverPacks work on all hardware.
Even better if you can additionally report to us you know of a previous DriverPacks version that worked.
Best case is if you can also point us to a new / updated driver that you know works. (tested known good)

We are a small team with very limited hardware to test on...
We can't fix it if we don't know what's broke and we can only test a VERY small portion of the drivers in the packs.
We can't tell if our changes fix an issue if you don't reply and tell us if our changes worked.
YOU are a very important member of our team to . 

Contrary to popular belief we do NOT have a secret lab with tens of thousands of little black boxes that represent every possible PC hardware configuration ever built, BUT we are looking for someone to donate one if you know anybody who has one they would like to get rid of. LOL PS a volunteer to run around and put CD's in them would be a plus! ROFL.

the point is users like you who use the packs daily are a big part of the DriverPacks team... but only if you report your HWIDs DriverPacks versions and your results.

Thanks Tom! Welcome to DriverPacks.net

Marking this as solved.

Thanks for reporting your success and have a great day.

Welcome to DriverPacks.net

Yes this must be done BEFORE you install windows... Then it will remain available AFTER you are done installing.

that is why it is called Keep The Driver. Normally the driver(s) are deleted at the end of the install

slipstream the packs into your install... then 'Keep' only the wireless (and modems / monitors if you like)

you could use SAD (Stand Alone Drivers) by calling SAD (with your pack included)
Add  an entry to call "DP_Install_Tool.cmd" to runonce or runonceex.

What was the second factor???

USB stick is a great idea... but SAD2 from a USB stick would be a far superior method to the manual one he demonstrates. I personally like a single click soulution. his method takes a LOT of user input. I worked in a shop and would typically have four to eight PC's on my desk at a time hooked to a KVM. No way i would have time to go through all those steps on each one (baby sit). Set SAD in motion and move on to the next unit... When you get back it's done.  time is money. Even if i only had one PC to fix I could be working on something else while the drivers installed. (multitasking)   

Smart is right about the rules... However Wim makes the rules, and mr_s and I have some input on all subjects DriverPacks related. Further it states "users" may not... We are the main team .

Let's get the ideas flowing and if something seems popular and feasable then we can decide if it is doable and within the rules and can be done in good faith with all concerned parties.

We could potentially get around the issue of making a sale by saying a Preloaded USB stick would come FREE with any donation of over $20.

the link to the HWID's tool is in our signatures

1) 7b is an error with mass storage drivers...
    1a. therefore chipset is not relevant.

2) Chipset is greyed out because BartPE does not support chipset drivers.
2a. BartPE is not windows, It is a pre-installation  environment. (PE)
2b. all drivers in Bartpe are TextMode drivers, not windows drivers.
2c. Sound drivers are also not supported, see 2a.
2d. there is no such thing as a textmode chipset driver
   d1] Try to find an F6 driver for any chipset you ever heard of.

3)Yes it is possible and No it would not be great, your PE disk would likely just crash. There is zero benefit to force installing chipset since only textmode (read DOS) drivers are in use. Even if someone did write the plugin that would allow them to be forcefully installed and I then enabled the chipset plugin. you would still be without any acceleration benefit, it would simply take the disk longer to load and for no useful purpose whatsoever.
- 3a HWPNP is one such plugin that was used to enable some advanced drivers in BartPE. UBCD4Win uses it to enable video drivers. At one point Video drivers were disabled too. HWPnP was never advanced far enough to allow multimedia and chipset drivers. Now that the NT6 version of WinPE is out it is unlikely that it ever will be developed that far. PE is an installation and  recovery tool not a replacement for windows so little interest / development was dedicated to enabling non essential drivers (like chipset).

4) Instead of making a ridiculous statement like "it would be great if you", try asking an intelligent question. LIKE

Why are the driverpacks chipset drivers not available in BartPE?
Would enabling chipset help with a 7b error?

Then you look smart and eager to learn.

When you say "if you do this, then you will fix this" implies you know better than we do... If you are going to go there you had better make darn certain you are correct, and you were not. 

If that last statement seems harsh...
When you signed up you agreed to the rules and guidelines.
on the rules page is a link to How to ask questions the smart way
no matter how much forum experience you have it's a good read.
I re-read it once a year or so myself since there is also good tips on how to answer questions intelligently .

Questions are always safe, and well taken. Telling someone how to do their business is risky at best. Especially if the admin is a grumpy old fart.

5) If you have a 7B error then
- read "Read BEFORE you post" linked in my signature, and is Rule #0.
- report your HWIDs here 
- link us to the F6 drivers that work for you 

we will gleefully add your driver the the mass storage pack (fixing the 7b error)

Thanks for "asking"

Welcome to DriverPacks.net

PS request denied.

He pulled them because the auto update feature is no longer supported...

He was getting to many emails about why the auto updater no longer worked.

Of course the answer is "greed killed the auto updater".

please use the hwids tool linked in our signature for the hwids

the one you posted is not valid. (unless you are running a non windows OS, and we only support windows )

a valid HWID will look like

PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&SUBSYS_61121095&REV_02\4&1F7DBC9F&0&58F0
    Name: Silicon Image SiI 3112 SATARaid Controller
    Hardware ID's:
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&SUBSYS_61121095&REV_02
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&SUBSYS_61121095
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&CC_010400
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&CC_0104
    Compatible ID's:
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&REV_02
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112
        PCI\VEN_1095&CC_010400
        PCI\VEN_1095&CC_0104
        PCI\VEN_1095
        PCI\CC_010400
        PCI\CC_0104