Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Unattended Windows XP Installation (Read 5689 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Check this out: It's a tutorial that teaches how to set up a Windows XP CD so that you can re-install without having to edit any settings. It'll even automatically install applications, drivers, and the latest Windows Update hotfixes.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #1 –
Yeah, i started to make such a CD last year. It's a hell lot of work if you want to get it right, and that website was much less sophisticated back then. After the 10th or 12th test CD, everything finally worked the way i want it to, since there were many pitfalls - especially if you don't use an english XP - that you can only discover with trial and error (i.e. installing XP from those CDs on a second PC). And it still needs steady maintenance, because you have to add the new patches, some new patches replace old patches, and so forth.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #2 –
Yeah, it really helps if you have a spare copy of VMware or Virtual PC kicking around.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #3 –
If you really want to save yourself some hassle, get Norton Systemworks 2004. It comes with Norton Ghost. Then you can build your baseline machine load including drivers for your system. Take a snapshot of it and burn it to CDROM. If needed, you can reload from the CDROMs, all drivers, and fresh load, in about 20 minutes.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #4 –
Quote
If you really want to save yourself some hassle, get Norton Systemworks 2004. It comes with Norton Ghost. Then you can build your baseline machine load including drivers for your system. Take a snapshot of it and burn it to CDROM. If needed, you can reload from the CDROMs, all drivers, and fresh load, in about 20 minutes.

That's not what i use it for. This CD tremendously simplifies XP installation on different machines. I install it for different people on different PCs, at least once per month, and it would take much longer without this.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #5 –
This is from an earlier post of mine. I believe it can save you a lot of work loading all those M$ critical updates each time.

Quote
The default install of Windows 2000 or Windows XP will use ACPI. This seems like a good idea, since it allows more IRQ sharing. In the case of APIC ( advanced peripheral interface controller AFAIK ) it allows IRQs like 21, 22, 23 etc. My ABX  experience has been that APIC and the use of ACPI ( yes it is a power model, not a true IRQ spec ) make a machine run like a dog. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
If you press F5 during initial install, you can choose to install Windows 2000/XP in 'Standard PC' mode. You gain two critical advantages. First, there is much less IRQ sharing, it will try to give key devices their own IRQs. Yup, all your stuff on IRQ 11 was sucking the life out of your performance.
The other advantage is for you IT guys who like to make one Windows image, and use Norton Ghost to deploy it across several different machines. Yes, I said several different machines, and manufacturers if you like. You can use one image to do different machines with different chipsets, graphic cards, etc. With a little automatic plug and play detection, a few driver updates, you are up and running. No more starting from scratch.

NOTE : With Norton Ghost, you must use this command line to prevent partition resizing. If you don't, Ghost messes it up, and you end up with a non-bootable image on dissimilar computers. I have been using a starting partition size of 9 GB lately. You can use the Microsoft Sysprep utility to automatically expand the image to the full size of the target hard drive later.

GHOST -clone,mode=load,src=d:\my2kimg.gho,dst=1,sze1=f

There is more I can share, however, this is looking blatantly off topic, so I will end for now. The moral of the story is, if you don't mind your P4 2.8 Ghz running like a P4 1.8 Ghz, go ahead and IRQ share. As for me, I like the proven performance boost of 'Standard PC' mode.
 

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #6 –
Quote
This is from an earlier post of mine. I believe it can save you a lot of work loading all those M$ critical updates each time.

So does the unattended installation CD. I have all fixes integrated on the CD; they are applied before the installation finishes.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #7 –
Ok, you seem to be set on doing it your way. That is fine.

Let's have a race to see which install is done first.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #8 –
Quote
Ok, you seem to be set on doing it your way. That is fine.

Let's have a race to see which install is done first.

Well one thing's for sure, the unattended install CD is bound to be more flexible. Don't forget that Windows sets some things according to the hardware during installation, depending on RAM size, BIOS settings and so on. I can install XP on a Celeron 300 and then on a P4 3.0 from the same CD, without having to worry about any such things.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #9 –
I am quite certain your statement is incorrect. Would you please provide proof.

The page file is adjusted at boot time, every time, unless you set it otherwise. That accounts for ram.

The power model, ACPI/APM and interrupt model, PIC/APIC are determined at install. That is the strongest arguement for my method. Standard PC mode provides the highest performance level on ANY pc. IRQ sharing only provides equivelent performance in perfect conditions. Drivers are critical, one bad one, and the whole system suffers while it waits for a device sharing an IRQ to free it up. IRQ sharing was introduced to ease installation for inexperienced users. It only hurts performance.

Windows 2000 and Windows XP are plug-and-play operating systems. That is why you can install a new sound card, video card, or network card, WITHOUT a full OS reinstall. Neither OS has proper chipset drivers for the NVidia NForce, or newest Intel products. Therefore, the OS could not install the proper drivers at install. These are post install, plug-and-play, manual driver install items.

I deployed an image built as I described in a company with over 800 PCs. The image is running well over multiple manufacturers, chipsets, cpus, and ram configurations. I have been using the method for about two years without incident. People using PCs imaged the way have noted better performance than even the stock Dell/Compaq/Gateway installs.

Additionally, I can pre-install several items I consider necessary today. I.E. Acrobat, Java, Spyware prevention, and applications the customer will need on all machines.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #10 –
and just what exactly about ACPI and APIC dictates that you're IRQ sharing? Besides nothing, that is? ACPI and APIC enabled:

IRQ 0   System timer   OK
IRQ 1   Standard 101/102-Key or Microsoft Natural PS/2 Keyboard   OK
IRQ 3   Conexant's BtPCI WDM Audio Capture   OK
IRQ 6   Standard floppy disk controller   OK
IRQ 7   NVIDIA nForce PCI System Management   OK
IRQ 8   System CMOS/real time clock   OK
IRQ 9   Microsoft ACPI-Compliant System   OK
IRQ 10   MPU-401 Compatible MIDI Device   OK
IRQ 13   Numeric data processor   OK
IRQ 16   Conexant's BtPCI WDM Video Capture   OK
IRQ 18   Win2000 Promise FastTrak100 ™ Controller   OK
IRQ 19   NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900   OK
IRQ 20   Standard OpenHCD USB Host Controller   OK
IRQ 20   NVIDIA nForce MCP Networking Controller   OK
IRQ 21   Standard OpenHCD USB Host Controller   OK
IRQ 21   NVIDIA® nForce™ MCP Audio Processing Unit (Dolby® Digital)   OK
IRQ 21   NVIDIA NForce MCP2 IDE Controller   OK
IRQ 21   3Com 3C920B-EMB Integrated Fast Ethernet Controller   OK
IRQ 22   Standard Enhanced PCI to USB Host Controller   OK
IRQ 22   NVIDIA® nForce™ Audio Codec Interface   OK

edit - the only time it's 100% safe to clone drives is when you're doing it with the same hardware, top to bottom. It's relatively safe if they all have the same motherboard brand and model. It's very unwise to do it with vastly varying hardware, especially the motherboard. This is the very reason MS gives you the ability to make unattended install disks, so that you can manage multiple machine variations in as little time as possible and do not recommend a one-for-all disk image. Any number of things can go wrong with that approach. You've just been lucky. And I would suggest you try some creative benchmarking as far as performance between ACPI/APIC and non-ACPI/APIC goes, you're in for a surprise.

I was in the middle of constructing one of these CDs for myself when I read this thread, streamlined a few things, thanks!

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #11 –
This is a fine theory. 20+ IRQ's sounds nice. Now, if you can just show me the trace on the printed circuit board that provides that IRQ. There isn't one.


Quote
PCs have 16 interrupt levels. These levels are defined by IRQ numbers 0 to 15. IRQ numbers 0, 1, 2, 6, 8, and 13 are employed by the PC itself and are unavailable for other uses. Available IRQs (from high priority to low priority) are 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 3, 4, 5, and 7. If enabled on the motherboard, COM2, COM1, LPT1, PS/2 tracking device, primary EIDE, and secondary EIDE are automatically mapped to IRQs 3, 4, 7, 12, 14, and 15. If USB is enabled, it will use an available IRQ.

The INT-A, INT-B, INT-C, and INT-D interrupts can be mapped to IRQ numbers 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 3, 4, 5, and 7. However, if an IRQ is used by a motherboard I/O device, it usually will not be available for PCI interrupts. Thus, PCI cards typically are mapped to IRQ numbers 9, 10, 11, and 5. With modern hardware and software, IRQ sharing need not cause problems. Nevertheless, sharing IRQs should be avoided on high-performance systems.


Full text:

http://videosystems.com/ar/video_overcoming_plug_pray/


From the mouth of Microsoft:

Quote
This means that, at best, this system will have an average of about three devices per available IRQ, assuming that all the devices in the system can share IRQs. Keep in mind that this machine has four CardBus slots, which means that, at any time, a user might plug in a PCMCIA device requiring two non-shareable IRQs for any one of those slots. Merely plugging cards into two of the four available slots could bring the machine to a state where it could not simultaneously operate all its devices.

Note also that the PCI devices in this machine are not directly connected to the interrupt controller. There are four IRQ steering devices within the south bridge, each capable of directing a PCI interrupt to a number of IRQs. This forces the machine designer to take the 11 PCI devices in the preceding example and wire-OR some of them together before they reach the interrupt controller, thereby decreasing the number of IRQs that will serve them to four.

APIC interrupt subsystems can have as many IRQs as are required in a specific machine. Commonly, chipset vendors design I/O APICs to have 24 IRQs each, and a client machine almost always contains only one I/O APIC. This is enough to guarantee a dedicated IRQ for each PCI device, which would make sharing necessary only when the user installs many PCMCIA devices.

In an APIC-based system, each PCI device can be routed directly to an interrupt controller input on an IOAPIC. Alternatively, some can be routed directly to the I/O APIC, and some can be routed through the IRQ steering devices. Ideally, the chipset could include more steering devices. (No OEM has ever taken on the extra cost of providing steering devices outside the chipset, at least not in single-processor systems.)



Quote
If we do not stop IRQ sharing, real-time performance on the PC platform will be negatively impacted, particularly where audio is concerned.


The full article is here

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hwdev/platform/proc/APIC.mspx


Snake oil is great for marketing, but IRQ sharing and APIC fail to deliver the performance a power user expects from a $2000+ computer.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #12 –
Also, to Shorty, please provide me with your benchmarks.

I will be happy to conduct a test of a natively installed Windows XP on a VIA chipset system, and one imaged from Windows 2000 on an Intel chipset.

I will look for the original links that support my position and why I am confident this method works.

Edit: added below

Another quote about APIC

Quote
Lash444
Explain to me why the AGP bus, which is not on the PCI bus, would need to have its access to its OWN seperate bus diminished.
For those with stuttering, and are using a Nforce2 chipset, your best best is disabling APIC. Go to amdmb.com and read the stickies. This is the only thing that worked for me. I dont have any stuttering with my Intel board unless I overclock my video card too high or dont supply enough voltage.
If you havent yet disabled APIC on your NForce2 I highly recommend it. Stuttering with this chipset comes from IRQ problems.


As far as IRQ sharing, your own post states it.

Quote
IRQ 20 Standard OpenHCD USB Host Controller OK
IRQ 20 NVIDIA nForce MCP Networking Controller OK
IRQ 21 Standard OpenHCD USB Host Controller OK
IRQ 21 NVIDIA® nForce™ MCP Audio Processing Unit (Dolby® Digital) OK
IRQ 21 NVIDIA NForce MCP2 IDE Controller OK
IRQ 21 3Com 3C920B-EMB Integrated Fast Ethernet Controller OK
IRQ 22 Standard Enhanced PCI to USB Host Controller OK
IRQ 22 NVIDIA® nForce™ Audio Codec Interface OK


That looks like 'IRQ sharing' to me. I would like to see what the real hardware IRQs are that those map to. I note that IRQs 5, 11, 12 are not in use, they typically available for devices such as a NIC or Audio card.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #13 –
Quote
I am quite certain your statement is incorrect. Would you please provide proof.

First off, not using ACPI/APIC isn't the best idea. For instance, APIC is necessary to make Hyperthreading of P4/Xeon work. Without ACPI, Suspend-to-RAM doesn't work. Some PC's may not power off by themselves anymore. But the first BIOS versions with a usable APIC/ACPI implementation came out around 2000/2001. How do you handle that with your image method?

About the variables, i read it in some older c't that multiple parameters are set during installation, depending on the hardware (file cache sizes and so on), but i can't find the c't issue (and have no time to search for it, as i'm assembling someone's PC at the moment).

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #14 –
Quote
It should be noted that currently, the only OS that supports Hyperthreading, is Microsoft Windows XP.  Even Windows 2000 or NT, are not officially supported for this technology.  Additionally, Intel recommends a clean installation of WinXP, when migrating from a non HT enabled system, so that XP can install its multi-processor kernel properly.  We performed clean installations in our testing but were able to prove out that, WinXP will detect the new virtual CPU upon boot up and after a reboot, Task Manager will report the two virtual processors in the control panel.  Additional testing proved that we were also realizing the benefits of Hyperthreading but more on this later. In the Task Manager shot above, we were running an MPEG to DIVX conversion on the test system.  As you can see, both CPUs were getting worked fairly hard.



Full Text here

http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/CCAM/p4_306ght.shtml

I have noted unstable and unreliable suspend to ram operation. STR is not even usable with some SCSI hardware. I do not use it for this reason.

Soft power down can be had by enabling APM in the power options of the control panel. This works fine on the Intel, Via, and NForce2 chipsets I have tested. Unfortunately NVidia's first chipset, the NForce does not support APM, and won't power off.

If you dual boot to Linux, these issues really come in to play since many guides recommend disabling ACPI/APIC and PNP.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #15 –
you brought it up, so where are your benchmarks? And now you're claiming hyperthreading support is OS-dependant? haha. Wrong. Any OS that is capable of SMP can and does use hyperthreading, with no extra code or even any awareness of what hyperthreading is or what a hyperthreading P4 is. It's just a form of SMP as far as the OS is concerned, doesn't matter that it isn't actually two physical CPUs on a motherboard containing two CPU sockets. It's becoming quite apparent this conversation with you is a big waste of time. Go read before you spout.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #16 –
Quote
The following desktop operating systems include optimizations for HT Technology and are currently eligible to carry the new Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor with HT Technology logo:
Microsoft* Windows* XP Professional Edition
Microsoft* Windows* XP Home Edition

The following desktop operating systems are not recommended for use with Hyper-Threading Technology. If you are using one of the following desktop operating systems, it is advised that you should disable Hyper-Threading Technology in the system BIOS Setup program:

Microsoft Windows 2000 (all versions)
Microsoft Windows NT* 4.0
Microsoft Windows Me
Microsoft Windows 98
Microsoft Windows 98 SE



Full text:

http://www.intel.com/support/platform/ht/o...iid=ipp_htm+os&

Edit: I was pleasantly surprised to see some Linux OSs support HT

Quote
Linux* Operating System Desktop Based PCs
The following Linux operating systems include optimizations for HT Technology and are currently eligible to carry the Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor with HT Technology logo:
Red Hat Linux* 9 (Professional and Personal versions)
SuSE Linux* 8.2 (Professional and Personal versions)
Red Flag Linux* Desktop 4.0
COSIX* Linux* 4.0

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #17 –
*Optimizations*. Again, any SMP-capable OS works with hyperthreading. Again, go do some reading. All you have to do to use hyperthreading in linux is recompile your kernel with SMP enabled.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #18 –
Perhaps you did not read the message.

Quote
The following desktop operating systems are not recommended for use with Hyper-Threading Technology. If you are using one of the following desktop operating systems, it is advised that you should disable Hyper-Threading Technology in the system BIOS Setup program:

Microsoft Windows 2000 (all versions)
Microsoft Windows NT* 4.0



As you may be aware, Windows 2000 Pro is SMP for 2 processors, NT 4.0 is as well. Therefore, as you can see, it is OS and BIOS dependent.

Unattended Windows XP Installation

Reply #19 –
since when does 'not recommended' mean 'doesn't work'? Of course Intel doesn't recommend it, because win2000 and NT4 don't contain any optimizations to make hyperthreading look good. It still functions in SMP mode, and still gives you gains. Just not as much gain as you get from altering the scheduler to better take advantage of the architecture involved with a P4 w/ hyperthreading. Obviously it needs more massaging of the code that a true SMP machine to get all you can out of it.