On Sat, 2005-02-19 at 14:56, Gregory Golin wrote:
> Be advised that BartPE has legality issues.
> 
> We  extensively use WinPE in conjuction with a proprietary product in
> our factory. As it is based on WinXP Pro, it has many limitations in
> terms or RAM detection. We asked our vendor if we could build a BartPE
> from a Win2k3 distro. A long, uneasy silence on their end was followed
> by an explanation - doing so would be breaking the EULA.
> Oh well.
> 
> Just FYI.
> 
> GG
> 
> 
> --- RBW1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > In a never ending quest to marginalize the impact of fundamentally
> > broken and vulnerable MSWin OS's on the admin tasks a network
> > requires I
> > have been looking at these two:
> > http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/#start
> > http://ubcd4win.com/howto.htm
> > 
> > Has anyone used BartPE? any problems?
> > 
> > I am looking at this as both a build as a type of Windoze "Distro"
> > with
> > native virus cleaning but also a native environment for the Ghost
> > utility. This may be good where you want a non-Linux lab tech to
> > "just
> > stick this CD in and reboot and call me if it doesn't work" no
> > brainer
> > Ghost CD and if it really doesn't work then you know to start looking
> > at
> > hardware.
> > 
> > Anyway this looks like an interesting way to keep the time consuming
> > unwanted OS specific network BS at arms length.
> > 
> > RBW

This is a good point especially if you plan to leave a working copy in
the hands of someone else.

I think I would build a barebones CD with a legal Ghost intstalled
(mostly for my purposes) and I could build others for basically a whole
set of "free" virus/malware prevention apps. I'm working under the idea
that one and only one of these can be made per license and then can only
be run in place of the licensed system (run on the licensed system or
when the licensed system is not on). See the "Legal information" section
in:
http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/#start

 The bottom line is that this is a real sticky wicket especially if you
are in an organization that needs to be accountable. 
Like I said the attraction is solely to limit having to have a
discussion about anything Windows with Windows only users.

<frustration opinion>
Man I hate dumb Windows users who can't even navigate the file structure
on their own hard drives any more. Am I crazy or wasn't it true that in
the Win 3.1-Win 95 days everyone knew how to navigate the file system.
WinXP is close (Jury is out until Longhorn) to the ultimate dumbing down
of the general population  that uses PC's.
</frustration opinion>

RBW

-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to