Thanks for the info, i tested it with mine Gigabyte and it works fine, I will let you know if i find anything
The problem is in OOBE and oemscan I want to change the custom settings and I want to correct a little trouble there. Have previously written about this problem but it remains still. When I want to install Windows 7 on my HP ENVY 15 with Windows 7 so it will be a different manufacturer such as Fujitsu. I know 100% that it should be added a bit of my computer in these two files. Would be grateful if I did this. List of what is missing in oemscan SLIC | HPQOEM | HP SLIC | HPQOEM | HPQOEM Missing and I want in OOBE In: SETKEY IF / I "% MAN2%" == "HPQOEM" IF / I "% Male%" == "COMPAQ" SET MAN2 = COMPAQ & goto: SERIAL And the last thing a folder in OEM, s The name HPQOEM I make a copy of the HP folder, and rename it and rename some files in the folder. Hope I have explained so that I can get help with this in the next release you do. Thanks in advance for an incredibly good work you are doing here. Excuse my English is my language is normally Swedish
I'll try the latest. But everyone else has had this problem, but I'll try and hope it is the right brand that is installed.
Most conflicts been fixed in last version if the problem still exist please post the query tool v5.3 results that way you can help him more to fix it I tried last one with Asus, Dell, Foxconn, Gigabyte, HP Compaq, Samsung and until now everything working just fine
@svenby, I have a hp envy and it installs correctly on it....we have the same bios info thus new version will work. If you do have issues in the future then run the query tool and post results.txt file. All conflicts are now resolved since it was the Baseboard Product causing the issues which has now been removed. Plus this is already in the script so no need to duplicate. It handles the hp Compaq issue from back in searchengines days. Because of the above entry in script it handles the hp/Compaq issue without need of editing ini file. All you will do is break it for other HP/Compaq machines. Look at my first post and see the query tool results of my HP Envy.
Your approach would fail svenby. The problem is the query is seeing the "TS" which is also in Fuj. If you edit the ini then all you will do is make it where Fuj. will fail. Resolving your problem but creating another one for Fuj. I can move the HP up above Fuj. and it will work but then Fuj will fail. So I will handle this another way so this isn't a problem. I will then upload fix.
No, not the one who is from the 27th of January think it's a few days back are not a hundred on it. I'll test it which is from 27th in the morning when I get home from my job. I promise to tell you how it gets
Don't bother for it will also fail...the reason is it sees the TS in id-1 which is also in Fuj. I have corrected the issues in both the query tool and project itself. Links are updated so you can test later. Change log (same date): Spoiler Change log 01-27-2015 (updated with same date): -Added new TTL OEM images. (Thanks Alphawaves) -Corrected conflict with HP/FUJITSU. -Added needed silent switch for new MultiMonitorTool v1.81.
Been doing some adjustments to the project... -oobe is a little smaller. -added mce logo for Surface OEM images, thanks to Baltagy. -added new method of protection to replace the old outdated one. -added VOID5=O.E.M to query tool and project in order to make scripts run a little faster. -added option of removing the OEM'S.7z in order to just apply activation and no branding (windows default will be applied if it is removed). -other minor improvements. This hasn't been uploaded yet. Still doing testing.
In Windows 8.1 warns that 7za.exe click Run to move forward twice. Right log right model or manufacturer
Decompile is legitimate, but there really shouldn't be a reason to pack it and ExeScript it all... ..moderated...
Your going to love reversing it everyday. lmao! I will change it every update to keep you busy plus more protection which is already in place but not released to the public yet. Funny the OEM's.7z isn't protected. LOL
It is, but it is also legitimate to prohibit discussions about how to decompile here @MDL. Please no discussions here to respect the author, thanks.
Not going to bother reversing it anymore (although I'm pretty good at unpacking, rebuilding IATs, writing VM unpack engines), just wanted to know if it was legitimate or not so I'd know if I could reasonably trust the author, so I did what I did. Now that I know your work here was true and legitimate, I trust this particular work, simply. I could've posted the password to 'Guard' but I didn't bother to, so I could respect the author's legitimate work. No needd to fuss. >_>
I find it kinda bold to post at the developers thread how to reverse his own created stuff......it's all about the purpose / intent....no prob if you do it for your own needs alone...