User talk:BF10

Why do you hate Creators Update? (Also did anyone realize that the wiki is getting buggy?) --LilShootDawg (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2018 (GMT)
 * I don't like the Fall Creators update since it made many computers unstable or even bricked it. For the wiki itself, yes I noticed it got a lot buggy, like being unable to upload images once and several downtimes. BF10 (talk)

Why don't you like Windows 98 FE? --LilShootDawg (talk) 20:25, 14 February 2018 (GMT)

"Safe to shutdown" screens
Hey there. Are you planning to add the shutdown screens from Neptune and Vista RTM (alongside 95/98/ME, NT 4.0, NT 3.1, etc.) to your history page? Are you also planning to capture the screens from NT 5.0 "Beta 1" and "Beta 2", 2000 "Beta 3" and Chicago? --105.158.187.205 20:54, 17 April 2018 (BST)
 * I will aim on getting these added later. I am kinda restricted on VMs, which makes it pretty hard to add all of them at once. I will try testing the Windows 2000 builds later, but the fact it requires floppies and are hard to install makes it hard to add. I should aim for getting that done (after many attempts of trying to install Longhorn Server 4028 all failing from setup not loading or BSoD on boot after setup). BF10 (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2018 (BST)
 * Just so you know, the NT 5.0 "Beta 2" and Windows 2000 "Beta 3" shutdown screens already exist on the Internet, though. They both look similar to the final Windows 2000.
 * NT 5.0 "Beta 2"
 * Windows 2000 "Beta 3"
 * The Beta 3 screen isn't the same size and placement, though, and it has a white line of the left side for some reason. Might be worth either capturing from actual VMs instead, or editing the screens using an image editor with reference to the VM captured screens (NT 5.0 "Beta 2", 2000 RTM, Whistler).
 * Now all we need (sort of) are the original NT 3.1/4.0/5.0 "Beta 1" and Chicago/Windows 95 "Beta" screens.
 * BTW, have you tried setting the BIOS date for Longhorn Server 4028? --41.140.89.246 21:35, 18 April 2018 (BST)
 * I will plan to add those including the placeholder blue safe to shutdown screen in late beta 1 NT 5.0 builds. And yes, I did set a BIOS date so it is likely a problem with the setup on WinPE. BF10 (talk) 11:39, 19 April 2018 (BST)
 * Alright. By the way, I am safe (get it?) to add any missing screen images of yours (e.g. Neptune) to your history page if I can, right? --41.248.131.63 22:32, 20 April 2018 (BST)
 * I wish it was, but editing another person's userpage is against the rules so it is kinda painful to actually do. I will plan on adding many at the same time to so there isn't a huge reason to edit it every time I upload one. BF10 (talk) 23:32, 20 April 2018 (BST)
 * Oh. One more thing: if you didn't know this already, the Windows 95 shutdown screen actually has a beta variant (found in Chicago Build 462 AFAIK), as well as a DOS variant (the latter of which is shown if the LOGOS.SYS file can't be found). There are also several translations. --41.248.131.63 00:38, 21 April 2018 (BST)
 * I'll plan to add those, but I can't upload multiple files in one run so it will take a while. Expect it done within the next few days. BF10 (talk) 14:36, 21 April 2018 (BST)

Did you know Windows 10 has a Safe to Shutdown screen? -- User:yellows111
 * It's still this, but since Windows powers down the video instead after build 8102, it's pretty much unused unless you dig in the system files. BF10 (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Even if that is true, I can get an actual image with QEMU, and it shows the text

lol
lol, im an idiot, thanks for fixing. --Meow2004 (talk) 17:27, 22 August 2018 (BST)
 * No problem. I sometimes encounter that too when the "png" becomes all capital when I port the images from Virtual PC (I use Windows XP VM to run Virtual PC). BF10 (talk) 17:30, 22 August 2018 (BST)

Where did you find LH 4005 WinUnleaked screenshots?
I cannot seem to find them anywhere.--ATeamInc (talk) 14:34, 28 August 2018 (BST)
 * I thought you got those from WinUnleaked and not BA. I'll remove that speck of information. At least TCB has a lot of images of the build including the setup. BF10 (talk) 14:51, 28 August 2018 (BST)

Thanks, BF10
Thank you BF10 for finding the place where 5086 was demonstrated! I kept searching for a bit and I wasn't able to find anything (I was searching for places IE 7 was demonstrated). Actually, from a quick search, in the Gnomedex '05 conference, IE 7 was indeed demonstrated (that buildtag gets credit).--ATeamInc (talk) 17:25, 29 August 2018 (BST)

A Channel9 video featured this build at about its half, the buildtag is not visible (really low quality) but they said that they will feature this build at gnomedex the next day. Interesting! This video actually showcases the new IE 7 beta. --ATeamInc (talk) 18:37, 29 August 2018 (BST)

Add a summary for your edits
Although it is not necessary, it helps me not having to look onto each edit and makes revising WAY easier. Please add a minor summary at least for your edits. Thanks. --ATeamInc (talk) 19:45, 4 September 2018 (BST)

Help with adding images to articles...
Hello, so I have been trying to upload some images to a page I am currently creating, but I'm having bit of a problem with doing that. Yes, you probably recognize me from WinWorld, I came here because I just like to try out other sites, such as this one. Back on topic, I'm posting here because last night I uploaded an image for a page I'm creating about a Windows XP build, and my image got deleted as I found a message by you, BF10, about the file deletion, and because you seem to be an expert at working with articles on this Wiki. So what I'm asking is, how do I embed files in BetaWiki articles?

P.S. I didn't resize the screenshot, I cropped it to just the desktop using Adobe Photoshop, because the snapshot feature in VirtualBox, the hypervisor I was using, wasn't working at the time, so I just took an entire screenshot of my screen using the Windows+PrtScn key trick, and then cropped the image. --JonathonWyble (talk)
 * First of all, when you upload files you must give it unique name, and not something common like "Image.jpg", "Desktop.png", or "Longhorn4094.png". I also recommend that your images are in true scale and is not a jpg. Secondly, after you upload an image you must add it to an infobox or gallery and add its filename onto there. For example:

...to add it in a gallery and...

...to add desktop and About dialogs into an infobox. If necessary, you can also use to add a single image. See Guidelines for more details. BF10 (talk) 22:25, 27 October 2018 (BST)

Something regarding my pictures
In response to a recent message I got from you, regarding pictures I took for Windows 2000 Build 1509, I am posting here to tell you what really happened. I was not using Bochs, I was using VirtualBox, but I didn't have 256 colors. Plus I couldn't get the virtual machine to be 1024x768, because VirtualBox VMs are always locked at 640x480. I tried installing VirtualBox Guest Additions, but I couldn't. So what I'm saying is, I was just doing what I was doing because it was all I got. Therefore, I may install guest additions for VirtualBox, so that I can take screenshots of my VMs in a better quality. But when I tried to install them, it just kept halting. So what I'm asking is, how exactly do you install VBox Guest Additions the proper way? --JonathonWyble, 30 October 2018
 * VirutalBox isn't locked to 640x480... and why are you even using VirtualBox? It doesn't support anything before XP. VMware however, supports things before XP til 95. --LilShootDawg (talk) 15:39, 30 October 2018 (GMT)
 * Yes, use either VMware, 86Box, or QEMU, since they are capable of having support for Windows 2000 OSes. Alternatively, you can use the VirtualBox NT 3.1 VGA Graphics adapter card since the correct one is compatible with NT 3.1 through Windows 7. BF10 (talk) 16:54, 30 October 2018 (GMT)
 * It's a miniport driver, not adapter. --Ovctvct (talk) 10:56, 31 October 2018 (GMT)
 * Okay, I will install Guest Additions for VirtualBox, this time I will do it the proper way. I got the tip from the VirtualBox forums. Also, VirtualBox actually can emulate OSes older than Windows XP, I've seen a lot of VirtualBox tutorials that show proof. Anyway, I will update the screenshots on the Windows 2000 Build 1509 article, and these images will be in 256 colors. --JonathonWyble (talk) 5:00, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * It can EMULATE them but their DRIVERS aren't supported with anything before XP. --LilShootDawg (talk) 13:13, 31 October 2018 (GMT)

Hello
I'm now your friend because I have seen so many of your contributions. You have made BetaWiki better. Now, if you're going to be away for a while, I'll be your substitute. LarryTN7722 (talk) 12:49, 21 November 2018 (GMT)

About your user page
In your favourite betas section, you listed sp1 as your favourite windows vista beta, but sp1 isn't a beta?--SArAmTaCoJeSUs (talk) 23:23, 23 November 2018 (GMT)

Converted To Windows XP Professional
Hello BF10,This Windows Server 2003 Converted To Windows XP Professional. This Is Boot Screen. --Naomi2319 (talk) 15:01, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * One: Changed boot screens or versions caused by utilities such as regedit or TweakNT isn't allowed. That means that images of builds proven by using TweakNT isn't allowed. Two: The image isn't even properly cropped, and it's not any better to use the Windows Longhorn ones too. BF10 (talk) 23:05, 11 December 2018 (GMT)

No,This Is Converted This Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition To Windows XP Professional,With TweakNT. This Original Windows Server 2003 RTM's Boot Screen This Here.--Naomi2319 (talk) 15:17, 12 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Cool. What's your point? --AlphaBeta (talk) 23:15, 11 December 2018 (GMT)
 * OK.--Naomi2319 (talk) 15:17, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

This Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (Converted To Windows XP With TweakNT) Winver This Here.--Naomi2319 (talk) 15:17, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Screenshots of modded versions of Windows are not allowed here. This includes TweakNT. What don't you understand? --AlphaBeta (talk) 23:22, 11 December 2018 (GMT)

No,This Is Converted This Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition To Windows XP Professional,With TweakNT.--Naomi2319 (talk) 15:24, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No matter what you call that, it is modded Windows Server 2003, not Windows XP Professional. TweakNT is a modding tool. Sticking a BMW logo on your Toyota doesn't make it a BMW, does it? There was no official 3790 i386 built from the   branch, okay? These screenshots are not acceptable for BetaWiki. --AlphaBeta (talk) 23:28, 11 December 2018 (GMT)

This Windows XP Build  Winver This Here.--Naomi2319 (talk) 15:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)


 * That's Longhorn. What point are you trying to prove? --AlphaBeta (talk) 23:35, 11 December 2018 (GMT)

Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (Converted To Windows XP With TweakNT) Demo This Here.--Naomi2319 (talk) 15:40, 12 December 2018 (UTC)


 * *facepalm* Quit being naive. We are stating that TweakNT SKU changes isn't allowed on this wiki. BF10 (talk) 23:43, 11 December 2018 (GMT)

Windows XP Build  Winver And Demo This Here.--Naomi2319 (talk) 15:46, 12 December 2018 (UTC)




 * Like what AlphaBeta said, you're still not proving any point here. In fact at this point I don't think I can take you any more seriously. At this point all you do is post nearly-useless images of you using a TweakNT-modified build and a bunch of irrelevant Windows Longhorn builds as well, clogging up my wall. Please do not continue or you might face consequences. BF10 (talk) 23:50, 11 December 2018 (GMT)

Windows XP Build  Desktop This Here.--Naomi2319 (talk) 15:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)



Windows Longhorn Is Shit? or Good? --Naomi2319 (talk) 04:25, 13 December 2018 (GMT)

About your delete request
I just want to let you know that the following articles on your delete request have been deleted. --2.28.175.216 18:55, 17 March 2019 (UTC) Windows Longhorn build 4002 (Lab04 N)

Windows Longhorn build 4003

Windows Longhorn build 4028

Windows Vista build 5004

Windows XP build 2455

Windows XP build 2464

Windows XP build 2493

Windows XP build 2239

Norton Commander Image
Hey, I'm wondering if you (or someone else whos an admin or has permissions) can put the logo of Norton Commander on the main page?

I can't really find the logo either.

--Meow2004 (talk) 17:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Swearing
The user LilShootDawg was swearing on his talk page. Proof--MCpillager (talk) (Sandbox) 06:57, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

NeXTStep template
Can you fix the Template:Infobox NextStep build template? --MCpillager (talk) (Sandbox) elcomeway otay etawikibay ! 07:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * EDIT: Can you delete this topic? I didn't check properly. --MCpillager (talk) (Sandbox) elcomeway otay etawikibay ! 07:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Mac OS Thing
Ok, it's been awhile since I have installed it, and I thought it was Mac OS X Server. Thanks for clarifying. Also are you sure the date is correct?
 * Yes, the date is correct according to the  command. BF10 (talk) 00:40, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Server 2016 build 10513's edit summary
If you have seen my first edit summary on the Windows Server 2016 build 10513 page, I'm sorry that I overreacted towards your grammar and spelling. Arkan9 (talk) 05:18, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

$OEM$ glitch on eHome Vista builds and Control Panel glitch in 5382, 5384.4 and 5461
1. Does that glitch still happen on later eHome builds, such as 5329, 5355, 5435, 5477 and on a real computer?

Can someone please confirm?

I do not have any real computers that I can test any Vista build on, only VMWare.

2. Also another thing, while using VMWare Workstation 14 on my Windows 10 computer, I noticed something while testing 5382, 5384.4 and 5461.

When I installed those builds, (with and without the eHome tools in the cases of 5382 and 5461), upon restarting the VM, the Control Panel... just stopped working for no reason whatsoever, it would not even open. Arkan9 (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * When I first did my testing on those builds, I used VirtualBox which installs all builds except 5308 and 5310 flawlessly without any errors (although you don't get Aero or those other goodies). I didn't encounter the Control Panel problem, but I did experience that on eHome builds, you need to either delete those files or choose the standard installer or it will fail as it tries to install the eHome features. BF10 (talk) 18:29, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

I do not encounter any problems on any of the eHome builds. (except 5284 of course).

So what could be stopping it in VirtualBox?

While in VMWare, these builds install effortlessly, with or without using the eHome installer. Arkan9 (talk) 18:38, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Question
"I have no plans of doing Anniversary Update or Server TP5 or later builds." Why though? --Sebono (talk) 13:50, 21 April 2019 (UTC)