Slashdot Mirror

Most people who are responsible for such systems are presumably intelligent enough to slipstream the latest Service Pack AND all current security patches onto a WinXP installation CD which can then be used to install a machine - in fact, this would be the recommended procedure, as it results not only in the machine having the latest SP from the start but also all the miscellaneous security updates which have been published since the last SP.

Remember, a fresh install of Windows XP + Service Pack 2 is still vulnerable to known exploits. Being able to incorporate all the security updates which are available at the time the machine is brought online results in a signifigantly more secure situation (although Microsoft's well-documented history of ignoring certain inconvenient security holes until they get their collective nose rubbed in them would still make me nervous, personally).

Of course, this only works for i386 versions of Windows - from what I can gather, it's not possible to slipstream the x86_64 version. If I've got that wrong, somebody please correct me (and provide a link to instructions).

This process details how to create a CDROM of Windows XP or 2003 that slipstreams a Service Pack and the post-SP patches...

http://www.vorck.com/remove-ie.html

This has been discussed before and seems to start flamewars.

Yes there is a way to remove the IE engine from Windows 2000's installation files (and indeed integrate IE6 into them, since 2000+SP4 comes with IE 5).

The method of doing so is here. However it breaks things such as Windows help, Windows Update and lots of miscellaneous parts of the OS. For me atleast, it made the OS almost unbareable, introducing alot of annoyances. Although to be fair, I followed the post-install instructions...in theory, pre-install removal should be smoother.

Well I don't think any one who still uses windows 2000 actually uses IE anymore.

Hell some of us proud windows 2000 users have already removed IE from the OS

Remove IE

Actually, it's possible. It's not particularly easy, but it can be done.

IE always seems to be the weak point, or the HTML subsystem... Even if it isn't, I've got instructions on removing several subsystems from Windows that will make it more secure.

Check out my page on Windows patches, I think it's a convincing argument to rip all of this stuff out of Windows. Just download the files, drag-drop-replace, burn, and install.

XP subsystem removal software here.

IE always seems to be the weak point, or the HTML subsystem... Even if it isn't, I've got instructions on removing several subsystems from Windows that will make it more secure.

Check out my page on Windows patches, I think it's a convincing argument to rip all of this stuff out of Windows. Just download the files, drag-drop-replace, burn, and install.

XP subsystem removal software here.

So remove Internet Explorer

Technical process

Automated software

Instructions for trolls:
1. reply that this cannot actually be done.
2. reply that removing IE makes Windows:
--a. unstable.
--b. less secure.
--c. disables windows update.

Fred Vorck
(Running Windows 2000 without IE, per my instructions)

Well, if you install Windows 2000 without it in the first place, that is.

Having text subject to a moderation period for hours or maybe a day or two in a discussion area (with some sort of indicator or flag) would be a LOT better than instantaneous posting, IMO.

I contributed to the entry on Internet Explorer (specifically, removing it). A while back, some editors at Wikipedia (I'm not attributing--I'm sure this time lack of attribution will make them happy) were continually deleting the section on removing Internet Explorer from Windows. The kept changing criteria... First, they wanted the passage on removing IE to say exactly who recommends it. Then, it had to meet Neutral Point of View and attribution criteria. Then, another Wikipedia editor asked what computer security experts recommend IE removal. It finally ended; they deferred and named the three experts in the field.

Per the article: Nonbias is a difficult ideal to live up to. Indeed, the most common complaint against Wikipedia is that it is unreliable; since anyone can publish or edit any article instantly, theres nothing except the diligence of other contributors to keep favoritism, misinformation, vandalism, or sheer stupidity out of the encyclopedias pages. I'd argue that so-called nonbias is not the problem.

The problem was that these dedicated editors were not deferring to the actual experts (in this case, me--the guy who has a site on removing Internet Explorer from Windows 2000, and ignoring the creators of XPLite and nLite). If the editors don't like something, all they have to do is claim that it violates the holy grail Neutral Point of View and you'll have to beat them over their heads to get your text into the Wikipedia. Moderation is a lousy way to get at the exact truth, but eventually, it comes to light (seems to here at Slashdot, anyway). No, obviously the truth isn't what everyone thinks, but it would sure help with those editorial battles. An article might have a comment that Hydrogen caused the Hindenberg disaster, and it gets modded +5. Eventually, you can bet the comments pointing out that it was the zeppelin's skin (paint) will also get modded +4 or +5. The key is with the Wiki, with moderation, potential authors wouldn't have to have month-long running debates and editorial beat-downs.

Automated

Technically detailed

Remove IE from Win2k

Remove IE from nLite

Oh, be sure to reply how:
1. Windows Update won't work! Even though I take great pains to point out the solution, I've never heard THAT one before!
2. It's really impossible to remove IE! Even though I document how to do it, I've never heard THAT one before!
3. It will make your machine unstable! I've been running IE free for 4 years and I've never heard THAT one before!

Freeware nLite removes IE from 2000, 2003, XP before installation

Technical Details on Reming IE from Windows 2000 before installation

Windows 2000 Pro SP4 is a very, very solid operating system. IE is not a web browser that any sane person would use, so it's lack of support doesn't really bother me in the least. As a matter of fact, here's a nice site with information on removing IE from Win2k at setup time (but leaving in the hooks so that apps which depend on it can still have it.. although I tend not to use apps that need it).

Personally, not only do I hate the childish default UI of XP (yeah, I know it can be changed), I hate the "security" XP SP2 added. Limiting the number of TCP connections isn't cool. "Background Intelligent Transfer Service"? Not cool. I'm not upgrading to XP, ever.

At least you could have done some reading before you became the 67,422nd person to tell me this. In either site's case, you can fine-tune what you remove so that incompatabilities don't happen. I have found that I can't run Norton programs without IE. That's about it. So if we want to call Norton's suite a whole heap, then I guess that's right. (A whole heap of something, anyway...)

Create Windows installation CDs that won't install IE (and/or many other things, like Outlook):

A howto + files for Windows 2000

Free (as in beer) software with no howto for Windows 2000, 2003, and XP

Customize 2k before installing files and instuctions

Uninstall IE and OE, etc from a 2k machine that already has them

Customize Win2k, 2k3, XP before installing

Customize 2k before installing files and instuctions

Uninstall IE and OE, etc from a 2k machine that already has them

Customize Win2k, 2k3, XP before installing