• [ Kill the Process, Use Killbox if your Access Denied ]

[In Windows Vista Run As Administrator, After Execution System Will Restart]

• %Windows\System\fun.exe
• %Windows\Inf\other.exe
• %Windows\dc.exe
• %Windows\SVIQ.exe
  
• %Windows\System32\winsit.exe
• %Windows\System32\Config\win.exe
  [ No Exact Information about Files, search above related files in Program files Folder ]
  If you have any of these files in running process from task manger, end the process before removal.
  Note: if task manager is disabled, Download the following file, Click to Download - Enable Registry.reg [ Right Click - Save Target As/Linked Content As ]
  Open it with Regedit.exe [%system32\regedit.exe], then it Confirms Add to registry Yes or No, Confirm Yes, then click Ok.

They don’t call Microsoft the platforms company for nothing. Thanks to a tip from reader Boldizsár, some developer documentation on MSDN is indicating Microsoft will indeed be backporting the new Scenic Ribbon UI framework introduced in Windows 7 to its misunderstood predecessor, Windows Vista (and Windows Server 2008).

Further information posted by a Microsoft employee in the MSDN forums reveals however a rather non-intuitive implementation of how the backport will be delivered to users. Instead of a simple redistributable resource file or runtime developers can bundle with their application package as one might expect, a “Windows 7 interoperability pack” creatively dubbed the “Windows 7 Client Platform Update” will be made available via Windows Update by October. This “recommended” update will then have to be installed manually by the user or silently triggered by the application setup to be applied.

Although the decision to backport Scenic Ribbon might come as somewhat of a surprise, it does make sense for Microsoft to quickly broaden support for its new frameworks rather than driving developers to adopt premature technologies that only become mainstream a release or two later.

If you’re a developer and have been holding back on adopting Scenic Ribbon in your application for this very reason, let this be the green light to Ribbon-away. That is of course if you’re willing to give up some XP users, but I say they don’t deserve it.

Just a reminder that you have until this Thursday, August 20^th 2009 to download the Windows 7 Release Candidate.

After that date, you will still be able to register your product and get registration keys but, the media will no longer be available for download.

If you have not downloaded the Release Candidate, please do so here.

An effort to change the license on a piece of code hit a wall recently. Mathieu Desnoyers wanted to migrate from the GPL to the LGPL on some userspace RCU code. Read-Copy Update is a way for the kernel to define the elements of a data object, without other running code seeing the object in the process of formation. Mathieu’s userspace version provides the same service for user programs. Unfortunately, even aside from the usual issue of needing permission from all contributors to change the license of their contribution, it turns out that IBM owns the patent to some of the RCU code concepts, and it has licensed the patent for use only in GPLed software. So, without permission from IBM, Mathieu can get permission from all the contributors he wants and still be stuck with the GPL.

Loadlin is back in active development! The venerable tool boots Linux from a directory tree in a DOS partition, so all of us DOS users can experiment with this new-fangled Linux thing. To help us with that, Samuel Thibault has released Loadlin version 1.6d and has taken over from Hans Lerman as official maintainer of the code. The new version works with the latest Linux kernels and can load up to a 200MB bzImage. He’s also migrated development into a mercurial repository. (Although not as popular as git with kernel developers, mercurial does seem to have a loyal following, and there’s even a book available at hgbook.red-bean.com.) After seven years of sleep, here’s hoping Loadlin has a glorious new youth, with lots of new features and fun. It loads Linux from DOS! How cool is that?

Hirofumi Ogawa has written a driver for Microsoft’s exFAT filesystem, for use with large removable Flash drives. The driver is read-only, based on reverse-engineering the filesystem on disk. There doesn’t seem to be immediate plans to add write support, but that could change in a twinkling, if a developer with one of those drives takes an interest in the project. Hirofumi has said he may not have time to continue work on the driver himself. Meanwhile, Boaz Harross has updated the exofs filesystem. Exofs supports Object Storage Devices (OSDs), a type of drive that implements normal block device semantics, while at the same time providing access to data in the form of objects defined within other objects. This higher-level view of data makes it easier to implement fine-grained data management and security. Boaz’s updates include some ext2 fixes that still apply to the exofs codebase, as exofs originally was an ext2 fork. He also abandoned the IBM API in favor of supporting the open-osd API instead. Adrian McMenamin has posted a driver for the VMUFAT filesystem, the SEGA Dreamcast filesystem running on the Dreamcast visual memory unit. Using his driver, he was able to manage data directly on the Dreamcast. At the moment, the driver code does seem to have some bugs, and other problems were pointed out by various people. Adrian has been inspired to do a more intense rewrite of the code, which he intends to submit a bit later than he’d first anticipated. A new source of controversy has emerged in Linux kernel development. With the advent of pocket devices that are intended to power down when not in use, or at least go into some kind of power-saving state, the whole idea of suspending to disk and suspending to RAM has become more complicated. It’s not obvious whether the kernel or userspace should be concerned with analyzing the sleep-worthiness of the various parts of the system, or how much the responsibility should be shared between them. There seems to be many opinions, all of which rest on everyone’s idea of what is appropriate as well as on what is feasible. The kernel is supposed to control all hardware, but the X Window System controls hardware and is not part of the kernel. So, clearly, exceptions exist to any general principles that might be involved. Ultimately, if no obvious delineation of responsibility emerges, it’s possible folks may start working on competing ideas, like what happened initially with software suspend itself.

Source of Information : Linux Journal Issue 182 June 2009

The competition between the Windows Marketplace for Mobile and the Apple App Store is heating up as Microsoft appears to have pulled a small punch at Apple and the controversy surrounding the rejection of applications in the iPhone App Store.

During the second and latest video to be released for the Windows Mobile Race to Market Challenge dubbed “The Race”, a scene appears in which a stick-figure developer walks into what is clearly to be interpreted as an “application store” only to have the pretentious-looking store staff (standing infront of a shelf full of other applications) reject his shiny new application.

If that wasn’t obvious enough, on top of all this the voiceover can be heard saying “If you want your app to do well, you’ve got to set it up for success. That means learning from experience, knowing when you could do better.” (emphasis added).

Whilst competition is always a good thing, I do find it somewhat hypocritical of Microsoft to highlight this when they know very well they could face the same criticism for disproving applications in the Windows Marketplace for Mobile.

And if it’s any indication of what’s to come, I’ve come across internal Microsoft documents that shows an outright ban on turn-by-turn navigation applications in the Marketplace. (Of course Windows Mobile has the advantage of being able to load applications via other methods). Update: A Microsoft representative has assured me turn-by-turn GPS navigation applications are not prohibited, contrary to the internal documentation.

It would be all too ironic and not entirely inconceivable to see Microsoft falling down the same rabbit hole which they’ve so prominently pointed out.

The original video is embedded below for your convenience.