[Download] UAC-Free iReboot BETA
- Thread starter mqudsi
- Start date
- Status
roirraW "edor" ehT
Member
I've tried again and again with FireFox and Internet Explorer and can't download the latest version. It only takes me to the login screen, and when I login, it gives me a 404 error. I had downloaded a previous beta build from this link correctly in the past.
BTW, thank you for iReboot, I've been using it since late last year.
BTW, thank you for iReboot, I've been using it since late last year.
Login screen for where?
I seem to recall a similar problem in another thread months ago, with the same symptoms when trying to download. Can't recall exactly where, but you could try a few searches to look for it.
From memory, Guru had to tweak something, so you'll probably have to wait for him or Mak to come online. It might be worth a trawl through the threads in case my memory is wrong, and there is something you could do yourself without needing to wait .
BTW emoclew ot eht sdraob Warrior !
From memory, Guru had to tweak something, so you'll probably have to wait for him or Mak to come online. It might be worth a trawl through the threads in case my memory is wrong, and there is something you could do yourself without needing to wait .
BTW emoclew ot eht sdraob Warrior !
Hiya Warrior, welcome to NST!
Please check the "Remember me" option when logging in, then attempt to download iReboot.
Addendum:
Well, it's been proven that people that don't get enough sleep tend to over-act their emotions.
Last edited:
I know what you mean CG re: not enough sleep....that's the story of my life!
This morning I'm greeted with two ireboot taskbar icons...strange? I did uninstall the old one first. I haven't tried rebooting yet mind you. It could just be a glitch.
I did, however, have two entries in Start/All programs/Startup - one for Ireboot 1.0.0 and 1 for ireboot 1.1.0., despite having uninstalled the old one I deleted one and hopefully that will fix that issue.
Addendum:
Rebooted and all is well.....panic over...!
This morning I'm greeted with two ireboot taskbar icons...strange? I did uninstall the old one first. I haven't tried rebooting yet mind you. It could just be a glitch.
I did, however, have two entries in Start/All programs/Startup - one for Ireboot 1.0.0 and 1 for ireboot 1.1.0., despite having uninstalled the old one I deleted one and hopefully that will fix that issue.
Addendum:
Rebooted and all is well.....panic over...!
Last edited:
roirraW "edor" ehT
Member
Thank you for the welcome and the advise, Terry60 and Computer Guru. Right now when I clicked on the link to download, it downloaded immediately. Strange.
Ex_Brit: about what login page, I was talking about when you go to download an attachment, it says you have to login in order to do so. I already had a login from the last time I downloaded the beta, and I did select to remember me, but it hadn't worked anyway before now. I may work out a method to this madness in a little while, and if I do I'll let you know what the deal was.
Ex_Brit: about what login page, I was talking about when you go to download an attachment, it says you have to login in order to do so. I already had a login from the last time I downloaded the beta, and I did select to remember me, but it hadn't worked anyway before now. I may work out a method to this madness in a little while, and if I do I'll let you know what the deal was.
CG, I'm not using this at the moment (HnS of course), but I am keeping an eye on the thread in anticipation.
Does the logic change of this latest build mean that if I were using it and booted XP for some reason late evening, then shut down the system for the night; that next day my default boot would be XP instead of Vista ?(my nominated default) .
If so, shouldn't you add a "shutdown" option so that the semi-permanent nature of the default override can be undone in the case of a close without restart ?
This seems a strange request since I was asking for fewer options only 2 days ago, but it just seems a necessary addition in the light of the latest change (as I understand it ), otherwise it'll be difficult to keep track of what exactly is going to boot by default when you hit the "on" button. (some of us do shut down at night, though I know that others try to keep their systems running 24/7)
Does the logic change of this latest build mean that if I were using it and booted XP for some reason late evening, then shut down the system for the night; that next day my default boot would be XP instead of Vista ?(my nominated default) .
If so, shouldn't you add a "shutdown" option so that the semi-permanent nature of the default override can be undone in the case of a close without restart ?
This seems a strange request since I was asking for fewer options only 2 days ago, but it just seems a necessary addition in the light of the latest change (as I understand it ), otherwise it'll be difficult to keep track of what exactly is going to boot by default when you hit the "on" button. (some of us do shut down at night, though I know that others try to keep their systems running 24/7)
Already a step ahead - this behavior can be disabled by changing a value in iReboot.exe.config in the Program Files folder
But do you think it should be the default or vice versa? My instinct was to keep the old behavior as the default, and add the option to automagically set the next boot target equal to the last choice, but Bernie's logic superseded mine - I had no real reason not to make his suggestion the default.
However, your concern regarding shutdown is a valid one.. I really don't want to add "features" to iReboot, it's supposed to be as light as possible.
Now that I think of it, a person without iReboot on their system should be blaming MS for going to sleep with one OS running, and waking up and finding another..... so perhaps it is more logical to keep that the default behavior even with iReboot, but offer a workaround (iReboot.exe.config) for those in need of one?
But do you think it should be the default or vice versa? My instinct was to keep the old behavior as the default, and add the option to automagically set the next boot target equal to the last choice, but Bernie's logic superseded mine - I had no real reason not to make his suggestion the default.
However, your concern regarding shutdown is a valid one.. I really don't want to add "features" to iReboot, it's supposed to be as light as possible.
Now that I think of it, a person without iReboot on their system should be blaming MS for going to sleep with one OS running, and waking up and finding another..... so perhaps it is more logical to keep that the default behavior even with iReboot, but offer a workaround (iReboot.exe.config) for those in need of one?
I think your last para is correct. Since MS dual-boot will result in the option system reverting to the default with an auto boot, iR should do the same, and offer an install-time option for those like Bernie who want to use iR as a way of changing the default behaviour.
Perhaps, to get back on my particular hobby-horse, you could also offer an include/exclude bullet choice for having the booted system in the list at the same time as offering Bernie's choice ?
That way, you could have your complete list as at present, and I, by use of both options, could set it up to be a really "light" version. On my system, use of the start button options Shutdown and Restart (and auto boots) would all take the system (ultimately) to the currently running system, but each system would have a notification area icon, which would simply switch systems until next used.
Perhaps, to get back on my particular hobby-horse, you could also offer an include/exclude bullet choice for having the booted system in the list at the same time as offering Bernie's choice ?
That way, you could have your complete list as at present, and I, by use of both options, could set it up to be a really "light" version. On my system, use of the start button options Shutdown and Restart (and auto boots) would all take the system (ultimately) to the currently running system, but each system would have a notification area icon, which would simply switch systems until next used.
Last edited:
CG, we're obviously tuned to slightly different wavelengths here.
What I interpreted bernie's request to be was
"semi-permanently change the boot menu to default to the currently booted system, until another iteration of iR requests a different system, at which point the boot menu is changed to default to that system. (not just temporarily for the one boot, but semi-permanently again)"
i.e. iR becomes a dynamic "default boot" editor as well as a booter.
Am I right in thinking that build 9 changes the boot menu to whatever you last selected in iR, which is not necessarily the booted system ?
For example, if Bernie uses XP's iR to boot Vista, then Vista's iR to boot XP, then in XP does WUD which reboots, which system will he get ?
The way I interpret your description of build 9, he'll get Vista because that's what was last flagged in XP's iR, when what he wants is to get XP.
This is all conjecture and speculation on my part, because I'm not using iR for the moment so I can't test it to see for myself, and is also based on what I think Bernie meant in his original post.
I await correction from either of you if my assumptions are incorrect.
For the record, I like what I think Bernie was suggesting too. That was the jist of my previous post that you couldn't fathom.
What I interpreted bernie's request to be was
"semi-permanently change the boot menu to default to the currently booted system, until another iteration of iR requests a different system, at which point the boot menu is changed to default to that system. (not just temporarily for the one boot, but semi-permanently again)"
i.e. iR becomes a dynamic "default boot" editor as well as a booter.
Am I right in thinking that build 9 changes the boot menu to whatever you last selected in iR, which is not necessarily the booted system ?
For example, if Bernie uses XP's iR to boot Vista, then Vista's iR to boot XP, then in XP does WUD which reboots, which system will he get ?
The way I interpret your description of build 9, he'll get Vista because that's what was last flagged in XP's iR, when what he wants is to get XP.
This is all conjecture and speculation on my part, because I'm not using iR for the moment so I can't test it to see for myself, and is also based on what I think Bernie meant in his original post.
I await correction from either of you if my assumptions are incorrect.
For the record, I like what I think Bernie was suggesting too. That was the jist of my previous post that you couldn't fathom.
Last edited:
- Status