Wow, someone managed to write a whole "How to" guide for a script that can toggle 5 on/off switches: intowindows.com/…

@OliverSalzburg I can't help but think it would've been easier to just convert it to a GUI program.

I could probably do it in 15 mins.

Give it 30 mins to be safe.

And there's less room for error too.

I'm actually not interested in that tool

I'm looking for ways to change the Windows 8.1 boot logo

@OliverSalzburg addictivetips.com/windows-tips/8oot-logo-changer?

Looks like it replaces a resource DLL

More manual process: winaero.com/blog/…

@OliverSalzburg superuser.com/questions/496006/…

Might be good to add a better answer there :P

Yeah, I'm familar with the process in general

@Bob I'm already on that page ;D Just downvoted/deleted answers

> I renamed winload.exe and bootres.dll! PC won't boot!

What did you think would happen?!

The major issue I have with the approach is that the bootres.dll needs to be signed

And the "signer.exe" that guides usually mentions just creates a new root CA, trusts it and signs the .dll with it

@OliverSalzburg Heh, didn't notice you did that.

And I'm not sure how comfortable I am with that

@OliverSalzburg You can probably use any code-signing certificate.

IIRC @allquixotic has one - might be able to get him to test the process in a VM if he's willing :P

Let me give you the whole story in fact

We purchased a couple of devices with "Windows 8 with Bing". They have the OEMs logo in the boot animation and we don't want that

Option 1: Turn boot logo off Option 2: Replace with own logo

@OliverSalzburg Just chuck a default bootres.dll in there.

What I find weird is, the bootres.dll that is on the device right now doesn't seem to be signed at all and the issuer is Microsoft themselves

That seems to be HP's recommendation, anyway: h30434.www3.hp.com/t5/Notebook-Operating-Systems-and-Software/…

@Bob That's another option, yeah

@OliverSalzburg "doesn't seem to be signed" and "issuer is Microsoft" are mutually exclusive

@Bob What I mean is, the "Copyright" and "Product name" attributes only refer to Microsoft, not the OEM

@OliverSalzburg Anything can go in those fields.

What makes you think it's not signed?

@Bob I thought that signed binaries have certain properties listed in the Details pane in Explorer

Oh, wait, no

It appears what I was looking for is "hidden" under Digital Signatures ;P

I don't have that tab on the device though, only on my desktop

@OliverSalzburg msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/…

> a system file that may be signed in a catalog

You probably want /a /v

hm. Managed to find my sandisk ultra micro SD

Left one is from the device, right one from my desktop

@OliverSalzburg blog.didierstevens.com/2008/01/11/…

> But when a file is signed via a security catalog file, the Digital Signatures tab is not displayed. Notepad is a good example:

I do recall some trouble with it so doing a full reformat and some testing

Just use SignTool :P

@Bob Yeah, I got that ;)

@OliverSalzburg which ones? ;p

@OliverSalzburg It's also possible that Win8 will show that tab even for catalog-signed files, but since you copied just that one file you probably left out the catalog.

Here's coping this mass of (somewhat-expensive) USB cables are actually good...

coping? ;p

o0

ahh ;p

@Bob It also doesn't show on the source system

@JourneymanGeek hoping*

-_-

;p

When I try to verify the signature, I get a WinVerifyTrust error

(also, I wonder if the OEM boot screen is a windows with bing thing)

@Bob yeah, I have one from startssl since I'm identity class 2 verified

@Bob High-current? What, are we talking about charging a Tesla Model S over MicroUSB? ... The highest-current USB connection I make is from my Note 4 to the turbo charger, and I do that with the OEM (white) Samsung Micro USB 2.0 cable. *shrug*

@allquixotic Well, capable of carrying ~2A over 2m without significant voltage drop? :P

The OEM cables are alright. It's just finding replacements that can be a pain.

@Bob Yep! :D I stuck some engine pylons on the bottom of my wings and put some engines on there facing straight down. lol

@allquixotic O_O why not elevators?

@Bob the aircraft has elevators; they just don't produce enough lift to get it off the runway before it runs into the drink

> If the preceding example fails, it could be that the signature used a code-signing certificate. SignTool defaults to the Windows driver policy for verification.

@allquixotic Sounds like you need flaps! :D

it's easier to plan a landing on a planet without atmosphere if I have downward-facing engines anyway... I can land it on the landing gear backwards

Here I am, learning about spacecraft and spaceflight from KSP and learning about aircraft and atmospheric flight from ACI and aviation.SE :P

action groups to independently toggle each engine set on/off to kill vertical or horizontal speed

@allquixotic Oh, rocket engines?

@Bob I'm still in love with learning about aircraft and atmospheric flight in KSP... but I use Ferram Aerospace

@allquixotic Do you just use that same cable everywhere? o.O

@Bob No. Modded RAPIER engines that are the same as the original but with 1.1x higher thrust (a slight tweak) and an Isp of 4000-6000 (a major tweak) ;p

@allquixotic But... landing without atmosphere?

@Bob Well, I have an accumulation of decent OEM cables from all the new phones I buy, so at work I charge my Note 4 with the Motorola Droid Maxx's OEM cable; in the car I charge my Note 4 with the S5's OEM cable... lol

Ah... I don't buy phones often enough to accumulate cables like that.

Got a drawer with probably 50 cheap cables, though. Lucky to get 400 mA through those.

@Bob RAPIER engines can be air-breathing or closed-cycle. In the atmosphere I make them air-breathing because you can save on oxidizer; in the vacuum of space I make them closed-cycle

Pretty sure they use a single strand of copper, or something close.

Forget about actual gauge ratings.

My current "good" ones claim 24 AWG, but the connectors are shit.

Monoprice claims the same, but reviews report failure pretty quickly.

Anker ones are supposed to have 21 (!!) AWG power lines... not sure how accurate that is

@allquixotic Wait, can you transport oxidiser independently now?

@Bob you can customize how much oxidizer and liquid fuel is in your tanks before you launch

O_O

also, many of the B9 Aerospace parts have customizations where you can configure them to be empty (nothing inside), liquid fuel only, liquid fuel and oxidizer, or monopropellant

I think some of the big wings they have can also double as a fuel container :P

@allquixotic ...is this new, or did I just not get far enough?

@Bob: they're short. But I tend to use daiso USB cables ;p

but we've had this comversation before ;p

@Bob I think it's been that way even in stock

0_0

@JourneymanGeek Huh... which message are you replying to?

And, yea, I know you use the Daiso cables :P

I took a look, and they claim... what, was it 500mA or 1A?

I really need to work out KSP at some point ;p

da

Anyway, not enough. And too short.

but the shortness probably helps

@allquixotic I haven't played in months. Might've updated.

@JourneymanGeek Well, $2.80 for the Daiso one or $7 for the Anker one (urk exchange rate).

I'll take the extra length.

@Bob 0.90 is awesome.... tack on Ferram Aerospace (realistic atmospheric physics and more plane stuff) and it's amazing

Assuming it actually works well.

ya ;p

If not... hopefully Amazon doesn't get annoyed when I try to return it :P

@allquixotic That yours?

My planes really look like cobbled together messes.

@Bob yup

@allquixotic Nice. How long did it take? :P

...and why do you have a vertical/horizontal stabiliser + elevator above what looks like your CoG?

takeoff is reliable but requires some skill: the first press of the spacebar fires the under-wing engines; let them get the plane just a few feet off the ground (maybe a second or two) while pulling the nose up with the yoke; then hammer spacebar again to fire the rear engines, which initially puts you into a dive but quickly corrects it with the continued control inputs

@Bob about 3 hours

Shouldn't you be positioning your elevator as far away from the CoG as is practical?

shrug my spaceplane attempt didn't even have wheels :P

the stability coefficients go all to hell without those elevons on the tailplane

the tailplane is inspired by the MD-80

those silver things have elevators on the back that can go up and down

unfortunately the bi-coupler is very hard to surface-mount parts onto, so I can't really get the tailplane any further back without it being off-center

the delta wings have gigantic elevators on them though, not sure if you can see that from the pictures

@allquixotic O_O

the aftmost triangular (delta) wings have huge elevons stuck to the back of them :P

it still has some sideslip, but that comes and goes depending on the mach number

there aren't really any problems at mach 0.9; the hard part is getting off the ground and climbing out

there's mach 0.9 -- as you can see, all the coefficients are fine; that very small red number isn't a big deal since it's so tiny

once I get about a kilometer off the ground I try to do the rest of the climb around mach 0.9

actually, when I set the altitude to 1 km, even that red derivative turns green

so yeah, this thing sucks when low to the ground, but once it gets going, you can fly it very fast and enter space with basically no issues

at some point the engines auto-switch over to closed cycle

o.o

usually by the time my atmosphere gauge is at the halfway mark between vacuum and MSL, I'm going mach 5 or higher

the ONLY thing to be careful of is going too fast in the early phase because that thick atmosphere will rip parts off the aircraft

@allquixotic Next step: make it more aerodynamic :P

@Bob for my next project I kinda wanna build a Soviet Buran type thingo just to say I've done it

where you have a huge aircraft with a lot of power (probably unmanned; I'll use a probe body) that gets the spacecraft into the air, then separate at around airliner altitude and have the manned spaceplane insert itself into orbit under its own power

will probably use propellers or basic jet engines (lots of them) on the carrier aircraft

@allquixotic I wonder if KSP will ever get in-orbit design :P

Ship parts to a space station and put it together there.

Aye, that would be nice

along with spare fuel transfer.

@Bob That's what produces the error I mentioned

@OliverSalzburg are you running it on the Bing device?

You must have the catalog file.

@Bob Yes

I assumed the catalog would exist on the device, given that it's a system file

@JourneymanGeek Hm... Interesting. But scary. I don't know if I am biased but I see a huge quantity of low quality content from Brazilians (bad grammar, inconsistent argumentation, spam, and so on). Maybe because it's unfiltered and I am more exposed to more people near me and social networks etc, I might tend to think Brazilians are noisier and dumber online.

(see the "huehuebr" stereotype in gaming i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/135/593/brfw0.png )

@Bob Scott Manley has several videos of mods in use that allow this

he created a large ISS-like lab in space by shipping parts to space, connecting them with docking ports, and strutting them together to reduce wobble

@ThatBrazilianGuy I have never seen this before...

oh lord...

Hey guys

whats up?

morning

@ThatBrazilianGuy ahh k ;p

@JourneymanGeek morning!!!

Morning

hm. Been troubleshooting the shared box.

I think the both digital outs on the video card failed

(and seriously, its 8 years old and just used to surf the web. It would be cheaper for me to replace it with a nuc-class machine than to buy a new card ;p)

eh. I'm trying to catch up on RSS feeds buuuut

er... not that!

lifehacker.com/…

THERE WE ARE, damn my paws

rofl. Went to post that. Looks like @Ramhound beat me to it. I shall show my dissapointment by upvoting that answer ;p