Recently, I have seen a lot of posts about the so-called VOL version of Simplified Chinese XP. Everyone has been arguing about the authenticity of this version of XP. In particular, many people say that it is actually a cracked version (according to these people, as long as the SP1 patch is re-introduced, the system cannot enter). Therefore, today I collected two Shanghai VOLXPs that have integrated SP1 (specifically, they should provide 2 different sets of SNs), and use them as installation files for my experiment. I personally integrated SP1A to verify this version. The authenticity of XP.
I first installed the one I have been using, and I think it is the most authentic version. KEY is
DG8FV-B9TKY-FRT9J-6CRCC-XXXXX (the last 5 bits are hidden, the same is true in the following article). After integrating SP1A, back up the original system and install the new XP.
Installation begins! The first thing that appears is the English installation interface. The meaning is probably to copy the installation file to the hard disk. After the restart, the Chinese installation interface appears. The subsequent operation is naturally the same as the user name that everyone is familiar with. Press Next. . . . . The system installation is complete. . Restart. . After seeing the familiar window interface, I finally got to the point where people were nervous. After creating the user and completing it, I waited for the system. But the disappointing thing still happened. The system prompts "The product number of this media type is invalid. Please install your system with the correct installation CD. Error code: 0X80040509" I am dizzy, and the rest will not need me to say it. . . . . . (I once saw in an article that this version of VOL is actually made by replacing the files in the Simplified Chinese version of XP with the English version of the VOL file. Later, I was in English on a website that provided English VOLXP. VOLXP saw the introduction of this KEY, it seems that this version of the Chinese VOLXP .....)
but I did not give up, immediately restore the system to start for the second version of the system integration of SP1A, After the integration, start the installation, it is interesting to provide three installation serial numbers in the SN.TXT of this CD, I picked a KEY:
M77MB-M4JR4-KB8DR-2YGD2-XXXXX serial number Installation, but the installation results also disappoint me, the result is the same as the first XP, can not enter the system.
Summary: From today's point of view the installation test, two versions of XP can not start normally. But if you don't re-integrate SP1A, you can enter the operating system (the first one has been confirmed, and the second is estimated to be the same). Therefore, according to the comparison between the installation file after integrating SP1A and the original installation file (known as integrated SP1A), I think there are 2 possibilities:
1 It is possible that the so-called integration of this version of XP is pseudo-integration In fact, there is no integration of SP1, just by modifying the file to fool the system into thinking that it has installed the patch. It is estimated that this is the reason why the Internet upgrade can be upgraded after installation. (Microsoft does not require SP1 to be installed before it can continue to install its subsequent patches? Probably the modified operating system is labeled with SP1. Microsoft's upgrade program, and when the SP1 was released, Microsoft did not say that SP1 improved the anti-piracy capability of XP. SP1 is also the magic weapon for Microsoft to detect cracked version and illegal CDKEY.)
2, It may be that the producer did integrate the SP1 patch when making the CD, but the content of the file was still modified, but the modification was only to avoid the re-detection of CDKEY by SP1. From the comparison of the manual integration of SP1A installation files, it seems that the second possibility is even more important (although there is a strange place, some files in XP for testing are actually not integrated after SP1A manually, from the name From the above point of view, it seems that a lot of it is related to Java. If it is said that it is integrated with SP1, some files that have been updated have not been moved. Some other files have been changed and the files have been changed. Modifications, such as the following two lines, are the parts of the test disc that have fewer files with the same name after manually integrating SP1
HKLM, "SOFTWARE\\Microsoft\\Windows NT\\CurrentVersion", "SubVersionNumber",0,"a"< BR>HKLM, "SOFTWARE\\Microsoft\\Active Setup\\Declined Install On Demand IEv5","{08B0E5C0-4FCB-11CF-AAA5-00401C608500}",0,""
There are many places like this, others the difference is not to say)
short, Shanghai VOLXP I think it is indeed a break, engineered version. If Microsoft is strengthening the detection of piracy like SP1 in its upcoming SP2 patch, it is estimated that Shanghai VOL will end its life (unless it comes to Shanghai VOL integration SP2 version again)
PS: SP2 patch comes out Before, I hope that through this test article, let everyone have a clearer understanding of this version of XP, do not really think that it is omnipotent, free of activation, now I heard that the Russian crack version has been unable to pass SP2, Ann The so-called big business \\ government version of XP friends, when upgrading SP2 at the beginning of next year, you should remember to be prepared, backup important documents.
Now it seems, may be OEM version numbers and do the math activated without any problems, so I want to pursue perfection comrades, or to get hold of the original XP, himself considered a number of it.
But I also heard that even as if you reinstall the OEM version of SP1 will not enter the system, have the opportunity to go test the OEM it.