Can you install and use the WAIK for W7 and Server 2008r2 with v9 SP2 if you are not planning on installing XP? I know youcan use the WAIK for VIsta for W7, but have not seen anything conclusive on the new WAIK for W7. We are not goign to be deploying old OS's like Server 2003 and XP and will be using OSD for W7 and Server 2008R2. Anyways, any clarification on thsi would be appreciated. :-)
1 of 1 people found this helpful
You MUST install the Windows 7 / Windows 2008 version of the WAIK for use with LANDesk 9.0 anyway.
The "old" Windows XP / Windows 2003 WAIK is only for LDMS 8.8 anyway.
We don't actually "use" the WAIK as it were, we just need its installation so that you have a legit (because it's now free with the WAIK) Windows PE license, and this stuff then goes about UNLOCKING the Windows PE stuff in LDMS.
We don't actually use any WAIK code, so yeah, you can work with Windows XP and whatever quite happily, just as long as you've got the right version of WAIK installed on the Core (which - again - we mainly use to activate the relevant OSD/Provisioning abilities after the legal requirements check).
- Paul Hoffmann
LANDesk EMEA Technical Lead
I just want to be clear, so i can install this version here then on my server 2008 R2 v9 SP2 core server? - http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=696dd665-9f76-4177-a811-39c26d3b3b34&displaylang=en
The WAIK that we use is the one that came with Vista. There is no change from 9.0 to 9.0 SP2.
In reality even if you use WAIK for Windows 7 (with WinPE 3.0) to activate we really only use it for activation, then we use our own WinPE image from WAIK for Vista (WinPE 2.1), like Paul mentioned.
This means, for example, that when you are adding drivers to the WinPE image you should continue to use Vista 32-bit drivers, etc.
If you would like to see WinPE 3.0 being used then you can make a request in the enhancement portal to get some support behind it. I haven't checked in awhile, so there might already be one there that you can just vote on.
Ok, i get it now. Sorry for being dense. ;-)
Hah! It's not about being dense; it's that I wanted to make sure the information was as clearly presented as possible. I think you had a pretty good handle on your question and the thread the whole time. [-8