All Activity

I also tested again the real-time protection module of SUPERAntiSpyware. The CPU usage on my old computer is high and completely unacceptable. Therefore, a Professional licence is not worthwhile at all on low-performance computers.

You have disable all programs registry policy, probably set by ExplorerPatcher

Athough I have disabled the checking for programme updates in SUPERAntiSpyware's settings, every time I start it up or update the definitions, I am annoyed by the usual pop-up promising a programme update. Therefore, I would like to warn you against updating the programme via Automatic Updates at this point. Stay at the version 10.0.01254 or uninstall it!

I have a weird problem, I'm not using "All Programs" all that often so I don't know how long it's going on already but I noticed I can't click it anymore in the Classic Win7 Startmenu. Even if I change it back to XP-style flyouts hovering over it has no reaction. It happens on every skin so it's not a skin problem. I'M on SaB 3.9.20 and Windows 11 25H2 26200.7623.

SUPERAntiSpyware stopped Windows XP support with the version 10.0.0.1254 which was the last working installer version. Until the end of last year, it was still possible to update to version 10.0.0.1266 via automatic updates. Since the beginning of the year, this is no longer possible. Users are constantly being nagged to perform a programme update under Windows XP SP3 32-bit that renders the entire installation unusable after application. This is because it updates to the 64-bit version 10.0.0.1282. The old files are of course overwritten, and anyone who has not created a backup beforehand is lost. Luckily, after hours of searching, I found a Norton Ghost image of my other XP partition with the last changed files when SUPERAntiSpyware was updated to the version 10.0.0.1266. That's why I was able to manually restore the destroyed installaton. Furthermore, the size of the virus definition file that is downloaded has increased significantly. As before, it takes forever to load. The only good thing is that the definitions are still being updated at all. So, nothing is fine. You don't need one. I've had a lifetime licence for the Professional version since 2013. It used to be worth something when Windows XP was still supported. Those days are finally over.

That's a good idea. I'll give it a try, but if I can't find a complete solution to this problem (and I still haven't given up hope), there's not much else I can do. I already have the "RECORDER" tool from Windows 3x, which allows me to record and play back any actions with a high level of accuracy (including mouse movements) and reproduce them in the same sequence. It works well in Windows 98 (although I'm not sure why Microsoft didn't include this useful tool in Windows 9x and later versions). About once every few days, I check RAMDRV64, which is used by several programs that are writing to it at the same time, causing occasional cross-writes that are successfully corrected by ScanDisk (restoring lost free space). Over time, these "mouse movements" become somewhat tedious. Therefore, it is important to me. Thank you!

So I was hoping to get a pic of my 95 *upgrade* cd (would be very FIRST version sold at college campus bookstore, there were "A", "B", and "C" releases of 95). I have three prime-suspect locations to search in my "small hoard", but I could not find it Online reading seems to label releases as RTM, Plus, SP1, OSR1, OSR2, OSR2.1, OSR2.5, but I simply *do not remember* them being called that when being sold at the college bookstore, I remember them being called 95a, 95b, and 95c and I know mine would have been the VERY FIRST and that it was an "upgrade" and does *NOT* have the "for sale only with new pc" on its label. Online reading also seem to suggest that the difference between "retail" and "oem" is whether it *includes* Internet Explorer and/or which *version* it includes. From memory, I guess I do not remember it rolling out that way. Here in the USA, the largest (be it "good" or "bad" is a discussion for another day) consumer market, we-in-the-US think of the word "retail" as a distinction of WHO can BUY the item. *Supply Chains* are broken down into classifications like "Tier 1", "Tier 2", and "Tier 3". In the vane of an *OEM* (Microsoft) building/creating Win95 and SELLING it, if Acer, IBM, NEC, HP, Dell, Packard Bell, Texas Instrument, and the like could BUY them to INCLUDE in their manufactured-then-sold computers, that is not (at least here in the US) considered as *RETAIL*. If Amazon, Best Buy, Radio Shack, Tiger Direct, Costco, Walmart *retail stores* were allowed to BUY them and turn around and sell to people like you and me, THAT is considered a *RETAIL* item. I guess I see things that way. But maybe the rest of the world doesn't?

it would be great to have a software that mimics mouse movement by just a keyboard shortcut, and that is compatible for 98/ME... With that, it can complete faster...

Maaaybe this? http://flowgorithm.org/download/files/Flowgorithm-2.30.3-32-Setup.zip I didn't test it on 98/ME, but see if it does work. I used it specifically for the algorithm university project. Still hate that subject to the core. You have to see all of the possible things you have to do with your code, like you are the Watcher of the multiverse. And about dictionary: https://absoluteword.com/awmaker/

Speaking of latest antiviruses, has anybody tested the latest Avast database definitions for v18? I know they have discontinued the XP compatibility check recently, but i'm curious if Avast can be still used as a real time protection AV? I'm not a fan of cloud only protection like Panda, even though currently it's the best solution for antimalware protection other than SUPERAntiSpyware (the definition updates are still being released, just checked on my XP x32 VM), which is fine for me. If only i had a key for Pro edition...

Thanks for the input. I'm going to give it a try. I liked what I read about it with respect to Windows 10 / 11. I didn't want to really use ZoneAlarm but that's how it worked out. It will probably be hard trying to get ZA off my computer with everything that it installs. Also thanks to NullEntity for the 'thumbs up' comment. ...

Many thanks, indeed ; but the naysayers are again back at it, one of them even had the audacity to downvote your comment; I posted one last "analysis" there, but, frankly, I'm totally disheartened and sickened by all those, self-proclaimed, "experts of today", so full of themselves and mean-spirited , who leave no room for old-school volunteers like myself ... Well then, I, you, Reino (and possibly others) know that the IOS HLS formats do still work, let the masses on GH's issue tracker choke on their venom ...

You need extender which brings this missing functions. On x86 TPM 2.0 driver works, But on x64 I managed only TPM 1.2 version.

Thanks very much for the explanation!

Bound means prelinked, a rarity these days. An address will appear there that should match the function address in the lower box. If so, the load will be faster, if not, a bit slower. Early versions of my ImportPatcher could validate bound import links.

Our college campus sold Win 95 *upgrade* cd-rom in the bookstore. ie, it did NOT have the "for sale only with new pc" printed on the disk. Not sure if that helps you, but to me, if it was sold SEPARATE from a new pc and sold at a college campus bookstore, that tells me "retail". You might try looking through *EBAY* listings, that may be a better source than any source including "fake cd-rom images".

Hi guys, I have been reading on the internets for several days trying to find a definitive answer to the question - was there a legit Windows 95 US-English Full Retail CD-ROM edition back in 1995? Thus far, I have not been able to find a convincing answer, even though some posts on different forums/boards claim so. On Archive.org I was able to spot a full retail edition which came on floppy disks; several fake CD-ROM images are also available, as well as images from the OEM CD-ROM (which people often confuse with the Retail version, as it seems). So I'd appreciate it if someone with legit experience / knowledge shed light on this issue. Thanks muchos in advance. Best!

Done.

http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/read.php?19,154431,158596,page=35#msg-158595 Just in case you need something to add.

That's right. But what's new is that libcurl (and thus curl_cffi 0.14.0) have now started to enforce these extensions (no idea why). Since 0.14.0 doesn't offer any critical features that we can't live without on Windows 7, I will pin my version on 0.13.0 for as long as possible. At the moment there are no security issues with that version. It's an uphill battle with yt-dlp always wanting the latest and "greatest".

Best greetings @nicolaasjan ; may I bring to your attention the "youtube IOS-client M3U8 formats" discussion found in GH#15569: https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/15569#issuecomment-3770540275 https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/15569#issuecomment-3771419465 https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/15569#issuecomment-3780166034 @bashonly, one of the main, current, yt-dlp devs, is being childishly stubborn at not acknowledging (repeated) claims that the IOS-client M3U8 formats are (currently) actually downloadable without 1) YT cookies, 2) a JS runtime enabled, 3) a PO Token. Could you, please, add there your own input (hopefully one that corroborates the "downloadable" claims) before that issue gets locked for non-devs? Many thanks in advance ... All the best for you!

It works now. But let me say one thing. While it is legit to complain as I did, and also helps to know what is the issue and see if I can fix, or can be fixed, if it is necessary to use the latest curl_cffi, just do it. Don't downgrade because a person complains. If I can use the x86, awesome, I'll use. In cases as with this tool, how many times are we dealing with over 2³² of data/memory needs to use the x64. It is more a matter of slightly better performance. off-topic from here Now, about the "modern DNS extensions". Actually they aren't modern... I mean, the original proposed standard RFC is from 1999, and then ratified as internet standard on 2013. It is fair to use it, but, why now? If I could I would update the hardware, OS, software, but... I don't live in a world of magic.

I have been running that version for years without problems on both Windows server 2008 R2 and Windows 7 x64. It is much more strict for my taste than Windows default firewall. I like firewall that blocks all by default and only permits if i allow it. That is why I like it over Windows one. Maybe I have worked too long on enterprise environments when think that way...

Thanks @roytam1. Yes, I'm aware that the runtime version I'm using isn't an official XP-compatible version. It was brought to my attention by @Monroe in another thread here. I think it was developed unofficially to help with some games which would not otherwise work on XP. Presumably, as I've now found, it can also cause compatibility problems with some other programs! I will probably keep it installed as a system runtime, but be aware that if any other program now fails to run, that might be the cause. Hopefully all I will need to do then, as with Firefox, is put compatible versions of the necessary runtime DLLs in the program's folder.

I don't think there will be many users of the 64-bit version that also have an old local DNS resolver, but nevertheless I will downgrade curl_cffi to version 0.13.0 for the next release. Forcing these modern DNS extensions on a legacy-OS target is counter-productive anyway. Meanwhile, here is a 64-bit test version, so we can see if curl_cffi 0.13.0 doesn't give issues for you with 2026.01.19.143412.