All Activity
- Past hour
-
freelance789 joined the community
-
NVIDIA GeForce RTX error code 43 on Windows 10 version 1607
halohalo replied to halohalo's topic in Windows 10
Did you make 3070 working with R510 and later? Take 538.49 as example, I checked 385CB40h and added new codes to overwrite the information before comparing begins, then I broke the compatibility of adaptive G-sync on later version of Windows 10 like 21H2 by deleting useless codes. Finally I took time to correct the mess I made and completed modification. If you still can't make 3070 and 4070 work by such kind of modification, I will guess NVIDIA uses different way to prevent GeForce from working on old version of Windows. Good luck. - Today
-
You're wrong. First, I didn't use VPN, second, it says: the page "isn't not working", when someone is blocked, the error code is "403 FORBIDDEN". I get 429, not 403, please pay attention to what I write. 403 Error when using VPN, again my error was 429, not 403. https://community.spotify.com/t5/Desktop-Windows/403-Error-when-using-VPN/td-p/5470781 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_403 https://support.google.com/chrome/thread/214178109/what-should-i-do-with-error-403-when-i-user-vpn?hl=en
-
If that is a bug or not i have no idea, but it is a minor one. The color you choose for the taskbar do not apply to those two windows: Each of them has an independent color
-
Thanks alot, Now I have no problems at all!!
-
Thanks!!! This practically solved the following for me: 1) Tabs sometimes crashing 2) Youtube videos stop playing and needing to be reloaded in a fresh tab 3) Sites not loading and needing to be opened in a new tab Great work!
-
... It all makes sense now : https://www.reddit.com/r/imguralternatives/comments/1357t3l/imgur_just_started_blocking_vpns_from_loading/
- Yesterday
-
Someone claims we need to start being beware of Fake Supermium. How do we know whether it's true, there's no official statement by win32. https://twitter.com/Supermium
-
maybe you need to check/tweak BIOS settings? EDIT: you may try the Award BIOS update: https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/shuttle-hot-433-ver.-4.0#bios
-
Is there a way to boot BIOS/CSM on a UEFI Class 3 device?
GD 2W10 replied to GD 2W10's topic in Hardware Hangout
Quibble isn't an option really, it can only boot UEFI Class 1-2. But is there an option for Class 3 UEFI for like an efi file emulating a BIOS, or a way to flash a UEFI Class 3 machine with something like SeaBIOS? Ppl do this with Chromebooks so I don't see why it can't be done with regular UEFI class 3 machines? I also found this: https://gitlab.com/tkchia/muefircate, what would this do? (this too: https://reboot.pro/index.php?showtopic=22488) -
https://safebrowsing.google.com/safebrowsing/report_error/
-
jopoh joined the community
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
AstroSkipper replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
The following rule has been proven to be true time and again in my past: The more spoon-feeding , the more demand for convenience. I think every member should do a research on their own first. If this fails, then asking is perfectly fine. Finding links for extensions whose name and version is already known is not particularly difficult and should be feasible for everyone. -
hans_glans started following NVIDIA GeForce RTX error code 43 on Windows 10 version 1607
-
NVIDIA GeForce RTX error code 43 on Windows 10 version 1607
hans_glans replied to halohalo's topic in Windows 10
@halohalo I got the 3070 working on 1709 (472.12 and 466.77). Now for the 4070, the same hex tweaks don't work and the minimum supported driver is DCH only now (531.41). Which values do I modify for the driver to run with the 4070 on 1709 (16299)? -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
VistaLover replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
... But you were given named (and versioned) options already: ... Let's start with the most trouble-free option, the XUL ("legacy") UserScript Manager Greasemonkey-for-Pale-Moon (works on St52, too): https://github.com/janekptacijarabaci/greasemonkey/releases/tag/3.31.4Fork https://github.com/janekptacijarabaci/greasemonkey/releases/download/3.31.4Fork/greasemonkey-3.31.4-pm_forkBranch.xpi ... And don't take this personally , but at my older age I refrain from "spoon-feeding" others ... Take good care and good night! -
This is about https://github.com/Feodor2/Mypal68/issues/427 Some people get crash but I don't, made a patch for them. codeberg file was wrong, now it is fixed
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
AstroSkipper replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
I noticed compatibilities issues to the Tab Utilities extension in New Moon 28 and some other problems with crashing or not correctly unloading tabs as in the PM fork Suspender. -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
modnar replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
I know of "this link" and the two links on that page, how about you just post the link to the userscript editor for Serpent instead, would be really helpful. I don't know how it's called. -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
modnar replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
I would advise you to search for Diskeeper 2011 for your disk to be as fast as can be. -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
Mathwiz replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
+1 for the recommendation. What's the advantage of 1.4.3 over newer versions? -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
AstroSkipper replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
@Kmuland On such weak systems like yours, you have to adjust much more than on more powerful ones. Install uBlock Origin Legacy and only absolutely necessary extensions! The less, the better. Defragment your complete system partition and don't forget to adjust your pagefile! It shouldn't be fragmented as well. Personally, I tried all extension for memory optimisation but most of them did nothing useful. I use an external RAM manager called CleanMem Pro which frees up RAM that is not used but not released. And most important is to open only very few tabs and/or a tab unloader like Lull The Tabs. I prefer an older version 1.4.3. For the management of websites, I use OneTab and Speed Dial to have only opened the absolutely necessary tabs. -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
66cats replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Just a guess, but nowhere. The typically cached elements are simply re-downloaded, again and again, as if the page was visited for the first time. If @Kmuland's internet bandwidth is greater than HDD bandwidth, disabling the cache makes sense. Again, just guessing, no idea how browsers work. -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
AstroSkipper replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
But if you are getting low on RAM and no disk cache is available, where is New Moon 28 supposed to write its cache files? TBH, that does not really make sense to me. Maybe, it is better to create a small partition only for caching files by browsers and defragment it on a regular base for performance reasons. -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
Kmuland replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Right! That was why I asked about his capacities for file storage. In general, I don't think it would be a good idea to disable disk cache on devices with little RAM. Here using a mechanic HDs (160Gbs), so when Im low in ram, there is too much virtual memory disk usage... If the browser disk cache is also enabled... the delays are tedious, the HD dont stop of write/read activity.. so I prefer disable cache. -
ZuluAlpha joined the community
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
AstroSkipper replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Right! That was why I asked about his capacities for file storage. In general, I don't think it would be a good idea to disable disk cache on devices with little RAM. -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
VistaLover replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
... Since you're low on RAM, why did you disable disk cache? I might be wrong , but doesn't this mean that the browser cache is now stored solely in RAM?