Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. If it were me, the 0patch solution is no solution at all, as long as it requires communicating with an external web server that may some day disappear from the internet.
  3. This is a copypasta of this post, for whatever reason: https://msfn.org/board/topic/177638-need-help-getting-error-failed-to-set-data-for-start_searchprograms/ The answer, which apparently is not on the original thread, is: "Do not use compatibility modes on program. Find Start_searchPrograms value in your registry and delete it." Which comes from this page which also has the same exact question: https://muut.com/i/startisback/general:need-help-getting-error-fa
  4. You can also run a trace on Internet Explorer to see if you can find any errors when trying to process a page. I would create a .htm file with just a .png sourced in the body. Open Internet Explorer and set it to about:blank. Then open Procmon and set iexplore.exe to included processes. Put the path to the .htm into the address bar, start the procmon trace, then press enter on the address bar. After the page quickly loads, stop the trace and save the PML. You can then look for yourself, but if you need help looking at that output, you can zip the PML and attach it here.
  5. Today
  6. Strange, YouTube is working fine here with Chrome 49! I haven't done any user agent spoofing. It's sending the default - Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/49.0.2623.112 Safari/537.36 I'm getting a warning about the browser being unsupported soon, but apart from that everything seems to be fine.
  7. "registering a .dll" may be different from "registering a .dll". In a nutshell a .dll may be : 1) containing NO registering info for Regsvr32 or equivalent 2) containing ONLY part of the full registering info for Regsvr32 or equivalent 3) containing ALL registering info for the FULL registering for Regsvr32 or equivalent Additionally another program may add or modify registry data related to a given .dll. So, unless a .dll is of type #3 above there is simply NO way you can "repair" its Registry info using Regsvr32 or equivalent. Hence the provided resources, containing the "standard" Registry entries for that particular .dll, try it and report: https://forums.majorgeeks.com/threads/ie-will-not-display-png-images.150568/ jaclaz
  8. Does anyone have pictures of the differences between the w8 and w10 settings (shown on install)? I don't understand the difference. Thanks
  9. This is normal for the free version. You have to get the paid version to remove it.
  10. Hi there, as the titles states, I need help fixing an error I' m experiencing. I have tried using the program in compatible mode. The computer is running windows 10 64x Has anyone got a solution for this error? with regards,
  11. OK, I never wanted a fight, and this is not a fight as far as I can tell, but hey, I can answer your questions fair and square, we are all friends here. I didn't link the article because "it came from a tech site". That site in particular is not one of those which I visit regularly - in fact it came from a search about browser security that I did. I linked because I've read it all, I thought it was well written, had some good points, made sense to me even though for some people it was just meant "to spread fear" or FUD, like you say. And I linked it to explain why I uninstalled from my Windows 2000 VM the browser forks like Pale Moon, New Moon, and sticked with the only well updated and working one - SeaMonkey. Which isn't even my #1 browser choice in other OSes. And most browser forks IMHO are unsecure not only because they are based on very obsolete code, but also because they came from unknown sources. "Who are the people behind these forks?" That's my question. I don't know them. For example, I don't know "Moonchild Productions". I know Microsoft, Google, Opera, Mozilla. For more important things like banking, I trust these. For minor things like "posting on a forum about retro things", I see no problem. And just to throw a little of fun so it does not turn into a heated debate (I never wanted a debate. I just wanted to explain why I did what I did with my choice of browsers on my VMs. Everyone is entitled to use any browser they want for any reason they like, but I wanted to tell my reason and my choice). Remember "How I Met Your Mother" ? Barney Stinson? I'm a huge fan of this series. In a few episodes he always says "New is always better". =P Yes, I can see the contradiction when I talk about Retrozilla - In fact, I was seeing that while I wrote my previous post. I should have predicted that it would be questioned... Yes, you're right, the code is old and unsecure - but it's only one that works well from Windows 9x and below (well, at least from all the browsers that I tried - and I tried many browsers, many versions, lots of nights without sleeping). There's no way to get newer browsers for these versions of Windows so a fork of it and a few updates (newer ciphers, maybe a goanna engine) is the only exception I'd like to see. Like I said, it'd only be used for a few fun things but never for more secure transactions, banking, things like that. About the "wasting time on browser forks for XP and above", I'd like to again point out that it was an opinion not a critic or an insult to them. XP, in my opinion, is still a relevant OS in these days - I've seen many companies here in Brazil still using it, so it is far from being retro IMO. I have to admit that I do not like XP, Vista, 7, 8 and 10 versions, but this is not the reason why I said these things. The reason was because it was still relevant, far from being retro, and still had good working apps & browsers, in spite of what I can think about XP. I mean, my father has an old laptop with XP installed just to run an old software that lets him work on his favorite mappings of his Hayabusa GSX 1300R engine. I told him to install 2000 if he wanted speed or 7 if he wanted an upgrade, but given how old and underpowered that laptop is (the original OS was the laggy Vista), XP was the choice to go for him. The laptop is not used for anything other than that. He could've made a VM on his daily driver 2017 MacBook Pro, but that would be an overkill. He gave an use to a tiny underpowered laptop with XP on it. I mentioned "3 or 4 trusted browsers good enough for XP". Well, for XP, you can always believe in SeaMonkey (2.49.5 is the lastest and last version supporting XP now), Firefox ESR versions, Chrome, Opera, while IE is out of this game, finally. Yes, the ones I mentioned before IE, do not support XP anymore (especially Chrome), but their latest working versions for XP still have enough security and can render all the sites properly. I believe more in SeaMonkey than any of these for older Windows for one particular reason - they do not go crazy like Mozilla actually does with their disgusting "Chrome clone" that is Firefox now. Actually, MS did a fine job with their new "clone" (Edge). It uses the engine but they did not deviate from the UI and look of Edge that much. And if we move ahead, Vista is on the same boat as XP, but from Windows 7 onwards, you have newest Edge Chromium, Firefox, Opera, Chrome versions working flawlessly. So why we have to develop more browser forks for XP when we already have official (older, I know) versions of Firefox, Chrome, Opera working so well in XP? I want to know why we need Serpent, Basilisk, Pale Moon, New Moon, for XP? We have near zero options in Windows 2000 (SeaMonkey 2.49.5 has a perfect score there with BWC installed), complete zero from Windows 9x and below. The real challenge is there, not in XP. I mean, hey, everybody does like a challenge, right? I don't expect my post to "magically" bring more effort to this direction, but that's just my opinion on this subject. Since I've made my opinion clear, I'd like to end this and go back to the original subject (Windows 98 in 2020), because I can see that me and LoneCrusader will keep disagreeing on that. So let's just agree that we disagree, shake our hands and move on.
  12. Regsvr32 works with other DLLs, so it's not damaged. I will provide some context about this problem, but it's a bottomless pit with no solutions. All over the web you can find discussions that go on for hundreds of pages about reCAPTCHA. I'm referring to "I'm not a robot" followed by those thumbnail images. Select cars, buses, fire hydrants, etc. Millions of people have trouble loading and using reCAPTCHA. I've probably tried 50 fixes. If I refresh the page dozens of times, reCAPTCHA occasionally loads. There is a Bypass reCAPTCHA script that works with GreaseMonkey. I tried the script. Doesn't seem to do anything. Registering pngfilt.dll is from a blog created by a very smart IT professional. He listed several reCAPTCHA fixes. It's very possible pngfilt.dll cannot be registered. This reCAPTCHA problem constantly reminds me of circuits I breadboarded many years ago, when I was learning electronics. If a signal is weak you carefully add stages that increase signal strength without creating distortion. There should be an app that works between the Google servers and your browser. Something that would focus all those bytes of reCAPTCHA data and beam it full strength into your browser. I know, it's just wishful thinking.
  13. Running Win XP Home Edition 2002 SP3 on a decrepit unstable HP Media Center M7350n PC and trying to use Chromium Version 54.20.6530.0 doesn't display Youtube properly. New to Chromium and I read about disabling spoofing. I've not been able to find anything online so I posted here. Can someone give me tips? Thank you
  14. OK, so my intent was not to "make fun" of you or anyone else. The point was to try and get you to realize that the article you linked (and seem to believe is somehow an authority on the subject) is strictly an opinion piece. Just because it shows up on some tech website does not elevate this type of stuff to "gospel." Just because any given "forked browser" project is forked from earlier code than contained in the current version of the original browser does not automatically make it "less secure." This is disingenuous. It's easy to create doubt based on a statement such as "it's based on a much older version." But that statement does not take into consideration what exactly has been changed in the "almighty newer version." For all anyone knows, there could have been no changes whatsoever to the actual "security" code. All changes could be to the GUI, etc. And to go a step further, the "almighty newer version" may have even developed a gaping security hole that didn't exist in the older code. "Newer is better" = chronological snobbery. OK, so, once again, if you wish to base your opinion on things like you linked above, be my guest. However, I fail to understand how you can be critical of "browser forks" and "smaller groups of unknown developers" when you wish "to see more from Retrozilla." RetroZilla is a browser fork, of a far, far older version of Firefox code than that used by Basilisk, Pale Moon, etc., and it is created by a small, small group of "unknown" (except to those of us here) developers. And, since those selfsame developers are "wasting time with several forks of Firefox for XP," I'd also like to see a list of those "3 or 4 main well known browsers ready, working and updated perfectly for security issues" on Windows XP.
  15. the aero glass8 thing from glass8.eu put a watermark on my screen does someone know why?
  16. I know that is old story, but there is not much info, on the subject.. Which MB was used? Few notes: I made Geforce 7950 PCi-E to work with unofficial driver with Z68, but its not really good driver or card.. In general 512 MB videocards has lots of problems with Win98. Cirrus is working for someone: Protection errors, its common for installed Win98 machine, often but now everytime helps remove hidden devices in Safe mode, otherwise clean install with every new cards should fix it, unless its some additional Unraid bug. S3 - these cards are really old, i had similar problem that very old ATI Mach 64. Im not sure, but if memory serves also Vooodoo 3 PCI was no go. Make sense to try - some ATI 8xxx, 9xxx card.. Geforce 2/4.. Geforce 5/6 are still to new to most working Nvidia Win98 drivers, but still much better than Geforce 7, i personally dont know anybody who made Geforce 8 working, when it is listed as supported by unofficial driver.
  17. Yesterday
  18. I know this is not a vsbscript but this little utility has been very useful to me. Old Timer’s ConvertIt is a simple to use tool that will convert single and multiple hex strings to ASCII text and also the reverse of creating hex values from ASCII text. It supports both the old Windows 9x version 4 and the modern version 5 registry .reg files. Paste in the hex (everything after the colon in the .reg file) or text value, select the conversion method and click the button. The result is clean and stripped of erroneous characters. Hex(2) is for a single line value, Hex(7) is a multiple line value. OTConverIt is only 174KB in size and portable. http://www.geekstogo.com/forum/files/file/404-otconvertit/ alacran
  19. This mod takes the start button from the early Longhorn builds and puts it into Windows XP's explorer. The start button shown below is the only modification to explorer. Installation Instructions: 1. extract the archive containing replacer.cmd and the modded explorer 2. Locate the original explorer.exe in x:\Windows 3. Open replacer.cmd, drag said original explorer.exe into replacer.cmd, press enter 4. Drag the new explorer.exe file from the archive in (_XPmodded for x86 and XP_x64_modded for x64), press enter 5. Reboot and enjoy NOTE: Installing service packs (including uSP4) will probably undo this, take this into consideration when installing. Credits: Most go to DeviantArt user Rafax64, I used the bitmap from his modded explorer. This is also where replacer.exe came from. Rafax64 modded explorer: https://www.deviantart.com/rafax64/art/Longhorn-Explorer-Mod-for-XP-132097072 Download link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I0mLHemUrzbPZO01QxIm8oGvz4QAXiG0/view?usp=sharing
  20. I'm not going to try and answer why you may have lost your drive. I've lost many over the years. As a rule any time I'm placing an order for myself or someone else I hide atleast 1 32gb USB 3 drive in that order. At like 7 bucks for a really good drive I'll just keep tossing them and never saving anything important on them. Other than that for doing any bootable media I always use Rufus. And whenever I have something screwed up on a drive I use diskpart clean to wipe it and start over. First hiccup I get out of a drive it just goes in the trash.
  21. Agent works, but to XP version for this patch.
  22. Seems to work fine with PAE on my end, none of the devices are reported as having a problem. Also I was using the driver on a Renesas USB 3.0 controller and it seems to work fine there as well.
  23. one thing i have noticed using either UBO or ABP is if you block the element for the you are using a adbocker and put in filters, when page is refreshed it comes back with another some you can bypass, some you can't
  24. Due to the recent outbreak of Coronavirus, I was asked to stay at home and do "smart working" which basically means to work remotely from home. I managed to login to Office 365 and access Outlook 365 with the modern UI by using Chromium 54 spoofed as Chromium 81 and everything works fine except for Microsoft Teams, which is a messaging system developed by Microsoft to be used as a built-in replacement of Skype for Business for chats, calls and video-calls between coworkers working for the same company. It's very well integrated inside the Office 365 Suite, however I have a problem... If I try to access it with Chromium 54 spoofed as Chromium 81 it doesn't load and if I try to use the very latest version of NewMoon made by @roytam1 it says that my browser is not supported. Of course I also tried to download and patch the official x86 Windows Executable but it's closed source and I've got tons of missing calls. Does anybody here use Microsoft Teams? https://teams.microsoft.com/downloads Microsoft Teams (Office 365 Suite) on NewMoon, Roytam latest build: Outlook 365 on Chromium 54 spoofed as Chromium 81 "chrome.exe" --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/81.0.4031.0 Safari/537.36" Outlook 365 on NewMoon (Roytam version):
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...