Leaderboard

Once I found FaceTime, never used Skype again. FaceTime just works. It's that user friendly thing.

It is actually in the readme files (leeme.txt): http://ericksystem.weebly.com/ http://ericksystem.weebly.com/software.html but yes, the site has some "queer" behaviour, so I am attaching it. jaclaz repair_this_1.0.zip

WHICH webpage? (but yes, wear leveling has nothiing to do with filesystem level activities) jaclaz

"Fluent" design is in itself inconsistent - by design. You never know where the UI elements are going to move to, or how they're going to look, or whether they're even going to be there. So expectations are out the window. The feeling of "I no longer remember how to use this" isn't supposed to recur for every use. There does seem to be a need to display information in various sizes and aspect ratios. Microsoft just wasn't terribly good at picking a way to do that. And some design decisions are just dumb... They may have sounded good on paper but in practice they just don't work. Discoverability has suffered, for example, because of things like mysterious appearing scroll bars. Just try to find all the configuration options in Skype 8. -Noel

Basilisk 55 (Moebius) is also sluggish with MSE if basilisk.exe isn't excluded: (Oh, for crying out loud - apparently it's "Forbidden" to post a screen shot now.) Apparently MSE slows down all Firefox-based browsers. I'll try Slimjet 10 when I get a chance. Edit: MSE spikes with Slimjet too, but it didn't seem as sluggish to me. That could be just my imagination, or it could be because the Slimjet processes use less RAM than Firefox/Basilisk (hence quicker/easier for MSE to scan); I don't know.

Although we were just trying to tame zippyshare.com so you could download one of heinoganda's files, I realized it would be of interest to other users of Roytam's XP browser builds. So this thread seemed the most logical place to respond.

Hmmm. I would call the video largely incomplete and inconsistent (not entirely unlike the MS crappy Windows 10 it talks about) The video can be summed up in three points: 1) there are evident inconsistencies in the UI design 2) it is undeniable that these inconsistencies exist and that the good MS guys didn't care about them 3) it is unfair to say that they are not capable of making the UI - if not visually agreeable - at least consistent, but simply they prioritized other things over the UI design The missing point is WHAT (the heck ) are the other things that: a. kept the good MS guys so busy to make a mess of the very thing that was sold to us as being innovative (the UI) b. are so good (and innovative) that allow them to be excused for the lousy work they did on the UI jaclaz

So just replacing bitmap while keeping same layout is just boring. What about putting Beta boot screen into retail? cross post from betaarchive: I think I found the position that sets progress bar and scrolling bar: NTOSKRNL.EXE 5.0.2195.7376, CHT, 1,691,648 bytes File Date: Thursday, 18 February, 2010, 20:17:26 SHA256: 86356E3BB6DB3E873AE8C881358233F5CD142EC2CEDF34D7B007B427CE085394 .text:0041D14A loc_41D14A: ; CODE XREF: sub_41CFF6+14Aj .text:0041D14A push 1B5h .text:0041D14F push 112h .text:0041D154 call sub_41CDAC .text:0041D159 push offset loc_41D1F4 .text:0041D15E mov dword_476070, 1A0h .text:0041D168 mov dword_47606C, esi .text:0041D16E mov dword_476000, 280h .text:0041D178 mov dword_475F40, 0Ah .text:0041D182 call InbvInstallDisplayStringFilter Y = 0x1B5=437, X = 0x112=274 is progress bar starting location Y= dword_476070 = 0x1A0 = 416 X = dword_47606C = esi = 0 W = dword_476000 = 0x280 = 640 H = dword_475F40 = 0x0A = 10 is scrolling bar location. but there is difficulty on setting dword_47606C, since "mov dword_47606C, esi" is 4-bytes shorter than others. -- so hacking around it is working! (VA)0x41d14a: 68 b5 01 00 00 push 0x1b5 e9 6d 29 04 00 jmp 0x45fac1 be a0 00 00 00 mov esi, 0xa0 /* it is 0x41D154 here */ (VA)0x45fac1: 68 21 01 00 00 push 0x121 e8 e1 d2 fb ff call 0x41CDAC e9 84 d6 fb ff jmp 0x41D154 that splits call to sub_41CDAC into half, pushing X value goes to 15-bytes spaces at 0x45FAC1, call 0x41CDAC can jumps back to 0x41D154 for making a space to set ESI. Thanks http://shell-storm.org/online/Online-Assembler-and-Disassembler/ for a flexible-enough online assembler.