Leaderboard

great, I pushed changes to git repo. next NM27 build will have bigger version number, and foxyproxy_standard-4.6.5-pm.xpi also updated.

Works totally fine now (though only with my version of Foxy Proxy with the dumb "fp.isGecko45 = true" fix).

hope this rev can help (preventing them to be enabled by users): https://github.com/roytam1/UXP/commit/e578dccb6d69c327f5ad334064320ba25b24f5de

I'm using the PM28 patch on my Thinkpad T42p with a 2GHz Pentium M, 2GB of DDR, and a Radeon FireGL T2 GPU. Scrolling speed does some to be much improved, but I did notice that the feedback score element is missing when I hover over my username on the eBay landing page. I have highlighted the general area where it is normally displayed, in the picture provided. Not a deal breaker, but worth taking note of IMHO.

I'm not going to change this as it is the only one reference to upstream for identification. first line changed to match basilisk as well.

No need to apologize , though what I actually meant is still slightly different. Mass Storage connection makes sense for a mass storage device and (by convention) this implies on Windows that a drive letter is assigned to volumes on it, but this drive letter assignment is the result of the way Windows works because it has access to the PhysicalDrive and - via mount manager - to logical volumes (what get a drive letter) and their filesystems. The (stupid) PTP/MTP approach is at a higher level and never provided drive letters because it has no connection to the physical drive, and what I was lamenting about was not the lack of drive letter access but rather the lack of the more direct access that allows otherwise (besides other possibilities) "normal" drive letter access. A good example of a similar approach is FTP, you have NO idea when you connect to a FTP site/directory what OS is running "there", nor which filesystem you are actually accessing. Still you have exposed some file characteristics, like (usually) size and date. If you take (on a "recent") window a ftp site you can map it to a drive (drive letter) just fine, *like*: https://www.thewindowsclub.com/map-an-ftp-drive-windows or - via third party tool - *like*: https://www.ferrobackup.com/map-ftp-as-disk.html Still only a part of the data (those provided by the FTP) are available, so, even if you have *some* access via drive letter, you do not have the same amount of data/access as if it was a local disk drive. In the case of a FTP (please read as "remote") device this is of course "normal", but in the case of PTP/MTP the mass storage device is "local" allright, connected by a (usually too short to be practical in most real world situations) USB cable, and there is no reason for arbitrarily removing (by using the stupid connection protocol) otherwise technically possible ways to access it, if not the utter stupidity and total lack of respect for the customers that are common between the good MS guys and the good Google guys (and all the sheep, which include the large majority of customers and the actual manufacturers of the phones). What anyone[1] would actually want to be able to do would be: 1) periodically connect his/her device to a PC and 2) run a full dd of the phone "as is" to an image or restore the phone to an exact previous state by dding an image to it OR 3) use Robocopy or similar or backup/restore software AND: 4) perform any "common" maintenance for mass storage devices, like copying files, defragmenting the filesystem, etc. This would be easy, simple and effective, needing not an internet connection (think of the stupid "cloud" backups) nor any particular software from the manufacturer of the phone device (usually crappy, bloated and what not). Probably too simple and easy . jaclaz [1] anyone with some common sense, I mean, a very small minority of people in my eperience.

The worst thing is that Google basically punishes you for not using Chrome, since it only seems to happen if you're using Firefox or any of its derivatives, not sure about other Chromium-based browsers, but I feel like it happens when using them as well.

not absurd if they do it on purpose ... if they made a "perfectly good OS" they nobody would ever upgrade to next one

Hello everybody, The acpi.sys file has been update and I have successfully installed XP. Here the link to my message on the Win-Raid forum with some screenshots and more details: https://www.win-raid.com/t4035f45-Windows-XP-Bit-and-Server-Bit-on-Modern-Hardware-227.html#msg96114

Just adding a note; you can actually run those from recovery environment. At least from my limited experience, running it from there and pointing it to a good installation as repair source (mounted WIM image) that has the same updates as problematic installation seems to be the most reliable way to achieve some actual results.

On XP, this is not a problem, because the installer still does not work, you need to unzip files using 7-zip.

Here is my Windows for Workgroups 3.11 desktop. The OS is running on a FAT32 partition under MS-DOS 7.1 (Windows 95 OSR 2.5) on my IBM PC 300GL: And the same machine on Windows 95: And Windows 2000. For seven years I ran a 95/2k dualboot on my only desktop until I could start moving up in the PC world: