Leaderboard

A good way for a Vista user using the Security Monthly Quality Rollups to determine whether they have telemetry, is to run netstat -b in Command Prompt/PowerShell as administrator with no programs running (especially web browsers). You get a few hits on a standard Windows 10 and Windows 7/8.x with telemetry, but not on Windows 7 without telemetry updates as well as Windows 10 LTSC with services like Diagnostic Policy Service disabled (in the latter case, simplewall may have been running with many system components blocked from making connections, but I don't remember).

Despite your arrogant attitude I have to say the UXP browser is very nice and so I guess we can separate the harsh personality (and that's putting it mildly) from the work. I finally got a newer model with much better processing and more ram and it blows me away how much better this is. On XP it is screaming fast, very impressive.

You can force "multiprocess mode" (aka "e10s") in Firefox 52 or @roytam1's Serpent 52 and 55, by creating the Boolean preference browser.tabs.remote.force-enable and setting it to true. This splits Firefox or Serpent into two processes. To allow more than two, set dom.ipc.processCount to a value greater than one (i.e., setting it to 2 allows 3 processes, etc.) Don't try this in New Moon, though; it will crash! It doesn't work in BNavigator or IceApe either; setting the above preference makes it appear to work in about:support, but Windows Task Manager nevertheless shows only one task no matter how many tabs are open. Edit: Summarizing what was discovered below, this preference is required to enable e10s (multiprocess mode) in FF 52 on Windows XP. But with later Windows versions, or some other FF forks on XP (confirmed with Serpent 55), you can instead use the preferences @VistaLover recommends in the next post: toggle browser.tabs.remote.autostart from false to true, and if necessary (due to add-ons flagged as incompatible with e10s), toggle extensions.e10sBlocksEnabling from true to false. In Chrome, each tab is a separate process; but in FF the maximum number of processes is limited by that preference. If you open more tabs than that value, tabs will begin to share processes vs. creating new processes.

I can't believe it's been so long since the most logical desktop UI was released. Windows NT API functions + DOS/win16 compatibility, FAT32 and basic USB support are pretty important as well. I started using Windows 98 long before I started with 95, but when I got my PIII machine, 98 was flaky beyond belief. I asked for opinions and some said that the near constant crashes were due to overheating. Then I went outside the next day. A razor-thin object hit my forehead and cut it. Turned out to be a Windows 95 OSR 2.1 CD-ROM. Used my 98FE OEM CD-ROM to boot it. And it installed with no issues. So those crashes were likely not related to hardware. My only problem was that the system would fail to boot or even be broken completely if the USB supplement was installed. But replacing the S3 Savage4 with a GeForce FX 5700 LE fixed it. I'm still quite satisfied with Windows 95, After Dark 10th anniversary edition, Office 2000 Professional and RetroZilla 2.2 (until MSFN broke in it earlier this morning due to apparent change in encryption. nice coincidence. ). I never, ever swap with 128 MB of RAM! I'd love to go back 15 or 20 years so I could run 95/98 as a main OS dual booting with Windows 2000 and not have to worry about compatibility issues. Seriously, since I dumped the Savage4, win95 has never given a BSoD or even inexplicable crashes of system executables (98SE did that to me often).

My WinXP is UK. Windows Update Agent files are version 7.6.7600.256, except wuweb.dll which is at 7.6.7600.257. As per Md5Checker 3.3, the MD5 for the downloaded wsusscn2_sha1.cab (July 2020) is a match. The December 2019 wsusscn2.cab (WBM link provided by max-h), on the other hand, does work with WUMT. Its MD5 appears to be BE65CE3E77B7EF1EFDEB112A95495607.

This is mine.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry for the quote spam. I just want to point out that those are file hashes listed in both of these recent posts, which is NOT the same thing as Microsoft's SHA1 signing key. These are just useful for checking for file integrity after a download to ensure that the downloaded file is identical to the original.

I can’t find any discussion of it; but if the same issue exists, then the same solution (security only rollups) also exists.

Then use nlite. No wait, nlite didn't work for you. Only for the record, the difference is that nlite integrates (slipstreams) drivers in the install source media (let's say on CD[1]), while the IntegrateDrv integrates them on a later stage, on the pre-expanded[2] installation media. Hint: #1 is almost entirely in \I386 #2 is in two directories: '$WIN_NT$.~BT' and '$WINT_NT$.~LS' It doesn't seem to me like hidden info: As said, no idea if it may make a difference in your case, it is perfectly possible that there is no way to install 2K on that PC, but right now we have listed 3 among the maybe 5 possible ways, and you ony tried (failing) one. And, once again: Personally I would still try making a plainer attempt with no AHCI, via DOS and WINNT.EXE on FAT32. https://msfn.org/board/topic/181798-the-installation-of-windows-2000-was-blocked-in-lenovo-g500/?do=findComment&comment=1186272 but again, no idea if it can work on your hardware, there are too many variables and unknowns (both known unknowns and unknown unknows). jaclaz

Ugh, now I feel even older. But aside from that, it's a weird coincidence but I had just been attempting to pick back up my 95 slipstream project from where it got left 4 years ago for various reasons. Never realized the significance of the date.. but it seems fitting now. I remember my second computer, a Windows 95 OSR2 machine circa 1997. I'd had an earlier DOS6/Win 3.1 system before, but the new Windows 95 machine was there when I first discovered the Internet and online gaming. When it died on me a few years later in high school it caused me to have to learn more about building computers and setting up software.. and forever put me on the path, lol. Also enjoyed your story about issues with 98 that didn't exist on 95 - 98FE was garbage. A friend of mine had a computer with virtually identical specs to my 95 OSR2 machine that came with 98FE. He was constantly battling weird problems that I never encountered. Eventually later on I had to use 98FE on a system for a while, and I experienced several flaky issues that didn't happen under 95 (or 98SE). At one point I decided I wanted a CD burner.. thought I would get one of those new fangled external ones. Went to Office Depot and bought a HP USB burner, since my machine was HP and had a USB port. When I got home and figured out that it would not work with Windows 95, I took it back to exchange it for a different model/brand that connected via parallel port. The guy at Office Depot acted like I was crazy, and kept asking "Why don't you upgrade your operating system?!?!?" The parallel burner worked very well.. still have it, but haven't used it in ages. Eventually I went on to build a new system, with a 3.06GHz P4 processor. My beloved 95 crashed, and I couldn't figure it out at the time. Had to move to 98SE. Years later here I would discover the solution through trial and error installing any and all updates I could lay my hands on until it suddenly worked. And, total vindication at last. With @rloew's help, eventually helped to create a USB Storage driver for 95 that would run that d@mn HP burner.. if I still had it!

TechnoRelic said: > Ideally though, I would like the BNAVIGATOR Browser to 'pop open' that dialog > where it ASKS you if you want to SET it as the DEFAULT Browser ... Of course, but that goes without saying. It's not an open question whether or not that will "ideally" happen. Don't worry, work on it is currently in progress (among other things), and just a matter of time until finished. Did you notice this was explained already? Actually, twice... or was it three times... It's a bit strange that you keep pushing roytam, although you say you're happy enough using another browser in the meantime, so why... You want him to do double work? To hurry this up, as an urgent top priority? Perhaps he'll speed it up, or not, but for us end users it makes no difference whether it's done upstream or downstream ;-)

Only updates for .NET Framework were being issued as rollups at the time of Vista’s EOL in April 2017. If you know approximately when the issue began for Windows 7 and 8.1, it would be much easier to search the lengthy Server 2008 Updates on Windows Vista thread for any mention of it.

Wouldn't the OS-level SHA-2 support be sufficient? And which Rust are you talking about? The programming language upon which newer Firefoxes are built, or the game? I'm trying. I'd really love to have Vista running stable on my Kaby Lake laptop as well. 2012R2 looks like Windows 1, and having Vista's UI would be a major improvement (I'm also going to work on getting graphics drivers like my Intel HD 620 ones working too). I had previously narrowed it down to the function LoadLibraryExW, and I recently installed Windows 7 build 6519 which has a very similar version of the function, and also doesn't have those bugs. But simply transplanting the function failed, as it resulted in a BSOD where "the system couldn't find the file specified (@98w9asoise590dj.dll [or similar nonsense file name])". But after trying a few more things, I think I've narrowed down the problems to one particular part of the function. But making a good patch will be very challenging. What also doesn't help is that this laptop has broken hinges, so I can't bring it to where I am half of the time.