Leaderboard

Just an FYI, some antiviruses such as Avast, may think this is a virus. Best to disable it temporarily when handling this file.

Hello to all! Although my program package eventually passed the beta test, I still had to make significant changes due to false positives of several AV scanners: All unnecessarily embedded files have been removed from my self-created executables. Changes in calling up other programs. In all my affected programs, protection against code injection has been improved. This leads to preventing of future "space bugs", too! Different issues which could have been noticed only in very rare cases, have been fixed. All unnecessary code has been removed. New bugs I additionally found have been fixed. Autostart entries of PopMenu and the new Min2Tray, automatically added to the registry by my configuration program, have been fixed in regards to the "space bug". All message windows of my programs have been resized and adjusted for a better visibility. All my self-created program files have been recompiled by using a different compiler. All these measures have led to a reduction in the number of false positives reported by AV scanners. Now I am testing deeply my program package from scratch. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Hi, many modern AMD motherboards have USB controllers, that cause frequent BSODs on Windows Vista (even if drivers are not installed), so the first thing you should try is booting into a vista installation disk 10-15 times and see if it crashes.

@AstroSkipper Do you still use CMDOW in your script? That's flagged as virus from it's beginning.

I tried to revert this changes in git HEAD, you may try again when next build is available.

It certainly works well, when people can match communication modes. What you describe sounds like a "Project" mentality. The kind of conversing found in a bug report thread. But even then, it helps if people have similar wiring. For example, three replies can give the same answer, but not every reader finds it in each. Way cool!

All that stuff is saved in the browser's "profile," which is stored in a separate directory from the browser code itself. (To see the directory it's stored in, click Help / Troubleshooting, find the "Profile Folder" row, and click "Open folder.") So yes; all you have to do is unpack the new version and run it, and all your data will still be there. You can almost always unpack a new version over the previous version, although I prefer to keep at least one prior version, in case the new version has bugs the old version didn't have. Also, you don't have to update every week, although you're free to do so if you wish, of course.

Model in 3D. Use your transforms to convert to a 2D viewport (window). Scale to screen coordinates. If you are already clipping in 2D to the viewport, then you only need to clip the polygons in 3D to the viewplane (plane perpendicular to the direction the viewer is looking). Harder but potentially more efficient is clipping polygons in 3D to the planes from the viewpoint to each of the four viewport sides. Actually, 3D clipping is too advanced for now. Just keep all your models in positive z space until you have everything else working. And use triangles, not polygons, to simplify rendering. Later you can support rectangles and arbitrary polygons by breaking them down into triangles.

Welcome to the MSFN forums! As a general rule, consulting your browser's Web Console/Browser Console/Error Console will provide useful hints/clues as to the "why" : ... and even if that's "Greek" to you, it'll give prospective helpers a general idea... The ING Bank site relies heavily on customElements, a web spec (part of the Web Components JS+CSS framework) discussed, by pure coincidence , in posts of this thread's previous page... CE/WC is a technology originally created by Google (they currently are the only ones who dictate how the web should evolve ), the upstream developers of UXP/Pale Moon, due in part to their aversion of anything Google, put WC support inside UXP in the "back-burner", so to speak; truth be told, there still exist major technical issues to backport/glue-in all of WC to the platform, which, as you might already know, evolved from a now quite "old" Mozilla Firefox forkpoint... CE/WC are currently behind a disabled pref, in an incomplete/immature developmental state... Third party extension authors try. with various success and targeting selected URLs only, to mitigate lack of CE/WC support in UXP-based browsers ; at this point in time, the extension which holds the best promise for UXP users is one maintained by your compatriot Sebastian Hütter, aka martok, which is called palefill: https://github.com/martok/palefill/releases Install the XPI file linked in that page and then kindly ask him to include support for ING Bank, by filing an issue (GitHub account required): https://github.com/martok/palefill/issues From my initial testing, implementing support would be as easy as adding in file "./lib/builtin-rules.js" below code: exports = String.raw` +www.ing.de + std-customElements +! -- developer.apple.com std-customElements For your convenience, I have prepared myself a patched XPI file of palefill, (.XPI file attachment removed on 202208160022Z) that you are free to test; works as intended here (under latest St52): Later addition: Bank sites are a major pain in the posterior for "legacy"/non-mainstream web engines, because Bank IT staff insist on using the very latest Web Specs in them (even ones that haven't yet made it to final state, though this is not the case for CE/WC), as they think it gives the higher members of the Bank's hierarchy (who probably know little about web development), as well as most of the Bank's clientele, a false sense of "on-line security" ... I'm not saying Bank sites should stick to TLS 1.0/1.1 to merely satisfy old browsers, but not always using the latest Google-derived "shinies" won't make their sites (and their customers' interactions) less secure, would it?

I wonder if we all do that a little. We attend to the problems of others, from our own experiences. And sometimes our advice may be colored by whatever our current projects are. I have wondered if some people, in the Win9x section, are intentionally sending others on a wild goose chase. Or providing information that leads to a dead end. But, since there are few of us here, I imagine it is more that we want to help one another; even if we don't know enough about the topic(s). It is also possible that personal bias will prevent us from helping someone achieve what we see little point in, or maybe even disagree with. Although, for some of us, we are doing exactly what we were when Win9x was more current. Socializing with "Win9x" dogma and opinions; be it for aiding or arguing. Some of us will probably find a way to keep doing that, right on in to the "Rocking Chair". That seems to be how it works out with any beloved hobby (talking shop). Language barriers can make trouble, but we all use these technologies differently. And that in itself can create another barrier. What may apply to your traditional setup, may make no sense to someone else's. Years ago, coming from a tech position, it was common that I had to help people setup up their machines, for specific needs. Often I configured systems/networks in ways that I would never chose to on my own. I knew they were going to have problems with that setup. But for some reason or another, someone somewhere wanted it that way. And it was my job to give them what they wanted. If you've ever had to help "fix" a family members PC, you probably know what I mean. The issue you resolve can often be caused by something that the owner will keep on doing. Or worse, the issue comes from the exact way they desire the system configured. It can be annoying. That annoyance is our own pride, while claiming we just can't tolerate ignorance. I suppose that's because we are all kings, right? I know this is way off topic, so I'll put a sock in it right here. You guys aren't trying to debug people :)

Those are good to start with. Sort your points by depth (z) and draw from back to front.

Now coming to the extended kernel, Qt 6 application support: The kerning issues happen even on NT 6.4. I will look into that as well, but there is also some more work to do to get Qt 6.3.1 and later working as well.