Leaderboard

Well now it works properly https://sourceforge.net/ both https and style window

It has passed its objectives after months of development and testing, so it is now released, with the objective of the enhanced compatibility and driver support.

I have solved it in XP2ESD v1.6.1. Now Windows XP SP2 x64 images created by XP2ESD have same OOBE as x86 XP.

To be clear (and fair to Google), it's not so much their Chromium engine (I use Chromium-based browsers - albeit "unGoogled" - when necessary) as it is Google's "predatory innovation" cycle ... Ok, just to clarify what I meant with the verb "stifle". Most of the developers of browsers and websites follow Google's lead. Be it the Chromium engine they use as a basis for new browsers or the frameworks the developers need to create or recode websites. In the end, it doesn't matter. The result is a "Chromium world" or "Google world", and alternative browser engines are tragically left behind. And, I say that as an Android fan and user whose tablet represents the realisation of a pure Google and Chromium world. Anyway, I am very happy to be able to use UXP browsers on my very old Windows XP machine thanks to @roytam1. Chromium browsers severely restrict the modifiability of extensions. I love extensions, and I deeply hate any kind of these restrictions. And, one thing is very clear. I am a Windows XP fan, I am just a user, I do not have to be fair with regard to Google. I have never wanted these cluttered and cumbersome websites, in fact I loathe them. I am not employed by Google, and I am not paid by this company. So, why should I think this aberration is good or judge it fairly? Sorry, no way! BTW, a similar misdevelopment can also be seen in Android itself. More and more restrictions from one Android version to the next, everything becomes more cumbersome, and the hardware has to be permanently upgraded to handle this crap. Simply suck! Microsoft has shown how it's done!

I did a new UEFI test. If we put Samsung 950 UEFI firmware in this way: Unpack UEFI firmware from the image.rom file: uefiromextract image.rom 950nvme.efi Build a FFS file using FFS tools: GenMod 950nvme.efi wild build a file 950nvme.ffs Use UEFITool insert file 950nvme.ffs as a DXE driver In pure UEFI (CSM disabled) or UEFI + CSM, bios does not see the Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe disk and not possible boot OS !!!

My findings after testing the new version on a somewhat period correct machine: - msi afterburner is still broken, no error code, just "MSIAfterburner has stopped working" - furmark 1.31 installer does not launch and every version higher than 1.21.1.0 the installer glitches so you basically have no buttons and can't do anything besides stop it from task manager - in prime95, cinebench r15 and r20 my core 2 quad q9550 is being recognized as a 1 core 4 threads cpu but cinebench r11.5 and cpu-z do recognize it correctly; the performance isn't affected in r15 (r20 launches but fails the test) but it is quite odd (i did manually set it to 4 processors in system configuration and it is the same) - kaspersky is back (don't care about other peoples opinion on this kgb virus or whatever they call it and i'm not russian), but i don't use firefox anymore and i remember it crashing only when using this specific browser - minecraft 1.18+ still fails to load into worlds (this starts to happen with snapshot 21w42a of minecraft 1.18) I need some software that works the way msi afterburner does because my gtx 770 gets hot and i can't set the fan speed to what i want

That's a good idea, @Dave-H! I always bristled a bit at the "abruptness" of the switchover from one "My Browser Builds" thread to the next. It makes more sense to start the next thread with the next set of builds. To be clear (and fair to Google), it's not so much their Chromium engine (I use Chromium-based browsers - albeit "unGoogled" - when necessary) as it is Google's "predatory innovation" cycle: Google thinks up new "features" that Javascript "needs." (And again to be fair, these "features" often are real improvements that make Javascript programming a bit easier for Web developers - but that's not the point of them.) Google updates Chromium (and Mozilla and Safari update their own Javascript engines) to correctly interpret the new "features," so if you stay current on Safari, Firefox, SeaMonkey, or one of the many Chromium-based browsers, nothing ever seems amiss. Google and "friends" (e.g., Microsoft) then use the new "features" as much as humanly possible, not only on their own Web sites (e.g., GitHub), but also in the "frameworks" used by most Web sites these days. (Nobody codes entire Web sites in raw HTML and CSS anymore; it's too labor-intensive. Everyone uses frameworks.) Web developers update their sites to use the new "frameworks" - often unwittingly, as they may simply link to a CDN that always serves, say, the latest JQuery version. Even if browser developers outside the "Goog collective" (like, say, MCP) are able to add support for the latest Javascript "features," by the time they do, so the cycle begins again, thus preserving the Apple/Google/Microsoft/Mozilla oligopoly.

@roytam1 In the past we have made a new thread here once the current one has gone over 200 pages, which this one now has! When you next publish new builds, could you make a new 'My Browser Builds (Part 4)' thread and use them for the first post? I will then close this thread. Thanks, Dave.

.

@Cixert! Here is the same browser with the same website loaded, but the shortcut of 360ChromePortable 13.0.2206 rebuild 9 is now set to Windows 2000 compatibility mode: Now, there is no problem with SourceForge's certificate anymore. Cheers, AstroSkipper

I just reviewed all changes: -Windows 7/8 functions added to kernel32 to support Firefox 106+, a couple of games, and Blender -DXGI extension added to run newer WxWidget x64 version of PCSX2 and others asking for CreateDXGIFactory2 -ole and user32 extensions to run many Qt 6 applications -Extension to bcrypt: add support for PBKDF2 hashing algorithm -PowerShell Core up to at least version 7.0.1 working -Several applications such as x64dbg and Telegram will now run if spoofed to Windows 7 (the fault of the VC++ 2012/13 runtime) -NTOSKRNL extension added, compatible with NVIDIA drivers 378 (adds support for all Pascal except GT 1030) in full, and 398 on some systems (supports all Pascal plus OpenGL 4.6). A modified version of 378 (and 398, which may not work properly on some systems) will be made available through the extended kernel website.

~ Windows XP Professional x64 Edition and Intel(R) Gigabit LAN x99 Platform ~ Tested Motherboards: ASUS SABERTOOTH x99, & ASUS Z10PE-D16 WS. Notes: Feel free to test this on other x99 boards or ones pertaining to this driver somehow. Installed and Working: ASUS Z10PE-D16 WS (Intel® I210-AT) currently using Intel® I218-LM choice and have tested Intel® I218-V and Intel® I217-LM with similar results thus far. Notes: It seems to run well with web browsing, P2P connections, virtualization (VMware) and connection sharing. Currently known Issues with ASUS Z10PE-D16 WS using this driver... Sometimes It disconnects and reconnects itself randomly... So, it's tempermental at least in my own testing. Update 01-10-2024: Under a mostly vanilla copy of Windows Server 2003 x64 it seems to perform far better as far as working and I would say is 99.9% stable, only have to re-enable the NIC in Device Manager in rare cases on some system restarts or if I install software that handles networking or some firewalls. Once I re-enable it, it simply stays working! I suspect my previous install of Windows XP x64 is not as stable with this driver due to an even more custom iso, since that was the only XP x64 install I tested with this driver. Another thing I did differently is having the Intel NIC set to UEFI mode in CSM, including all other devices besides my video PCI-E boot, thats the only one I have set to legacy boot. I've been running it for 2 weeks straight; I am very pleased with the new results! Update 01-13-2024: Under a mostly vanilla copy of Windows Server 2003 x64 it seems to work better? Its seemingly stable on this install but, I would still deem it somewhat tempermental... It worked great for about 2 weeks, then all of a sudden decided after a system restart to disconnect and reconnect itself at random... So, I'll see what happens when I restart again? Maybe the LAN chip is overheating, I don't know at this point.... I may just revert back to an older snapshot and see if that fixes things. Since the only thing I changed was installing more security software and enabling Windows Firewall/Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) service. Update 01-16-2024: After restoring my operating system to a fresh snapshot without the security programs I added, or the service I enabed and without the windows firewall with network filtering, the Intel NIC is perfectly stable again. SO FAR... Final Update 02-23-2024: I've now concluded that it's overall stable on my Server 2003 x64 install. If I ever run into it disconnecting and reconnecting randomly (Which is quite rare) I simply go into device manager and Disable and Enable it again and it normally stays working for a long time after, sometimes weeks at a time. If I restart my computer and it shows it as Disconnected I simply go into device manager and re-enable it, like I stated above it normally just stays working for quite sometime afterwards. Also to add, I am using the bottom port and only installed the driver for that particular port, I left the other one alone to avoid possible issues. Another things to point out is, the drivers stability had absolutely nothing to do with the security software I had running, the service I mentioned or the windows firewall. Since I have Comodo Firewall 12.0.0.6818 and as IObit Malware Fighter 11.0.0.1274 running without issues at all. A key thing to leave you with, always document changes you make, be sure to create backup[ and snapshots if possible to reverse any possible issues in the future. Installed with Errors: ASUS SABERTOOTH x99 (Intel® I218-V) using/testing all options including Intel® I218-V choice which is native for the board. Currently known Issues with ASUS SABERTOOTH using this driver... Error Codes: 01 and 10. Install Method: Device Manager (Force Install). Step by Step: Go to Device Manager and right click Update Driver. Select "No, not this time" and Click Next. Select "Install from a list or specific location (Advanced)" & Click Next. Click "Have Disc..." and Click Browse... Go to folder "Intel® I2xx-xx (XP x64)" Select the file "e1d51x64" and Click Yes. Download Link: ( https://www.mediafire.com/file/ouxct64c06e4fts/Intel%C2%AE_I2xx-xx_%28XP_x64%29.7z/file ) Notes: Keep in mind, this is technically experimental so it would be wise to make a backup before proceeding with any driver installs. Results may vary... As always, I do hope this is helpful to someone... Sincerely, XP-x64-Lover

... As far as I am aware, the default setting in uBO is to have "cosmetic filtering" always enabled ("activated"), both in a global scope: as well as "on a per site" scope: Relevant reading material here ... So I take it, by what you posted, that you had disabled CF yourself sometime in the past... Am I correct in this assumption? Kind regards

Thanks for that link ... Let's just accept that for "now", WinXP isn't "retro", just "obsolete" : https://dfarq.homeip.net/is-windows-xp-obsolete-or-is-it-retro/ ... But it'll have become "retro" sooner than you and I would think (late 2020s, early 2030s? ); whatever the adjective used to "correctly" refer to it, "facebook" and their "pals" would still not consider it (and the browsers running on it) as a platform to officially support/test on... FWIW, let it be put on record that I personally hold nothing against WinXP; but in the majority of the cases I would post (especially in GitHub issue trackers) and complain that XP support had been removed from an app (often taking Vista support with it ), "they" were quick to point to me that "XP was first released to the public in late 2001"... Later edit: I believe https://w2k.phreaknet.org/ is a project run by one of MSFN members... "Retrocomputing" is the first term on the header; I see many references to XP therein, so perhaps it was from there I had formed a more "loose" comprehension of the "term" (to also comprise XP ) ...

That is not accurate. I have been using it up until now (still using it on 3 computers) and the newer broken versions of Windows are irrelevant to me. What sucks is the honorable sum of money I wasted contributing to Big Muscle's efforts and now I cannot generate a key for my fresh install of Windows 10 LTSC 2019 on my newest laptop with Aeroglass. I guess now I need to start hunting for a creative workaround to remove the watermark since Big Muscle has left his financial supporters high and dry.