Leaderboard

By all means, create a thread for any-and-all. Just as Astro likes his threads to stay on point, I fail to see how Brisk Bard 2.6.0 pertains to "360Chrome v13.5.2044 rebuild 2". Sure, there might be a case to be made for not having a 2044 thread, a 2036 thread, a 2022 thread, a 1030 thread. But I do that for a reason and forum "activity" will/should roll the old off of "page 1" and keep the "active" at the top. At least, that's what I'm used to, I have this forum so heavily style-sheeted that I have no clue what it's supposed to look like, lol. The just-discovered .crt/.cer/.p7c "pinging" does affect *ALL* versions of 360Chrome (mine, Humming Owl, Russian Repack, upstream). But I maintain that for the most part, issues with 2044 have no bearing on 1030 so issues with 2044 should be contained within the 2044 thread. Et cetera. That was the intent at least. I say that being a "rare user" of Serpent 52 and New Moon 27/28. Being a "rare" user, I don't read that thread daily/weekly. And jumping in once a month is a NIGHTMARE to get one's self "caught up" on Serpent 52 when several other browsers are discussed all within the same exact thread. BOTH approaches are perfectly valid, of course. We all have our own opinions re: thread-count (and forum trolling, I see them as related due to the "parties" that say "this" versus "that"). "Opinions are like butts. We all have them, doesn't mean we all want to hear them."

That's what I always told you! As for the fetching, China and Russia, they all have their own forged certificates - which aren't valid all over the world, obviously. Of course they are fetched from different sources, not the official ones.

Would you want me to help you, maybe?

Just use Driver Signature Enforcement Overrider and you will get rid of the annoying windows popups and the such.

"also" ? what else is "not true" ?

Here's a definitive answer for you and everyone who usually love to whine about how D.Draker deletes "too many" "needed" files. No, you didn't whine, I mean the others who did. That file is an extremely bugged piece of garbage, that has millions of different versions so the developers themselves put curses on it. I'd also add Vulkan, "Swift" Shader and OpenGL to that list. "..it uses the UCRT (universal CRT) which means that by default it does not run on all Windows 7 machines." https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=920704 Disable all that crap in chrome with flags, delete the files and you get a really fast browser !

I might, got latest Ungoogled Chromium 118 to launch, it loads web pages as well, but it normally crashes on resolving delay-imported function QueryUnbiasedInterruptTimePrecise, Win8.1 only has version without "Precise". Did a bit of reading on x64 calling convention, might explain why initial DiscardVirtualMemory hack wasn't as disastrous on 64-bit binaries, first four parameters of a function call are passed in CPU registers, not on stack. Patch for 64-bit chrome.dll version 118.0.5993.88: >chrome.dll 0000000000294616:48->EB 0000000000294617:89->13 0000000000294618:D6->CC 0000000000294619:48->CC 000000000029461A:89->CC 000000000029461B:CF->CC 000000000029461C:E8->CC 000000000029461D:2F->CC 000000000029461E:1B->CC 000000000029461F:44->CC 0000000000294620:0A->CC 0000000000294621:85->CC 0000000000294622:C0->CC 0000000000294623:74->CC 0000000000294624:1D->CC 0000000000294625:48->CC 0000000000294626:89->CC 0000000000294627:F9->CC 0000000000294628:48->CC 0000000000294629:89->CC 000000000029462A:F2->CC 0000000000299C77:48->EB 0000000000299C78:89->11 0000000000299C79:F1->CC 0000000000299C7A:4C->CC 0000000000299C7B:89->CC 0000000000299C7C:FA->CC 0000000000299C7D:E8->CC 0000000000299C7E:CE->CC 0000000000299C7F:C4->CC 0000000000299C80:43->CC 0000000000299C81:0A->CC 0000000000299C82:85->CC 0000000000299C83:C0->CC 0000000000299C84:0F->CC 0000000000299C85:84->CC 0000000000299C86:FA->CC 0000000000299C87:00->CC 0000000000299C88:00->CC 0000000000299C89:00->CC 0000000000299F38:4C->EB 0000000000299F39:89->0D 0000000000299F3A:F1->CC 0000000000299F3B:4C->CC 0000000000299F3C:89->CC 0000000000299F3D:E2->CC 0000000000299F3E:E8->CC 0000000000299F3F:0D->CC 0000000000299F40:C2->CC 0000000000299F41:43->CC 0000000000299F42:0A->CC 0000000000299F43:85->CC 0000000000299F44:C0->CC 0000000000299F45:74->CC 0000000000299F46:9A->CC 0000000005666C6E:48->EB 0000000005666C6F:89->0D 0000000005666C70:F9->CC 0000000005666C71:4C->CC 0000000005666C72:89->CC 0000000005666C73:F2->CC 0000000005666C74:E8->CC 0000000005666C75:D7->CC 0000000005666C76:F4->CC 0000000005666C77:06->CC 0000000005666C78:05->CC 0000000005666C79:85->CC 0000000005666C7A:C0->CC 0000000005666C7B:74->CC 0000000005666C7C:1D->CC 000000000BD5774C:50->00 000000000BD5774D:72->00 000000000BD5774E:65->00 000000000BD5774F:63->00 000000000BD57750:69->00 000000000BD57751:73->00 000000000BD57752:65->00 000000000BD58042:31->30 000000000BD5B02A:44->56 000000000BD5B02C:73->72 000000000BD5B02D:63->74 000000000BD5B02E:61->75 000000000BD5B02F:72->61 000000000BD5B030:64->6C 000000000BD5B031:56->41 000000000BD5B032:69->6C 000000000BD5B033:72->6C 000000000BD5B034:74->6F 000000000BD5B035:75->63 000000000BD5B036:61->00 000000000BD5B037:6C->00 000000000BD5B038:4D->00 000000000BD5B039:65->00 000000000BD5B03A:6D->00 000000000BD5B03B:6F->00 000000000BD5B03C:72->00 000000000BD5B03D:79->00

Uploaded a fix version, the RunAsTI ini option should not be needed anymore.

This browser doesn't fetch certificates (don't know the origins of it, China?), it is based on Chromium 92, the name is Brisk Bard 2.6.0 . it works on Vista without mods or patches, could you try, perhaps it works on XP, too! You will need to update the engine on 360Chrome soon anyways. As proof, look at the UA, which tells it runs on Vista.

SysTray on more than one monitor? Incredibly!! . @Tihiy you are the wizard. THNX ...

Just replacing "DiscardVirtualMemory" with "VirtualAlloc" in opera_browser.dll (or equivalent in other browser ) doesn't make much sense, they're different functions and have different number of parameters, leaving VirtualAlloc to be called in place of DiscardVirtualMemory corrupts the stack after function returns, plus it'll receive some other values in the stack in place of its 3rd and 4th parameter, so it can't know what it should do exactly. When I got 32-bit Opera 104.0.4944.33 running with just that string replaced, it didn't take long for the tab that opened on first launch to crash. Chromium uses DiscardVirtualMemory in its memory manager, it's a faster way to do one specific operation that could be done with VirtualAlloc with MEM_RESET flag pre-Win10. There is still fallback to VirtualAlloc in place, so easiest way to get it going correctly is to simply skip the code that would call DiscardVirtualMemory. I think they used to check if function exists before dropping pre-Win10 OS, might have to check older revisions to be sure. Obviously, we still have to replace the string "DiscardVirtualMemory" in the import table so the loader is happy when it loads the DLL. Here's the full patch that can be applied with x32dbg (included with x64dbg), this is only for opera_browser.dll of 32-bit Opera 104.0.4944.33, started with this one as I'm more at home with x86 code. The text file usually has *.1337 extension. I was working with a very recent version of x32dbg, it's compatible with Windows 8.1. >opera_browser.dll 000000D0:89->EA 000000D1:E9->78 000000D2:E4->E5 032BD3CB:57->EB 032BD3CC:56->11 032BD3CD:E8->CC 032BD3CE:24->CC 032BD3CF:79->CC 032BD3D0:2D->CC 032BD3D1:06->CC 032BD3D2:85->CC 032BD3D3:C0->CC 032BD3D4:75->CC 032BD3D5:08->CC 0448C04F:53->8B 0448C050:8B->7C 0448C051:7C->24 0448C052:24->04 0448C053:08->E9 0448C054:57->80 0448C055:E8->00 0448C056:9C->00 0448C057:8C->00 0448C058:10->CC 0448C059:05->CC 0448C05A:85->CC 0448C05B:C0->CC 0448C05C:75->CC 0448C05D:7A->CC 0448C05E:8B->CC 0448C05F:54->CC 0448C060:24->CC 0448C061:08->CC 0448C062:8B->CC 0448C063:5C->CC 0448C064:24->CC 0448C065:0C->CC 0448C066:8B->CC 0448C067:7C->CC 0448C068:24->CC 0448C069:10->CC 0448C06A:E9->CC 0448C06B:E5->CC 0448C06C:FE->CC 0448C06D:FF->CC 0448C06E:FF->CC 0448C0C2:56->8B 0448C0C3:8B->7C 0448C0C4:7C->24 0448C0C5:24->0C 0448C0C6:10->EB 0448C0C7:57->38 0448C0C8:E8->CC 0448C0C9:29->CC 0448C0CA:8C->CC 0448C0CB:10->CC 0448C0CC:05->CC 0448C0CD:85->CC 0448C0CE:C0->CC 0448C0CF:75->CC 0448C0D0:2F->CC 0798707E:53->EB 0798707F:57->09 07987080:E8->CC 07987081:71->CC 07987082:DC->CC 07987083:C0->CC 07987084:01->CC 07987085:85->CC 07987086:C0->CC 07987087:74->CC 07987088:2F->CC 0A7FCF04:44->56 0A7FCF06:73->72 0A7FCF07:63->74 0A7FCF08:61->75 0A7FCF09:72->61 0A7FCF0A:64->6C 0A7FCF0B:56->41 0A7FCF0C:69->6C 0A7FCF0D:72->6C 0A7FCF0E:74->6F 0A7FCF0F:75->63 0A7FCF10:61->00 0A7FCF11:6C->00 0A7FCF12:4D->00 0A7FCF13:65->00 0A7FCF14:6D->00 0A7FCF15:6F->00 0A7FCF16:72->00 0A7FCF17:79->00 When importing it into x32dbg, say yes to both prompts that appear. You have to at least open opera_browser.dll before and "launch" it before you can right-click->Patches (or CTRL+P)->Import, then Patch File to save the patched copy on the disk. I like things to look clean so it's not the most minimalistic...back in the day I went out of my way to leave no empty gaps, now that makes it super annoying for someone who would want to compare changes afterwards! About "api-ms-win-core-localization-l1-2-2.dll" error, you don't get it if you actually use DWrite.dll from Windows 10 Build 9926, but with many newer versions, they're linked to "api-ms-win-core-localization-l1-2-2.dll" rather than "api-ms-win-core-localization-obsolete-l1-2-0.dll". The latter is supplied with Windows 8.1. Still, I used DWrite.dll from my daily driver Win10 installation, so I just created a hard link of system "api-ms-win-core-localization-obsolete-l1-2-0.dll" named as "api-ms-win-core-localization-l1-2-2.dll" to satisfy DWrite.dll's dependencies without having to modify DWrite.dll, as some have apparently done in the past. Dixel's suggestion about "api-ms-win-core-localization-l1-2-0.dll" is redundant, the one supplied with Windows 8.1 already satisfies the other dependencies of newer DWrite.dll, related to localization APIs and most importantly, doesn't contain any API that "obsolete" version does. To put it simple, there's just one lone function that was exported through "api-ms-win-core-localization-obsolete-l1-2-0.dll" at one point on Windows 8.1 and early Windows 10 builds, but got moved to "api-ms-win-core-localization-l1-2-2.dll", so that's what newer DWrite.dll references. Today's Windows 10 and 11 no longer use stub DLLs, it's all handled internally by the loader, so even when there's no actual DLL referenced (despite being called DLL), the special name with the help of the logic in the loader makes a link to real DLL where particular function implemented. Just read the bloody docs...those who actually want to learn something. It still has to be run without sandbox, which I hear is pretty much Win10 exclusive in its current form.

Did not get to a "rebuild 3" of 2044 this weekend. I do have a "rebuild 9" of 1030 that uses many of 2044s files (where possible) and implements all of 2044s discussions/evolutions. 2044 (and 2036, perhaps even 2022) has been found to occasionally ping (seemingly) "fake" certificate 'updates' via HTTP. I have to "assume" them to be fake because I would find it very surprising that "real" Microsoft certificates are fetched via HTTP versus HTTPS. I have not seen the pinged certificates effect XP's official certificate store. 1030 is not making those pings so I've reverted focus towards 1030 over all of the newer builds (technically, 1030 has always been my preference, as far as that goes).

Yes, indeed! @Dave-H, could you please block/remove those misleading posts with fake images, thanks you. Those are not related to Supermium at all. And the posters refuse to answer. https://msfn.org/board/topic/185045-supermium/?do=findComment&comment=1252527 https://msfn.org/board/topic/185045-supermium/?do=findComment&comment=1254569

Or maybe try this one (digitally signed). Just rename it to api-ms-win-core-localization-l1-2-2.dll api-ms-win-core-localization-l1-2-0.zip

You could try updating the UCRT files https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/2999226/update-for-universal-c-runtime-in-windows

Thanks! Here is the updated Dutch one. (ping @gerwin)

StartAllBack 3.6.15

@yoltboy01 is a talented modder, what works for him, doesn't necessarily means will work for others. From what I read, the last rather simply modded and fully working Opera for ordinary people - was Opera 97 (Chrome 111).

There's no guarantee, but chances are higher. That's unlikely. Canary is most likely strictly Windows 12 and far enough from Windows 11 technically already.

Wouldn't exactly classify as "Software for Windows 8.1" more like "Modded Software for Windows 8.1". The fonts look smudged, is it the usaul case with 8/8.1, the same ugly/blurry fonts, like in Windows 7?

Good point, but it then will involve adding missing stub DLLs. no? I didn't try myself on Win 8, but I kind of gussed it will not be finished with just replacing virtualalloc.

No problem here in the third pre-release of Mypal 68.13.0. I use uBlock Origin 1.49.2, and it works without any problems. And from now on, even without changing the minversion in the file manifest.json. Thanks to @feodor2! Here is a screenshot: I assume either your installation or your profile is faulty or misconfigured. And be aware of possible incompatibilities to other extensions or scripts! I still didn't observe such incompatibilities until now, though, but they are possible, of course.

@feodor2 Do you have any idea why the legacy extension loaders don't work properly in Mypal 68.13.0? How far along is the development at the moment regarding everything that concerns extensions? E.g. the update function of extensions and so on?

In the meantime, I tried this legacy, bootstrapped version of Tab Mix Plus. But there are issues when I install the legacy extension loaders in Mypal 68.13.0. When using UserChromeJS, Tab Mix Plus can't be installed even if I change the minversion of Tab Mix Plus v1.0.0-pre.15 from 78 to 68. When using bootstrapLoader.xpi, I am able to install Tab Mix Plus v1.0.0-pre.15, but after restarting the browser, all installed extensions disappear in the Add-ons Manager. Therefore, no settings of the installed extensions via the Add-ons Manager are possible anymore although the extensions are still installed and seem to be working in Mypal. I think both legacy extension loaders are not really compatible with Mypal 68.13.0 at the moment. Mypal 68 is based on Firefox but also different and still in development. Especially everything related to extensions is still incomplete.

FYI, the new pre-release of Mypal 68.13.0 has also a new default user agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/78.0 Mypal/68.13.0. I guess that from now on you can also try extensions whose minversion is 78.0. Of course, these extensions have to be edited regarding the minversion in the file manifest.json. Since this has already worked for uBlock Origin 1.49.2 as I have shown in previous posts, I am hopeful that this will also work for others. Cheers, AstroSkipper

uBlock Origin can now be updated to the version 1.49.2! I changed the minversion in the file manifest.json of uBlock Origin 1.49.2 from 79.0 to 68.0. Doing so it can be installed in the new pre-release of Mypal 68.13.0. Here are two screenshots: As you can see, I already tested uBlock Origin 1.49.2, and it seems to be working properly in the new pre-release of Mypal 68.13.0. The filter lists have been updated flawlessly, and I can't notice any problems. Cheers, AstroSkipper

May be you know why even not 78 but 79 I have overrided minstrictversion to 79 for the fun, and latest ublock 49.2 seems works fine Very good idea! I will also test uBlock Origin 1.49.2 in my installation. If it really works without compatibility problems, that would be a sensation. @feodor2 I tried this method but only changing Services.vc.compare(version, minversion) to Services.vc.compare(79, minversion) didn't work for me. uBlock Origin 1.49.2 couldn't be installed that way. I tried another approach. I changed the minversion in the file manifest.json of uBlock Origin 1.49.2 from 79.0 to 68.0, and doing so it can be installed in your new pre-release of Mypal 68.13.0. Here is a screenshot: I tested uBlock Origin 1.49.2, and it seems to be working properly in your latest Mypal 68.13.0. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Malware Hunter Malware Hunter is an antimalware program from Glarysoft and is still XP-compatible. It comes in two versions, the free version Malware Hunter and the commercial version Malware Hunter Pro. It detects and removes stubborn malware that can cause potential danger. Its malware database is constantly updated either automatically or manually depending on the installed version. Additionally, it is supposed to clean disks and speed up your PC. It is even equipped with the Avira scan engine. Features: Malware Scan - Scan your computer quickly and thoroughly. Detect and remove stubborn malware to prevent potential danger. Support scheduled scan to save your time Speed Up - Help you optimize your system to speed up and boost your computer performance. Disk Cleaner - Clean up temporary & unnecessary files. Remove unneeded documents to save computer storage space. Process Protection - Protect your PC from malware, such as Trojan, worms, spyware, and other online threats. 3 Scan modes Avira engine Hyper scan for a faster scanning speed Malware removal Real-time protection and automatic updates (only in Malware Hunter Pro) Homepage: https://www.glarysoft.com/malware-hunter/ Version number: 1.185.0.807 Date of release: 17.06.2024 System requirements: Runs on Microsoft Windows 11, 10, 8.1, 8, 7, XP and Vista. Including both 32-bit and 64-bit versions. Version history and release notes: Reviews: https://onlinecloudsecurity.com/malware-hunter-review-is-it-safe-to-download/ https://tweaklibrary.com/glarysoft-malware-hunter-pro-review/ Download page: https://www.glarysoft.com/downloads/?p=mh-page Direct download link: https://download.glarysoft.com/mhsetup.exe Screenshots: Although I personally don't prefer features like cleanup or optimization inside an antimalware program, the fact that this program is still compatible with Windows XP and has an Avira scan engine does not make it uninteresting. In any case, it can be used as an offline scanner in the free version and can also be set up as a portable version. You have full control over Malware Hunter via its systray icon. It is definitely an option for Windows XP. Cheers, AstroSkipper

This site (MSFN) is relevant. The moderator (Tripredacus) is suggesting that you start a new topic/thread. Since you are referring to programs that span two main categories (one category is Win10, the second category is Win7), then perhaps the "general" category is a good place to start a new topic? You should see a "Start new topic" button at the top of any page when you are logged in.

It's basically a nice "history". It basically only COUNTS how many "vulnerabilities" have been "fixed" with each Chromium Release and adds them all up dating back to the User Agent version it sees you on. It's nice "hype and propaganda" marketing to scare the masses into running the "latest-and-greatest". If you think about it, all it really does is reveal how truly "bad" Chromium has been over the years by informing just how many vulnerabilities have been "patched" with BANDAID FIXES over said years. Think Microsoft versus Linux. People love to put Microsoft down and claim that if it was designed properly, there would never be a need for "Patch Tuesday". As if somehow Linux never gets any "patches" ??? What would be nice is a historical comparison to Firefox. Something that reports "Chromium has fixed this-many-hundred vulnerabilities since version X in the year 2000" and compare that to "Firefox has fixed this-many-hundred vulnerabilities since version Y in the year 2000" - then compare those two numbers. But it also reveals how "bad" the versions have been over the years. I mean, a high school senior could design a web browser for a school project and it have 5,000 vulnerabilites - he'd still get an A on the project because nobody else in high school could "code" a web browser. He/She could improve that project the following year as a college freshman and get it down to 2,000 vulnerabilities - does that make it ready for Prime Time because 3,000 vulnerabilities were "fixed" ???

This is a very good idea! Maybe, there is more antivirus outside for all desperate Windows XP users (and I don't mean me).

You're welcome! Not only does it sound good, but it also values an actual true statement. But verifications of statements can of course always be carried out and won't harm, anyways.

We all can test a lot. But AVG 18.8 is definitely supported under Windows Vista. Following approximating equation has to be evaluated by the Boolean value of true: Avast 18.8 ≈ AVG 18.8

That's not correct, unfortunately. AVG 18.8 versions won't receive security updates anymore but definition updates. There is a significant difference. BTW, Avast and AVG are almost the same. Now one and the same company, so what applies to Avast also applies to AVG. I know both of them very well. I used them for years. That's why I didn't mention AVG here at all.

I don't think his English is that bad, maybe you overexaggerated a bit. He just used it to drag himself off the hook, when I refused to simply swallow his baseless accusations, he accused me of something I didn't do, and then tried to blame it on his poor English. And yes, I'll not provide that person with any technical answer, someone who just insulted me *right out of the blue* (I don't even know who that is!). A recent case, where our wise moderator @Tommy asked me to just ignore such cases and move on, and I respect it. So I'm answering for everyone, except that moody member. And I shall not engage in a stupid bickering that he tries to drag me into again. First he said - not working, now he says "not true". But here we need to look and check the specs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_NVDEC , despite being budget, the card RTX2060 fully supports all 1080p/1440p/2160p hardware decoding formats, so how one could explain the fact it decodes on win 10, but not on win 8 ? Maybe chrome limits it, don't you think ? That's precisely the case. Besides, he didn't provide us with any kind of proof that he says he still can decode low resolutions like 1080p. And then again, I'm still not sure why he zealously continues to talk about windows 8.1 here, this topic is win 7 exclusively , and I talk about chrome and windows 7 ! EDIT : he zealously talks in all topics about win 8.1, despite being 100% off-topic

As I already mentioned, I chose Xubuntu LTS, too. It is leightweight, compatible with old hardware, and a lot of program packages are available. Managing, fixing, flashing Android devices and repairing devices is my main use of Linux. And, I was always successful, at least until now.

Yes, I know you were a good guy during that days.

Linux is great and can be very helpful, especially if problems occur which can't be solved in Windows. And Linux is especially valuable if you are an Android user like me. Android is based on the Linux kernel, so Linux is predestined to communicate with Android devices. No driver problems in Linux when an Android device is connected to the computer, as is unfortunately very often the case in Windows. Of course, you should choose the Linux distribution that is best suited for you. There are so many, and it is not so easy to find the right one. It should therefore meet your needs and fit your hardware. Greetings from Germany, AstroSkipper

FYI, real, independent booting of OSs is only possible if the OSs have been installed independently and completely. How this can be done and checked is described in this article "Check independence and completeness" here: https://www.boot-us.de/eng/tips_i02.htm Cheers, AstroSkipper

I never used dual boot, i.e. two OSs installed in the same partition. I always use an independent booting of each OS. Each of my system partitions are independent from the others. Boot-US can be installed into MBR of your hard disk, floppy disk or bootable USB stick. If you boot into a OS, all other system partitions will be hidden. All my system partitions have been backuped by an imaging program. If something goes wrong in one of my system partitions and can't be fixed easily, I simply restore the saved image.

I see, well maybe need to edit that post then ? Not to confuse the others.

I'm sorry, you lost me, so do you still recommend it to others or not ? https://msfn.org/board/topic/184466-win7-die-hard-is-considering-linux/?do=findComment&comment=1239568

Also about the same extnison I already wrote about , think needs to be moved.

There's a dedicated topic with that extesion and I already wrote about it quite some time ago. I think it needs to be moved there since it's largely offtopic here @Dave-H, what say you ? https://msfn.org/board/topic/184357-chromium-forks-and-stuttering-video-playback/#comment-1236754

On my old Windows XP computer, I installed a Linux distribution on a separate partition years ago. I decided to go with Xubuntu, a distribution for low-performance systems. With the installed boot manager Boot-US, I can select the desired operating system when I start the computer. For each OS, you can set in Boot-US which logical partitions are to be available. Linux as an additional alternative to Windows is simply great. My main operating system is still Windows XP and will remain so, though.

Is that 474.06 driver runs on windows 7 ? Did you port it ?

So far we have only one (1) somewhat modern game with mediocre specs that runs on Windows 7 . Elden Ring starts with a black screen, despite my GPU supporting DX12, I tried that "Fake" DX12 fix and it didn't work. Stray cat also dind't work , not to mention the other several games I tried and wrote in the topic about non-working soft on win 7.

I really appreciate you're being honest and respectful ! I said, no mocking. And RDR2 worked for me without Volcano ! It had stutters with it and I I just deleted it and the game ran quite fine , perhaps it has something to do with my GPU being 12GB ? I dunno ! But apart from RDR2 (2019) - no other modern games worked. I used that last 471 driver (which btw is slower than 456). You wrote you aren't on Vista anymore. I'm confused. Anyways, thanks again.

@win32 , 373.19 is a very special case , indeed : 100% official Vista support . It still has the Vista block and it doesn't call for memcpy_s in ntoskrnl ! By the way, it is actually newer than 375 , I think . Why I think so ? Some file versions are similar and it has the telemetry . And as far as I remember, the 375 (official nvidia driver) was the first to incude it ! Pascal , no , I do not have any Pascal , also I sold my Maxwell recently . But Dereck Draker (also a Fujitsu Siemens owner) says it works with GTX980 and it is very fast. As for me , I tested it with the Fujitsu Siemens laptop (obviously), the card is the first version of GT820M , also I can confirm it works on GTX Titan (the first titan) , GTX780 , GTX780ti [the first version]. My neighbour says it works with DX9/DX10 games with his 1070 , but I can't confirm . I mean , there is no reason for him to lie to me, but I just can't go inside his house and test myself. Yet again , I can give it to you , no prob. . But only to you , since you also own a Fujitsu Siemens. EDIT : Forgot to say , there were a bit older drivers (several actually) like 372.93 , 373.06 supplied to us , and they all work with Vista . And you know 372.70 was the last one.

I have a unique driver version 373.19 x64 and x86 too (released on 1st of January 2017) , it was available only for those who paid for extended support . Only for Fujitsu Siemens notebooks' owners (some models) . So , as you may guess , I'm the owner of this marvel ! This driver works on laptops and desktops too . I'm guessing it could help you , no ? I mean , you could compare the dlls , right ? It has outstanding FPS in Vista . This driver includes the telemetry , but partially removed . I would gladly give these drivers to all of the members here , but their EULA forbids me to do so , sorry folks !!! But we know win32 has a Fujitsu-Siemens laptop , so no problem giving it to him ! Why silent about it ? I dunno , perhaps bacause he just stopped writing to me ... all of a sudden.