Leaderboard

Some reported success with RTX3080, so if you still can return that notebook and replace it, perhaps worth a try, but then again, no 100% guarantees.

No drivers for Windows 7/8/8_and_a_half exist.

It should, being a purely DirectX9.0c GPU based on G70 chip. https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/quadro-fx-4500.c1342

Incorrect, SSE4A is AMD-only instruction set containing 4 instructions which are not available in SSE4.1 and subsequent SSE4.2, collectively known as full SSE4 set. SSE4.1 is being targeted by SSE4 build of Thorium, so @Anbima should stick with SSE3 version on his old AMD.

Correct, compact characterisation. It looks like the browser world is about to shrink a little. At least for me. Chrome 127 is definitely the end for me. A browser like that has to be avoided. And there seem to be many users who feel the same way. The reason for this is, of course, manifest 3 and the associated restrictions on extensions, which are particularly tragic for content blockers like uBlock Origin. Personally, I'm happy to use New Moon 28, Serpent and Mypal 68 and will continue to do so for as long as possible.

I'm not sure that's true. Maybe it's true of some, but I often read what's going on "over there" when @VistaLover or @UCyborg links to a thread about a technical issue that affects UXP browsers (and "UXP-like" browsers such as St 55) generally. That said, there's often an arrogance "over there" that their decisions are the only "correct" decisions. It's not merely hating on MCP to recognize that there's still a lot of unnecessary tension between them and @roytam1 (not to mention @feodor2). It's important to recognize where we stand. I'm perfectly happy with MCP and @basilisk-dev refusing to support Vista and older OSes. You have to draw the line somewhere. But that doesn't make it the correct decision for everyone on the planet! Some folks prefer to stick with XP, some Vista, etc. I happen to prefer Windows 7 without Aero, which many folks think is weird because it makes it look like Win 98! But I think it's best to adopt a "live and let live" attitude, and not try to force my preferences on anyone else. Everyone is trying to make the best decision for themselves, and I think it's better to support whatever folks are trying to do than to belittle them because they made a different choice than I might have.

Lute

There is no need to use ProxHTTPSProxy for all internet connections, even in Windows XP. Mypal 68, 360Chrome, Thorium, Supermium and all @roytam1's browser editions are capable of the TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols. However, the proxy is actually only needed for those programmes which are not capable of these protocols but need them in these days. Same applies to WU/MU, for example. Therefore, I use ProxHTTPSProxy only occasionally when really needed. And such cases happen, of course. Which sites do you need this proxy in 360Chrome for? Which sites appear to be unsafe for you in 360Chrme?

All @heinoganda's, @Thomas S.'s, @cmalex's proxy versions and also my packages of ProxHTTPSProxy's PopMenu are based on whenever's ProxHTTPSProxyMII. All of them can be considered secure, of course. Or do you think I would offer here unsecure proxy packages? And first of all, credits to the original developer whenever.

It detects something like 128Mb or so. Like XP detects only approx. 2Gb out of 6GB GPU.

Duke

Rite

@Anbima If you try Thorium as a solution to your secure connections problems with 360Chrome, and you have issues, please address those problems in the Thorium thread. Thorium should not need the use of any proxies, as it is based on a very recent Chromium version.

... As I understood this, the suggestion was to use Thorium standalone (presumably because Thorium comes also with its own CA store/is less prone than 360EEv13.5 under WIndows XP to fail on secure connections... But yes, thanks to Anbima, last pages on this thread went like this: 360EEv13.5 standalone -> 360EEv13.5 + ProxyMII -> 360EEv13.5 + ProxyMII + Local PAC script -> 360EEv13.5 + ProxyMII + Local PAC script + Chromium extension(s) -> 360EEv13.5 + ProxyMII + Local PAC script (without extension) -> 360EEv13.5 + ProxyMII (standalone, without PAC script) -> 360EEv13.5 + ProxyMII + extension -> Thorium standalone (for his "problematic" HTTPS connections) -> exclusively Thorium-related queries -> ... IMHO, ProxyMII / ProxHTTPSProxy was the constituent with the lesser percentage in these recent discussions ; the "issue" could well have been posted in one of the 360EE threads ... FWIW, if the issue encountered is the infamous "red-X" instead of a green padlock on some HTTPS connections on 360EEv13.5 under XP, this is an already known "issue" and can well be a "red herring" (or not, but no-one posted something definitive on the matter...); IIRC, you can restore the padlock on these connections by running the 360chrome.exe executable in win2k compatibility (or something in this vein - have never faced this issue under Windows Vista SP2 x86 myself...).

Just a little reminder. This thread is about proxies. I believe there is no need to use Thorium together with ProxHTTPSProxy. @Dave-H Can you please move your conversation with @Anbima to the Thorium thread? A bit offtopic is normal and ok but I think this is the wrong place here. The Thorium thread is more suitable. Thanks!

As mentioned before. Avast can be really difficult to remove. And it can sometimes even leave a system crippled after removal. I prefer to just reinstall Windows at that point.

Thank you both. I do have another XP machine laying around, but the other fix seemed a bit cleaner. Following the discussion linked by AstroSkipper, I 1) Headed to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\WmiApRpl\Performance 2) Deleted the First Counter, First Help, Last Counter and Last Help entries 3) Headed to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Perflib 4) Set Last Counter to decimal 1846 5) Set Last Help to decimal 1847 6) Rebooted It worked like a charm.

FYI, (in regards to uBO Legacy) Replace EasyDutch with AdGuard Dutch. (I think as a consequence of my post on Reddit) No commits to repo since Jan 14. See also issue tracker.

Personally, I would now just use Thorium or Supermium to access such sites on XP if security there was an issue for me.

will be "pared back," as there will be fewer of them. Join us, Luke.

Perhaps win32 will be able to keep Manifest V2 in Supermium, it should land in Thorium as well. My remark about choice and apathy was meant to be more general, more broad, not limited to web browsers or even computers. I made a bit ranty / rude post a while back on PM forum about them switching 64-bit builds to require AVX (1) instruction set, they deleted it. Still wonder where it makes significant difference compared to SSE2 build. I've been using contributed AVX2 build on work laptop for a while, but I'm not sure I'm detecting much regarding performance. What little I did turned out to be more related to clean session vs dirty session. I think only clever manual coding could speed it up significantly...maybe, Mozilla couldn't do it with keeping all the cruft for extensibility. This whole thing reminds me of one aspect in gaming world, (G)ZDoom source port of Doom, original game was released in 1993 and it's famous for being ported to all sorts of devices that at least have something resembling a CPU. I've read on VOGONS forum you may be able to run Doom Eternal from 2020 more smoothly on 2013 hardware than some mods on GZDoom specifically, some due to bad coding of mods, some due to all the cruft in the engine that's there to support competing standards for extending game logic. And even having expensive computer won't help with performance much. Kinda similar with Pale Moon, you can't sell that browser to an average individual, it's almost universally perceived as very slow. I'm somewhat used to it, but I also use other browsers, depending on the mood. Though I tried disabling 3 of 4 cores on my CPU recently and tried browsing on XP with Serpent, but this is where my patience ends, couldn't live with that.

I have saved Partition Assistant 10.1.0.0 which I know works fine under XP and installer was obtained under XP before the dropped support. https://www.mediafire.com/file/w4s3a5eynl4nsu5/PartitionAssistant-all.exe/file Can be installed silently with /silent switch P.S. Full version require just correct cfg.ini in installation directory.

Meh! Some have thanked me for exposing it. That's fine though. I'll leave it be. I think many people feel that once Tobin left, all the toxicity was gone from the Moonie Forum. However people like moonbat are the most toxic, and Moonchild is very disingenuous. I take pride in point stuff like that out. But again, I'll refrain from posting this stuff any more.

I found a German forum site where the same issue was reported under Windows XP long time ago: https://administrator.de/forum/win-xp-ereignis-id-3012-loadperf-16362.html Use an online translator! Maybe, the solution at the end of this thread works for you, too. Cheers, AstroSkipper

It's a new feature to reduce fingerprinting by the means of serial ports.

Which developer do you mean? Please, be a bit more precise! If you mean the extension developer, I assume he warns the user not to misconfigure the Proxy Switcher extension and not to use unsecure web proxies. Which proxy do you mean? If you mean ProxHTTPSProxy, this local proxy is as secure as Windows XP and direct connection is.

I had to create for each domain a separate, new IF query otherwise it wouldn't have worked in my installation.

@Anbima didn't say anything about that. If one doesn't make clear announcements, one can't expect to get exactly the information one needs. We are not clairvoyants. If the PAC script contains a different URL than the one you want to call up, you don't have to be surprised that it doesn't work.

For me. it works as it should. No. No green. Just insert the PAC script code! You won't get any confirmation messages. I really don't know what you are doing. All a bit strange. "example.com" is completely sufficient and exactly corresponds to the URL which you wanted to load.

No. What about that here:

That's not the issue at all. Most of developers and manufactors have stopped supporting Windows XP, and Windows 3.11, of course. That's not the problem at all. But to trash and ridicule special forks for older OSes such as New Moon 28, which is excellently maintained by @roytam1, is a no-go and shows a fundamental lack of respect.

Pure

Lure

Dire

Dice

Tile

Rile

I don't know what exactly you are going to take my word for. But I know exactly what I'm talking about. This guy likes to write disparagingly, especially when it comes to MSFN, old operating systems and New Moon. Rudeness and negativity are the pillars of its character. Guys like this trollbat were the reason why I gave up my account in the PM forum and never posted there again. Good decision.

"The comment" looks exactly how this poor soul generally thinks, hates and writes comments about all MSFN related. It never ceases to amaze me what certain intellectual low-flyers are allowed to write there. Apart from that, the ignorant has no idea about Windows XP. And then it also wants to be a developer ...

sine

Bone

Do you have Enchantress update? After the Enchantress patch they had "fixed" the low volume "issue", I didn't have that issue with the volume with only the basic game set, and had to turn it down drastically to avoid hearing damage.

Please read the topic title again. See "8". So it's NOT off-topic. And when it is, we have our good admins to handle the situation, Is it clear? Get back to me, if you need any further assistance. Geforce 6/7 and 8 AGP/PCI-E Driver Edition for Win98/ME by Zak!

I don't see "admin" by your account. Senior MSFN members don't agree with your opinion. Compatible GRAPHICS CARDS with Windows 9x: GeForce 7 --- AGP & PCIe (Requires UnOfficial Driver) GeForce 8 --- AGP & PCIe (Requires UnOfficial Driver) Quadro Quadro2 Quadro DCC Quadro 4 Quadro FX Quadro NVS https://msfn.org/board/topic/107001-compatible-hardware-with-windows-9x/?do=findComment&comment=708168

Attention! KB4134651-v2 has the same problem with the file "oleaut32.dll" as KB4134651!