Leaderboard

the compiler has to translate like c, java, phyton whatever to a machine code this code is by far not perfect. a solution to avoid this is to write that programm in assembly - smaller, faster - but a lot more to write - and a lots of math and logic the same goes for MMX,SSE, AVX the compiler probaly just cant write a 100 % code in avx if you really want that you would have to write the entire programm (in this case entire windows10/11) in assembly (aka AVX assembly code) - sounds impossible to me c is relativ a lot more near to assembly , java and phyton are script and engine-ish - even then phyton, java would call their functions (then it is already gone away from a real avx/assembly solution) c/c++ is faster then scripts - a well known old problem but important to say these new c++17 c++21 use engines and scripts - i would not call this c/c++ anymore - its getting a so called "high-language" - a high-language is a other word for a script or easier and in most cases slower solution

Approved !!! I really hope this goes stays viral. MUCH better than the zero-creativity $-spelling used in the past. https://cybernews.com/ai-news/microsoft-microslop-copilot-teams/

Hello Windows 2000 fans, by chance I noticed that there is a bug in the function "bMakeXlate" of the class "EXLATEOBJ" in the file "win32k.sys". The initialization of XLATE data structures doesn't fill out all fields. Some fields remain uninitialized and therefore keep their random data which they received during the memory allocation. This can lead to unexpected and unwanted behaviour of functions which read the random values from the affected fields. There is an update available to fix this problem: WINDOWS2000-OTSKB000002-V2-X86-INTL.exe There is more information available about this issue and this update in the article in the knowledge database: OTSKB.chm The patch updates the file "win32k.sys" from the version "5.00.2196.0002" to the version "5.00.2196.0003".

Version 2 has been released: WINDOWS2000-OTSKB000002-V2-X86-INTL.exe Users of version 1 (OTSKB000002-V1) are advised to update to version 2.

The normal registry editor can load hives from other systems and make them generally accessible for reading and editing. I use the TorchSoft Registry workshop, but the loading is the same. I haven't messed with permissions. I guess it is probably fine to edit System or Administrator(?), but maybe other users have their own numbers within the target system. Only old Hiren's Boot CD makes sense to use on XP-grade computers. These developers should have not hijacked the name for their new boot medium (that doesn't fit on a CD). Now everytime I tell people to use Hiren's Boot CD, I have to add an explanation and sometimes face resistance from them to using an old version. Get both 10.6 and 15.2 where they only have free software (apart from Windows).

Is something broken? Because just because there hadn't been a release in 7 weeks, it doesn't mean that the software is abandoned.

Forgot to attach the translation. Several members, including this one, contradict one member that tells "no passwords and their hashes are transmitted". Another "silver" (high rep.) member gives a link to his investigation and writes "Don't make such categorical statements. I observed this activity (stealing passwords) many times."

Hi @George King! Thanks for your reply! The command start /wait is definitely buggy, confirmed several times. I tried it in my first version of my batch, and it doesn't work as described by Microsoft. Therefore, your statement is not correct. Due to a bug in the command start /wait it works in some cases, and in others it doesn't. It depends on the program you want to launch with this command. Due to a tip from @cmalex about the correct use I was able to get rid of the bug. But once again, in some cases it may work. In my case, unfortunately, it fails. In the case of cmdow, I have had no problems so far. I love it. It has a lot of interesting parameters. Here is a link: https://ritchielawrence.github.io/cmdow/#usage The tool is virus-free and certainly cannot be blamed for false alarms. But, I'll test your Invisible.vbs as an alternative, too. In any cases, thanks for your efforts! I do appreciate that! Cheers, AstroSkipper

Hi to all! Just a short update! Due to a tip from @cmalex about the correct use of the command START /WAIT I was able to solve my problem completely. Microsoft's documentation is flawed and misleading. I was very close to the solution, but I couldn't find the correct syntax of the command START /WAIT. This command is buggy, and its documentation, too. I wasted a lot of time in trying all combinations of this START /WAIT command. Thanks for that bug, Microsoft! Anyway, I modified the code of my batch file, and it works perfectly. No further need of a loop! No unnecessary background activity! Exact what I wanted to achieve! Therefore, no further solutions are necessary, the problem is solved. And once again, many thanks to @cmalex! You are an excellent programmer as far as I can tell! Cheers, AstroSkipper

Hi @cmalex! Here is the code of my batch to show you my implementation of the functionality described above: @ECHO OFF TITLE Start ProxHTTPSProxy cmdow "Start ProxHTTPSProxy" /HID START /MIN "Activate Proxy" ActivateProxy.bat CD.. START "ProxHTTPSProxyMII v1.5" ProxHTTPSProxy.exe CD PopMenu :LOOP tasklist | find /i "python37" >NUL 2>&1 IF ERRORLEVEL 1 ( GOTO CONTINUE ) ELSE ( sleep 10 GOTO LOOP ) :CONTINUE START /MIN "Deactivate Proxy" DeactivateProxy.bat EXIT As you can see, the activation and deactivation are done by the batch files ActivateProxy.bat and DeactivateProxy.bat. After hiding the program's window, my file activates the LAN settings, starts the proxy, performs a loop checking whether python37 is running or not, and deactivates the LAN settings on the proxy's exit. The file sleep.exe is an alternative to timeout.exe, which is not compatible with Windows XP, to perform a delay. I decided to use the program tasklist.exe inside the loop because it has an ERRRORLEVEL output I needed. If all this is done by using a higher programming language such as Python, it will presumably lead to less processor load and less background activity. If you want to take a look into my files, let me know! BTW, any improvements or optimizations of my code are welcome, of course! Cheers, AstroSkipper PS: Although I had my doubts, such functionality can actually be realised with pure batch programming. q.e.d.

I find something. It must call "on_exit" function then window closed. I'll try to integrate it. import win32api import time def on_exit(signal_type): print('caught signal:', str(signal_type)) time.sleep(1) for i in range(1,5): print (6-i) time.sleep(1) win32api.SetConsoleCtrlHandler(on_exit, True) time.sleep(30) Hi @cmalex. Thanks for your reply! What functionality exactly do you want to integrate? You know I do not have any skills in the programming language Python. I am just a batch programmer If at all. As far as I can see, the code you posted is a loop in python. You try to catch the event of ProxHTTPSProxy's exit. Is that right? Anyway, it would be great if you integrated the functionality of activating the proxy's LAN settings on its start and deactivating on its exit. I already did that by creating a batch, compiled to an exe file, providing such functionality. But the background activity still bothers me. A more elegant solution is welcome at any time, of course! Cheers, AstroSkipper

I performed a +1 and a thunbs up to support your call. I personally hate all unnecessary changes breaking websites which worked in the past. Just to be a bit "modern"!

Hi to all! I optimized my batch file to reduce CPU load. After a lot of tests and adjusting the code, I compiled my bat file to an exe. The processor load is now ok i.e. normal. The background activity is less than before, but frankly, it still bothers me. It would be great if some more ideas or suggestions were offered to solve the problem described in my previous posts. Perhaps, there are also other solutions than a loop. Anyway, I was able to create an exe file with the functionality of @heinoganda's ProxHTTPSProxy_PSwitch.exe. It was not as easy as it might seem. Honestly, I am not such an elegant programmer, and the file ProxHTTPSProxy_PSwitch.exe I like more, but my file definitely works, and that's most important. I love simple and functional solutions. At the moment, though, I don't know wether I'll end up using it in my PopMenu. It's a decision about whether you like something or not. Cheers, AstroSkipper

@jaclaz Thanks for your reply and your point of view! AutoIt is certainly worth a try. At the moment I am struggling with pure batch programming. And what can I say? I programmed a loop checking wether the proxy is running or not in a simple batch. When the proxy is closed manually, my batch goes on and deactivates the proxy's settings as it should be. Actually, I should be very happy, but the processor load on the one hand and the intense background activity on the other still bother me. Have to think about that in general, and of course, about possibilities of optimization! And I still need alternatives! Any ideas or suggestions are welcome! Cheers, AstroSkipper

ProxHTTPSProxy is easy and great. Read my first post in this thread and my short tutorial from here: What I need now are further ideas, tips, suggestions or at its best, solutions for my question!

I have heard a lot about AutoIt. I'll take a deeper look into it the next days. But, what about the processor load of such a loop using AutoIt?