dencorso
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by dencorso
-
-
14 minutes ago, tamarindojuice said:
Yes, i deleted the post cause first of all i wrote it with helping other people here in mind, but it feels like nobody didin't even bother to read it or even noticed it, so i decided just to remove the post cause i felt like talking alone among another people talking.
That's *NOT* the right attitude at all: when one posts something one deems useful, but then nobody else seems to notice it nor react to it, that content ought to be let stand, nonetheless. We here post to help others, even if we never get any feedback on it, let alone any kudos. To delete the content out of spite for being ignored is very much frowned upon here (even if it's quite typical of the worst the 21st century has brought us: an oversensitive generation).
7 -
On 12/20/2019 at 2:06 AM, Jody Thornton said:
Well, if you're just using the desktop - and you're not planning to use the Metro apps or the touch environment at all, Windows 8 does provide some benefits over Windows 8.1 that are as follows:
- There are no known telemetry updates in Windows 8 that plague both Windows 7 and Windows 8.1
- Windows 8 does not have any known CPU blocks (which affected update support). Then again, Windows 8 went out of support in January 2016, so any updates you get will be manually applied from Server 2012 anyway (you can get these from the Microsoft Catalog)
- No GWX Nags!
So you have a Windows version that's fairly modern, and that Microsoft leaves pretty much alone. You can't run IE 11 (but that hardly matters). Windows Defender still protects the system with updated definitions.
There actually *IS* a more serious reason to use 8.0 instead of 8.1, for those intending to use the x64 version (most users, nowadays, I'd guess), which cannot be solved by wufuc (because here we aren't talking about any artificial CPU blocks, but of a totally different issue):
On 10/15/2016 at 9:26 PM, dencorso said:[...T]o avoid decommissioning (= retiring) perfectly good and healthy older hardware, which is @Jody Thornton's original reason. Of course, one can stay on 8.0 for other reasons, all perfectly reasonable, but deciding to keep one's loved/trusty hardware may compel one to stop at 8.0, [in case] one wishes to use the x64 version (the hardware requirements discussed in the quotations below apply to x64 only!).
On 12/18/2015 at 11:13 PM, dencorso said:Intel processors that are unable to run 8.1 and 10 lack PREFETCHW, which all multicore AMD processors do include, whereas most multicore AMDs that are unable to run 8.1 and 10 lack CMPXCHG16b, instead. [Of course,] all Athlon XPs cannot run even 8.0, because they lack SSE2, among other things [and] not all Athlon 64 X2 and later AMD processors are able to run 8.1 or 10, but all can run 8.0...
On 9/9/2016 at 5:06 PM, dencorso said:Of course we're talking about Intel processors from Jan 2006 or newer. It turns out that the 1st Intel processor to support PREFETCHW was Cedar Mill, the 65 nM final revision of the Pentium 4 released on January 5, 2006. [However], it seems that the 1st AMDs to support CMPXCHG16B were the Bulldozers, from late 2011!!!
Sysinternals' CoreInfo is the right tool to test whether a machine has those requirements or not.
NB: Care when interpreting CoreInfo's results: in them a "*" means "yes" and a "-" means "no", but all the features it tests are alway listed. So, the excerpt below means "YES Supports CMPXCHG16B and NO Support for PREFETCHW":
... CX16 * Supports CMPXCHG16B instruction ... PREFETCHW - Supports PREFETCHW instruction ...This summary is provided just to remind people of the described issue, and has been edited (by myself) for clarity and to stress tha some guesses at the time they were originally posted are now known to be facts.
3 -
On 11/29/2020 at 10:48 AM, Ximonite said:
Plans for future:
Fix Dependency Walker and CFF Explorer crashes (this one has been around since the original KernelXE and I still haven't figured out why they happen)
Add PAE through "/PAE" in boot.iniIf I'm not mistaken, @Mov AX, 0xDEAD was addressing precisely those DepWalker and CFFExp issues, when he said:
On 11/20/2020 at 8:35 AM, Mov AX, 0xDEAD said:Seems you are messed with arguments/stack at return, "ret x" must take return adress to parent, but it take from stack random arg and jump to it
So, please, double-check the clean-ups at return time (= the value of x at the RET x instructions), on the functions/procedures you've added.
0 -
It actually *is* impossible.
That paticular dead horse has been already beaten to a fine pulp, but in case you want to know why, do search MSFN and you'll find plenty about it.
2 -
18 hours ago, Tonny52 said:
I may be jumping to conclusions, but there could be a chance that he is no longer here with us considering the current situation in the world.
Are you sure you were wearing all the required PPE (*and double-checked it was working right*) before jumping?
0 -
41 minutes ago, UCyborg said:
Using DOSBox for anything other than DOS games is at your own risk.
And what isn't, nowadays, when dabbling with legacy software?
0 -
No real reason, IMO. I do run my 4GB as a single NTFS partition, too. Among other things it avoids using more than one drive letter, which is great! @SamirD, OTOH, loves 2GB partitions, so I'm not surprised by his comment.
1 -
Flash 32.0.0.453 is out!
3 -
7 hours ago, LuckyCrydiaa said:
I am using Windows XP Anime Edition SP4
That's warez! Banned on Rule #1!
0 -
Well, while trying to do a condensed version of the main points in this vast subject (not all of them present in this thread alone), I realize I lost sight of the main post of my last two posts, which is: "There's a new, untested, generation of My Passport, which now has reached 5GB as their biggest USB external drive offer... so, does the old good WD format tool work with this generation, too?"
Although we know older WD My Books and Easystore drives exist in sizes bigger than 5GB, on which the old good WD format tool is known-for-a-fact to work, they're both physically bigger than the My Passports, which are much more portable, so a usable 5GB My Passport ought to be good news to the XP community. In fact, were it not the fact that Brazilian currency lost half its purchasing power since our current president's inauguration, and that Covid-19 ate about half the income of the least affected brazilians (all others lost more than that), I'd already have bought one 5GB My Passport, tested it myself and reported, but that's beyond me at the moment. [The last time I looked, São Paulo City, where I live, has already had 13128 people deceased due to Covid-19, more than most countries in the world will have till the end of this current pandemic. ].
As for the Paragon drive working with internal 4kiB drives, that's a welcome fact I had failed to notice, so thanks for the head's up!
0 -
Good to see you around, my friend!
I feared the recent (google provoked) problems for access from Eastern Europe were preventing your access, of late.
I'm sorry to say but we're still far from solving it completely, because the revenue from ads is sorely needed to keep MSFN going...
All best wishes!
0 -
Of course! I just tried to change subjects and give a head's up regarding the newish USB 3.0 5 TB My Passport, which is smaller phisically than a My Book but *BIG* bytewise! Yet, I should have said I was trying to steer the thread back to USB external drives.
On 8/16/2020 at 8:07 PM, dencorso said:[...] I have a NTFS formatted 4KiB sectored USB 3.0 WD My Passport using a single primary partition of 4TB for a long time already (since Mar 11, 2018, to be exact), with no issues at all. At the time I said:
QuoteI confirm it does work! I've just formatted a 4TB WD My Passport (manufactured in 2017, which came as GPT)
with the tool you indicated and lo: it's now visible to XP and declares 4KiB sectors and a capacity of
4,000,751,546,368 bytes, of which 4,000,561,778,688 bytes free!And there is report by @Asp of having created a single 6 TB patition, too.
And there's also a report by @SamirD himself, of having changed sucessfully the apparent sector size to 4 kiB on two different 10TB Bestbuy WD Easystore drives, but IIRR, at that time he hadn't tried to format either as a single 10TB partitions...
Just before his passing, RLoew was investigating the WD Quick Formatter and he said he had figured out which SCSI commands are used for the "sector size change", but his results also pointed out to the fact that the only HDDs he found that implemented such commands were the external USB WD drives. He also found out, although that's just a curiosity, that the "sector size" might also be set to other values than 4 kiB, but that, in fact, the NT-family OSes can use only 2 kiB (besides 512 bytes and 4 kiB), Yet, his son did not yet find any material about that reseach, which, in fact, may have been all done inside a debugger, so probably only some handwritten notes or text documentation may exist, if any. And no, he also determined that XP (SP1-3) cannot handle internal 4 kiB drives, be them SATA or IDE. Only the USB stacks are able to do that. It's possible that NT-family OSes v. 6.x may do that (10 certaily does), but that's beside the point, of course, since this is the XP forum, after all!
QuoteI think that's precisely what this version of the WD Quick Formatter, http://download.wdc.com/misc/WD_Quick_Formatter_Win_1_2_0_10.zip does: set some undocumented feature in the Drive, to change it from exposing 512e to exposing 4Kn.
The program requires no installation besides unzipping, FTW.
Some more info: https://support.wdc.com/knowledgebase/answer.aspx?ID=3868
0 -
BTW, now (well... actually for some time already) there is a 5 TB WD My Passport available on the market.
When (and if) any member here do decide to take the plunge, buy one and reformat it to 4 kiB sectors, please don't forget to tell us about the experience.
0 -
-
With all due respect: Chredge for Linux? What an oxymoron!
0 -
eMule_v0.60a-community was released on Oct10, 2020.
Does it work on XP? They say it's now being compiled with VS 2019... so I doubt it.
Anyway, I do know for sure eMule_v0.51d-community does work OK with XP SP3.
Later edit: It does work on XP, after all!
2 -
Flash 32.0.0.445 is out!
2 -
-
5 hours ago, win32 said:
I brought BWC's PE Maker to its knees.
Have you ever heard about binary ninja ? I've never had the opportunity to test it myself, but maybe it can be of help in your project...
1 -
Have you read the rules already?
0 -
Banned on Rules #1.a/b/d.
1 -
1 hour ago, VistaLover said:
PS2: As of this writing, I have employed a "hack" to keep updating my WD with defs past Aug 28th, which essentially boils down to keep using the last compatible engine, v1.1.17300.4, with definitions (files *.vdm) prepared for the non-compatible engine 1.1.17300.5; for now, it seems to just work; but the two engine versions are close enough/similar; I bet when a future engine version is released, say 1.1.19xxx.0, the new definition files it will come with won't be backwards compatible with v1.1.17300.4 - it'll then be GAME OVER!
That hack is essentially the same we used on XP: by keeping Engine Version 1.1.15800.1, we were able to continue updating up to the *.vdm v. 1.293.2807.0... then the next *.vdm files required a newer engine version and game over it was. But, from that period just before game over, @heinoganda had cobbled up an automated updater that download the the new definitions, replaced the engine by the last one working and put all files in their proper place, therefore helping more people to keep their MSE up-to-date up to game over, and I bet he sure might be able to modify that tool for the Vista community to enjoy the last leg of their MSE/WD more confortably. In case he doesn't ping this theread soon, do send him a PM. I'm sure he'll be delighted to be of help. Ceterum censeo Decimum delendum esse!
3 -
If I'm posting this in the wrong place, please do PM me and I'll move it to the right place.
the pic below shows MSE v. 4.4.304.0 (this is x86, but the same applies to x64) still working OK and updating by itself on Windows 7 SP1.
I don't know whether this is relevant or not for the Vista community, but decide to post just in case. This is the last version that works OK with no nags at all on XP SP3, but nowadays cannot update anymore on XP, due to the required engine version being unable to run on XP... however, the fact that it runs OK on 7 means that even in the case it cannot auto-update on Vista (but I didn't test it on Vista to ascertain whether it can or not auto-update on Vista), it sure should run OK, with no nags at all and support being updated by hand. HTH.0 -
21 hours ago, dencorso said:
And I would prefer mine called "Gwendolyn", so what?
21 hours ago, asdf2345 said:Since we're talking about what names we'd like, I like the idea Royfox
That's the problem: I wasn't stating my preference... what I was is called being ironic!
Why is it almost no folks nowadays are able to even detect irony?
And no, please, don't answer the above question: it's just a rethorical question.
Now, what is literal is that the next post about renaming @roytam1's forked browsers in this will be deleted.
That's way off-topic and totally pointless nowadays. So, please, stop. Do stop. Resist useless posting.3
That paticular dead horse has been already beaten to a fine pulp, but in case you want to know why, do search MSFN and you'll find plenty about it. 
Are you sure you were wearing all the required PPE (*and double-checked it was working right*) before jumping? 
].
Is Windows 8 lighter than 8.1?
in Windows 8
Posted
No more than a few. As for AMD users, I guess there may be some more users of CPUs from before 2012, though.