osRe

What can I say? It's not like I have other references to compare it with. With my A/V skipping problems it says, as usual it seems, that NDIS.SYS is to blame.

More and more of Microsoft's stuff is becoming a hassle. So which updates are responsible?

I figured, if I'm not going to make that generic memory patcher I had in mind, for the time being, better just finish the fixed-function thing I did some testing with. So here's a memory-patching utility equivalent to the modified AltTab.dll. It's only for the current version of Win8.1 x64 (AltTab.dll v6.3.9600.17415). You can choose which of the two tweaks to apply, and it doesn't modify files. Works here, but tell me if you see anything funny on your end. What's TaskLister? Couldn't quite find it.cAltTab100_win812_x64.7z

In many cases I get Windows Explorer frozen for a few seconds after opening a file/directory's properties (Alt+Enter) then closing the properties window. This also happens for some other actions initiated through Explorer, though I didn't quite get the pattern yet. I've noticed this problem on two or three separate installs of XP on different computers. I haven't ruled out yet shell extensions, but I just use a handful of common ones. Has anyone encountered this and found a solution?

I find that Opera 10 on Win98 barely loads many HTTPS sites. It waits and finally shows an internal error page. In some cases refreshing makes it finally load. I suspect it has to do with a lack of certain root certificates?

There's an endless choice of checksumming programs. Sadly, none of them gets remotely close to offering all the features I'm after or doing everything (or even most things) right. For single files I'm using HashCalc. The GUI is a bit crude, it's not the fastest, but for a file here and there it's okay. For DOS I'm using McAfee's VALIDATE.EXE. It's all manual, no reading/writing of SFVs or similar, only CRC, but for my limited DOS uses it suffices. Note that the results it shows are the inverse of the common CRC32 used in pretty much everything else.

Yeah, appears to be the same. Not that it's that crucial. TASM.EXE 136,018 02-21-1996 5:00a 97eb0007 v4.1 TLINK.EXE 120,426 02-21-1996 5:00a aaa7a0f4 v7.1.30.1

I don't think this part is used by DOS. In this specific case it's supposed to be TLINK's version. v7.1 in my case, and apparently your v5.1 writes 0x50. MZ header details: http://www.fileformat.info/format/exe/corion-mz.htm Not necessarily.

Is it TASM.EXE v3.1 that compiles it without modification? I wouldn't say it's buggy, since these aren't really code errors. If anything, v3.1 might be more lenient, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Maybe v4 is in a strict mode by default, but can be switched somehow to the same relaxed mode as v3. TASM and TLINK versions don't have to go in tandem. TLINK is probably used with all other languages as well. A colon in a label isn't part of the name, it's what terminates a label name inside code parts. Otherwise it would try to interpret it as an opcode. TLINK's /x parameter just prevents the creation of a MAP file, so it's not important. You can use the MAP files to see why the EXEs from different versions of TASM or TLINK end up being a different size.

Supposedly, a downgrade is possible for one month after an upgrade: http://fossbytes.com/windows-10-downgrade-one-month-time-downgrade-after-upgrading/

Also I wouldn't mind "enabling" a Win8 key for Win10, but without installing it. Though, by the looks of it, Win10 needs quite a lot of third party work to fix it and reach even the usability state of stock Win8.

Here. I didn't test it, so use with caution and check if the specific modified functions do the expected thing. The compiled code, at least, looks okay. The errors you saw aren't what I saw. The problems here were lines 2743, 2919, 2921. In the first, it didn't like having ES inside the brackets: okdoformat: cmp word ptr ES:[bx+1feh],0aa55hIn the other two it wanted the explicit addition of DWORD PTR: mov DWORD PTR es:[bootbuffer+offset freeclust-offset bootsec32],eaxBTW, some label names in the code include a question mark. A strange practice, and it's surprising TASM accepts it. I'm not sure what TASM version or settings the author used but it'd odd that it wouldn't compile as is. Maybe it's possible to use global settings through an INI file or an environment variable, and this wasn't included in the makefile? And I don't get TASM's version numbering. I downloaded something which the README calls v5.0, yet TASM.EXE is v4.1, same as the one I had before (though I didn't compare the EXE, can't do that right now). AEFDISK.ZIP

It's assembly so it just needs TASM and TLINK. In "makefile" you can see the compile parameters: TASM aefdisk /m9 /q TLINK aefdisk /x There are three errors with my older version of TASM, one easy to fix, the other two need more familiarity with the subtleties of TASM. I assume v4.5 or v5 will do, but haven't tried.

No immediate plans here to use Win10, even if it were perfect in terms of compatibility and UI and bugs. Transitioning a computer to a new OS is something I'll go through only if I must. It may be the thing I hate most in computing.

Not over, just more hassle. And more like, started rather than over. I never felt the need to change themes before Win8.

Win10 still foolishly requires this hackery, right?

UxStyle doesn't modify files on disk.

I should probably update my 4.1.0...

DPC Latency Checker doesn't really support Windows 8, so I guess it's a bug. It is that software, right?

Your system info shows Windows 8 rather than 8.1?

I've no idea, but I can attest to seeing audio/video skips rather frequently. Even something simple like audio playback in Winamp is susceptible. No idea what's to blame.

I wouldn't mind some visual UI fixes, but can't be bothered to start working on figuring the skin elements.

I was about to send my Great Dane.

I don't know what you mean about the DOCX.

That's how it looks in Win10?! Noel: The icon problems are finicky, affected by random settings or conditions. (Why does the forum not show the image at 100% size even though there's plenty of space?)