LoneCrusader
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by LoneCrusader
-
-
I received one of these as well. I assume a spammer created an account and used the PM system to send out solicitations. This does not mean that the spammer actually knows your email address, he just abused the PM system. When I logged in the offending message had already been wiped out, so nothing to worry about.
Hopefully someone higher up will give us a word on what happened, it's above my pay grade...
0 -
4 hours ago, siria said:
As I understand the current polls, they are for finding out "which" names might be liked, which is the big "??", not about IF or if NOT rebranding.
About this point some people have already expressed their opinion loud and clear and repeatedly, nothing new there. But if they insist to get a checkbox to cross too, here's a suggestion for a specific YES/NO poll. Just to show opinions of course, all decisions remain up to roytam1. Who did declare after Tobins deal offer that he'd be ready to accept and rename, just that others shall please do the tedious work of finding names etc.
not sure about wordings, just a (slightly too verbose) draft...
- YES! roytams forks are different enough to deserve own names long since
- YES. Makes sense. I understand browser confusion happens too easily
- Yes. Wouldn't need new names, but really like Tobin's offer
- Yes. Okay with me, just please keep new names similar to old ones
- (yes) Would have kept ori names, but helping each other is better than struggling
- (???) Can't decide...
- (no) Slight preference to keep old names, but won't boil with rage if renamed
- No. Because modified names will cause more confusion as ori ones
- NO. I see zero reason to change names, and expect no future probs
- NO! It's not true old names cause anyone probs, and don't dare to threaten us!
Very convenient to omit the option to leave things as is, so long as it pushes the "rebranding" agenda, no?
Yes, I've stated my opinion clearly. And it was not my intention to restart the debate; I simply pointed out the fault in the choices. But, since you apparently have decided to make a "snide" comment about it, complete with innuendo regarding the "thoughts/intent/motivation" of those who might oppose the viewpoint you're pushing it should be pointed out that we also have our share of those who have loudly, and clearly, and repeatedly "browbeaten" (to borrow a very good term that was used before) roytam1 toward taking this action, despite the fact that he does not see it as a problem.
Also, to clarify another point, roytam1 also indicated that branding was needed to go along with any name change. So there are two criteria at work here; not just a name that he approves of, but also corresponding branding he approves of to go along with it. Anyone can spout off names, but there are very few, if any, of us who can produce "branding" of a quality high enough to correspond with the product.
Now, I certainly have better things to do with my time, and no desire to spend any of it on this issue again. I've said what needs to be said up to this point. But do not behave as if any who oppose your viewpoint on the issue do not have the right to voice that opinion and/or point out the fact that this "election" is rigged.
The one consolation is that, in the end, roytam1 makes the decisions.
0 -
8 hours ago, Tripredacus said:
Is there any particular reason why the current name "New Moon" is not a poll option and (apparently) cannot be used?
This is subjective, depending on which side of the "great debate" you come down on. Those who are advocating for (or going along with those who wish to) changing the name have created the poll(s), and as such have purposely omitted the option to leave things as-is.
0 -
"RoyTamFoxMoon" was never intended to be a serious suggestion for consideration, and roytam1 specifically objected to names based as such, so it should not be an option.
Also, while I'm sure someone will object to this, in the interest of democracy, there's no option for "just leave the names alone and quit rehashing this every few months."
0 -
Not a bad idea, although true slipstreaming is better IMO. We can't distribute custom slipstreamed builds though.. so any solution at all might be an improvement.
0 -
14 hours ago, Bruninho said:
Oh, that’s fine. Everyone is entitled to have an opinion, I have mine, you have yours. I never wanted to make fun of someone else’s opinion. Security is important. But actually, when they refer to the versions of Firefox these forked browsers are based in, they’re not wrong at all.
OK, so my intent was not to "make fun" of you or anyone else. The point was to try and get you to realize that the article you linked (and seem to believe is somehow an authority on the subject) is strictly an opinion piece. Just because it shows up on some tech website does not elevate this type of stuff to "gospel."
Just because any given "forked browser" project is forked from earlier code than contained in the current version of the original browser does not automatically make it "less secure." This is disingenuous. It's easy to create doubt based on a statement such as "it's based on a much older version." But that statement does not take into consideration what exactly has been changed in the "almighty newer version." For all anyone knows, there could have been no changes whatsoever to the actual "security" code. All changes could be to the GUI, etc. And to go a step further, the "almighty newer version" may have even developed a gaping security hole that didn't exist in the older code. "Newer is better" = chronological snobbery.
15 hours ago, Bruninho said:I didn’t want to spread FUD or whatever you call it - I just exposed what I think about this and wanted to express that I’d like to see more from Retrozilla. I believe people are wasting time with several forks of Firefox for XP and above (Serpent, Basilisk...) when there are at least 3 or 4 main well known browsers ready, working and updated perfectly for security issues on these Operating Systems. The real challenge is on Windows 3.x and especially 95 and 98, which is one of the things that were discussed here.
For example, why not resurrect and update Netscape while there is the source code available for it?
OK, so, once again, if you wish to base your opinion on things like you linked above, be my guest. However, I fail to understand how you can be critical of "browser forks" and "smaller groups of unknown developers" when you wish "to see more from Retrozilla." RetroZilla is a browser fork, of a far, far older version of Firefox code than that used by Basilisk, Pale Moon, etc., and it is created by a small, small group of "unknown" (except to those of us here) developers. And, since those selfsame developers are "wasting time with several forks of Firefox for XP," I'd also like to see a list of those "3 or 4 main well known browsers ready, working and updated perfectly for security issues" on Windows XP.
0 -
1 hour ago, DougB said:
@LoneCrusader: I'm not able to access the RLoew archive that was on your website. FF gives the following message:
"Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead
Firefox detected a potential security threat and did not continue to lonecrusader.x10host.com. If you visit this site, attackers could try to steal information like your passwords, emails, or credit card details.
What can you do about it?
The issue is most likely with the website, and there is nothing you can do to resolve it. You can notify the website’s administrator about the problem."
- DougBMy hosting provider has been making a lot of changes lately, some of which directly prevented me from further updating the section devoted to Rudy's work for a few weeks. I can make changes again now, but I'm not certain what the issue with the certificate is. I can't see any options anywhere that I can control that affect it. So far the only solution to bypass the security warning seems to be to ensure you're using http:// to access it rather than https://. I have modified the link in the earlier post as such.
0 -
46 minutes ago, Bruninho said:
https://www.howtogeek.com/335712/update-why-you-shouldnt-use-waterfox-pale-moon-or-basilisk/ (this post even has a link for why you shouldn’t use Chromium forks - although Edge now is a Chromium fork as well, it comes from MS, more trustworthy than smaller groups of unknown developers).
FUD rubbish. Stuff like this is garbage, just another crackpot's opinion.
2 -
I'm aware there is some degree of history and disagreement between you. Both of you have been a bit out of line with some of your comments. I'm glad that this issue has passed now, but it still must be addressed.
sparty411, you were out of line to ask Omntech "who are you to..." back during the "great browser renaming war." Some of us who have been here for many years could put the same question to you as well, but it still wouldn't be right. I pointed it out back then, but I mention it here again for reference for anyone who may not know the full history, and because I feel this previous situation created a degree of animosity that helps to explain the current situation.
I am aware of the response Omntech posted to that statement that was removed, and it was definitely out of line as well, to be clear. Another staff member judged that to be the best course of action, hoping that my post would be the end of it and you both would cool down, which seemed to be the case for a while.
On 2/15/2020 at 11:29 AM, sparty411 said:Using an old browser chalk full of security holes does not make you bold, or enlightened. Frankly, it's asinine, but you're free to do whatever you'd like.
When using an unsupported operating system, the least you can do is mitigate the security risks that come with browsing the internet.
It should be noted as well that it doesn't come across very well here, at MSFN, and in this community, to spread "FUD" regarding older operating systems, older software, and those who choose to use them. Our general philosophy is that everyone has the right to use their computer as they see fit, and they have the right to not have to listen to others criticizing their decisions as such, which, regrettably, seems to be the norm across most of the internet. Let's celebrate the freedom to use our systems as we see fit here, not turn it into any other online forum where we refer to other people's choices as "asinine" and ask them why they want to do things instead of helping them do it.
On 2/15/2020 at 11:28 PM, Omntech said:Which are really non-existent for the most part. The only people really affected by them are dorks like you who basically spread them around with *YOUR* useage of the internet.
The days of non -dorks playing the hardware/software upgradge-ratrace game people like you play is pretty much over.
People are not going to trash their investments of time and money in their computers and cellphones and other equipment just to appease people like you.
You really need to get a clue and a life.
The reality is that people are going to keep using their old computers,software ,cellphones and other devices untill they die of hardware failure,because there's no real reason for them not to do so.
Omntech, I would ask that you please direct your arguments toward the ideas or situations that you disagree with rather than attacking the people who are presenting them. It's not acceptable (or necessary) to call others names to get your point across. Personal attacks cheapen the effect of a good argument.
Yes, I "Liked" the post in question above. It was my gut reaction as I disagreed with the post you were responding to. But while I agree in sentiment with many of the things you've said, we must remain a place where ideas are debated rather than a place where personal attacks and insults rule and distort the power of the argument. While it may feel good to lash out at your enemies as such, it reduces the power of persuasion for anyone else reading it who was not directly involved.
-
This last statement is not really directed personally at either of you, but a general statement of principle. We should not judge someone solely by the number of their posts, or attempt to brand someone as a troll simply because they join and take a different viewpoint during a polarizing discussion. Polarizing situations often bring out those who might not otherwise speak, but this does not allow anyone to simply paint them with a broad brush as a troll or a flamer. Only time will reveal whether or not a member will become a contributor, a leecher, a clueless observer, or a troll, or anything in between. So let's move on from this, and not have any more such distractions.
2 -
MSFN is not the place for requests of this nature. Requesting or providing links to copyrighted, unredistributable material is forbidden, no matter how "old" the software in question may be.
0 -
You can "slipstream" Rudy's SATA patch by placing a patched copy of EDSI_506.PDR and his SATA.INF file in the \WIN98 folder along with the CABs. Any time you need to include an "updated file" where an older version exists in the CABs, you can simply place it in the same folder as the CABs and SETUP will use the unpacked copy instead of extracting the one from the CABs. AFAIK you can also drop drivers into this folder (like SATA.INF) but I haven't tested it myself.
Or, you can actually slipstream it, given that Rudy's 9x slipstreaming tools have been uploaded here.
Some time back I spent a long time trying to fool with an Intel motherboard that had an AMD chipset that I had several of... a D102GGC2 to be precise. If the system you're referring to has the same or very similar hardware, do not waste your time. Not even Rudy could make it work on that board (I actually sent him one to try.) This chipset (or at least Intel's own implementation of it, with their garbage BIOS) is utterly useless for Windows 9x.
I've also seen issues with SDD breaking Plug & Play, but in my case it was on Windows 95 OSR2.x. I never found a solution.. I'd have to find and look back over some old notes to see if I ever learned anything useful about it.
IIRC, VBE9x can be used with DOS Boxes, provided you always run them in full screen mode.
0 -
The NForce 4 board was an anomaly for me, lol, I don't usually use AMD-based boards since back in the K6-2 days. Not had good luck with 9x on that board, or an earlier NForce 3 board either.
device=c:\windows\himem.sys /machine:1
You might still try my suggestion at some point, but given that the problem seems to have gone away after you changed drives it may not be related. If you try that configuration again, use rloew's SATA patch first.
0 -
rloew's patches can be found here. As for the slow booting issue, I've seen a similar problem before. It may be a problem with Gate A20 line control when loading HIMEM.SYS during boot. I had the same issue on an NForce 4 board and found a solution with rloew's help.
Add a line to your CONFIG.SYS file for HIMEM.SYS and use the "/MACHINE:1" setting and it may solve the problem. If you need further reference, look here.0 -
7 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:
If you need I am available to buy them for you and send them to you.
If that doesn't violate your laws and maybe you get into trouble.+1
6 hours ago, roytam1 said:yeah I do need surgical mask (requiring "EN14683 Type IIR" / "ASTM Level 3" for best protection, or "EN14683 Type IR" / "ASTM Level 2" for basic protection) indeed. I'm very pleased if you can donate surgical mask to me (and my family). You can PM me for the shipping address.
and you may need to fill something other than "surgical mask" or "Personal Protective Equipment" for customs clearance (i.e. don't fill aforementioned words), for example, fill "cloth" or "printed materials" instead. So parcel(s) won't be trapped by Hong Kong customs.
Unfortunately I ran into a problem. I know someone who works in a pharmacy, and I contacted them about ordering some of these masks. Apparently they're on backorder all over the United States, citing a "global shortage," and none of the medical supply companies they use are accepting orders for them or even providing an expected date when they will be resupplied. So at this point, unless one can find them online (and provided these online sellers still have adequate supplies themselves and don't put you on "backorder" as well) it looks like it's going to be hard to lay hands on them.
1 -
1 hour ago, 173a said:
I reflashed the bios in an effort to fix the issue.
If your system was working before the BIOS flash, it may have been a factor. But if the problem appeared before you did so then it's unlikely to have had an effect.
Have you enabled or disabled any of the controllers, potentially altering the order they're recognized in?
After rereading your previous posts, I've seen another possible issue. Previously you had a HDD on the same cable with your CDROM, which, assuming you followed the standard configuration of not having a HDD as a slave on the same cable with an ODD as master, would have made the CDROM the slave on that cable. An issue exists by design with ESDI_506.PDR in Windows where CDROM drives appearing as the primary master on a PATA controller (common on mixed systems where the HDD's are SATA and PATA ODD's are used) are blocked and will not be recognized by Windows. IF any such check exists in OAKCDROM.SYS, it might cause problems here. (Pure speculation; no idea if OAKCDROM contains anything of the kind.)
1 hour ago, 173a said:How could I force it load the gcdrom.sys?
You would need to download GCDROM.SYS and add it to your boot floppy and load it in CONFIG.SYS using the existing OAKCDROM.SYS as an example.
If you wish to be able to boot and run SETUP from a CD you would need to create a new CD, ripping a copy of yours to an ISO, ripping out the boot (floppy) image from the resulting ISO, editing it in the same way I described above, and then re-inject it into the ISO and burn a new CD.
This is quite a project, and could be a major undertaking if you're not familiar with doing such things. I would suggest you try using a floppy first if you can, in order to be certain GCDROM solves your issue before going any further with the CD.
-
BTW, please do not link to sites redistributing copyrighted software, no matter how old it is. Link above removed.
0 -
@Nikitastepanov Rather than posting a whole series of new threads, please learn to use the search function of this forum and spend some time reading through the many informative threads that already exist. (See "Important/Sticikified Topics") These will answer most of your questions. Don't expect people to do all of your work for you.
These two specific questions are both answered by updates created by rloew, who recently passed away. You can find links to his software here.
3 -
If you updated the BIOS version from what you were running before when everything worked, it might have changed something in the coding for the HDD controllers. In my experience some "mixed" systems using PATA + SATA still require the use of a SATA CDROM driver (GCDROM.SYS) instead of OAKCDROM.SYS, even on PATA-connected drives. I started to mention this earlier, but since you said everything was working fine before with OAKCDROM.SYS, I figured this wasn't relevant...
0 -
PM notifications by email are Russian roulette here. Sometimes you get one, sometimes you don't.
0 -
On 12/21/2019 at 10:38 PM, Mathwiz said:
...RoyFox and variations thereon...
While thinking on this one at some point I somehow ended up with the kludge "RoyTamFoxMoon," which does evoke some degree of humor... it's the RTFM browser! lol
(please, no one take this as a serious attempt at a name! I'll address RoyFox further down)On 12/22/2019 at 3:03 AM, Sampei.Nihira said:Even if I'm in the minority, I think the same way you do.
On 12/22/2019 at 3:00 PM, genieautravail said:+1
Thanks for the support guys. It's nice to know I've not been the only voice in the wilderness.
On 12/22/2019 at 8:43 PM, Mathwiz said:I suppose I should ask how you feel about RoyFox (perhaps with variations as @Mcinwwl suggested). I know you'd rather we not rebrand at all, but if it happens, we still want your opinion on what the new branding should be.
I'll give mine: I like "Moebius" for Serpent 55. I've been labeling my Serpent 55 icons "Moebius" long before @Matt A. Tobin suggested using the name.
I don't think RoyFox is necessarily a bad idea, but I believe there could be better options. I did love the icon that was first suggested for RoyFox, but even though it's nice Mr. Tobin may have a small point when he says it's too close to the original Firefox logo.
Wasn't Moebius a name also used by MCP and company? I've lost track...
On 12/22/2019 at 9:07 PM, dencorso said:In the recent past, when we were trying to come up with an interim image for both Serpent 52 & 55 @roytam1 made crystal clear he opposes identifying his builds as "for XP", since they do work OK on later NT-family OSes. This is the one thing about branding we know precisely how he feels about.
Agree here re: the "for XP" language, while it seems clear and convenient it makes the name unnecessarily longer and omits the fact that the builds work on Vista as well.
55 minutes ago, sparty411 said:You only have 2 posts, so you're likely new here. Who are you to show up and start jumping down peoples throats?
Let's not start judging people based on when they joined or how many posts they have. A very bad precedent to get started.
However it does seem that things have cooled down to a much more acceptable mode of discourse now. Let's try to keep it that way, with no one pushing this way or that beyond reason. This is the only way this issue will ever be settled in an acceptable manner. It may take some time, but this is the right way.
0 -
That's the DOS PATH variable being set; it's necessary and it probably takes a fraction of a second. Something else may be slowing down the bootup process, but that's not the cause.
If you have installed a network card, and it is set to use DHCP to obtain an IP address, and you do not have an Ethernet cable connected (to a working DHCP server obviously) then Windows 9x will sit and spend a long time waiting for a DHCP response that never comes before booting. But when this is happening the LOGO screen is usually displayed, not the DOS screen. Check for this; but it may not be your issue.
0 -
You're welcome. Glad you got everything working!
0 -
15 hours ago, Matt A. Tobin said:
I'm sorry LoneCrusader but by invoking the bsd-wip github issue you have lost any credibility among any of us over here. I will take responsibility for what I said on the Pale Moon forums and in my channel. I even take responsibility for what I said in that github issue BUT in THAT CASE I was in the right and there is no denying that from any rational mind. Could a word order change have not evoked such a disproportionate response from them?
I have asked that question many times since then. I want to say yes but I know those bsd people are batshit insane. They don't respect intellectual property OR software licenses wanting to treat everything as public domain and/or theirs without cause and are at a level of fanaticism that outshines even my self. So no. You don't get to cite that as a valid argument against me to promote blatant anti-Tobinism. I won't stand for it. You're done.
Fortunately for the rest of everyone who isn't you, I am not going to let that impact the start of what I hope will be better times. So to everyone else, nothing has been impacted by LoneCrusader's machinations. I stand by what I have offered and suggested.
As if I need your "credibility" - ha! From my perspective, the BSD issue appears as just another incarnation of yourself and Moonchild whining about an "unsanctioned" build for an "unsanctioned" platform. You can't control them, so you try to intimidate them. You might be surprised the difference making a request in a reasonable manner makes versus dropping in and making demands. Machinations.. LMAO.. wow.
The sad part here is that none of that was even directed at you at this point. Those links were simply directed at TechnoRelic, who has, time and again, refused to understand what was going on. And almost all of them, including the BSD one, were in the previous thread already.
We've had our debates, and said our piece. Probably never going to like each other, or agree about very much. But provided you continue with this "better attitude," cease you threats, treat roytam1, his project, and its users with respect and common courtesy, then I'm mostly content to sit back and watch.
13 hours ago, Mcinwwl said:@LoneCrusader We remember the past and all know it was not always milk and honey, but hey, when's the option to change for better, I'm into peace negotiations, or at least instable truce, as better option than constant warfare. That's egoistic from me, but I just think it might be better as for an end-user of the Roytam's build, as he'll have more time for builds, having savings in less arguments... and I don't see anything ethically invalid in my stance, as Roytam agreed to work on that proposal already, just a few posts before.
I have a feeling that your past issues with mr. Tobin and MCP, that you mentioned few hundred posts before and that are by far pre-dating Roytam's builds for XP being announced here on MSFN, are vastly affecting your view on the events here. You might be right that war will rage on soon again. But form me it's better to try to work diplomatically, as Roy might gain projects stability in long term, and worst case he'll loose some work done. Tradeoff worth checking.
I wondered how long it would take for someone to accuse me of some "past bias" against Mr. Tobin. Frankly I resent that.
Sure, I don't like the guy. But everything I have said here in relation to this issue has been strictly based on the events at hand, and strictly in response to Mr. Tobin's behavior toward roytam1 and his project. I have been perfectly willing to have "civil discourse" with Mr. Tobin, provided that he cease his attacks and threats and behave like a reasonable person.
If peace can be made with Mr. Tobin, that's fine too, with a couple of caveats: 1) That this "peace" not be based on giving in to threats or intimidation; and 2) That this "peace" not be based on everyone pressuring roytam1 to accept a change to his project that he clearly does not see as a priority.
In fact, I had pretty much said everything that needed to be said, and even stated that I was mostly indifferent to the name changes, and stated that I would stand by roytam1 whatever HE decided. And then everyone here started jumping on the bandwagon and pressuring roytam1 to accept. Let's let roy make this decision himself, it's his project after all. He does the work. I'm interested in what HIS view is, not what is "popular."
7 hours ago, Mathwiz said:Anyone who finds the suggested "Whistler" branding for NM 28 objectionable, should let us know now, while there's still time to change it. Seems pretty innocuous to me, but you never know what might turn folks off unless you ask!
Fine, put me on that list. Not that many here seem to care what I have to say though anyway. IMO re-using Microsoft code names that are completely unrelated seems to be going off on a weird tangent. Not to mention that Microsoft has now abandoned XP and is in the process of "disappearing it" from history. As noted by others, let's have more original names, preferably with some degree of relation to (or being derived from) the parent programs...
1 hour ago, dencorso said:The @LoneCrusader is a dear friend and it grieves me to be pushed into arguing publicly with him about this, but I was never given any choice about it, since he seems to be the main (and, ATM, only) voice oposing the (re-)branding of the browsers.
Ah, den.
I thought you, of all people here, would understand where I've been coming from. If you don't at this point, I'm not sure how I could make it any clearer...
And what you say is not even wholly correct. I'm not entirely opposed to the renaming. I'm opposed to it under certain conditions. The first of which is being opposed to renaming to appease people making threats. Fine, that one seems to be behind us for now. The second of which, however, you yourself contributed to by jumping on the bandwagon pushing for this. roytam1 doesn't see it as a priority, and it's his project. But now everyone but myself is pressuring him to accept this.. and for what? Like I asked before, what benefit do we gain from changing a name and a graphic? How is this "positive" pressure really any different from the "negative" pressure when roy, unlike the rest of you, doesn't see this issue as some kind of crisis?
When and if roytam1 chooses, on his own, without influence from either side, to make changes to his project name or branding, I will be perfectly willing to accept it.
1 hour ago, dencorso said:True enough. But, while not forgetting, moving on is sometimes required, and I think this is one such case.
Possibly. However, does no one but me see the intricacies of the irony in the situation? How can I phrase it...
Does no one but me have a problem with the fact that roy is being pressured to allow Mr. Tobin, the very person who has been a thorn in his side for however long now, to essentially place his chosen names and his chosen graphics on roy's projects?
Should roy, who has continually worked on his project and succeeded through all the criticism and nastiness, allow his ("former?") enemies to put their stamp on his work, which just recently they were trashing?
Should roy, every time he builds or uses his project, have to look at a name or a graphic chosen by those who did their best to harass him and cause him any trouble they could?
Should Mr. Tobin be allowed to "make his mark" (and a very visible and prominent mark) on a project he has, in the past, done his level best to destroy?
I don't understand how these issues aren't striking a chord with anyone...
It's not that Mr. Tobin lacks the ability. It's not that he hasn't been making a seemingly genuine and sincere effort. It's simply the sum of the situation itself.
1 hour ago, dencorso said:There is a time for appeasing, and one for open confilct. I hope we won't keep arguing uselessly until we are beyond all possible compromise. Most of those in this thread are for the (re-)branding. I think that PoV has already won by acclamation.
I'm not interested in "popular." I'm quite used to being in the minority, you should know this by now.
Everyone here should know this, from or OS choices if nothing else.This is roy's project, not a group project. Occasionally some members are able to help, but essentially without roy this project would cease to exist. So I'm interested in what HE thinks and decides. I don't care for how everyone is "pushing" him, and you are the one who started that by pointing out roy's ignoring of Tobin's message. roy has every right to ignore Tobin if he so chooses. What has Tobin previously contributed to this project? Nothing. What had Tobin previously done to "sabotage" roy's projects? Most everything he could. So why is roy expected to "sit up and take notice" when Tobin posts? It's not as if Tobin were offering any real help with actual functionality of the project...
1 hour ago, dencorso said:... and you are the only one doing quite a strong effort to derail any compromise, when most of us don't see the facts in the same light as you do.
Once again, this is not wholly correct. I am NOT trying to "derail any compromise." I have even stated that I am NOT completely opposed to changing the names. I do favor keeping them as is (say 60/40), but it's not that important. The situation is the issue. Aside from the points I've already made clarifying my standpoint I am simply disgusted with all this "bandwagonism." I may be the only one speaking now, but several others have spoken in favor of keeping the current naming convention in the previous thread. (I know, I re-read it yesterday while looking for links.)
"Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." - Mark Twain
3 -
17 hours ago, Tangy said:
@roytam1 I am afraid NM28 32bits link still gives 404 Not Found
Cheers
fixed
0 -
You should install the unofficial NUSB package you will find referenced here. Version 3.3 will be fine; a 3.5 exists but is better left for specific cases.
NUSB provides a USB 2.0 driver AND a USB Storage driver. Note that if you attempt to remove USB2 controllers from the Device Manager in Normal Mode, you will get a BSOD. These should be removed in Safe Mode when necessary.
Now, if you are using the Unofficial Service Pack, it may provide these USB drivers as well. I am not familiar with what it includes as compared to NUSB.
0
I thought you, of all people here, would understand where I've been coming from. If you don't at this point, I'm not sure how I could make it any clearer...
Forcing the video card to play nicely with the half-compatible motherboard in 98.
in Windows 9x/ME
Posted
Intel-branded motherboards later than the D875PBZ are garbage for Windows 9x. The proprietary Intel BIOS is useless for configuring anything of importance, and many things are not configured in a 9x-friendly way, leading to various odd incompatibilities and errors. Third-party boards based on Intel chipsets are usually fine, especially if they use AWARD BIOS.
Several years ago rloew and I spent many hours experimenting with some Intel boards similar to this one.. in fact one was a D945GCCR. Also included a D945GTP, a DP43TF, DP45SG, and a couple of others I can't remember offhand. All of these exhibited some strange issues under 9x; resource conflicts, problems using video cards, hangs when loading USB2 drivers, etc etc. Third-party boards (Gigabyte/MSI/etc) using AWARD BIOS based on these same chipsets did not exhibit these problems.