tomasz86

@blackwingcat Why not just set it to 32 all the time? That's how Windows 2000 Datacenter Server has it defined. The OS will use only as many cores as available anyway.

I've managed to find Wget 1.5.3.1 and even 1.4.5 but both of the two files are larger than 1.6. If anyone's interested: http://web.archive.org/web/19990429173903/http://www.ccp14.ac.uk/mirror/wget.htm

@kishra Let me clear some things. I suppose that by UURollup 1 and UURollup 2 you mean Update Rollup 1 and Update Rollup 2. The first one is the official rollup released by MS, and the second one is the unofficial rollup of official updates and hotfixes that were released after Update Rollup 1. UURollup (Unofficial Updates Rollup) consists only of either unofficial files or official MS files ported from other Windows systems such as XP or even Windows 8. Development of UURollup-v10* has been put on hold and there are no plans to release any new versions. The current one is considered stable although there do exist a few known minor bugs. The real problem with UURollup-v10* is that it's rather old which means that a lot of newer software won't work despite having it installed. UURollup-v11* is currently in developmental stage. There's no stable version available so you need to choose between weekly or daily releases. I haven't been able to thoroughly test the most current releases, thus only the daily line is being constantly updated, while the weekly one is almost 10 months old now. For this reason you should be careful when using UURollup-v11, especially if system stability is your priority. I don't want to discourage you or anyone else from experimenting but I'd STRONGLY suggest doing a FULL BACKUP of your system disk / partition before applying it. I myself rely on Clonezilla which is open source, available for free and offers a full backup solution that is at the same time relatively easy to use. As for my .NET Framework combined installer, you don't need to remove the currently installed .NET packages from your system. However, you'll definitely need to apply UURollup-v11 before using this installer. Otherwise there will be a lot of bugs, and .NET Framework 4.0 won't work at all with UURollup-v10. If you do decide to install both UURollup-v11 and the .NET Framework package after that, I just want to warn you that it may take very long time to install all the .NET Frameworks on your Pentium II system. It may literally take a few hours to finish the installation so be prepared to wait

There's one exception in case of IE6/8: KB2898785. The IE6 version updates one more file than the IE8 one. You can find details on the Mimo's Windows XP Updates List.

I've made my mind up to look only for tablets in size of 10" (or a little bit smaller but not too small). The 11.6" form factor may be more comfortable to use but it's also bigger, heavier and less portable in general. At this moment there seem to be only two options available (well, three but see explanation below). The first one is DELL Latitude 10 which is a 10.1" inch device with Wacom support. It's available for around 300$ on eBay (used / refurbished). The problem with this tablet is that it's a business oriented device. It has more ports than any other 10" tablet such as a full USB 2.0 port, etc. Because of this the tablet is way heavier and bulkier than the other ones: DELL Latitude 10 300$ 10.1" (1366 × 768) IPS Atom Z2760 1.8 GHz 2 GB 274 × 176.6 × 10.5 mm 658 g The price is good though so I'm seriously considering buying this tablet when I've got some additional finances to spare. On the other hand, the tablet which I'd prefer to have is Samsung XE300TZC. In terms of specifications, this tablet is exactly the same as the former but is much smaller and lighter: Samsung XE300TZC 500$ 10.1" (1366 × 768) Atom Z2760 1.8 GHz 2 GB 257.4 × 165.3 × 8.2 mm 543 g It also has only one micro USB port and lacks the other ports available in DELL but I don't really need them. The difference in dimensions and weight is huge though, despite the fact that the screen size is exactly the same in both devices. The real problem with this tablet is its price. Even for used / refurbished device you still need to pay around 500$ which I couldn't justify comparing to the DELL tablet that can be bought for 300$ despite all the other benefits. I mentioned the existence of a third option. It is Lenovo Thinkpad Tablet 2. I don't take this device into account because there are just too many reports over the Internet about the poor quality of the device and other issues related with it. When it comes to other screen sizes, the newly announced ASUS Vivo Tab Note 8 seems to be the only smaller Windows 8 tablet with Wacom support. It's supposed to cost 299$ once released but I'm still not convinced about the 8" screen size. For 2 years I've been using Samsung Galaxy Tab 8.9" that has 16:10 aspect ratio (1280x800) which the same as the ASUS device. The 8.9" screen size is still enough to use it comfortably but I've always thought that anything smaller than this would just be too small to view / edit text documents comfortably. If I were to choose something smaller than 10" I'd prefer a device that is similar in screen size to the Galaxy Tab rather than being even smaller than this. I've also found a useful thread in another forum: List of Windows 8 and RT tablets and convertibles with stylus In summary, at this point of time it's DELL Latitude 10 vs Samsung XE300TZC for me but I'm still going to search and look for other options.

It's Wget 1.6.

I don't know There's no version number defined. The time stamp says 2001.01.19.

Good to know! I've just compared the two. The uncompressed version uses 768KB RAM while the compressed one uses 868KB. In this case I think it's worth to compress the file.

Thanks for the clues I've managed to find this one: ftp://84.237.21.34/public/prosovetsky/wget.exe (116KB) VirusTotal 0/46 After using UPX with --ultra-brute the size gets shrunken to 49.5KB (VirusTotal 4/48)

I'm looking for the smallest version of wget for Windows. I've managed to find this one: ftp://78.139.97.87/Antivir/drweb/drweb_livecd_updater/UTILITY/wget.exe (66.5KB) Virustotal for the file is 19/42: https://www.virustotal.com/pl/file/e0f932063d19d093a9aa5da6bc8417147326f42344dfa42cab131928f9e9e4f4/analysis/ so download it at your own risk. The file does work nevertheless. I'm just wondering whether there's any "safe" version of wget that is smaller or similar in size to this one. What I need is to be able to download a file using the -N switch (i.e. time stamp checking).

For simple PDF viewing SumatraPDF is the fastest and lightest solution, but if you need more options (such as advanced printing settings) then I'd go for Foxit which I use myself. Foxit used to officially support Windows 2000 but I don't know whether it still does. SumatraPDF requires the unofficial kernel to run. I'd recommend downloading portable versions of both programs from PortableApps and trying them out yourself.

This is very interesting I've always wished the compatibility between yours and BWC versions of the same files was better. There are still many cases where the APIs offered by your version of a file and by a BWC version of the same file are completely different

Yes, there will be a major update to my website in the near future. I hope to finish it by the end of this month. I'd already been working on it for a long time last year but eventually had to postpone everything due to work / studies. This time I can say for sure that the website is going to be updated as soon as possible You need to either close all Windows Explorer windows or kill the "explorer.exe" process itself. I've tried to fix the issue but it doesn't seem to be possible using the built-in MS hotfix installer I only managed to find a workaround during the uninstallation process. By the way, as for UURollup, I'm also going to have a look at the new WildBill unofficial updates' releases and see if there are any files that could be integrated into UURollup.

Extended Support doesn't mean that they absolutely cannot release such bug fixes They don't have to do it though. If you look at the situation of Windows 2000, the last hotfix for it had been released in May 2010 which was just before the system went EOL. However, the vast majority of the other hotfixes were produced between 2000-2005 during the mainstream support phase, and only a small number between 2006-2010 during the extended support period.

In case of Vista the mainstream support ended 2 years ago. MS is only obligated to release security patches. When it comes to pure bug fixes, they may release them but don't have to do it.

I'm still sorting a lot of stuff for which I had no time during the last several months. Once everything has been set up I'm going to speed up with all the Windows related projects. I'm planning to use my Pentium III-M based notebook as a testing device for Windows 2000 related unofficial patches and other fixes. This way it shall be much easier for me to test problematic behaviour (such as the audio driver problems) on real hardware rather than being dependant only on virtual machines which is the case now.

Those utilities may not work in Windows 2000. At least the Samsung one didn't (it couldn't detect the SSD at all).

It's no different than using SSDs with XP or Vista. There are plenty of tips available about how to set up an SSD for XP (proper partition alignment, etc.). You can find a lot of instructions through Google. I ran Windows 2000 on SSD for more than 1 year and everything worked smoothly. There was no difference in speed despite the lack of TRIM (yes, I ran benchmarks after the 1-year usage to prove it). That SSD is still in use in another computer with Windows XP If you're using a standard consumer SATA HDD then of course there will be huge performance improvement with an SSD. After having used SSDs and 15 000 rpm HDDs I myself just can't work on standard 7200 rpm HDDs any more

Very likely a false positive. In case of UURollup the kernel itself is modified so no need for any additional wrappers.

By the way, in my opinion one of the biggest advantages of the new Opera over Chrome (and other clones) is the fact that mouse gestures are built in the browser and work on both external and internal pages. It means that you can use mouse gestures to open / close any tab, including Speed Dial or settings. This is actually one of the main reasons why I just can't use Chrome comfortably on desktop, as I rely primarily on mouse gestures when browsing the Web. In Chrome mouse gestures are available only as an extension, and extensions are disabled on internal pages completely. As a result, with mouse gestures you can open a new tab when viewing a Web site but can't close that new tab with them. Mouse gestures also don't work when pages are being loaded (you need to wait until the loading has completed). This is extremely annoying for someone who has always relied on gestures, starting from old Opera and later in Firefox (in Fx extensions work everywhere).

CES 2014 is almost finished. I need to look through all the devices that have been presented but at the moment there's one which I find very interesting - Asus VivoTab Note 8: It's an 8" tablet while I'd prefer something around 10"... but it's good to see more competition in this area. The tablet has Wacom digitizer support. The price is still unknown but I hope it will be cheaper than the Samsung tablets which I consider overpriced (especially when speaking about new devices, not used or refurbished). While searching for the tablet I also found information about the older model - 11.6" ASUS VivoTab. It also has Wacom digitizer included but the tablet is much bigger and heavier than the new one.

Why do you think so? Not that I like the current UI but in my opinion it's very FAR from being optimised for touch. I've used a lot of browsers on touch screen devices (Android and Windows) and the best experience was offered by... Metro IE. It's the only browser that I can say to be fully optimised for touch. You use gestures to navigate, can switch between tiled tabs very easily, etc. All of the other ones feel like modified desktop versions where some elements are bigger, others removed but in the end you still need to click (tap) on very small area to navigate. What I mean is this: 1. Chrome (Android). There are a lot of small elements used for navigation. This isn't something I'd call touch optimised. 2. Firefox (Android). Better than Chrome but still buttons are too small and too close to each other to navigate comfortably with fingers. Now look at Metro IE. This is something that's really nice to be used with touch. All in all, I don't think the changes inside Opera have anything to do with the tablet market...

I didn't say it wasn't a resource hog I just think it's lighter and slightly faster than Google Chrome. How about the other mainstream browsers though? The old Opera is definitely much lighter when it comes to RAM consumption but it's no longer developed. Firefox is lighter but the difference isn't very big (and its UI is very laggy compared to Chromium, especially when trying to do something while websites are being loaded at the same time). IE is no alternative as it lacks decent addon support and synchronisation, and is available only for one OS. I've tested several alternative browsers inspired by your other thread but in the end there were always problems with some sites in each of them

It was a little bit different situation but I also once had problems with shutting down / sleeping / hibernation and the culprit was the SATA driver. Are you sure you've got the newest version of the drivers installed? It may also be caused by a faulty hardware.

I haven't experienced the issue (yet?). I find the Chrome's UI significantly heavier than Opera. The browsing engine is the same so there shouldn't be any difference there. One clear advantage of Opera is the Off-Road mode which can be extremely useful if you've got to rely on a limited data plan.