sonyu

interesting, why don't you try XP or 8.0 N if you want to fly? anyway as I know, vista and 7, both uses WDDM 1.1 and... in case you want to try xp, J1900 is baytrail from 2014 too: + drivers (comment 1133292)

https://web.archive.org/web/20210922030457/https://ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=10622

I follow all the improvements and tests you all do with XP these days (acpi, backported drivers, uefi boot, longhorn files...) and I don't want to go offtopic, but I need to ask something considering this topic... There are a lot of Baytrail Intel Atom tablets with a x64 cpu and 32UEFI bios which, until today, can only boot 32 bit windows. Since some years ago people managed to boot 64 Linux on them but it seems and still is impossible to install/boot Windows 64 on them. With CSMWrap or your findings, do you know if there is a change to install and boot x64 windows on these x64 atom baytrail cpus? There are tons of tablets and low powered devices with this cpu. https://superuser.com/questions/1055305/installing-windows-x64-on-32-bit-uefi-efi-ia32-via-grub Just asking because lot of people is waiting for this since a decade ago. Just search for: "UEFI32 / 64-bit OS" or https://www.google.com/search?q=Install+windows+64+bit+Intel+Baytrail+Atom+with+32+bit+UEFI Long story short about the linux: https://github.com/maharmstone/quibble/issues/2 https://github.com/Manouchehri/vi8/issues/4#issuecomment-135216613 well, just asking if this topic can help booting x64 windows on UEFI32 and x64 CPU like z3735 / z37370 Please don't consider this question full offtopic cause it's related to UEFI boot and Windows. So... maybe there is a change to boot X64 Windows in non-UEFI mode in UEFI32 baytrail? I didn't read all comments in the topic... just asking if there's a way in 2025... Thanks to all for your amazing work!

Hi, I need GMA 600 driver for XP, My GPU (DEV_4102): “Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator 600” = igdlh32_T, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_4102&SUBSYS_16B510CF currently I've this info: GMA500 (PowerVR SGX535@200Mhz) VEN_8086&DEV_8108 "Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 500" [Intel.Mfg] **%Intel% %i900G0% = iegd_plb, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_8108** %Intel% %iTNC0% = iegd_tnc, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_4108 %Intel% %iTNC1% = iegd_tnc_ext, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_8182 https://www.driveridentifier.com/scan/intelr-graphics-media-accelerator-500/download/540130730/CEDA0088331647219484B1E7D50AC308/PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_8108 GMA600 (PowerVR SGX535@400Mhz) VEN_8086&DEV_4102 "Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 600" https://www.driveridentifier.com/scan/intelr-graphics-media-accelerator-600-driver/download/296459761/3774BEC1E39E49B38705DC5BA2057104/PCI\VEN_8086%26DEV_4102%26SUBSYS_16B510CF W7 various .inf I've seen: [Intel.Mfg.NTx86.6.1] "Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator 600" = igdlh32_P, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_4101&SUBSYS_16B210CF **"Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator 600" = igdlh32_T, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_4102&SUBSYS_16B510CF** "Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator 600" = igdlh32_C, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_4102&SUBSYS_16BB10CF [Intel.Mfg.NTx86.6.1] "Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator 600" = igdlh32, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_4102 Since both are based on PowerVR SGX535, can I get GMA 600 working with a modded .inf ? I've found early Vista drivers too: https://server05.driveridentifier.com/data/mydrivers/display/intel_graphics_81463056-vista-7-32.zip As I read on this blog https://gma500booster.blogspot.com/2017/09/download.html "The Driver works only with (US15) Poulsbo Platform devices and stock Intel GMA500(200Mhz) N.B.It doesn't work with GMA600 due to the different platform! (probably need some patch in sys path" I've all SM35 drivers working except the display adapter http://web.archive.org/web/20130512093051if_/http://file2.mydrivers.com/board/intel_chipset_9.2.2.1029.zip https://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?t=69184&start=20 OTHER RELATED INFO I'VE FOUND: **%i900G0%** = GMA 500 https://www.userdrivers.com/Video-Graphic-Adapter/intel.htm https://cdrdv2-public.intel.com/777304/efi-bios-10-4-users-guide.pdf https://docs.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/attachments/20121004/69e1e025/attachment.pdf [Intel.Mfg] **%Intel% %i900G0% = iegd_plb, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_8108** %Intel% %iTNC0% = iegd_tnc, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_4108 %Intel% %iTNC1% = iegd_tnc_ext, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_8182 i915GD0="915G/915GV/910GL Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i915GD1="915G/915GV/910GL Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i915AL0="915GM/915GMS/915GME/910GML/910GMLE Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i915AL1="915GM/915GMS/915GME/910GML/910GMLE Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i945LP0="945G Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i945LP1="945G Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i945CT0="945GM Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i945CT1="945GM Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i945WB0="945GME/945GSE Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i35BL0="Q35 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i35BL1="Q35 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i35BL0A2="Q35 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i35BL1A2="Q35 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i3150DT0="GMA 3150 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i3150DT1="GMA 3150 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i3150MB0="GMA 3150 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i3150MB1="GMA 3150 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i965BW0="965G Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i965BW1="965G Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" iG9650="G965 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" iG9651="G965 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" iQ9650="Q963/Q965 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" iQ9651="Q963/Q965 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i946GZ0="946GZ Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i946GZ1="946GZ Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i965GM0="GM965 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i965GM1="GM965 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" i965GME0="GLE960/GME965 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" i965GME1="GLE960/GME965 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" iGM450="GM45/GS45/GL40 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" iGM451="GM45/GS45/GL40 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" iG450="G45 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" iG451="G45 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" iG410="G41 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" iG411="G41 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" iELK0="Q45 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" iELK1="Q45 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" iQ450="Q45 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0" iQ451="Q45 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 1" **i900G0="US15 Embedded Graphics Chipset Function 0"** [Intel.Mfg] %Intel% %i915GD0% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2582 %Intel% %i915GD1% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2782 %Intel% %i915AL0% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2592 %Intel% %i915AL1% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2792 %Intel% %i945LP0% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2772 %Intel% %i945LP1% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2776 %Intel% %i945CT0% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_27A2 %Intel% %i945CT1% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_27A6 %Intel% %i945WB0% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_27AE %Intel% %i35BL0% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_29C2 %Intel% %i35BL1% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_29C3 %Intel% %i35BL0A2% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_29B2 %Intel% %i35BL1A2% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_29B3 %Intel% %i3150DT0% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_A001 %Intel% %i3150DT1% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_A002 %Intel% %i3150MB0% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_A011 %Intel% %i3150MB1% = iegd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_A012 %Intel% %i965BW0% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2982 %Intel% %i965BW1% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2983 %Intel% %iG9650% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_29A2 %Intel% %iG9651% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_29A3 %Intel% %iQ9650% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2992 %Intel% %iQ9651% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2993 %Intel% %i946GZ0% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2972 %Intel% %i946GZ1% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2973 %Intel% %i965GM0% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2A02 %Intel% %i965GM1% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2A03 %Intel% %i965GME0% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2A12 %Intel% %i965GME1% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2A13 %Intel% %iGM450% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2A42 %Intel% %iGM451% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2A43 %Intel% %iG450% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2E22 %Intel% %iG451% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2E23 %Intel% %iG410% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2E32 %Intel% %iG411% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2E33 %Intel% %iELK0% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2E02 %Intel% %iELK1% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2E03 %Intel% %iQ450% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2E12 %Intel% %iQ451% = iegd_gn4, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2E13 **%Intel% %i900G0% = iegd_plb, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_8108** **[https://www.driveridentifier.com/scan/intelr-graphics-media-accelerator-500/download/128394373/2CD13D07FF084F6A9BA1595D728A3E04/PCI\VEN_8086%26DEV_8108](https://www.driveridentifier.com/scan/intelr-graphics-media-accelerator-500/download/128394373/2CD13D07FF084F6A9BA1595D728A3E04/PCI%5CVEN_8086%26DEV_8108)** **[http://www.mypcdrivers.com/results/download.php?item_id=73403664&scanid=06879D00BCE545BEBFCAEE2E9A9E2E6C&hardware_id=PCI\VEN_8086%26DEV_8108](http://www.mypcdrivers.com/results/download.php?item_id=73403664&scanid=06879D00BCE545BEBFCAEE2E9A9E2E6C&hardware_id=PCI%5CVEN_8086%26DEV_8108)** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PowerVR_products https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Atom_processors#CE_processor</strong> I have seen also the IEMGD driver build kit: https://pcloadletter.co.uk/2012/07/06/iemgd-for-vaio-p/ IEMGD editor: https://gma500booster.blogspot.com/2012/10/capitolo-chapter-5-easy-quick-guide-to.html Comparison gma 500 vs 600 https://gma500booster.blogspot.com/2013/06/internal-gma-500-vs-gma-600-overclock.html "The revised version of the previous Intel SCH (System Controller Hub) for the ATOM Z6xx series under the code name Lincroft. In fact, this is the same graphic system as the GMA 500, but with a double speed. (From 200 MHz to 400 MHz)." GMA 3600 is clocked at 400MHz (same as GMA 600) and core is PowerVR SGX545 https://laptop-driver.blogspot.com/2014/04/intel-gma3600gma3650-drivers-and.html https://www.jogglerwiki.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5221 https://archive.org/download/intel-gma-drivers-win https://imgur.com/d6XdgSd GMA 3600 (2011) was released after GMA 600 (2010) and it has XP compatible driver I see also PowerVR references in the .inf of this one for GMA 3600: ;8.14.xx.xxxx Win7 & DX9 DriverVer=06/27/2012, 8.14.8.1083 CatalogFile=kit46198.cat CUIDeviceIndependentKey="Software\Intel\Display\igfxcui" DisplayKey="Software\Intel\Display" CUIDriverOldShareKey="Software\Intel\CUI" GfxKey="System\CurrentControlSet\Services\PowerVR\PowerVREurasia\HWSettings" GfxOGLKey="System\CurrentControlSet\Services\PowerVR\OpenGL"

yes, installing XP on low-end hardware, coming with Vista RTM / SP0 pre-installed, was the best you can do back in 2006-2009 era. It feels like having much powerful hardware so... installing XP on a Celeron coming with Vista feels like having almost an intel i3

Windows XP: "My Computer" (100% sure it's mine) Windows Vista: "Computer" (just "a" pc but is not clear who is the owner) Windows 8.1: "This PC" (just "this" pc... but...it is mine?) Windows 10: "MS Computer" ( oh oh) Windows 11: "MS Service" (is not your pc anymore since you can't control windows update or what's happening in the background... )

even XP compatible hardware (wddm gpu), can feel the benefits and run faster when using w8 6.2 & wddm 1.2. After Windows XP, this only happens on w8 NT 6.2. https://web.archive.org/web/20170918122254/https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/b8/2011/10/07/reducing-runtime-memory-in-windows-8/ I agree with this. All was optimized back in the day when resources were limited. Now the cheapest computer has at least 8gb ram + SSD or SATA hdd + bus with amazing bandwidth... so resource wasting is allowed and nobody cares about it, since w10 also have memory compression... and a lot of pagination... just (started at least this way) to run metro inside a Win32 desktop OS --- All these bloated OSes (w10 + w11) are the consequence of a TEAM trying, who have the most used OS in the world, deciding how to compete to Apple's iPad back in 2011. It exactly happened when they wanted to release Windows RT without Win32 for tablets + intel releasing low powered capable atoms + trying to decide if they include Metro on desktop to have more users on non-win32 based apps... as a result we still have this nonsense aka metro aka mobile apps on desktop and all the desktop interface messed; https://winclassic.net/thread/1652/list-metro-ified-components-windows so.... MS started to left Windows DESKTOP OS in 2015 releasing w10 1507 (10240), and last Windows DESKTOP OS was 1511 (10586).... I don't know an exact term to say what kind of OS is Windows starting with 1607, it's a mobile os with some desktop interface parts? it's a desktop OS with some mobile interface? MS left desktop users in 2015. Well, what's the point? It always happened the same: an OS released today is slow for current hardware and will fly installed as a downgrade on the hardware released in 4 years from now. The only problem now is that we aren't on Vista days and we have too much background processes, too much metro too much messed up interface, too much WDDM.... it feels like they're all the time releasing an OS to be run only on gaming hardware. Long story short, it's already proven Service packs > Windows as a service NEWER is not BETTER bonus:

ex7forw8 + rename windows.immersiveshell.serviceprovider.dll

how to install the updates directly into XP installation? I don't want to integrate into ISO and reinstall is it possible? Thanks

@dotexe1337 is it compatible with windows 8.0 ? since windows 8.0 it's more similar to 7 than 8.1, I mean it has more w7 code on it...

@reboot12 @Dietmar not sure if can be helpful here but you can try with "setup_var" which can be used to change hidden UEFI values by using a modded Grub EFI shell (rename it as bootia32.efi / bootx64.efi) Well, it's used to boot legacy mode, on systems that do not have exit to EFI shell on BIOS exit page example here https://www.bios-mods.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=12774&pid=59489#pid59489 and about CFG Lock, you can try... https://github.com/QuanTrieuPCYT/Dell-Latitude-5480_Hackintosh/blob/main/Disable_CFG_Lock.md anyway, sure you both know more than me about this and, perhaps, AmiSetupWriter.efi can do the same. [...] what `setup_var` does is access an EFI variable called "Setup". The variable contains a binary blob, and the command sets a particular binary value at a given offset inside that blob. What IFRextract calls "VarStore" is mapped onto an EFI variable, via the GUID and "name" field that IFRextract reports for each varstore. You can use the `dmpstore` command builtin to UEFI Shell to inspect EFI vars, including the "Setup" var. See [2] for an EFI application which provides similar functionality to the `setup_var` command. To use it, save the `setup_var.efi` EFI application on any file system accessible by UEFI Shell, then boot into UEFI Shell and run `setup_var.efi` to do what you need. I've also seen references that imply `setup_var` is UEFI shell builtin command, but that doesn't seem to be the case. from what I can tell that command was (at least once) available via patches to either UEFI shell, or grub. But never in upstream "UEFI shell" [1] https://github.com/datasone/setup_var.efi [2] https://github.com/LongSoft/Universal-IFR-Extractor credits: user JamesKen @ archlinux org

@awkduck And the universe answers sometimes... WELCOME TO THE FUTURE... ....DREAMS (are starting to...) COME TRUE: POCKET 386 !! looks promising. Ok, we need a bit more power... waiting for the pentium mmx or 486 version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVgITS8aLzc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSSjvwrfvP4

https://youtu.be/wJ46Y6xt2pU https://youtu.be/SFYRVVpatqo https://youtu.be/-7QhRdhtnzE

Still have my SEGA Genesis here too I think it's not about nostalgia nowadays, the world was really a bit better some years ago. We've lost the beautiful shapes in buildings, cars, cities... why do we need to completely convert a car to a InternetOfThings-car? do we really need a screen replacing the speedometer? same is happening with Windows OS, Taskbar was perfect before... I never believed in the sentence there are two types of people (there are tons of different people) but we can now starting to see 2 types of people: Those who grew in a world where there were no Internet or Smartphones, and the others.

just found this the other day regarding to Modern Operating systems: youtu .be/ YGRbT5nQM58 by YT user Jody Bruchon Microsoft has never made a Windows OS that is superior to Windows 2000. It pre-dates all of the Themes/Desktop Window Manager/Aero graphics bloat of XP and later. It provided a "flat interface" far better than that of Windows 8 and 10. The Start menu was a straightforward, predictable, out-of-the-way cascading system that could be reliably used with keyboard shortcuts. Visual effects for window movement and progress indication were fast, minimal, and low in "visual noise." The instability of Windows 95, 98, Me, and even NT 4.0 weren't brought into 2000. Windows had borders. Clickable elements had proper affordances, unlike many of the Windows 8+ visual elements and settings panels that have little or no indication of what's clickable and what's not. Scrollbars had good contrast and reasonable handle size, making targeting them easy, unlike every "modern" OS in existence today that uses skinny, low-contrast, auto-hiding scrollbars. Resource requirements for the core OS were minimal and Win2k by itself was very fast and responsive. About the only complaints about Windows 2000 that I can think of today are all based on features and hardware support that didn't exist when it came out, but that's hard to fault the OS for since such features could have been added had it contined to be developed. Device Manager didn't support recursive scanning of directories for compatible drivers until Vista. Window snapping and tiling are features I sorely miss when sitting down at a 2000 or XP machine today. The Windows+X menu may be the most useful thing to come out of Windows 8. USB 2.0 support was added in Win2k Service Pack 4, but USB 3.0 support is non-existent without some hacking that involves putting XP components into 2000 and using third-party kernel extensions (KernelEx) made by some amazing dedicated retrocomputing hackers. __ And make sure you read this comment too (by YT user Shock_Treatment): This is going to be a long, ranty comment. I'd love to have a modern operating system that's fast, non-intrusive, doesn't spy on you, doesn't have tons of bloatware and adware, does what you want it to do, and with no fluff. I do actually like more modern looks a little, but I don't want anything that's over the top. A simple gradient is pretty nice, but a lot of the modern operating systems look kind of good and bad at the same time to me. I'm not sure what it is. I think it's that I like dark mode and a sleek look, but some of the icons and layouts just are very odd looking and can be confusing, like the Windows 8 start menu, and the Windows 10 start menu to a lesser effect. The dark theme also doesn't carry over to every aspect in Windows, which just makes it seem half-assed. These modern systems are just so difficult to navigate sometimes, and these OS makers are shifting things all over the place, renaming things, moving things around, and hiding familiar things for no good reason other than to look new. Why does everything have to be updated just for the sake of being new with little to no new functionality? These operating systems also give off a sort of childish appearance, as if the operating system were just a toy meant to teach children how it works. I'd like an operating system where everything is literally at your fingertips, and navigation just makes sense instead of having to click a million times to get somewhere. It seems like modern operating systems like to make you go all over to find something simple, like how in Windows 11 you can't easily get to the devices and printers section of the control panel without it taking you to the printer page in settings first. I think OS makers (especially Microsoft) have just gotten out of touch with their audience, or maybe it's that the audience has gotten so dumb that they'll just consume whatever garbage the OS makers produce without protest. An operating system should be about exactly what Jody said. It should be simple to use, fast, out of the way, and just let the user do what they need to get done. Now it's the opposite of that. At every turn it's bitching at you about something, like your carbon footprint, how you're almost forced to have a Microsoft account now, or how it adds all of these unnecessary apps where some are impossible to uninstall without breaking the system, like that god awful "Get Started" one in Windows 11. I don't want that trash. I should be able to choose what programs run on my system. The only ones I want preinstalled are the ones that are necessary for the functionality of the system. That's it. Society has definitely changed for the worse, I think, and I'm not even that old (mid 20s), yet it seems like everything has gotten worse. Nobody repairs stuff anymore, companies also make it as hard as they can to repair stuff, everything is cheap and made to break, Big Tech is out to steal all of your data and control everything you do, and everybody just puts up with it. It's awful. That's why I'm sure we'll never get that modern dream OS. There's nothing in it for the corporations by catering to the customers. They have their base and market share already, and they know they can get away with nearly anything. I can tell you though, if such a perfect system did exist, I'd be willing to pay thousands for it (as long as it was a permanent, one-time purchase like the old days when you could buy a physical copy off the shelf and use it forever). I can't stand subscription services, and I have no doubt Windows will end up that way sometime soon. I guess that's the end of my rant. I'd be surprised if anybody read it all, but I don't really care. It was mostly just so I could get some of the annoyance out of my system.