sonyu

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.

I completely agree. Image how difficult will be for somebody, who has never used Pentium I with Windows 98, to understand how fast Windows was back in the day in a hardware that was 100 times slower than the one we have nowadays. Now... ¿how is this possible? or ¿what is happening? Possible solution: ¿Time to get back to SERVICE PACKS? It feels like a BETA OS Since Windows 10 1607. Windows as a Service isn't the path to follow, MS. This is completely no sense: https://winclassic.net/thread/1652/list-metro-ified-components-windows Current Windows status can be only understood in one way: nowadays hardware, even the cheapest laptop, comes with tons of RAM and disk space to waste... It's a bit sad how all has changed after w8.1.... we are in the last days of computers. Sometimes I think if MS is only testing Windows on a highend PC, even if this is true, the OS feels like a beta; slow gui, lag... tons of background processes... It was one day an (almost) perfect Operating System and not this kind of beta "Service"

No. He didn't installed 98 on FreeDOS, he only used FreeDOS as a bootdisk (like we all have done in the past) to install 98 which comes with its MS-DOS version... Currently is only possible to install 3.1 on FreeDOS, that's why I'm asking if you succeed with chicago.

This isn't 9x on FreeDOS, that's why I'm asking for 95 build "81" on FreeDOS Thanks for sharing YT of 98 on kaby lake

in freedos? I've never seen 9x in freedos, can you upload YT video? did you tried betaarchive files / procedure?

...in FreeDos, and if FD isn't patched Win3x will only work in Standard Mode youtu . be / R0P8B9d9hho anyway, interesting I think it's possible to patch it to run 3.1 in enhanced mode can you try to boot an early chicago build? https://betawiki.net/wiki/Windows_95 well I'm interested in 81 https://betawiki.net/wiki/Windows_95_build_81 since it's the first one to have the start menu and the close button

do you get real usb 3.0 read/write speeds on 2k with these drivers?

just found Powershell 7.3.10 works on windows 8.0

I'm currently in love with this one: Zenburn High Contrast Dark Theme https://www.deviantart.com/eluinstra/art/Zenburn-High-Contrast-Dark-Theme-for-Windows-8-552177110 you can then open chrome://flags and change these: Forced colors: Disabled (so CSS images and backgrounds are displayed) Dark theme: Enabled (in case you don't want white backgrounds) (no UX theme patch required since it's high contrast theme) or hc-midnight-v033 / win8msa https://github.com/nitschis/GreyEveTheme anyway, since you asked for AERO dark theme... https://www.vinstartheme.com/sem-theme/ https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v= e_ebJiTHl5U https://winaero.com/gray8-theme-visual-style-for-windows-8/ https://www.deviantart.com/hkk98/art/2012-theme-Windows-8-Dark-Version-286725057 https://www.deviantart.com/ezio/art/Gray8MOD-dark-Visual-Style-Windows-8-1-Upd-1-U20-346677370 https://www.deviantart.com/hkk98/art/2012-theme-7N8-Windows-Dark-Metro-29814121