Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by sdfox7
-
I totally agree, I'm just voicing my "freedom of speech" opinion. We have laws for a reason, otherwise there would be chaos. However, today we have many situations where there is no accountability (like Valve). This is exactly what's wrong with the world today. In the name of profit, anything goes, regardless of the consequences. Our entire political system revolves around money. Since this is off topic, this is all I will say on the matter!
-
I'm not too worried about this. Since I'm from the United States, I'd rather not patronize or support a company that believed it would be a good idea to market and profit off of a school shooting game. Public outrage promptly corrected Valve's poor judgement. Parents of Parkland victims are outraged about a new video game that would let players shoot up a school.
-
I think it's safe to say that Microsoft Silverlight is officially dead, considering it has now been over a year since the last 5.1.50907 update on June 13, 2017: https://www.microsoft.com/getsilverlight/locale/en-us/html/Microsoft Silverlight Release History.htm#SL_5_1_50907
-
Adobe Flash, Shockwave, and Oracle Java on XP (Part 1)
sdfox7 replied to dencorso's topic in Windows XP
Beta channel for Adobe Flash Player was updated to 30.0.0.122 yesterday June 13, and is confirmed working on Windows XP. https://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer.html Chrome 45 and newer PPAPI: https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashruntimes/flashplayer/install_flash_player_ppapi.exe Chrome 44 and older, and Mozilla Firefox (NPAPI): https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashruntimes/flashplayer/install_flash_player.exe Internet Explorer: https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashruntimes/flashplayer/install_flash_player_ax.exe Uninstaller: https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashruntimes/flashplayer/uninstall_flash_player.exe -
Backporting newer browsers to Win9X with KernelEx
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
@roytam1 @~♥Aiko♥Chan♥~ @siria I am only using the UURollup, I do not have KernelEx installed. Roytam's page has K-Meleon 76, not 77, but yes, it works on Windows 2000 with UURollup. I don't know if it works on vanilla Windows 2000: -
Backporting newer browsers to Win9X with KernelEx
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
@Dibya This is what I'm running: -
Manually Update WideVine on Windows XP with Google Chrome
sdfox7 replied to sdfox7's topic in Windows XP
No, you just have to manually download (http://sdfox7.com/xp/sp3/EOL/WideVineCDM/) and place the components as I described above: -
Backporting newer browsers to Win9X with KernelEx
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
I did not use PM or KernelEx. I used the portable version of New Moon. -
Last Versions of Software for Windows 2000
sdfox7 replied to thirteenth's topic in Windows 2000/2003/NT4
I am not using KernelEx or Pale Moon, just the portable version of New Moon. I also have UURollup installed which might make a difference. -
SeaMonkey was updated from 2.49.2 to 2.49.3 on May 4. However, I've discovered that "Check for Updates" from the file help menu does not detect the update, and it is necessary to manually install the update (https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/seamonkey/releases/2.49.3/win32/en-US/SeaMonkey Setup 2.49.3.exe). I filed a bug report on Bugzilla today: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1468378
-
Last Versions of Software for Windows 2000
sdfox7 replied to thirteenth's topic in Windows 2000/2003/NT4
I have discovered that @roytam1 New Moon browser for Windows XP (updated weekly) also works on Windows 2000: https://o.rthost.cf/palemoon/?sort=date&order=desc -
Backporting newer browsers to Win9X with KernelEx
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
@roytam1 SOLVED! There is no need to backport Pale Moon to Windows 2000. Your weekly Windows XP New Moon updates work just fine on Windows 2000, including YouTube! -
Backporting newer browsers to Win9X with KernelEx
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
@roytam1 By the way, the "spinning behavior" also occurs on Windows XP SP3, so this is a Pale Moon issue, not OS issue. -
Backporting newer browsers to Win9X with KernelEx
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
I tried a few things like updating DirectX to the the final February 2010 DirectX 9.0c version (directx_feb2010_redist.exe), that didn't work. Also, old tricks that used to work to force YouTube to use Adobe Flash Player no longer work. By the way, Pale Moon does not shut down properly, it continues running in Task Manager even after exiting. -
Backporting newer browsers to Win9X with KernelEx
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
@roytam1 I can confirm your backported Pale Moon 26.5 is working on Windows 2000. Thanks! -
Backporting newer browsers to Win9X with KernelEx
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
Does this work properly in a VM? I followed the steps but I don't get much other than freezing issues. It's an i3-390 configured with 512MB for Windows 98. -
It seems like we lost this thread with the server crash, so I'm recreating it. The current versions of Flash Player 29 (and the beta Flash Player 30) work flawlessly on Windows 2000. For best results, I recommend Windows 2000 Service Pack 4, the Windows 2000 Service Pack 4 Security Rollup Package (SRP), the Windows 2000 UURollup, and Internet Explorer 5.5 Service Pack 2. Many sites no longer work or are broken after upgrading to Internet Explorer 6 so I do not recommend it!
-
Last Versions of Software for Windows 2000
sdfox7 replied to thirteenth's topic in Windows 2000/2003/NT4
@~♥Aiko♥Chan♥~ they are in my Windows 2000 Important EOL Updates folder: http://sdfox7.com/2000/Important_EOL_Updates/ UURollup is here: http://sdfox7.com/2000/Important_EOL_Updates/Windows2000-UURollup-v11-d20141130-x86-ENU.7z The latest Firefox and Internet Explorer Flash Player installers for Windows 2000 are here: http://sdfox7.com/2000/Important_EOL_Updates/install_flash_player.exe and http://sdfox7.com/2000/Important_EOL_Updates/install_flash_player_ax.exe Internet Explorer 32 bit versions are here: http://sdfox7.com/ie/win32/ -
My Browser Builds (Part 1)
sdfox7 replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
@roytam1 Thanks for the newest update, as always. @vasevase New Moon updates are contingent on Feodor2's patches, as indicated by the "about" dialog: -
@WinClient5270 Thanks for the update. As VLC 2.0.x has been in development since 2012, I expect version 3.0.x to live on for quite a while after it is released. I'm guessing there will be major point releases such as "3.1.x" and "3.5.x". I also want to note that Apple Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard (both Intel and PowerPC) has continued to be supported through VLC 2.0.10: https://www.videolan.org/vlc/releases/2.0.0.html It is pretty remarkable support that VideoLan has supported PowerPC this long, when Apple began the transition from PowerPC to Intel in 2006, 12 years ago! https://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-macosx.html
-
Adobe Flash, Shockwave, and Oracle Java on XP (Part 1)
sdfox7 replied to dencorso's topic in Windows XP
I am pleased to announce that I have tested the first beta for the next major release of Adobe Flash Player 29. It is tested and working on Windows XP with Internet Explorer 8, Google Chrome 49, and Mozilla Firefox 52.6.0 ESR. It was released yesterday, February 7, 2018: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer.html Internet Explorer ActiveX: https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashruntimes/flashplayer/install_flash_player_ax.exe Mozilla Firefox NPAPI, and NPAPI for Google Chrome 44 and older: https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashruntimes/flashplayer/install_flash_player.exe Google Chrome 45 to 49 PPAPI: https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashruntimes/flashplayer/install_flash_player_ppapi.exe Old version uninstaller: https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashruntimes/flashplayer/uninstall_flash_player.exe -
@Dave-H Anyone can accept the license agreement, or you can use my direct link. I'll update the link in my previous post. http://sdfox7.com/xp/sp3/EOL/jre-8u162-windows-i586.tar.gz
-
@Dave-H @dencorso @i430VX @Thomas S. @Yellow Horror Thanks everyone for the input. Java JRE 8 Update 162 is also working for me on Windows XP. I downloaded the file from http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/jre8-downloads-2133155.html (alternate http://sdfox7.com/xp/sp3/EOL/jre-8u162-windows-i586.tar.gz) and extracted this to my desktop, which gives you a folder called "jre-8u162-windows-i586". I then took that folder and placed it in C:\Program Files\Java, deleting the previous "152" folder. Java now works correctly. The only other thing I needed to do was update my Start Menu shortcuts, because they were previously directing to the "152" folder which no longer exists, since it is replaced by "162". I just had to edit the shortcut path and change "152" to "162". Thank you everyone who looked into this!
-
@dencorso @harkaz @i430VX I submitted a bug submit to Oracle today. I'll be interested to see what their response is. While Oracle does not "officially" support XP on Java 8, I'm hoping that they'll be motivated to fix it. It seems to me that this is likely a minor compatibility issue, since all previous versions of the JRE 8 run and install correctly. I doubt they would want people running outdated versions of their software because of an error they made with the software. If they don't care, then that is at least an ethical issue they need to make a decision about. Here is the report I submitted, with the field headers redacted: http://sdfox7.com/xp/files/java.pdf
-
Adobe Flash, Shockwave, and Oracle Java on XP (Part 2)
sdfox7 replied to Dave-H's topic in Windows XP
I submitted a bug submit to Oracle today. I'll be interested to see what their response is. While Oracle does not "officially" support XP on Java 8, I'm hoping that they'll be motivated to fix it. It seems to me that this is likely a minor compatibility issue, since all previous versions of the JRE 8 run and install correctly. I doubt they would want people running outdated versions of their software because of an error they made with the software. If they don't care, then that is at least an ethical issue they need to make a decision about. Here is the report I submitted, with the field headers redacted: http://sdfox7.com/xp/files/java.pdf