VistaLover

... Possibly slightly off-topic here, but I, too, was using above userscript (in Violentmonkey, in Serpent 52) ; it used to work on both the (bloated) desktop YT GUI and the mobile YT GUI, too (via that Fx WE) ; well, the userscript can be now considered "a thing of the past", as a result of the ruthless war Google unleashed against YT-specific scripts/extensions/downloader apps, etc. A month or so ago Google changed radically the way their fragmented streams (MPEG-DASH) are being delivered to "web" clients (browsers); each fragment is now "POST-requested" instead of "GET-requested" and, additionally, each fragment URI is now being "protected" by a PO (point-of-origin) token, unique to the browser YT session; that change alone BROKE practically all downloader usercripts for browsers (e.g. Youtube Links) and SYTARB suffered the same blow, in that adaptive age-gated streams were impossible now to "unblock"; to add insult to injury, Google have also removed the most popular "progressive download" format 22 (premuxed, standalone MP4 container with h264@720p25+aac@128k), so the userscript could, at best, unblock just the lowly format 18 (progressive, h264@360p25) ... However, it appears that even that is now out of reach, because the "age-verified-YT-account-proxy", the back-bone of the userscript (and of a specialised yt-dlp plugin) has been taken DOWN ca. 2wks ago (supposedly the hosting agreement expired ); you can read more at the userscript's GitHub issue tracker ; with Google even patching the only known "hack" (tv_embedded client) to bypass age-gated videos, it's now IMPOSSIBLE to view/download age-restricted YT videos without an age-verified YT account... I have never had a Google account myself and I'm not inclined on creating one now just for the sake of watching those age-gated clips (which, due to "political correctness", have grown exponentially in their numbers; yet another Google ploy to grab your personal details, if you ask me); in my country (EU member), the last time I checked, Google wanted to send them a digital scan of your "proper" ID card so that they could "age-verify" your YT account ... The web, just like the real world, has turned into a really "bad place" - I'm despaired/depressed by both, TBH ...

... Did you actually want to write "many years" ? AFAICR, WidevineCDM never worked in any official release Firefox version that supported Windows XP; the module itself lacks patented decoders and on Firefox it relies on WMF's ones (Vista SP2+PlatformUpdateSupplement and higher); yes, it would work in Google Chrome 49 (which itself bundles patented decoders), but support for XP in the module itself was removed soon after the demise of Chrome 49 (both it and FxESR 52.9.0 had support for WV v1.4.8.903[signed 20160709]); current versions of WV (4.10.xxxx.0) require at minimum Cr69, but this number is probably of little practical significance now, as most DRM services (websites) are designed to work in quite recent Chrome versions... If it's still desktop browsers on Windows we're talking about here, then WidevineCDM has always been limited to L3 there (software decryption, the weakest form of DRM protection); L2 (aka VMP) is a quite recent addition (to desktop browsers), I'd say not older than 2-3 yrs; as for L1 (H/W decryption) on a desktop Windows browser? Some Reddit posts mention it should be available on (Chr)Edge (via PlayReady 3.0) on Win11, but I'm not even sure this is correct; basically, for L1 DRM on Windows [10?] 11 you need a compatible GPU/CPU with TEE (decryption chip) and the latest (Netflix) app from the Windows App Store... For reference (though from 2.5yrs ago) : read this ; as a rule of thumb, WV L1 is restricted to mobile devices (phones/tablets), STBs and Smart TVs...

... Actually, YOU CAN'T : https://github.com/Alex313031/thorium-legacy/blob/main/docs/FAQ.md ... Same goes for Supermium and other, non-major-league, browsers; and the latest version of WidevineCDM, 4.10.2830.0, requires at least Win8 to be functional; and in Th/Sm, only the sites that do not enforce VMP will work (latest Sm-v126esr-r4 offers a kludge to re-enable WV on Win7, again ONLY for L3/non-VMP DRM services). Read above... This is ancient history ; the app/plugin hasn't been supported by Microsoft for close to a decade (off the top of my head, did not look it up) and Netflix have dropped the "Silverlight fallback" more than four years ago? ... No way; at any given time, only the latest WV release will work (which is v4.10.2830.0); planned releases are usually every 6 months (sooner, if "hacks" become publicly known); for 3-4 wks after a new release, the immediately previous one (v4.10.2710.0 currently) may also work... TL:DR For Netflix: You want Win8+ and a supported major browser (practically, this boils down to official Google Chrome & Mozilla Firefox) whose vendor has paid Google the hefty price of VMP signing ...

... Thanks, but this on-line test has been already cited previously in the MSFN forums, even in this thread :

... And at the time I post this, the expired certificate has been renewed : So, whatever means used to bypass the expired (previous) certificate should be revoked (as it affects the global browser behaviour, not just that specific site) ...

... The separate standalone mpeg-dash streams are in a media format/container (iso6dash) that IS NOT compatible with old media players (such as mpv from back in 2015 ); when you download via yt-dl and a recent-ish build of ffmpeg is used, the separate media streams are muxed together into a standard iso MPEG4 container that has been supported for at least two decades... The 360p encode is itself by default packaged (and streamed) inside a "proper" MPEG4 container (with its mov atom placed in the beginning of the MP4 file) ...

@S75, @reboot12 : Most evil/satanic Google have got the upper hand now, it appears; you can read about it here ; "potoken" is the name of their latest anti-downloader measure ; the WEB client fully enforces it now, so youtube-dl from back in August now gets the door ... I had better success with reboot12's video posing as a different device, not yet fully potoken-ed : youtube-dl -f 136+140 "nhPaWIeULKk" --user-agent "Mozilla/5.0 (Android 14)" => [youtube] nhPaWIeULKk: Downloading webpage [youtube] nhPaWIeULKk: Downloading API JSON WARNING: You have requested multiple formats but ffmpeg or avconv are not installed. The formats won't be merged. [dashsegments] Total fragments: 3 [download] Destination: Gorillaz - Stylo (Official Video)-nhPaWIeULKk.f136.mp4 [download] 100% of 28.23MiB in 00:24 [dashsegments] Total fragments: 1 [download] Destination: Gorillaz - Stylo (Official Video)-nhPaWIeULKk.m4a.f140.m4a [download] 100% of 4.67MiB in 00:05 (yes, I know about the missing ffmpeg.exe; this was just a test download with only the yt-dl v2024.08.07 nightly binary...)

@Zorba the Geek Greetings ; all your "OneDrive" links inside this thread are not accessible here ; all redirect to a Microsoft login page now... E.g., your Feb 12th 2024 link in this comment does this for me: https://onedrive.live.com/download?resid=993BA94307E5CD88%21984&authkey=!APTkuAtsiWMQQNc => https://login.live.com/login.srf?wa=wsignin1.0&rpsnv=162&ct=1728603475&rver=7.5.2205.0&wp=MBI_SSL_SHARED&wreply=https:%2F%2Fonedrive.live.com%2Fdownload%3Fresid%3D993BA94307E5CD88%2521984%26authkey%3D!APTkuAtsiWMQQNc&lc=1032&id=250206&cbcxt=sky&cbcxt=sky Can you help, please? Has the "authkey" expired? Are the packages no longer available? Thanks for any insight ...

Greetings; yes, you're posting in the Supermium thread, so you must be using the Supermium browser ; but it would've helped greatly if you mentioned already from the beginning the specific version of Supermium used and the OS you're on ... As for Win XP (SP3?) x86, there have been several pending issues in the official Supermium tracker already: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/940 https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/867 https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/797 https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/444 This appears to be an XP-exclusive issue... As for sourceforge, Supermium versions 121-r2, 122-r6, 124-r2 and 126-r3 (all 32-bit) DO NOT trigger here the cloudflare anti-bot protection ; all are "dirty" profiles, different to each other, with several extensions installed; OS is Vista SP2 x86... KafanMiniBrowser (Cr87) and 360EEv13.x (Cr86) BOTH trigger the CF "protection" and I can tell you it's practically IMPOSSIBLE to pass the challenge on those two browsers; in desperation, I tried a fresh new profile of KMB (with no extensions) and I eventually managed to pass the test only once after maybe twenty successive attempts; but it gets worse, because access to sourceforge.net is shortlived (despite the cf_clearance cookie expiring a year after ); once the browser session terminates, you're being blocked anew ... Given that recent Chromium versions on Win10 don't get the door, I used this extension https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/custom-useragent-string/lejiafennghcpgmbpiodgofeklkpahoe (v0.2.1 is the last MV2 one compatible with Cr86/87) to set a SSUAO for SF: and I can now access SF unobstructed ... NB: Both KMB and 360EEv13.x DO NOT send out CH by default (you have to enable #enable-experimental-web-platform-features for that first; and even then, this is an immature/alpha edition of the CH API). Can the link to this file of yours be made public, please? I suspect some Supermium default security setting might interfere there, if that "file" isn't palatable to Google's notion of "security" ...

Salut ; since you are the party interested, i.e. the one in possession of an SSE-only CPU, you can "try" yourself whether the following route leads to somewhere: The CPython (py3.9) implementation used by nicolaasjan is a fork and recompile of a py3.9.x release by @cmalex , targeting his SSE-only processor; do note that this compile has special configuration that deviates slightly from the PSF's one, as I had discovered in the past myself when messing with it (e.g. pip wouldn't successfully install some modules, while the installation would be fine with the PSF compile). You don't need a yt-dlp_x86.exe binary per se; you can try to install yt-dlp as a Python module python -m pip install yt-dlp using the py3.9-win32-sse library; the above command will attempt to co-install all necessary dependencies; however, some of these contain binary parts (C/C++ extensions, they're the files with ".pyd" extension) that have been precompiled as wheel packages by their authors, not specifically targeting < SSE2 CPUs... As cmalex has done himself with some python modules he was after, these had to be also (forked/)recompiled locally on his target machine, to ensure no SSE2 instructions sneak in the compiled code; this only complicates things further (i.e. when python modules have to be compiled from source rather than installed via wheels); a similar approach would be to "try" and run yt-dlp directly as a python script, using, of course, the aforementioned py3.9-win32-sse compilation; again, the "requirements" must have been successfully installed, which is the real question here... (rant mode ON) Python coders of this era have no consideration at all for backwards compatibility; they'd like to only code in Python 3.20, if they could get their hands on it now, supposedly because it makes their lives "easier"; with the official PSF stance being "we only support what Microsoft supports", this practically means that Python projects will soon ONLY run under Win[10/]11, on H/W compatible with these OSes only ; to add insult to injury, with Win11 being 64-bit only, I have trouble already finding 32-bit compiles for many of the (open source) programs I want ... If it weren't for dirkf, who decided to go against the tide and tries single-handedly to keep youtube-dl code compatible with older Python versions (thus able to run on older Windows, too), things would've been already dead for XP/Vista[/Win7] yt-dl users... (rant mode OFF)

... According to: https://pypi.org/project/pyinstaller/3.2.1/ ( "Programming Language" in the sidebar), pyinstaller==3.2.1 hasn't been tested to work on py>3.5 ...

... Doesn't seem to be limited to just NM28; when using the VORAPIS V3 userscript (in KMB[Cr87]+ViolentmonkeyBETA-2.25.1 here ), the loop playlist button can be enabled (highlighted), but, sadly, does not have the desired effect ; playback of the playlist ends with its last item (what happens next depends on how you have configured things...) ... The current YT GUI is a PITA to load and operate here in this 2008 Vista SP2 32-bit laptop (Core2Duo+iGPU+RAM=3GB) but, out of (perverse ) curiosity, I wanted to test this ; I used NHTPG's playlist posted previously in this thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiW7NbkhbJ0&list=PL2ZucxOJLzfVRTHxcWt5TjQ2ZCRNjc6TM&index=1 (FYI, out of the 321 playlist items, only 295 are accessible in my location - rights issues...) The loop and shuffle playback buttons are behind a playlist "header", so not immediately visible; you seem to be able to select a "once more" playback of chosen playlist: or a continuous loop playback mode... In either case, when you reach the end of the playlist (NB: Autoplay must be enabled), you are presented with a (misleading) in-player dialogue pertaining to a YT suggested clip (not contained in the original playlist), but if you leave it be, the page auto-reloads and playback begins anew with the first item (index) of the list...

... For Mozilla-based browsers capable of WebExtensions (MyPal68, St52, St55), especially on old and under-resourced H/W, I always come back to: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mobile-for-desktop/ This add-on has been mentioned before across various MSFN subforums, but personally (without a Google/YT account) I find that the "mobile YT" iteration is the one less "hungry" in my old 2008-era laptop ; of course, if you insist on >=1080p resolutions, "mobile YT" is not for you ... OT: It's too bad the developer hasn't come up with something similar for Chromium-based browsers...

... From the linked homepage : ... thus innounpacker-setup.exe (of v1.9.5) won't run on XP ; hence the suggestion by its author, echoed by @we3fan here ; however, the German author has not yet updated the application to v1.9.5 (on purpose? ), as the zipped distribution is still on v1.9.4 ; since the CLI tool is XP-compatible (thanks @AstroSkipper ), one can use it (on XP) to unpack innounpacker-setup.exe and ascertain whether the main GUI executable, InnoUnpack.exe, of latest v1.9.5, can launch under XP SP3 x86 ... Name and surname corrected in original post ... Thanks for that, too; a freeware in its basic functions, a donationware if you want "advanced" features ; of notable mention the ability of the (third-party-hosted) installer to perform a "portable" installation ...

... This is a generic Windows error produced when one tries to run a Windows executable which has a sub system version value inside its PE Header higher than the host OS the executable currently resides in; e.g., file "cpu-z_2.11-en.exe" has a value of "6.1": meaning launch will proceed on Win7 (SP1) and higher; thus, when that .EXE is double-clicked on NT 5.x (XP and its servers) and on NT 6.0 (Vista and its server) it will generate the error mentioned; however, this error doesn't tell the whole story on its own; you can try to lower the sub system version value (with special PE Header tools ) to match your current OS and then try anew; sometimes, you may be surprised ... Still, in this particular case it's the version of the InnoSetup (IS) script used to package the installer that is the real obstacle on Win < 7 (as already mentioned here and here ) ; when you can't successfully run the installer even after patching its PE Header, you may try to extract its payload instead (not needed, obviously, in the case of CPU-Z, since the author already provides zipped distributions ) ... Mind you, the most popular InnoSetup extracting tools (innounp.exe, innoextract.exe and GUIs containing them, like UniExtract2) don't (yet) support IS script versions 6.1+ : https://sourceforge.net/p/innounp/discussion/353235/thread/ef0e2c5c41/ Luckily, thanks to a compatriot of AstroSkipper's called Jürgen Rathlev, such a tool has recently been made available ; the CLI is called "innounp-unicode" and it's currently at version 1.72: https://github.com/jrathlev/InnoUnpacker-Windows-GUI/raw/master/innounp-1/bin/innounp-172.zip One can use the standalone CLI or use it inside a dedicated GUI, InnoUnpacker-WinGUI-v1.9.5 : https://www.rathlev-home.de/index-e.html?home-e.html#unpack Tip: If you're already a UniExtract2 user (like myself ), you can substitute the old v0.50 of innounp.exe contained inside it with the CLI of "innounp-unicode" ... Disclaimer: ALL tests were done on a Vista SP2 x86 machine, nowhere near an XP box at the moment ; test for yourself and report back...

... The v126-r1 one was a "rushed" release only a few days after the previous 126-pre[2] release, just to fix a critical bug with NO SOUND output on XP machines (and pre[2] was released hours after the initial buggy pre[1] release, to fix an "empty UA" bug, that had many cites refusing to connect...).

... People, sadly, continue to do so now with Supermium/Thorium 32-bit on 32-bit XP SP3 (PAE-patched, a configuration the vendor NEVER supported) and have the audacity to create "issues" in the official trackers: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/846 IMHO, this type of users are beyond the point of realising they have a "serious problem" themselves...

https://github.com/Blaukovitch?tab=repositories Christian name: Reinhard Residence: Austria (unsure about his descent, of course ) ; the account isn't currently banned, it does appear as the one account that provides bin-patched recent Google Chrome versions Win7-compatible ; but what has already been written about the RAM stands true: I am on Vista SP2 32-bit, BTW, so I've never used myself any of these "cra*ks" ...

... Oops dear Dave , isn't that a contradiction of sorts? ... On Google's Chrome sure, but the Supermium (on which Thorium-Legacy is based on) and Thorium authors have different plans : https://www.win32subsystem.live/supermium/ https://github.com/Alex313031/thorium/discussions/797#discussioncomment-10508470 ... provided, of course, gorhill (or someone else) keeps developing the MV2 uBO implementation...

... In addition to the on-line Contact Form, the "cpuz_readme.txt" file bundled in the ZIP distributions contains a valid e-mail address : CPU-Z Readme file ------------------ Version 2.10 July 2024 Contact : cpuz@cpuid.com Web page: https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html Validation page : https://valid.x86.fr/ Hall of Fame : https://valid.x86.fr/records.php CPUID SDK : https://www.cpuid-pro.com/products-services.php OT: Luckily for me, v2.10 does launch successfully under Vista SP2 x86 ; whenever I read about an app ceasing to function under WinXP SP3, I fear the same would be true for NT 6.0, because most app authors tend to put Vista inside the same boat as XP ... But in this case it may be the author simply upgraded to a compiler not targeting NT 5.x by default/at all ...

... The Supermium author notified that the "old" --disable-features=UserAgentClientHint cmdline switch will be applicable to his next release, either a third (and final) M124-based one, or the first of an M126-based series (Chromium 126 ESR branch): https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/779#issuecomment-2282969891 https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/779#issuecomment-2287764156

... And just out of the blue, KMB just got an unexpected official update yesterday, Aug 1st 2024: https://browser-download.kfsafe.cn/MiniBrowserSetup.exe The Chinese installer (not recommended to execute directly ) the above URI affords is of version 1.0.0.134, has a digital file signature of 20240801 and comes more than two and a half years after previous official release, 1.0.0.127, which was digitally signed on 20211209... I wasn't able to find any changelog for this release; the installer is 7-zip extract-able, thus I verified the app is still based on the M87 Chromium kernel... @Humming Owl, would you please oblige?

Another Supermium 124 release made it to the GitHub Releases Section: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/releases/tag/v124 Though it is still labelled as "Pre-release", the author claims it's "the main release of Supermium 124"; among the Release Notes: The distributions bundle (official) progwrp.dll-v1.1.0.5018 ; and before any member of the known "family" asks anew, no, the "not-possible-to-disable-the-CH-API-on-Sm122+" issue hasn't yet been addressed (else, it would surely have been mentioned inside the Release Notes ) ... Kind regards to all ...

... But it did work in my posted test; FWIW, 127 just made it to the Windows BETA channel: https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2024/07/chrome-beta-for-desktop-update.html The emphasis on my previous post was on "current Cr version", I didn't specify a Cr channel, did I? (... Why is it my distinct impression you just posted with an intent to discredit me? Please, don't answer, since I won't answer back myself...) @66cats: I don't know what to tell you , with the default Cr86 UA I get this (Vista SP2 x86):

Hi Dave ; I wish I were over at your part of the planet, where you currently have a pleasant 18C, while here we're in the middle of a never-seen-before July heatwave, about to last at least until the 27th (to get an idea, it's 23:34 now and the outside temp is at 35C ! ) ... Back on topic: Your ex-colleagues are simply blocking the version of 360EE you're using (on XP) due to the User-Agent-String it broadcasts; I suppose you're using one of the @NotHereToPlayGames's mods, so inside its loader you'll find the cmdline switch below: --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.198 Safari/537.36" They outright block Chromium 86, so when the browser tries to load that page, it gets served an "errorcode337" and the tab ends up blank... This is a bad practice altogether, since Cr86 is perfectly capable of loading+rendering that site; to circumvent their block, just spoof a current Cr version: --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36" ... and Bob's your uncle: ... Might I also add that the page has a sub-optimal web design, not fit for desktop browsers and without any consideration for older, low on resources, hardware (e.g., it contains in its top part a constantly animating huge video/gif that consumes far too many CPU cycles on OSes without native H/W decoding, via GPU) ... Apologies for the rant, cheers and best wishes ...