cc333

I like those two DEs. They make sense, and also remind me of what it was like when I first dabbled with Linux way back in 2004 when I got a book with a copy of Fedora Core 2. With Trinity, some minor tweaks and choice icon and theme packages, I can make a modern distro look very similar, if not identical, to FC2 since KDE 3 (one of two default choices; the other was GNOME 2) was the latest and greatest for quite some time, and Trinity is basically an updated version of it. c

Here we go with Browser Wars 3.0! I came of age just as Netscape vs. Microsoft was wrapping up, and MS, of course, won that war. Then Firefox vs. Microsoft (aka Browser Wars 2.0). Firefox won! Now Google vs. everyone else! Google is employing the same sorts of tactics (and worse) that MS was trying back in the 90s, and sadly, it seems it's working in their favor, much as it did MS back then (the only difference is that they got sued for it; nobody wants to try suing Google now-- they're too big!) When will they ever learn? c

OK, I can think of a couple: Roytam1's port of Pale Moon, called New Moon Ports of various experimental browsers by the makers of Pale Moon, also ported by Roytam1 Chrome360, which is somewhat shady, but appears to be more or less equivalent to official Chrome 69 There are probably more, but these are among the most useful and important ones that I know of. c

Fair point. The official canon does seem to have some interesting inconsistencies. Some of them (such as the almost complete role reversal between the Klingons and Romulans) are pretty obvious. If you look at the events of ST VI, however, you can see that the Klingons, desperately trying to survive after a moon blows up and severely damages their home world, sign a peace treaty with the Federation, realizing that they can't survive without their help, and thereby setting the stage for Klingons as we see them in TNG, which took place maybe 60-80 years after the treaty was signed. As for the Romulans, I'm not sure. If you think about it, their behavior isn't *too* different, but perhaps they were purposely developed that way to provide a new villain after the Klingons became allies, and since there was only one TOS episode in which they were directly involved, maybe the TNG writers (particularly after season 1) thought they were free to be more creative with them? I don't know.... I like every series except ENT, because I'm not terribly fond of all the acting (particularly the Vulcan woman, whatever her name is). I don't know about Discovery (the newest one), because CBS is only broadcasting it on their streaming service, which I don't subscribe to, so I can't watch it (maybe they'll put it into syndication on their main TV network someday?) Hmm, I didn't realize it was based on such a recent version! I guess they basically took the rendering engine and such and grafted the pre-28 UI onto it? That's very interesting! I suppose it would be pointless, but as you said, Pale Moon (and all other related projects, presumably) are open source, and anyone is free to do exactly what roytam1 has done. At least legally. But, at what point does New Moon become different enough that it would warrant changing things internally such that it has it's own separate profile folder? and would it really break things to simply change that path? I'm not the most adept at programming (yet!), so please pardon my ignorance here! c

To be fair, in the last two seasons of DS9*, the Romulans finally do make peace with everyone else and unite to fight the Dominion; Everyone gets along pretty well, though the new relationship is rather tense at first due to a strong sense of mutual distrust. (*I'm a pretty big fan of the whole franchise, except the reboot movies (too much modern bling and shallow, cliche-ridden characters for my liking)). Anyway, back to the topic at hand (such as it is): Why does Matt Tobin feel the need to troll everyone (particularly roytam1) so badly? It's just plain mean-spirited and unfair. If he could just stick to one opinion and let everyone do their thing, it would be OK. I *guess* I can kinda sorta see his point, but I really think he should lighten up and just let it go. All he's doing right now is building animosity and resentment, and there's already *way* too much of that going around these days.... I realize this would be absolutely nontrivial, but what about forking the main Firefox source from the same point as Pale Moon (which I think was somewhere around 27.x.x), or perhaps something newer for better feature support, and backport the necessary security patches and stuff? Kinda like a clean room re-implementation of Pale Moon, if you will. It would certainly take a long time to accomplish, but it would get Matt off your backs by rendering the branding issue completely moot, wouldn't it? It's just a thought.... c

I have a legitimate, valid key I'd like to use, but no media. However, everywhere I look, I can't find any info regarding XP x64. There's plenty out there for 32-bit XP, however. I'm sure the procedure is 100% identical, but I'd like to know for certain, because when I try changing the PID in setupp.ini (which is in \AMD64 instead of \i386) for the media I downloaded from places best unknown (it is clean, however), nothing happens... it still won't accept the CD key I have (which comes from an Action Pack or something?) So, let me know! c

I use New Moon 28, and I'll probably give the others a try to see how they compare to Firefox 52. Just a quick mention of the other thread, which I follow (I'd have said this there, but it was locked for 24 hours): I think that certain developers, one of whom has been trying to incite some sort of flame war for some time now, are just selfish, mean-spirited trolls who need to lighten up and be more generous with their code (it is open source, after all!). Roytam1 has done a fantastic job keeping these browsers alive for XP, and hopefully can continue to do so for some time. c

I have seen some desktop motherboard with a combo Keyboard/Mouse PS/2 port, so they do exist. I don't think one can take a board that only has a single use port and make it do both, though (I'm not sure, but doesn't the port require extra hardware to be able to do both at once? The standard PS/2 port specs don't mention that feature, do they?) c

Does this mean that things like Classic Theme Restorer will work? I ask because I really like it because it makes Firefox (and, by extension, Waterfox and any fork based on FF => 3x.x) resemble a somewhat modernized version of the Firefox 24.x UI, before the Australlis UI, which I'm not super fond of, was introduced. That being said, I'm not very fond of Photon (is this the name of the new UI introduced with 57.x?), either. The custom CSS scripts made by the creator of CTR helps, but it's not the same, and customization, compared to earlier versions, is virtually nil. Also don't like the flat look (FF 56 and earlier have a subtle gradient in the toolbars, tabs, and (in macOS), the menu bar). Again the custom CSS helps, but it's not the same. c

This is what Microsoft would like us to think. FUD at it's finest c

I was looking for a thread in the XP forum today, and accidentally clicked the last page button, which transported me all the way back to September 11, 2001 (definitely not a day worth reliving), and among those threads, there was one regarding XP, of course, and it goes as follows: This reminded me exactly of Windows 10, 18 years later! What MS was doing back then is nothing compared to what they're doing now. I also remember a whole bunch of hoopla regarding Activation (XP, as we all know, was the first Windows version to have it), but now we all pretty much accept it as a force of nature, for the most part. Goes to show that some things never change, and MS will never let up on some of their shady business tactics (if anything, they've gotten worse). c

I wonder if MS will extend the support period? It seems there's still a relatively significant minority of users out there, based on these findings.... c

He was also responsible for the Windows Vista debacle, wasn't he? Windows 7 was also released during his tenure, which, to be fair, was a decent and stable, albeit bloated OS that did much to clean up Vista's mess. To be clear, was he CEO from '03 or '04-ish to '13-ish? I don't remember, but I do know that Bill Gates stepped down sometime before Vista's release, which was late '06/early '07. c

Sure! I thought that was the point! It takes work to not only install the software, but to copy it all to the floppies. Not everyone has "Access" to that many disks anymore*, let alone the drives they go in. Oh, and here's another: it's not a pun per se, but kind of illogical. When MS designed the Windows 95 UI, why did they think it made sense to put the "Shut Down..." command in the "Start" menu? It just seems like an oxymoron to say "click the start button to shut down the computer". c

Excellent! Thank you very much! Does hibernation work? I don't care about standby, as I rarely use it, but working hibernation would be nice. No big deal if it's out too, though. c

This is fun! Regarding the missing backend stuff, can't one infer what it does by examining the frontend client stuff, and then re implement it somehow? How do the inner workings of v6 differ from v3/v4? Aside from cosmetics, I haven't noticed a huge difference in functionality, so maybe the v6 backend can be hacked for use with the v3/v4 UI? c

Whoever did this must have a lot of free time... It's an "Excel"-ent way to get bored out of one's mind! c

Funny. I remember people saying more or less that same thing about XP it was still the latest and greatest. And Vista. AND 7.... It just keeps getting worse with each new release I guess. Me too. Computers, in many ways, seemed much more interesting then, despite their limitations. The hardware industry has, in my opinion, become rather boring and unimaginative lately. The data mining, ad and SaaS industries, however, are in their prime right now. c

That sounds about right to me, based on my limited experience. However! I think that only really applies if you're creating partitions from within the Windows 7 installer, as it prefers to put boot-related files into that partition instead of the root of the C drive if it can. Not sure why, but I'm pretty sure that the Disk Management GUI creates normal partitions without that extra System Reserved stuff. c

Does this mean that little puppy thing is gone? c

And speaking of the DoD, XP was released right around 9/11 (release to manufacturing August 24, public release October 25), which really puts into perspective how long ago that awful tragedy was! (it could've been so much worse!) And it still feels like it just happened.... I remember that day pretty well.... Likewise, XP, despite being 18 years old now, still feels modern enough that it can still do 95% of modern things (there are some edge cases, but we have Windows 7 for those). c

XP simply refuses to die, doesn't it? My current PC can't run it right now, or else I'd probably still be using it. c

c

OK. c

@daniel_k I am! Let's try it!! The patched BIOS shouldn't interfere with any other OS once it's installed, correct? c