cc333

Yes! c

Can it run without NewShell? And what is "Superpack 7"? c

OK, I have it all up and running now. I like it! It totally blows modern Firefox away, yet manages to still render modern sites properly. I think I have a new favorite browser for XP (and anything else this will run on)! c

Also, where did you get that theme, and what is it called? It looks like FOXSCAPE (which was my favorite theme back in the Firefox 10.x-19.x days), but FOXSCAPE hasn't been compatible with anything since FF28. EDIT: Never mind. Found it! It's called MOONSCAPE! c

I better download this! Pardon my ignorance, but is it technologically better than Firefox in some way? Since the ESR is set to be the last supported version for XP, it seems like this could be the best option going forward, and I suppose that alone makes it better. c

Ah, I see. When did you stop maintaining it? Any work you did would probably be newer than whatever came stock on older Linuxes, such as Fedora Core 1-4. Yeah, everyone seems to have this mistaken understanding that people want something *better*, yet everything they've thrown at us is quantifiably worse in almost every respect. We just want something that works! I mean, there's no reason why we can't have an ultra modern OS like 10 function with the UI of XP, and without Telemetry. My point being, one doesn't need to reinvent the UI in order to add new functionality! c

I remember KDE2 and 3. They were a bit hard to get used to (almost *too* customizable for the average person ), but quite powerful and flexible. I'm glad you're maintaining it, because I could never quite figure out KDE4+, and it's gotten rather big and heavy. Xfce is a fairly good substitute, but it's actually gotten a bit heavy too. LXDE is the lightest of the modern, full featured environments I've tried, and it's decently fast and light. The old KDE and GNOME of yore were the best, though! c

And it's not really that good. I suppose there *are* some genuine improvements in the Win10 start menu somewhere (though I can't for the life of me fathom what they are), but it's just such a strangely distorted and mutant thing that I can't stand using it. The good old menu from Windows *95* was perfect, in my opinion, though I did appreciate some of the enhancements it got in Windows 98, 2000, and XP, though, most notable of which is drag-and-drop. What was nice is that it didn't otherwise change how the menu looked or worked. XP's start menu was kinda weird at first, but not that bad really. I still prefer the good old classic menu though. ClassicStartMenu is great and all, but it's really stupid that Microsoft couldn't just leave the built-in menu alone (do what they did in XP and Vista: keep the old menu around, but offer the new one as an option). And that's not all, because there are so many things that have been ruined in Windows 10. Pretty much every NT 5.x based OS has a perfect UI, though 6.x-based Windows (except 8.x) are OK too with some tweaks. Windows 10, though? It's just a stupid, jumbled mess of new technologies that are cobbled into an ugly and unchangeable UI. And don't even get me started about Telemetry! Let's just say that I'm not really liking the direction modern Windows (and Mac OS) has taken lately, and if there weren't specific programs I need to run, I'd probably be OK with Linux for modern stuff. Fortunately, Windows 7 (and Mac OS 10.9) still have enough life left that I can keep going with them for at least a few more years. c

@Anixx Can you tell us how stable it is? If I can get my 8.1 to look like that without losing a bunch of functionality, I'd probably use it more regularly. Getting it or (especially) 10 to run with the supposedly excised Classic Theme *stably* is quite an impressive feat, and if you've accomplished that, then good job! c

I guess anything below XP, such as Windows 2000, is considered NT. Nevertheless, with all the excellent hacks and stuff that blackwingcat has added to it, it's roughly equivalent to XP in many fundamental ways anyway (as it was in the beginning (XP RTM and 2000 were quite similar, except perhaps for some interface tweaks and improved, but largely compatible APIs and kernel); nowadays, stock XP SP3 and stock 2K SP4 are quite different (stock 2K is almost useless), and BWC's hacks help to close that gap), so it's not surprising to see a few people using it for web surfing. I find it fascinating that almost half of the PC world still uses Windows 7. It's like MS got it so "right" that nobody wants to give it up (it's like Vista, but better, and it has aged fairly well (compared to, say, Apple's Mac OS X 10.6, which was released contemporaneously with 7, and is now almost completely abandoned), so it's still quite modern and capable of many of the social media-y and webby things people expect nowadays (don't ask me what those things are, because I'm stuck in 2012, and most of those things, save for Facebook and Twitter perhaps (to name a few), didn't yet exist then ). c

Wow! Great Windows 9x-like look!!! That must've taken some doing!! How did you do it? How stable is it?? The best I can manage is to get 8.1 to look somewhat like an updated Windows 7. Any attempt to activate the Classic theme crashes everything for me. c

Really? I never thought of that possibility! Based on some basic Googling, it appears that I should begin by tweaking tray_icons_padding. I haven't touched it for awhile, but with this new information, perhaps I'll revisit it and see if I can refine it some more. The next step after this would be to get Windows Explorer windows (particularly the toolbars and address bar) to look more XP-like. Thanks! c

MY main machine is an Early 2009 Mac Pro, firmware flashed to think it's a 2010 Mac Pro, and it runs the following OSes in addition to OS X, in order from bay 1 through bay 4: HDD #1: Windows XP Professional 64-bit HDD #2: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit HDD #3: Windows XP Professional 32-bit HDD #4: Windows 8.1 Pro c

All is right in the world once again! Yay!!! I'm sorry about what you've been through, but the most important thing is that you survived it, and now you can get back to life. And, of course, welcome back! c

Went to Home Depot the other day, and I noticed they were using 10 on their check-out registers. What a *terrible* decision!! I guess it makes that other, more insulting meaning for "POS" more relevant.... c

I found a reference that suggests build 4015 uses NTLDR. Over at BetaArchive I think. Maybe that info will help you find what you're looking for? c

I don't do Facebook, and that is unlikely to change. Are there any other places I could use to test? c

Yes, it does. c

I just tried enabling this on my Latitude D630 running XP SP3 with POSReady updates, and everything looks good, except the test sites all say that H.264 is not supported (what?!) Why? Is there something I missed? I followed the instructions.... c

Hi, Just wondering if anyone has accomplished this. It is Ivy Bridge-based, so it's iffy, but it should be possible? Anyway, when trying to boot from the setup CD, it freezes with a blue screen that states that the BIOS isn't ACPI-compatible, and to override and proceed without ACPI support. Problem is, there doesn't seem to be such an option for XP x64. I could run the 32-bit version, but I'd be stuck with 4 GB of RAM (my MacBook has 16). And why XP, you may ask. Why not 7 or 8.1? Well, I like XP! And it does 90% of what I want to do with a computer, so I'm happy with it. Thoughts? c

That's excellent! Upon occasion, macOS X (yes, even Macs can crash!) will do something similar, where it will hang at a solid blue screen with nothing but a cursor in the top left corner. No amount of clicking and typing will do anything. Going off this, I think I'll call it "The Aqua Screen of Despair." That has a nice ring to it, don't you think? c

Interesting! Is your patch available publicly? c

I assume that since XP, 2k and 2k3 share a common codebase (NT 5.x), whatever applies to one, should apply to the others, and thus it doesn't really matter which forum it gets posted in, since it's equally relevant to everything NT 5-based. That's my understanding, anyway. c

I'm not sure I can reproduce it, but bookmarks simply wouldn't work. I think it was with 2.8d. c

Not sure about KernekEx, but using BWC's Extended Core, I can run the latest Firefox ESR on 2000 perfectly. At one point (with an older version of Extended Core), bookmarking didn't work, but that seems to have been fixed in the most recent update (I'll have to test more thoroughly, but the stock bookmarks do show up now, and they didn't before, sooo...) c