cc333

I don't know, but apparently CS4 is the last to "officially" support XP or Vista. Subsequent versions can probably be made to work more or less via your method of adding functions and stuff to the kernel. c

That is most definitely a bug! How can someone have 4 TB of data on a 128 GB disk? There must be some excellent compression at work! @NoelCWhat happens if you try copying in the Disk Cleanup executable from either an earlier Windows 10 build or from Windows 8.x? c

And this is yet another reason why I refuse to downgrade to Windows 0! (no, that's not a typo!) I'm sorta feeling like Dibya. XP, for all it's technological deficiencies, represents the apex of the Windows UI, and everything thereafter is just meaningless medlling (yes, there are some newer features I like, but many, if not all the features I actually want can be added to XP via third party tools). That being said, XP x64 has a somewhat more modern, 64-bit kernel and architecture, yet retains the best of XP's UI. I use my Macs for most things, though, so I'm OK with even Windows 95 (though 2000 is my practical minimum for using Windows in a modern context (*maaaybe* 98SE, but that's stretching it quite thinly)). c

Doesn't the SP2/SP3 hal have important security patches and such? But, if it works, why bother with security ? I should give that another try (I think I tried it on my Mac Pro earlier this year, and it made things too unstable; perhaps it was because I did something wrong?) c

NoelC: My Mac Pro is quite similar to your system (I'm using x5680s though, because they offer 98% of the performance at 50% of the cost of a pair of x5690s), and XP handles 12 physical cores/24 logical cores perfectly (the 32 GB of RAM mostly goes to waste, but that's expected of any 32-bit OS, especially those with broken/absent PAE support). Windows 7 flies on it, and 8.1 is surprisingly decent, even with an old laptop drive as its boot disk (it was all I had at the time, and I didn't want to wipe any of the other 3.5" disks in my system). c

Yeah, I believe drives bigger than 2 TB won't work properly on XP 32-bit (you might be able to use a 3 TB drive formatted as GPT on 2k3 Server 32/64, but I don't know). There are some things XP simply can't do anymore (it's sad, I know). By the way, maybe XP *is* safer, if that many fewer CVEs were found? c

Indeed. I had forgotten about NoScript (which I've used before), and I installed it today. I have to say that, once I've got it tweaked just so, it really does speed things up. Stuff doesn't look quite as "pretty", but I don't care; all I want is the information (I'd have everything set up to look like it's 1996 if I could, as, in my opinion, the vast majority of sites from that time were simple and concise). Back on topic, though, Windows 8.1 really does feel sorta like a 7 SP3 once it's pounded into shape. 10 is in a league all its own though, and with it a strange obsession with useless changes that only make things worse. One could argue that it's been going on for decades, but they're now taking it to new heights never before seen in the industry (that I know of). c

I wouldn't be surprised. Bloat seems to be The Order Of Things nowadays. Gone are the times when people actually cared about making software efficient by saving resources like disk space, CPU cycles and RAM, which in turn ran faster because it was less bloated. The Internet is the worst offender, since even a "simple" web site nowadays brings my 2009 Mac Pro with dual six core X5680s and 32 GB of DDR3-1066 to its knees (that's inexcusable! Especially since it plows through everything else). Don't even think about my lesser machines! (my laptops are "slower", but they're based on newer gens of CPU architecture, so they're about the same as the Mac Pro). It's not just computers, either. My phone, an iPhone 6 Plus, was among the top of its class just a year and a half ago when I got it, but now when I try loading more than two or three of these wretched sites, it lags and stutters like nobody's business (the web browser has even crashed on me a couple of times because of it!) By 2001 standards, XP had a lot of bloat (and often slowed down modestly-specced contemporary computers that were only slightly dated when it was released), but looking back at it after 11 years of Vista et al, it doesn't look so bad, even with all the bloat it too has accumulated via updates and such. <end of rant> c

Wow! Based on that, I roughly figured out the amount of increase from version to version: NT 4.0 to 2000: ~3.6 times increase in disk usage 2000 to XP: ~2.3 times increase XP to Vista: 10.67 times increase! NT 4.0 to Vista: An incredible 88.89 times greater!!! Almost two orders of magnitude!!! Everything else since Vista have been relatively even from what I can tell (maybe 8.x and 10 are a bit more due to all the Metro App junk). c

I hate to be a naysayer, but it still seems to be trending downward, though? Although, I'm gratified that it is holding as steady as it is, and I hope it continues. c

In my experience, XP (and highly upgraded 2000 with BWC's Extended Core) work fine online. This is subject to change, however, as browser support gradually disappears (as it did with 9x from 2006 to 2013-ish). On the bright side, though, XP will still have ESR 52, which gives us at least two more years before things start going downhill. Vista is a sort of oddball, as it's somewhat 7-like, yet it's being treated like XP, so it will have the same problem in 2018. c

Maybe someone can make an up to date branch of ESR 52 that will continue to work on XP etc. after Mozilla drops it in 2018 (because, with the POS hack, XP would still have a good year of useful life left). Something for XP x64 would be nice too (Waterfox does, but I had issues running the latest version (put bluntly, it didn't), so an alternative based on the ESR would be better I think). TenFourFox, which did the same for PowerPC Macs, is alive and well, so I'm certain that it would be feasible, if someone is willing to do the work. c

2000 works okay, is very 98SE-like and it'll run Firefox ESR 45 pretty well, provided you install BWC's extended core and kernel (bookmarking/downloads don't seem to work, though; The Plain Old Favorites and Downloads Window plugins can workaround those problems for now). I'm using it now, in fact, and you can even install Flash, so it's all current (for now, anyway). But yeah, for a relatively trouble free experience, Windows 7 (or, dare I say, Windows 8.1 with all the metro gunk stripped out) is probably the best way to go. 7 should work okay on the hardware you got, but unless you decide to get newer stuff, I wouldn't recommend 8.1 (I don't think it'd even run on it, as it requires, what, SSE3?) c

Without KernelEX: Firefox 2 and Opera 10.63 (I think?). <<=== Not terribly useful in a modern context. With KernelEX: Firefox 10 and Opera 12.02. <<=== Still not great, but probably the best you're going to get until Retrozilla gets better rendering capabilities. c

I just discovered a problem with Firefox ESR 45.4.0 on Windows 2000 Extended Core: bookmarking doesn't work! I am using "Plain Old Favorites" for now, but I wouldn't mind getting native bookmarking fixed. c

I actually got it! I used SuperOrca, and it worked! I now have Audition 3.0 running on 2000, something I've been wanting to do for like 8 years! I can't believe it took me this long to figure it out!! I will keep that spoof in mind for when I need to install things that aren't MSIs. c

I tried using Orca to modify "component.msi", but every time I try editing it, it won't load. Any ideas? I could spoof the Windows version, to see what happens, but I'd rather bypass the installer's OS check. c

I recently downloaded the Atheros Client Utility, version 8.0.0.204, and it supports WPA2 on Windows 2000! (tested on my iPhone's Personal Hotspot, which is WPA2 only). It seems to only support Atheros WiFi cards, though. The good news is that the card I got uses the AR9285, which is fully compatible with 2000, and other cards that use this chipset are cheap and plentiful ($18 USD get's you a lot of five on eBay). The fact that it's also Wireless a/b/g/n is good too, as it's relatively modern (no wireless ac, but for most purposes, wireless n is still good enough I think, especially given that only the fastest internet links can even come close to saturating an ac link). So, for any PC laptop that uses Mini-PCIe for its internal Wifi card, this is a good upgrade that doesn't hurt one's ability to run 2000. c

Thanks! I didn't know HFSLIP created its own ISO, so I'll go try it out and see what happens. And I'll put the log aside for now, but I'll post it if the HFSLIP ISO does the same thing as the nLite ISO. c

I'm using CS2, and it's perfectly adequate for my needs. I also have a copy of Photoshop 7 (yes, 7) from 2001, and it works fine as well. Why do I need anything else? The only thing about CS6 I like is that it includes an updated version of Audition (Adobe's DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) software), and finally ported it to OS X. I had been using Audition 3.0 forever (and that version remains my all time favorite), and since it was Windows only, I was somewhat dismayed because I wanted to use it on my Mac without booting into Windows (I bit the bullet and just booted it into Windows, and as it turns out, my Mac runs Windows better than most PCs I've encountered, so it ended up being a very good thing (XP was current then, so it was very fast; Vista and 7 (and most recently, 8.1) are fairly fast as well, but Audition's interface somehow feels a bit laggier when run on 7 compared to XP). (TL;DR) Until something better comes along, I'm sticking with what I have, no matter how old and decrepit it becomes. c

Where is the log file? I will upload it when I find it. It was an untouched SP0 source, although I used nLite to create a bootable ISO. Do I have to add my own WINNT.SIF, or is that only for your own uses? It's a great package, and it allows me to treat 2000 more or less the same as XP in terms of throwing software at it (with the addition of BWC's Extended Core and Extended Kernel). It's like the good old days (for me, 2004 - 2009), when I could use the two almost interchangeably. Thank you for your hard work! c

I have downloaded it and integrated it into my Win2k installer, but I have a weird problem with driver signing: it seems that every driver (including stock ones) are no longer digitally signed. I get the "cannot verify digital signature" dialog during setup when it's installing drivers for the IDE/SATA adapter and the mouse. Any idea why? It doesn't harm functionality (so far), so it's little more than an annoyance, which I can live with. c

I hate to dredge old threads from the depths, but... I'd like to know if any development has continued with this, and where I can find SmoothText. Thanks! c

Yeah, I think that's an artificial problem, whose solution involves changing a setting or two within FF's about:config page so that it'll download and install the appropriate component to support H.264/HTML5. c

Yeah, that was probably a mistake. They'll break something else to make up the difference. c