cc333

I find it somewhat odd that no one has yet made a generic TRIM support package which is XP compatible and works with all SSDs. Surely the protocols are standardized enough for this to be theoretically possible? Unfortunately, I don't presently have the knowledge to make such a thing happen, but someone around here must? c

Does "IA32 Win32" mean it will run on non-SSE2 CPUs? By the way, which one of these represents the Serpent 55.x branch? The logic w/re how versioning works here is escaping me somewhat at the moment (not enough sleep ) c

Huh, interesting. In that case, is there a setting somewhere which can change that allocation? Or maybe some lines in the source code (if available)? My home connection gets at best ~350kB/s anyway, so it's not likely to hurt me much, but it would nevertheless be nice to know if it can be somehow changed. c

To alleviate this problem somewhat, it is possible for Burp to be run on another PC which is configured as a proxy server to the Win98 PC? I ask because it's possible that the slowness is due to the Win98 networking stack's inherent architectural inefficiencies, which are being exacerbated by running Burp via Java 8 on KernelEx. c

@loblo How'd you accomplish this?! c

It often amazes me how easily some of you find such hard to find files! These ones, of course, aren't obscure by any means, but they have nevertheless been rendered quite hard to find since Intel apparently took them offline, and most of the "driver-finder" sites link back to Intel's copy of the files it seems. *sigh*... A few weeks ago, I tried to find Windows XP Intel Management Engine drivers for a laptop of mine (Dell Latitude D630C), and couldn't (most everything was for 7 and up). Ended up not mattering though,a s I simply turned the ME off, and the missing devices disappeared OK, enough thread hijacking. Carry on! c

I've tried 7-Zip 19.xx, and it seems to generally work OK (GUI, extracting and compressing). The GUI is a bit weird in that most strings in some dialogs are cut off, but the buttons seem to work. This is with KernelEx 4.5.2 and all recent updates on Win98 SE. c

@flyod Have you tried disabling hardware acceleration within the browser? The setting for it is in the advanced tab. c

That's too bad, for I've seen examples of when Matt Tobin actually can be decent (the thread about finding permanent names for roytam1's browsers, for example). I think it's just that, for whatever reason, he seems to get impatient very easily and apparently has a bit of a temper. Even so, Seamonkey's email client is integrated within the browser suite, and it is nice to have it as a standalone program à la Thunderbird for those who don't want the whole SM suite just for the email client, so we can give him credit for that, if nothing else. Anyway, my main OS is macOS 10.13 from 2017 right now, and Polymer 2 is in no danger of being unsupported there. However, I do still dabble with NT5.x (and do occasionally use it as my primary OS, depending on need), so it'd be nice to have a browser there which supports it and isn't sponsored by either Google or the Chinese government (I don't trust Chrome or its China-based derivatives to respect any privacy settings whatever, at least not without extraordinary means; other Chromium-derived browsers (such as modern Opera) are probably OK, but none of those run on NT5 to my knowledge, so....). I dunno, maybe I'll give one of the Chinese chromiums a try, for they might not be as bad as I'm fearing they are w/re privacy (or maybe it's more easily manageable via HOSTS or other such tweaks than I'm thinking?). So to that end, which ones of the lot are most current and recommended? c

Thought so! I like to know what I'm using, how it works and why, so I'm glad I figured it out successfully in this case! Anyway, back to the topic at hand (sorta), I use Transmission on Mac all the time, as it is the only BT client I've used (for Mac, anyway) whose UI is sensible and easy to use. i knew it also supported Linux, but until today, I didn't know (or had forgotten) that there was a Windows port that ran on XP/Vista! c

@dencorso Agreed. Just because the latest release is no longer compatible with XP, doesn't mean that the last release that is won't suddenly stop working (we've seen some rather unscrupulous examples of that elsewhere over the 6 or so years since XP's "official" EoS). My understanding is that, while Bittorrent has added new features to its protocols over the years since it was introduced, the basic architecture is more or less the same, and virtually all clients, new and old, can still connect to it just fine, just without the advanced features of newer versions. Unless I'm missing something? With all the paranoia surrounding the coronavirus lately, this is actually becoming a real life phenomena, something I never thought would happen! (I kid you not, I recently came across a headline (from a reputable source) that stated that some people are *wearing hazmat suits on airplanes* because of the extreme fear of acquiring the virus!) While i won't be stupid and go put myself in a situation where I'd be infected, I'm not going to live in that kind of fear. Same applies to old Windows and software. While I will use newer, safer software when appropriate (online shopping, banking transactions, etc.), I'm not going to stop using XP, Vista or 7 (or any software thence developed) simply because MS isn't releasing patches for them anymore! Enough said. c

No, I haven't. Perhaps I should? c

Apologies for my somewhat rambling post! I remember the year 2004. Life seemed easier back then XP was the latest and greatest, and SP2 had just been released. And if you didn't like XP, you could simply use Win9x or NT/2000 instead, all of which were fully supported by all the mainstream browsers of the day (and pretty much all but the oldest browsers still more or less worked fine on most of the Internet). You could even browse competently on Win3.x if you wanted to!! and the best part is that security was still considered optional for most things, so browsing around didn't require a ton of computer resources for all the fancy encryption algorithms that exist nowadays. And most websites were still relatively simple HTML+CSS, which helped even more. It's a far cry from now, where only the latest or second latest browser is supported, most sites are actively blocking anything older, and maximum security everything is mandatory. In this respect, computing simply isn't that much fun anymore. Anyway, back on topic: with everything hacked as much as I can to make it behave somewhat like 8.x or 7, combined with a few choice addons (7+TaskbarTweaker, ClassicShell, AeroGlass), Win10 1809 is finally acceptable. Not great, but acceptable. Maybe once it's finally released, I'll download 2004 and check it out to see if it has regressed any. I suspect that maybe it has, because MS invariably does stuff that breaks some or all of the tools that make life with 10 tolerable. Whether this is by design, or, more likely, simply an unintended consequence of various security/usability/stability fixes, I do not know, but it's definitely frustrating. My feeling is that, despite all the.. how shall I put it.. boneheaded design and policy decisions MS has made over the past decade or so, I don't believe they're an evil entity whose sole purpose is to abuse and torment its customers (though it does seem like it for the most part), but rather just simply trying to do what they think people (primarily their investors) want them to do. It's unfortunate that they seem to be out of touch with the vast majority of their user base, but that's the way it is, and there's not a whole lot that we can do about it aside form what we are doing (hacking up current versions of their products to make them more reasonable and/or hacking up older versions to run modern software they otherwise can't run, and to connect to modern services they otherwise can't connect to). c

I think I have tried that, but it can't be set as the default shell and provide a taskbar and desktop, can it? I know of that forum. The work they've done there is remarkable, but the tools they've developed so far definitely still aren't reliable enough for day-to-day usage. I've never minded XP's icons, though I do like the simpler look of 98 and 2000's icons quite a bit better. It also amazes me that many of those icons are still embedded within the latest versions of 10, though they don't seem to be exposed in the UI as much, having been partially replaced with more updated equivalents (the "This PC", AKA "Computer", AKA "My Computer icon", for instance; The windows 98 version of this is my favorite.) c

Good, thanks for clearing that up! c

For update19delta, I can't find sheet.dll? However, it appears to exist in update21delta, and update18(beta). Which one should I use? c

Yes, that was the error! Any way around it, do you know? Other than running true XP x86, of course? c

That's too bad. It seems that many of the bigger PC makers are conspiring with MS to force everyone to use Win10 (Intel all but admitted to the fact when they announced that Kaby Lake onwards would have no official support for anything other than 10). I still use the last closed-source version, Classic Shell 4.3.0, because I've had bad luck with Open Shell every time I've tried it (it *really* doesn't like Windows 7 or 8.x, as it crashes often and exhibits very strange UI glitches that render it unusable. That aspect doesn't bother me, as I don't use the feature (I use OldNewExplorer instead, as the Win Vista/7 Explorer UI, while still not my favorite, is in many ways far superior to the Ribbon UI in Win8 and up). Have you looked into 7+TaskBarTweaker? It goes a long way toward making the taskbar more sane (it doesn't make it XP-like, but I'd say probably more Vista-like). Yeah, that would be very nice. If someone could find a way to make the Win2000/XP explorer.exe (with its original XP-style UI) work on 7 and up, that would pretty much solve all our usability problems. It should be technically possible, except it probably links to various system dlls that have had their contents either rearranged or removed in newer Windows versions. Perhaps with some kind of patch, the old explorer can be linked to renamed versions of any XP-compatible dlls it needs to work? It should also be theoretically possible to get a 100% classic taskbar and start menu this way, if this hypothetical patched up explorer were set as the default shell. c

Is there any special trick to getting PotPlayer to work on XP? I ask because, on numerous occasions now, I've tried installing whatever the last version was (can't recall now), and all I get is some error dialog that suggests that something is incompatible (I can't remember what it says, though I can try reinstalling and take a screenshot of the error if need be). Regardless, the end result is that the program won't start. I did this on Win XP x64, maybe that makes a difference? I don't see how though, given that if PotPlayer is 32-bit, it should still work as it would on 32-bit XP, right? c

@Bruninho, @HarryTri, et al, suffice it to say that pretty much all the major tech companies are out to get our info one way or another. That seems to just be a part of doing business for them nowadays, unfortunately. And even more disturbingly, most people don't give it a second thought anymore (we're at the point, it seems, where the current generation doesn't know what it was like before privacy was routinely ignored, so they don't question the practice as much as those of generations past do). I would say Apple is among the least malevolent, to their credit, but I won't go as far as to say that they're completely innocent (the "Walled Garden" they've developed the iOS ecosystem within is okay for what it is, but rather limiting if one doesn't wish to conform 100%). Their software doesn't track one's every move without permission, and Apple appears to care more sincerely about their users' privacy. And w/rt the "ARM Mac", it concerns me because it means the Mac is going to become little more than an overgrown iPad, and I'm hoping they don't lock down the platform down as the iOS one has been since the beginning, because if they do, I may finally make the switch to Linux when my current crop of software becomes too old to be useful (I continually dabble with various Linux distros in case of such an event). Google, Facebook and MS seem to be the polar opposite. I actually bought and installed a Windows 10 Pro for Workstations license on my main PC so I can say I have it for real, and not in a VM, but I still find myself using mostly macOS, Windows 7, XP and 2000, with a bit of MS-DOS and Windows 9x as seasoning, primarily because I simply like those OSes better. I've managed to mostly whip my install of 10 into submission pretty well, and it looks and behaves more or less like Windows 7 and 8.x, which is good enough for me, but no matter what, I just can't seem to actually like it, mostly because of some of MS' boneheaded design decisions, such as, for example, that weird, mutant Start Menu,; while it is somewhat similar to the menus of Yore, it's still no substitute for the Start Menus of older systems (my favorite is the classic menu, but the "new" XP menu, and those of Vista and 7 are okay too). c

No worries! I was just going based on your reported info at the time. Can you figure a way to somehow run/install that service on XP? Seems you're getting warmer w/rt this being a possible reason why settings aren't being saved across reboots. By the way, is it morning over there? Good morning, if so! c

Excellent! So now all that needs to be done is to get some version of it running on XP, and it'll be good to go! c

Is it possible that ETDCtrlHelper.exe is somehow responsible for refreshing the settings at user login, and its not running is why settings aren't being remembered? That being said, it would be interesting to see what happens once you get it working. When running Win8.1 with the same/similar drivers that work, are settings forgotten as they are on XP after logout/reboot when this executable is intentionally disabled? That might offer some clues.... c

Something akin to @looking4awayout's UOC patch, perhaps. It could even be something based on it directly, but tweaked to be more suitable to Windows 9x/ME. It's open source I think? Maybe with looking4awayout's blessing, it could happen with some research. c

Interesting. Do you think maybe that has something to do with the trackpad being dead on XP when certain drivers are installed? c