cc333

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

Is it possible that driver signing could be an issue? I've found that some drivers won't run if not signed properly. Of course, this is on 64-bit Windows, which i believe has a somewhat stricter driver signing policy than 32-bit. c

How so? c

I forgot about this thread! Last November, I was riding in a taxi in midtown Manhattan, NY (I don't live there; I was visiting from California), and came across this peculiar sight on the video screen: I'm pretty sure that whatever's driving the display is running XP, judging by the styling of the dialog box (all later versions look different). What makes it puzzling to me is that the taxi couldn't have been more than a couple years old, so why didn't they go with a newer system? c EDIT from almost 6 years in the future: I have to delete the above photo because my attachment quota is exceeded. Sorry :/

I have a couple thoughts, if I might: Firstly: could it be that your trackpad is somehow intermittently faulty? Drivers which, by all accounts, should support your hardware and run on 8.1 aren't, and sometimes this can indicate that there's a problem in the hardware (or perhaps firmware) somewhere, in my experience. Of course, this isn't necessarily so, and is consequently rather unlikely, but when all else fails, it's something to consider nevertheless. Secondly: I know you're reluctant to redo your XP install, but have you considered upgrading to XP 64-bit (hereafter XP-64)? API-wise, it shares a bit more in common with Vista than XP 32-bit (XP-32), and thus also seems to support some hardware that doesn't ordinarily support NT 5.x-based Windows. The reason for this is that to some limited degree, XP-64 can support some 64-bit Vista drivers, provided said Vista drivers don't use APIs that don't exist on XP-64 (which, while not as troublesome as with XP-32 and it's somewhat older codebase, can still be a problem). Indeed, the reason this is possible is because the kernel of Windows Server 2003 (upon which XP-64 is based) was used as the basis of Windows Vista. c

OK, got back to my 98 machine, and the last version of CTR that would install on Firefox 31.x is 1.5.3. To fix the rendering artifacts in the tab bar, I've found that setting the appearance (first drop down list on the "Tabs (1)" screen) to Australized V2 works well. Still no Javascript, but at least we're at a point now where the UI chrome is 99% functional (the popups for installing addons, saving passwords and such have big black lines around them, likely due to the fact that the transparency effects they use are broken and missing on Win9x). c

An old version of Classic Theme Restorer will also work. I don't recall which version, but it works fine with 31.x, even on Windows 98SE. c

I have standard Firefox 31.8.0 ESR more or less working with only standard updates + KernelEx 4.5.2 + latest KernelEx updates. The only issue (and it's a big one) is that javascript is almost completely broken. I have to turn it off in order to browse anywhere, or else the browser will lock up hard and then crash, occasionally taking Windows out with it. No one seems to have devised a fix as yet, but it stands to reason that the problem must be a manifestation of an incomplete or nonexistent implementation within KernelEx of something the javascript engine depends on. I would think that if that were so, it would throw up an error, but who knows? Maybe it's failing before it can? As the community researches the problem, it can hopefully be better understood so a fix can be made. c

I've been following this interesting adventure, and have a radical thought: is the trackpad the same physical shape/size between the new and old machines? Perhaps you can swap trackpads between them or, if they're incompatible, find another variant of this model whose trackpad is 1) similar to tthe one on your new machine, and 2) known to work on Windows versions earlier than 8.x or 7 and swap that into your machine? If it requires too much hacking (it might), it's probably not worth the effort, but it's nevertheless something to consider. c

I've heard of DVD-RAM, but never CD-RAM! c

@Nojus2001 Interesting. I guess 2003 somehow leverages 2010's MSO.DLL to facilitate its ability to open docx files, and the non-XP compatible version likewise breaks it? c

Hmm, OK. Maybe you can try 2000 with BWC's extended core? With some careful tweaking, it can run much of the software XP-32 can, but with somewhat less overhead. c

Perfect! That's exactly what I wanted to hear! Armed with this information, I shall now go install and update Office worry-free c

You can do that?! Can you install any 64-bit OSes? c

This is a potentially cumbersome solution, but what about getting an older PC, such as something from the Core2 Duo era (or even something like a Raspberry Pi or some other similar embedded-like device), and installing a pair of VMs on it, one for WRP+Chrome, and one for iSH? Then, in theory, all you'd have to do is chain them together (which, as I said, could potentially be rather cumbersome) and set it up so the computer running WFW3.xx and/or Win9x accesses it as it does your iPad now, except it'd be a one-stop-shop that incorporates both solutions into one package. Thoughts? c

OK, I'm planning to install/upgrade my old copy of Office 2010 on this old XP install I've resurrected, but I want to know which updates have the bad MSO.dll file so I can avoid them. Without having to read the past 15 pages, is there a definitive list of every to-be-avoided update released thus far? c

I'm updating an older XP Home installation (2011), and it's gone fairly smoothly for the most part, but I seem to have hit a snag with the .Net Framework 4.0 updates. They all fail with error 0x800B010B. I'm sure this has been encountered and solved several times over throughout the course of this thread, but I have very little desire to scan through 200+ pages at the moment EDIT: I should clarify that I've also used the dotnetfx cleanup tool and reinstalled the whole of dotnetfx 4.0 + updates, and I've applied the POSReady hack before doing so. I should also note that all the updates that are failing are post-2014 and are designated as being for Windows XP Embedded, which could be the problem, maybe. I note also that every post-2014, non dotnetfx40-related update has installed successfully as far as I can tell. c

That makes sense. However, JS on these same browsers (such as it is) works fine when they're run on a natively supported OS (XP), so I'm inclined to think its depends on some sort of API that KernelEx hasn't fully implemented yet. c

Hmm, OK. I guess the only two options, then, would be to either re-implement from scratch a modern JS engine/Gecko in its entirety (very nontrivial, I would think, but probably ideal since it could be highly optimized specifically with 9x in mind for maximum speed and efficiency), or tweak/extend KernelEx so that Gecko 3x works more or less completely as is (probably not as fast or efficient, but should be much more possible with the tools at hand, and a slow, inefficient browser that is stable and usable is far better than a fast one that crashes constantly). We're already 80% there, due to the fact that, JS notwithstanding, Gecko 3x otherwise starts up and renders sites with little or no adjustment. The key is to make the necessary adjustments to KernelEx, Windows, Gecko, or some combination thereof, such that JS will work. If I knew more about coding and such I'd give this a try myself, but alas I don't, so all I can do is churn out ideas. c