Windows 2000
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Windows 2000
-
-
In my honest opinion, I think that you should prioritize x64 work rather than x86, as x86 is first of all, harder to get stuff working on and secondly, less people use it by a long shot.
0 -
6 hours ago, asdf2345 said:
Hmm, guess I'll need to build my own updated ISO, and try again
Anything I need to know, like what software to use, and what order the updates go in, and such?
You really are going to need a ps2 keyboard to be able to install it. Tried it on my own, but don’t have a ps2 keyboard and usb stuff didn’t work. I think your best bet would be to install it on the hard drive from another computer and then put that hard drive back to your ryzen system.
0 -
Could newer nvidia gpu drivers work by any chance? Has anyone tested them or shall I have that privilege
Honestly, so far that project seems like a pure miracle.
0 -
The certificates updater actually fixed all the certificate problems on the computer. Thanks to everyone who tried to help!
1 -
After adding the registry, the updates installed, but there doesn't seem to be any difference.
0 -
18 hours ago, ED_Sln said:
Chrome uses the system's encryption system, so you need to install update KB4467770 and the latest update for IE8, and then enable support, as described in this article https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4467770/update-to-enable-tls-1-1-and-tls-1-2-as-secure-protocols-on-winhttp
This will solve the problem of opening most sites using TLS 1.1 and 1.2. But if this does not help, then we need ProxHTTPSProxy.I can't seem to be able to install those updates on the Home edition of XP. It says that they are for a different Windows version.
0 -
Hey, so i just installed a fresh copy of Windows XP Home on a 2010 netbook, but I seem to be getting some weird web certificate errors which weren't present before the reinstallation. Is there a way I could fix this issue?
0 -
8 hours ago, win32 said:
The i7-6970HQ is just a high-end mobile CPU; good luck running a Skylake laptop on NT5 since all of the reasonable GPU options don't support it (unless you get a 700M-series GeForce, which is a little old compared to Skylake, or a desktop GPU option).
Oh, right. It was a quick Google search and I must have misread something somewhere
0 -
Technically, that would make the theoretically most powerful stable Windows 2000 system be with the following specs:
- Intel Core i7-6950X
- GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB GDDR5
- 32 GB DDR3 Memory
That's of course if I am not missing something along the way.
0 -
5 hours ago, caliber said:
faking user agent will allow you to sort this out.
Not really. Faking the user agent goes just as far as telling the website that you're running a newer browser while you are in fact not. The trouble comes when a site has some feature(s) that are unsupported by the older spoofed browser and then it simply does not work or load properly.
A very good example of that is when Chrome 49 gets spoofed to Chrome 51+ and as a result, YouTube does not work - at all.
0 -
8 hours ago, win32 said:
Nope. If you were to remove the user agent override from roytam1's browsers, you would see the newer design.
Yes, I was aware of that, but Google is greedy and their new YouTube layout works smoothly only with a Chromium based browser. Here is a rough explanation of why that is: [Click To Open Twitter]
So really, using it on roytam1's browser is not a very good option regardless.
Please keep in mind that I do not have experience with the newer and more resource heavy layout on older hardware as I have been using XP on a modern computer and performance has never been a problem for me, so it might not be as noticeable on older computers as it is on newer and more powerful ones.
10 hours ago, Dave-H said:So Extreme Explorer 360 is the only XP browser that displays the new YouTube GUI on older hardware, and that's what @Windows 2000 meant?
More smoothly than any other non-chromium browser with a spoofed user agent, yes. Also, neither the last official Chrome (49) that works on XP or the Advanced Chromium (54) support the new layout, even with a spoofed user agent. (The layout does not load properly and does not work, at least to my knowledge)
8 hours ago, Dave-H said:I assume the last word should have been "design"!
Layout, to be more precise. Please excuse me for the confusion that I may have caused due to English not being my primary language.
12 hours ago, win32 said:I think he's referring to the design that is pushed to Firefox 45/52+
Right on point.
1 -
On 1/11/2020 at 12:33 AM, Zorba the Geek said:
I needed a version of Chrome that would enable me to view the catch-up service provided by Channel 5 known as as my54.tv, The site specifies Chrome 60+ and Vista+ as minimum specifications, so I was out of luck with Advanced Chrome for XP. I have tried the Russian repack version 12.0.1053, but it only enables the advertisements to be played. I have tried to change the browser's user agent to indicate Windows 7 and I did empty the browser cache. Also I remembered to install the Adobe Flash Player for Chrome (PPAPI) .Perhaps a feature of NT6 is required to play video encrypted with FlashAccess DRM.
As for the claim that this is really the equivalent of Chrome 78 this is hard to verify because sites like whatismy browser.com only read the information given by the browser's user agent.
I'm positive that Chrome 360 is based on a newer version of Chromium solely on the fact that it is the only XP browser that can load the new YouTube desing.
0 -
2 hours ago, IntMD said:
whether is possible, depends on which card (a few of 'em), whereas the only thing you can get working is only 2d acceleration.
I am pretty sure due to personal experience that the success rate is 100% with the whole pascal lineup, although as you mentioned, only 2d acceleration is possible.
0 -
Actually, I was wondering the same thing, but for Ryzen 7 2700x.
Can anyone with any am4 processor test to see if Vista is a lost cause for those processors?
1 -
5 hours ago, FranceBB said:
Sure, I don't think @dencorso will have something against it: https://mega.nz/#!6JESDYrQ!gw0yUcbVfIsTIEU5bEbzh73qfXwACV8wwqdDGbaLxro
(Den, in case there's something wrong, feel free to edit my reply and remove the installer).
I tried it on a Vista Ultimate x64 virtual machine and I was bombarded with error messages for missing functions followed by an App Crash followed by an error of d3d11 file missing.
Unfortunately, it wasn't able to get to the browser itself after crashing devastatingly.
0 -
12 hours ago, tailswave said:
Good, hopefully it will work well on my 3.20ghz pentium 4
Good luck. It seems to be working just fine on my first ever laptop with a Pentium M from 2006 and integrated graphics.
1 -
31 minutes ago, tailswave said:
Wait it's really running on Chromium 78? How's that possible, I thought it was using API's that XP couldn't support or something.
But really, that's quite impressive I'll definelty check it out. How well does it run?
Well, they have backported it somehow. Nevertheless, it does work and it works really well, especially on older computers.
0 -
33 minutes ago, tailswave said:
I work with a lot of Windows XP computers and well I have to connect some to the internet (So I can do junk like get drivers on them, install software or just playing music in the background while I work on them)
Anyways, for the past while I've been using Chrome for web browsing but Chrome's starting to feel slow and a lot of sites aren't working right anymore. So what's the best browsers for XP - one that's more are more up to date? (side note: I use Firefox on my main xp pc, as it works best with YouTube)
At this point I really feel like I am kind of advertising them, but I can not stress enough how happy I am that there is a Chromium 78 (which is the latest) based browser on Windows 2000, XP and Vista.
I've been using it as my main browser for a couple of months now and honestly if you can get past the chinese setup, it is the most up to date browser you can get.
0 -
11 hours ago, LincolnG said:
Thanks for that. I have a GT 430 1G DDR3, do you think that a GT730 2GB DDR5 would offer much of an improvement in XP x32 SP3 (Card must be silent, no fans). I tried a GT 710, which was fine in XP but was constantly crashing in Windows 7. I'm between a rock and a hard-place, I have essential hardware that won't work on newer motherboards and software that has long since been discontinued. I currently use a dual boot system XP x32 SP3 & Windows 7 on a GIGABYTE GA-H55M-D2 motherboard.
It is probably worth it as it won't break the piggy bank and after all you're getting a new unused gpu which will guarantee atleast a few years of usage and it will also be less power hungry and a little quieter. If memory serves me right, there were even fanless versions of the gt730. The faster memory of that card will also be very beneficial for some light gaming.
0 -
On 10/31/2019 at 7:04 PM, LincolnG said:
Hi has anybody ever managed to get GEFORCE 10xx series working on XP (32 bit, SP3)
I got a Gigabyte GT 1030 silent 2GB (Hardware ID: 1D01) works great on 7 but can't get a peep out of it on XP.
I downloaded the iCafe driver and edited the inf. Tried all the section modes. Installer works perfectly, but after reboot Hardware manager says "Device cannot start"
It is presumed that it doesn't work because this one needs the NVLDDMKM.SYS driver.
Failing that I'll send it back, shame tho. What should I change it for that'll work well with 7 x64 and XP x32. Should have 2Gb DDR5 and be fanless. Full Profile is fine. Nice and fast for Hungry Windows Apps.
I do not think that you will be able to get it working properly in XP.
If you're looking in buying new, your only options really are GT 730, 710 and 210. Second hand would be a better bet. I got a GTX 970 for just 90 euros last year and it has been doing a flawless job in both XP x64 and x32 ever since.
0 -
8 hours ago, ~♥Aiko♥Chan♥~ said:
I believe sogou browser is based off Chrome 72 and can run on XP. It's not dead yet; Chinese developers have to backport and/or remove XP-incompatible code, so it's going to take a while.
After a quick test, it seems to actually be based on Chromium 65, rather than 72 unfortunately.
1 -
On 10/1/2019 at 5:16 AM, win32 said:
Yes; Windows 2000 went down from 0.01 to 0.00% on netmarketshare in August.
All of the web-browsing 2000 users I know (including myself) also use XP-10/Linux (even BWC posted about his new win10 laptop on his blog) as well, and even when using 2000 I sometimes spoof the OS version or the user agent.
I still think 2000-Vista are still good for web browsing as updated browsing options remain available from at least two sources, and a third if 360 Extreme Explorer hasn't dropped support.
Unfortunately, as of right now, the latest version of 360 Extreme Explorer downloaded on a Windows 7 machine and transfered to an XP one, does not seem to work in any way.
I sincerely hope that a legacy build is on the way. Maybe it takes them a little longer to release new versions for Vista, XP, 2000? If not, then version 11.0.2216.0 (Based on Chromium 69) seems to be the last for XP x64 and probably Vista, XP x86 and 2000.
EDIT: After a quick test, it seems like the final version is still in fact 11.0.2216.0 (tested on Windows 10 machine) so we may still be good to go. I do not know why the 7 setup did not work back when I did that test so my apologies for the false information.
0 -
Thanks for the replies. About the SSD, it is just 128GB as there aren't gonna be any programs on this system really. If space is so scarce, as @alacran said, I could always add a secondary 2tb hdd, but I don't think that it would be initially necessary for my grandpa. Afterall, YouTube and Ebay don't take 80GBs so easily.
I am more worried about Windows Update to be very honest. I might just stick a 240GB M2 SSD as it is just 20€ more.
About the the CPU situation, I will try opting for a Ryzen 3 2200G, but only if the budget allows it of course, because this is as previously mentioned, a pretty tight budget system.
7 hours ago, alacran said:Asus is my prefered option even the entry level models. Gigabyte is also a reputable brand and would be my second option.
Don't buy a cheaper brand as they usually faill sooner than the 2 mentioned brands, just to let you know I still have an i3 3225 running on an Asus MB (first and only MB used), and another i3 3225 (My brother PC) still working (both builded with a difference of 3 months) is on its third MB (one Asrock and now on second Biostar), soket 1155 MBs were not available anymore but I had 2 used Biostar from upgraded PCs.
About the motherboard, I have had some rough past with Asus mobos so I would really prefer to just get a Gigabyte or Asrock one over it.
0 -
Hello everyone!
As said in the title, I'm gonna be making a tight budget PC build for my grandpa and the parts which I have choosen as of now are:
- Athlon 200GE CPU with Radeon Vega 3 Graphics
- Gigabyte A320M-H Motherboard
- Kingston 2x4GB DDR4 2666MHz RAM
- Transcend 120GB M2 SSD
- Cougar 400W 80 Plus Bronze PSU
The machine in question is going to be used mostly for YouTube, regular email checking, some office work, playing music and occasional 1080p/4K video playback and I was wondering whether the Athlon 200GE can handle all of those tasks smoothly paired with the M2 SSD, 8GBs of RAM and Windows 10 Home.
Please note that this is my second PC build so I might have made some mistakes. The goal is to make a power efficient, quiet, fast, cheap and a long lasting PC.
Any tips and suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Have a great day and thanks for reading!
0
I am more worried about Windows Update to be very honest. I might just stick a 240GB M2 SSD as it is just 20
Windows 11?
in Windows 11
Posted · Edited by Windows 2000
And now, there officially has leaked an early dev build of Windows 11, with curved corners, new design, new icons and sounds!