ED_Sln

No, all updates are up to date, I installed office and installed Legacy Update, it showed the same list. I also found the KB832668 update, it is required for Win 98-ME, it adds ctfmon. Project2002 and Visio2002 were separate components at the time and not part of the main office suite, so I didn't add them.

It means that your OS has accumulated a lot of problems that are causing the slowdown. Because on all computers where I have done a restore, I have not noticed any change in performance after the restore. For example, my main computer I'm writing from now has been restored twice, first in 2017, when my network failed due to a conflict between antivirus and firewall, and second time in 2020, due to a program that installed an incompatible driver. But the OS still works fine today, no problems or bugs. Yes, restore points do not give a 100% guarantee that there will be no problems at all, or it happens that restoring from a point fails, but in 75% of cases the OS will be restored to the state at the time the point was created. Incidentally, the recent worldwide Windows crash could well have been quickly resolved if Win 10 had Recovery Points enabled.

You misunderstood me, I repair computers, not only their hardware, but also reinstall the OS, virus removal, recovery, and so on. You just don't understand how a restore point works. It restores files and registry entries as they were when it was created, so the OS at the time the restore point was created = the OS after the restore. Of course, if the OS has a lot of bugs, it's easier to reinstall, they accumulate gradually and usually restore points don't last that long. But if something breaks a well working system, a quick rollback is best. For example, the wrong driver can cause a BSOD, safe mode doesn't always work, and rolling back from a point will quickly and correctly remove that driver.

Except that this advice is harmful. I do computer repair and over the years have been able to recover a large number of systems using restore points. And on my computers system recovery has saved the system from reinstallation several times. On Win 10-11, restore points are disabled, so any problem there means you have to reinstall the whole system, so I enable system restore there too. And even SSD wear and tear won't be an excuse, because a full system reinstallation gives more wear and tear than an occasional non-big restore point.

Yes, with the files from pm26xp-no-manifest, palemoon-26.5.0-20240601.win2000 started.

@roytam1 In Windows XP SP1 on a Pentium III E, the system crashes into a blue screen with error code Stop: c000021a when running palemoon-26.5.0-*********.win2000, except palemoon-26.5.0-20180718.win2000.old, it starts. What could be the problem? Does the browser require SSE2 instructions?

But Nvidia's help claims that DX12 is supported even in Kepler and Fermi: https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3711/~/which-nvidia-gpus-will-support-dx12%3F But all this is of course marketing, there is no DX12 there. I'm not a gamer, so I didn't check out the games. I know for sure World Of Warcraft and Cyberpunk 2077 before some update support DX12 in Win 7. But I compiled the D3D12On7 test and it works for me.

Just like DX11 had versions 11, 11.1 and 11.2, DX12 has different versions. 12(11_0) = DX11.1 - Nvidia 7*0, not a real DX12. 12(11_1) = DX11.2 - Radeon HD7**0, 12(12_0) = DX 11.2 - Nvidia 9*0, this version was called real DX12 after its release, it seems to be the same version in GTX10*0, GTX16*0, RTX20*0. And the newest DX12(12_2), RTX30*0, RTX40*0 and RX7*00. All data taken from GPU-Z.

Yes, GTX1060. But you can call it at least 13, or you can raise the version every month like browsers do, it doesn't mean that it really has such changes that it's a new version. It's just further development. In the history of DX, has there ever been a time when video cards supporting an older version suddenly started hardware support for the new one? I don't remember. And even video cards supporting DX9.0 could not support what was added in DX9.0c.

The fact that video cards that do not support DX12, but support 11.1 began to support DX12 after its release, indirectly confirms that there is no 12, it is all an update of 11, for so many years there is a lot of things added, so now it can be conditionally called 11.5. So also the version of NT10 is not true, it is the same NT6 core, and now actually core 6.4. Although in the registry under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion even in Win11 the version is listed as 6.3, as in 8.1.

I don't have this error, I checked on three OS, one of which is XP x64. Did you take the files from chrome-xpapi-adapter_x86.b5064-wD3D9accel.zip and additionally the file from chrome-xpapi-adapter.5065.for.testing.zip?

The files have been renamed, everything is correct now.

Here it is, at the very top 124 version, but pre-release: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/releases Except that instead of the x32 version there are debug files.

ffmpeg 7.0.1 full requires Windows 10.

Yes, I tested with chrome-xpapi-adapter.5062.2.for.testing. But again, I was testing in a virtual machine. I can also test on a physical computer with i7 3770 with 8 threads. Upd: Tested it on an i7 3770. The result is the same for the original progwrp.dll and chrome-xpapi-adapter.5062.2.for.testing. On tests: Aquarium 500 fish, 5 fps, CPU load on average 70%. AV1 1080@3000 - 17% CPU load on average.

WebGL test with the original progwrp.dll showed exactly the same results, both in CPU load with different number of cores and in fps, as well as on 6 was 4 fps, and on 12-16 - 3 fps. The av1 video test also has the same CPU load with both dlls.

I checked it in a virtual machine with 6, 12 and 16 cores. With the increase of cores the load only decreases. But the fps even slightly decreased, on 6 cores it is stable 4, and with more cores - 3.

I checked each file separately, but apart from setup and uninstall it found only two files. It turns out that inside the archive finds a lot, but without the archive - no, how is this possible?

I'm checking individual files, not the whole folder, and it seems to be clean there, I checked almost all files, but only chrome_pwa_launcher.exe has one trigger. Strangely, the number of antiviruses finding something is much lower in the 64 bit version.

Checked individual files, yes progwrp.dll is clean, all triggers come from setup.exe. But again, none of the famous antivirus does not find anything there, so I'm inclined to false positives. Perhaps all these antiviruses use the same detection method.

I think it's progwrp.dll, it overrides system calls, so it can be detected as suspicious. The same happens with VxKex for Win 7, it also has call interception and some antiviruses detect it as a malware. Kaspersky antivirus also detected progwrp.dll as a trojan at first, but after updating the antivirus databases it stopped detecting it, apparently they figured out that it was a false positive. And on Virustotal, only some unknown antiviruses find trojans, only 2-3 I've heard of at all.

You have the second revision, there is a driver for it for Win10 only. Therefore, if you want to continue using Win7, you will have to install an additional network card.

Welcome to MSFN. Write the ID of the device. There are two revisions of the I219, one has a driver, the other does not. As a last resort, you can use a PCI-E Network Card, or USB-LAN if there are no ports available.

Because versions for XP, Vista, 7 and 8/8.1 Now separately: https://github.com/Alex313031/thorium-legacy/releases/tag/M122.0.6261.168 And so far the latest version for all of them is 122.

Right this way: https://msfn.org/board/topic/182599-nt-5x-windows-update-urls-dump-inc-custom-support-updates/ In the archive you need the file NT_5.2.3790-x64-Custom.txt in it there are links to updates released for the period July 2015 - August 2019. The links seem to be working for now. Almost all updates can be installed on XP x64. There are also updates for .Net in the NT_5-x64-NetFx.txt file.