win32

Here are all of the browser names from this thread. I think I've got everything without error. Please correct if necessary. I'm aware that some other suggestions were made in the old browser thread but there's waaaaaaaayyyyyy too many in here. browsernamesr1.txt

I noticed a possible error in your iaAHCI.inf. Change ; 3400 %PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_3B2E&CC_0101.DeviceDesc% = "Intel(R) 3400 SATA AHCI Controller 4 port" to ; 3400 %PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_3B2E&CC_0101.DeviceDesc% = iaStor_Inst, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_3B2E&CC_0101

Compare the hardware ID of your SATA AHCI controller against the ones listed in BWC's driver INF file. If it's not there, copy it into BWC's INF and try.

Windows 2000's theme engine (themes.exe) is the same as the one that comes with 98 Plus!, so yes. XP is backward compatible with 9x/2000 themes as well. Windows 98/2000/Me can actually run XP+ themes (not visual styles of course). But you must only select the "Mouse pointer", "Desktop wallpaper" and "Icons" checkboxes in themes.exe or else you will lose stuff like your sound scheme and screensaver preference.

It's just like some recent Chromebook commercials which also suffer from a bit of a time warp. Windows 7 and XP error dialogs followed by a 9x blue screen. There was a Canadian commercial for an insurance company that actually featured a nice recreation of the Windows 95/IE3 interface to depict someone trying to obtain insurance online. But the background of the web page had an early '80s-style isometric 2D (Tron-like?) background. They can never get this stuff right!

It's just another round of hex edits where all instances of "ntdll" in those files are replaced with "ntdl1". Windows Vista with Platform Update and 7 RTM are very similar, but I guess that SP1 and W7's Platform Update (which adds many APIs from Windows 8) widened the gap.

I have a report from a user on an X230T, who stated that the regular ACPI HAL worked somehow. If that doesn't work, you can install BWC's Extended Core v16a which has updated HALs and try changing them then. The EHCI driver issue should not be related to HALs (since they do apparently work with the MPS HAL), though here are the instructions to get them working:

You could try wrapping your kernel33 and chrome files with a "ntdl1" from W7, but the likelihood of success at this point is about <0.1%.

Windows 98 remained the most popular home OS through about 2003 or so. And as such, I remember using my aunt's PC running 98 FE around that time, just before she upgraded to XP. My very first PC was running 98 in 2006, but I didn't have it for long. I entered school not long after that, and through the computer experiences I had there and in other places, I determined that the common denominator for poor performance and instability was XP. Everything took minutes to be ready and loaded, unlike 98 or 2000. So when I finally had my own desktop, I changed out XP for 98 FE. That was very unstable (culprit was a S3 Savage4, which also has poor quality drivers; now using a GeForce FX5700 LE) so it was changed out for a 95/2000 dual-boot. That desktop is too old to make use of 98-only software, so it keeps 95 forever. But I do have a ThinkPad T41 which is one of the most powerful laptops capable of running Windows 98. Only issue is that the latest ATi Mobility Radeon 7500 drivers are quite poor as several games that work in 2000/XP crash on start in 98. I'm going to look for an older version. I found that if using USB 2.0, use the USB driver installer from the unofficial service pack, which installs the Windows 2000 SP4 USB stack. It's not installed by default, but the executable will be plopped in System32 folder after the main SP updates are installed. Intel or NUSB drivers on their own caused bursts of extreme system-wide non-responsiveness when doing copying operations.

Actually, I've got four copies of that DLL on my win2k system. Three of which are in the New Moon/Serpent binaries. So copy it from there (preferably the x64 binary) into your Iron folder and try. Also try running Dependency Walker to see what else you could need (it has an x64 version).

Native UEFI + GPT is possible with Vista SP1 and above: But it wouldn't surprise me if the newest implementations didn't work well with the Vista EFI bootloader. His posts do indicate that legacy boot (CSM) is available on his machine though.

Yes, that will work in Windows 2000 as well. That also disables the condensed menus.

I've been using Windows 2000 on-and-off for about 16 years (only third to that frivolous XP and 98) and I am very pleased to say that with the help of all those who have contributed to extending its capabilities, it has now reached the high-water mark of being one of the few OSes to remain usable for everyday tasks 20 years after release! A few of my workloads now require Vista/7, but most still do not challenge win2k much. No other OS offers such a degree of folder customization, nor the nice, big picture previews in the "My Pictures" template, neither do I get a task manager with CPU/RAM indicators in a blocky, futuristic font. And I've also got the old Windows flag combined with the post-modern Tahoma font. And enter the extended kernel, to run my browsers and some other newer applications. So, here's to another 20 years for Windows 2000!! scratch that, considering that Windows 2000 was the best operating system around at the start of the millennium, it shall be the best operating system around to end the millennium!!!

If it asks you to enter a key repetitively or complains about missing registry keys, then you need to install Office in XP then copy over the contents of HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Office\12.0\Registration to the win2k machine. This works with the VL version, but unsure about the retail version if problems arise with it.

I'm missing them as well.

Unfortunately PCem only emulates up to a Pentium MMX 233 and a S3 ViRGE DX/Voodoo 2 SLI, which are quite suboptimal for web browsing and D3D 7+ (and probably earlier). The best option would be for a hypervisor to emulate a more-powerful but 9x compatible GPU, like a TNT2 or above (or even better: Radeon 9xxx or GeForce4 and above), removing the overhead of having to emulate the CPU. However such products are focused on servers, so no one has tried to pull this off. And I'd think you would need many CPU threads to get it to work acceptably as well.

My win32k version is 5.2.3790.6080, dated 2017-04-26 17:57. I'm running an X58 system with Xeon X5670 (Westmere).

Yes. My ntoskrnl version is 5.2.3790.5583, dated 2015-03-17.

HM370 chipset, I see. I think you'll have little to no issues installing as 8.1 has inbox USB3 and NVMe drivers. But the Intel UHD Graphics 630 doesn't function very well on 7/8.x based on various reports.

I loaded the page in Serpent 52 x64 without issue. I have every update except for the May 2019 updates.

Windows 7 will remain a viable choice for all those things through the late 2020s by my guess. The major browsers will drop support earlier, but there will probably be builds from people like roytam1 (if not himself) for a very long time.

The banner is not present in newer New Moon 28 releases because the default user agent for youtube.com references Firefox 60, so Polymer v1 appears there (and it's much slower than the old layout on my Core Duo T2400 ). As for Serpent, I simply blocked the banner's elements using uBlock Origin.

I use fcwin2k to "tell" New Moon 28/Serpent 52 that they are running on a newer OS so that pages like the one listed in the OP load. This is with Windows 2000 with Extended Kernel v3.0e and with DX10 compatibility enabled in the extended kernel installer.

I had it the wrong way around, as nss3.dll was making calls to various libraries, including libegl.dll, kernel32.dll and palemoon.exe, but usually not the right one, opengl32.dll. "glGetPointerv" was one such call. These calls were only made when loading that site on a system with the DX10 components; no OpenGL calls are ever made when the module is not installed, nor does it make them on most other sites even when installed. I used Dependency Walker to evaluate. UPDATE: Tested on Vista SP2 + Platform Update and mostly the same behaviour as on Windows 2000 with DX10 module, but it loads successfully. I also compared loading times on XP x64 and 2012R2 (Serpent 2020-02-08 and Pale Moon 28.8 respectively, all x64). They were the same on my Xeon X5670 machine at 13 seconds. So hardware acceleration differences are indeed not a factor. But the site is quite sluggish in general. Oddly enough, if you tell the browsers that they're on Vista or 7, the pages load without crashing in win2k.

Correct.