user57

hmmm maybe we should ask Dibya about the 128 GB ram patch for XP (there is a such thing - do i know if it works - no i do not know if that 128 gb ram patch works - but i know 32 bit can pass the 32 bit address room) from what i remember he said he tested that and it works, when i first seen the 128 GB patch i had doubts Dibya should be still around, he may know better about that 128 GB patch for XP, maybe others also know some details, geoffchappell also has mentioned that 128 GB ram somewhere if there is nobody at least it seems that we have people that want to test that out a problem could be that it maybe is app/executable-wise, but thats still ok then you have 4 GB RAM each app, only 2 APP´s would already use 8 GB of ram - what sound ok to me i say this because i remember a problem with the PDE/PTE´s windows had it calced for exactly 4 GB ram, so going past might overwrite one of the entrys (they follow up directly) i do not know if windows has a different way to handle this if more then 4 GB are present, this is not a problem if that PDBR (that i mentioned is involved) - because that exactly leads to 4 GB / per app

there are basicly 4 things that can pass the 4 GB limit 1 PAE physical address extention 2 PSE page size extension 3 the PDBR (page directory base register) 4 segments also worth to mention is setting the userspace to 3 GB instead of 2 GB with normal settings windows xp use 0-7FFFFFFF (usespace of 2 GB) the rest for kernel mode this can be changed with /3GB then the userspace is going up to BFFFFFFF (3 GB) its only 1 GB more, but it is considerable to some extend to not explain it to a long story text i try to make it short PSE can extend the page size - a page is a certain amount of memory like 4KB PSE can increase that to 2 MB or 4 MB each page PAE this can use more address bits and therefore using more then the 32 bit limit the PDBR is something that points to a "APP/Executable" memory these are filled with PDE (PAGE DIRECTORY ENTRY(s)) and (Page Table Entry(s)) these can address a different spot in memory, therefore you can have an APP each time for 4 GB address room this dont extend the memory for 1 app to more then 4 GB ram, but allows you to have many APP´s with each having 4 GB address room segments: a segment was a known thing in 8 or 16 bit mode a segment point to a fraction of memory like for 16 bit it would be 64 KB (per segment) the next segment is then a next segment of 64 KB (for that example it would be 0-65535 kB then 65536-131070 (that makes a segment 0 and a segment 1 - aka 2 segments) also worth to mention is what you called out the normal harddrive what today is a SSD (flash memory) xp use that as memory too(yes it can use a HDD or SSD as ram) since we have SSD now this isnt a bad thing SSD´s are fast in the past you used up a slow harddrive and the loadtime was like terrible this is called the PAGEFILE so storing data to the disc is also an option that we can mention also worth to mention is that 32 bit can calculate with at least 64 bit (its the FPU unit or so called XMM registers) if you have AVX 32 bit can even handle 512 bit since these are made speed if if you are on x64 bit, MMX/SSE/AVX are faster then normal opcodes ... so if someone gonna challenge SSE or AVX with normal 64 bit opcodes he still gonna lose very hard against this hardware speed registers by far they not 1 times faster often 50 or 500 times faster in short story first was MMX then got the name SSE then SSE version X-X then SSE was called AVX (so basily its the same nature) i could write more detail, but its like complicated stuff and would fill to much of text now 2 more things are also important to remember: the hardware has to be able to do so (an example would be that there are only 32 wires or the cpu dont got the PAE or PSE mode - so lets just say cpu and bus/ram have to be capable to do so), the software has to have it supported/programmed (aka windows in our case)

maybe joaquim is a good candidate to reprogramm VDMSound, and the right spot to ask would be that dosbox guys it only has a few people working on it https://github.com/volkertb/vdmsound

it might be an application that starts up this. try msconfig and look around

well from a programming perspectiv it is most likely the buffer it also can be the cpu what ticks cant read it out smoothly so knowing if this happens on a faster cpu/ram is also a little piece from consideration a good way would be to know 1: the game (i suspect its a game) 2: the source code of the emulator 3: a open source game if it has the same problem having those give you insight in the input (such as your open source game) and where it lands (the emulator) 1 way was already said, just using a different emulator one programming way would be instead of just playing that sound instead is loading the sounds into a memory location, memory accesses are a lot faster a ssd would also be possible a to small buffer can also be the case a false order (such as a wrong interpretation) if the source is slow the buffer is slower to be filled (delay) a very common windows function to play a wavesound would be playwave: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/dd743680(v=vs.85) a codec such as mp3 use compression tricks that goes from lossless tricks to "what soundwaves the ear hears better "soundhearing" " the mp3 does not recontruct the wave as it was to be for example mp3 boost certain types of wave forms you might dont hear that so well - but in a wave compare programm you can see that then there are like longer discussions too for example that 18-24 khz discussion "can you hear the 20 k tone or not ect." a other one would be the "sample rate" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(signal_processing) often in a computer its just a small piece of data like "make 10 k wave" "make 2 k wave" ect. at the end a sound is nothing but a wave form i think it is certainly possible to find that issue but its work to do all the steps you have to search the right code, the right OS, the right compiler, the right debug toolz, the right places of the code, you have to run tests ect.

32 MB/s is a very common speed for old flash memory - you might look what speed your flash usb stick has flash memory are in USB sticks, SD-cards and SSD harddrives to make an older example the super ninentendo ram uses flash memory https://www.kingston.com/en/blog/personal-storage/memory-card-speed-classes flash memory is a lot faster then reading from optical devices (like the cd-rom to dvd/blu ray) - the cd-rom use light to read out the signal the next storage is a common hdd drive, it use a magnetic tape older versions where VHS (yes hdd drives and vhs have a "head" for the reading signals) those are cheaper to manufacture the optical devices long lost the battle also because they are bigger light is around 380-800 nanometers while a modern CPU goes with 5 nanometers, thats a lot smaller then the light also a common myth is that light drives faster then "electrons" , this is not the case what also is very important is the frequency that can be used - not always only the "drive speed" a fibre-glas-wire is also never straight it bounces in the wire - also the "basel effect" makes it impossible for light to go straight - therefore you never reach the 300 000 km/s (travel not tick/frequency speed) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basel_problem a next problem is that the "photons" due that problem have different momentums so some overlap because a different momentum - so some what not suppose to reach the target yet are hitting the target before the others then you have to give the "photons" more time - what result in less speed now the catchy part photons dont exits its a so called electromagnetic spectrum (aka 380-800 nm) there are smallers (gamma rays for example) that also travel in that 300 000 km/s speed

you might have an example where and how exactly it starts to lag from what i know the ms-dos mode is not a real ms-dos mode anymore for xp it is a "emulated dos" some old ms-dos stuff do not work there anymore i criticized that trend also in win98 - in win95 when you returned to dos-mode useally worked ... in 98 it was bugged already you had to boot up in dos mode first windows 98 and his last release (windows me) still had 16 bit parts inside that gone away while windows me had its turn (and to my opinion was a bit more bugged then win98 SE) they made their first 32 bit only aka nt 3.1 4.0 and 5.0 (what later was called windows 2000) is it a ms-dos game ? its been really long when i programmed a dos sound device (midi and wave for example) so its hard to say where the problem is if we dont know the cpu and the ms-dos app sure i think also xp still has open possibilities regard backwards compatibility to ms-dos as i think xp has found a nice compromise to still support backwards, somewhere in the xp area and future compatibility

SSE dont sound to bad for me to be honest, at some point a CPU would probaly just be to slow to handle the job - here it might could be solved but is it that SSL that was written in SSE ? if so it is certainly possible to write that one to normal opcodes then you probaly need to understand that XMM logic and transfer it to normal opcodes (emulators of elder retro games do so for example). since it would be a hash then nobody would reconize a differenz

"ImportError: DLL load failed while importing win32api: The specified module could not be found." that one sounds of interests because if its right what it says it has searched for a module (aka a dll or similiar) not a missing function (that may resides in that youtube downloader code) as i said i dont know python so i cant say exactly - but if its the other way around (for example it did not find the function) that description message is wrong but as i know python is a challenger to java - and java is rather a script/engine like language that means if a certain version build in some new functions or changed things up you bond to that engine - therefore it breaks up it got an advantage however since its a script "that should solve a piece of code" that code can get a different interpretation then that function can just be replaced with one function that works with the backwards compatibility i have a bit of a different meaning to vistalover you can write a code that works for all os (in this case just normal opcodes) then both works - and its "like" a end of story the way this gotten is a bit weird it sounds like 1 guy tryed to go against many people code (what he probaly has hard to win over) while if all just made normal opcodes that would not even have been a problem it makes it sound like its hard to make it backwards compatible - but rather its oposite in this case it might be right if you make the right "if´s" but if it gone the other way around (just making normal opcodes) neither future nor the backwardsguy "diskf" would have any problems and that way it would not be harder for anyone either in sence of a company backwards compatibility is a good thing - because it means more buyers, as it has a wide range of users that can buy that product

i do not know python however if i interpret it right it says it cant install that "packet" called "pypiwin32" version "219" ? if so not the compiler told you a problem, then the installer of that pypiwin32 failed whatever name it can be given "packet" "plugin" "addon" "extra piece to pyhton software" "pypiwin32 v219" https://pypi.org/project/pywin32/ only in case if i suspected right, if not im happy to see the comments and being correct to the right thing

a fingerprint ? its just a infrared light (flash) that red light is used as flash on your finger - then a sensor record that image that image is then compared with all "finger-pictures" it has in the databank like being a criminal :-) a few also look for the finger temperator with a second sensor (but why, then you hold that guys cutted finger under your arm - and that finger has the right temperature) the iris scanner is working similiar - the iris is even a little more unique - im not certain what light is used - but also it is a picture

i get it, its that python compiler that use these sse commands then that vc14+ are just different writings that the compiler has to translate, the compiler probaly didnt care using normal opcodes instead it just included sse commands the compiler then see what you wrote and translate them into opcodes, link them together ect. that c-runtime made us problems, in the past we could just edit the c++ files that generate that c-runtime that c-runtime is a .obj file (that one contains the functions the compiler links against/to) microsoft then hidden that .obj file somewhere (actually we dont know where maybe as resource in the vs2019 executable or that hidden .obj file somewhere in its temp files) - but no matter we know its a .obj file people wondered why they see functions in vs2019 they never used in their entire code - the c-runtime ".obj file" thats why it get executed before your executable is running -> after that it executes your code i did not find a good method that gives that vs2019 a good buildchain (so our functions are overruled) , and somehow you cant override these functions , if you try to trick that c-runtime it come up with an error i still wonder why a modern vs2019 compiler dont have a such thing, there seems to be no real override method vs2019 offers then it would be about to edit the python compiler and replace the instructions if python is open source - so you right to choose 2 executables - the other way around makes to much work

the same downloader has 2 versions for SSE2 and SSE ? why it didnt go the common way like check if mmx -> use mmx , if sse -> use see, if sse2 -> use sse2, ongoging you can definatly make it so, the compiler like vs2019 use sse if not turned off but if you have a routine that use sse you can skip it if you need, therefore the opcodes are then skipped if you dont have sse you can use normal opcodes or a different mmx-avx routine to have the right functional code one way to emulate a 64 bit command with normal opcodes is doing it multiple times , and instead of a register you can use the stack or some memory space you can control that piece as 64 bit i think dietmar did a such thing regarding replacing the 32 bit command CMPXCH8B command, it is a command that can change 64 bits in 32 bit operating systems using two 32 bit registers if its the same downloader it might solve this issue

i think i have to understand the problem regarding oauth he wanted to get his emails with outlock - what is normal and common then microsoft aka hotmail.com added that oauth now it raise questions a : it need a second email for oauth / or login and pw for that oauth server b : it is just a mechanism that connect to that oauth server - where outlock dont have the oauth code - so it cant make this part and microsoft email just stops doing its job having that what they called a "token" to me it seems to be some hash then it can call with this hash, the server of interests and gather the data of interests that rather sounds like you have a login to some kind of server that says "this IP has sended me the right code - let this guy on your server" this sound all very old like a handshake with TCP SSL or a server that gives out something like "let this guy in" then your email such as a hotmail email allows you to see facebook, paypal, youtube - without having entered the password for facebook,youtube or paypal it raise questions where this oauth has its code , but the part that is making the question to the oauth server has to be on the users computer if its that it might be a module, a internal function, a hash maker in firefox, a certain code that is being executed that sounds insecure to me if someone has the right conditions can probaly just enter your facebook , youtube or wrose your paypal account this not only goes for a hacker, that also means people of interests can just make this with your account (such as the right people who have that trusted status - and that will not only be the police - and if so it raise questions why the police can just enter and look around in your facebook,youtube or paypal without having anything going on ...) so its a spy mechanism for the state - the more they know about the people the better they can enslave/control them (because guess what these people will have that mechnism´s - one might claim "on no i would not do that" - nope he will do he get a letter from a lawers and at some point he collopse, or something like "we dont do it yet/now" -> "oh see there in 2025 the terms of use changed now every people i want i can give this") so we cleared 1 question, why the do this - it dont give any security questions, rather it opens security questions and we know how this ends in a change of the so called "terms of use" - and then its done - you can be spyed

to me OAuth looks it just being a extra mechanism something like "shake-hands", that xp certainly could do if the mechanism is known where and how the picture OAuth only also shows a picture where your computer is asking their "OAuth-server" if everything is ok - this "OAuth-server" then communicated with the target (such as youtube, microsoft and others) when the OAuth with your computer was ok and the others (yt,ms ect.), then it grants access to the wanted resources like pictures and video that dont sound so special to me SSL or TCP-handshake is doing a similiar thing to me then it sounds like they just added a next one doing the same thing, with only one difference that a such mechanism is used 2 times

i have made a nice visual for the PSE (Page Size Extension) - the memory limit in the right part of the picture is from a older list of memory limits - that may or may not also include the other method (PAE Physical Address Extension) or both PSE and PAE combined the calculators show the related bits in 1010 binary format and in DEC for both 36 bit or 40 bit (since amd athlon maybe ? but somewhere around 1999 that started - now we have 2024) as you can guess PSE is 1 of the methods to reach more then 4 GB ram the other is PAE, a third way would be a second/3/4/ect. application (that then can address or point to different physical memory) interesting i find that intel lacked behind with 36 bits (64 GB) while amd already had 40 bit (1024 GB) also we can see that windows 2000 can have more then 4 GB ram, in that list it has 32 GB of ram (that also fits to the release dates of the cpu´s)

that might be interesting most cpu´s had 64 bit support while everybody used up 32 bit the speed maybe ? hmm no mainly because 2 reasons first normal opcodes are not that fast (you lose vs 32 bit even on x64 bit if you use MMX-AVX (we talked about fast cpu and compatible cpus recently)) then also you have more then 32 bits on that MMX or AVX registers (in 32 bit mode) then the next question kicks in high languages are rather made for making the things simple - but they are not fast c++ found a good compromise however it still lose to a assembly implementation so if somebody say i want to use 64 bits because that is faster then i must say no rather changing your programming language would speed up your code a lot (and also significant lower the file size) there is a big downside to assembly and maybe c++ but lets talk about assembly first, you need to know like a lot more of math and logical reason to do this also you need to write the entire code yourself (not like for (x=1,x<3x++)) you have to write this code this make it a lot more work ... - definatly a downside a other problem are engines, engines are useally simplier to program but also they not very fast (so that have to leave to if you ask for speed question) i dont want to talk to much off topic now but we had a such discussion recently (LAV engine) - but that is not true so directly it already are 2 engines (that LAV engine + the d3d9 engine) (and thats only the ones we certainly know of - maybe there are more) (now we have 2 engines it goes through before it even reach anything ... while we figured out that we dont even need that engine nor a engine to do so ) a other discussion is the memory limit and no the thing can be a little harder here i wrote about that already so i try to make it short this time in the past segments was a word (in like 8 bit and 16 bit (65kb) or 20 bit (1mb)) so the idea was to have a segment that points to 16 bit memory (65 kb) that * 4 bits (256 * 65 = ~ 1 mb) (i think some should have heared about that 1 mb thing somehow or seen somewhat) (here one for later to have one from wiki) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_memory_segmentation a segment is like a arrow -> segment -> 0 = 0-65 kb segment -> 1 = 65-131 kb so if one arrow points to a house and that arrow can aim for a different house you understand segmenting to call out this part, 32 bit has segment registers - but it would be rather a long story more into detail (rather talking about 4 kb or 4 mb pages (long mode) ect.) the most applications dont need 4 gb either, for sumatra pdf this is the case - you can set the compiler to x64 (chrome for example start up a an next application (always called chrome.exe) and having always new address room) but except that the file is more and that it dont start on 32 bits nothing is diffrent for sumatra pdf, and guess what you can run that 32 bit sumatra pdf on x64 too to me that raise questions why i would even compile a x64 version

can i ask why is having x64 important ?

to be honest i do not know all the user/system settings that are possible however the restriction that the other "users" cant do anything was a common want there used to be like a father giving his son his PC, making him a such "user" account - restricted , not followed to see everything , not allowed to install everything also on the most installers you can select "for all users(aka system)" or just "this user"

i think neither where that leads to, he should try to be the administrator and see if that happens there

on your installation you didnt set a administrator pw ? if empty you can just click ok there are programs and methods to remove that administrator password - maybe someone point it out some of those, its been a while for me since i do this - i never had problems with this as im always logged in as admistrator maybe: ? https://www.partitionwizard.com/clone-disk/windows-xp-password-reset.html

well it says check to free disc space that´s an easy one start -> my computer -> (rightclick local disc C:)) -> properties (free disc space) for the permissions you look the folders if something is wrong check all permissions C:\Documents and Settings\ C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\ C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\ you look there if you have the right permissions "All Users" describe you not logged as administrator you can try "right click and start as administrator on one of these installers" or you can change the user to administrator and see if the installation works there that is somewhere start->Log Off where you can switch the user

well if that is always the problem adding the algo why you not just write them to normal assembly commands ? that is possible making that hash/algo with normal commands dont cause more cpu intensity because they are only a small thing in the code MMX and all its followers are rather for cpu intense parts (such as a decoder or encoder, or a sort mechanism) - but just to make a hash ? that raise questions its going back to a old story - where the makers once had 2 cpu´s 1 with old but very compatible commands (that only got improved in speed) 1 with specific made for speed but no compatibility - almost nothing worked here - and if so they had to be entire rewritten only to do so - big cost = both where taken - the CPU can do normal commands and MMX+ commands now they already beginning to say something like hum now we have AVX we dont need SSE4 or SSE2 anymore to my opinion the answer is very clear - we can have both

you wrote "Problem is that when i tried to install Visual C++ 2010 Redist" but thats a own installer its called something like "vcredist_x86.exe" but then in the screenshots you tryed to install some kind of the "dot.net framework 4 installers" later on "adobe reader xi" that raise the question why you said the VC 2010 redist is the problem - while you tryed to install different things while framework said the disc is full or inaccessable adobe said something like it cant connect the update server (if i got this one it right) there are installers need internet access is it a windows 32 bit XP or a win 64 bit XP ? 32 bit framework 4 to try (KB982670): https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/ScopedViewInline.aspx?updateid=0d076fbf-33cd-4b86-9288-ab31899b74da 64 bit version (KB982670 x64): https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/ScopedViewInline.aspx?updateid=434aa8fa-b425-47a9-be5b-dd000b66c6ed one more thing about the x64 bit version of XP - that time everybody used a 32 bit system thats why there are 32 bit version of the next following operating systems that time we could not find any real advantage to a x64 bit system therefore x64 XP missing many fixes that XP got up to 2019 - the people didnt care about it much - seems microsoft neither you can run a chrome 32 bit version on a 64 bit machine np, but if you set the compiler to "x64" you cant run it in 32 bits - while giving litterally no advantage chrome is running new executables (aka starting up chrome.exe severial times) - and those all got 2-4 gb room (that is a lot for a app) 2 GB if you want just userspace , 3 GB if you use the large page version (then the userspace is 3 GB for each startet app), 4 GB if you include the entire address room directly however those executables can point to different memory - therefore it can pass the 32 bit limit of 4 GB , by starting up multiple executables (only 1 way of severial ways, as paging can point to different memory too(paging was a thing in the past - it seems it got forgotten there was for example a 64 kb vs 1 mb paging version, just to make an example)) let us know if these framework installers work or not ty

the lap-top "Lenovo G580" you described has sse but or we talking about the specs you posted below ? "AMD Athlon 600 MHz" that one only got MMX just to confirm are you talking about this one ? : https://support.lenovo.com/us/en/solutions/pd025312-overview-lenovo-g580