user57

well actually i do that to make the text easier to read - it seems that didnt work sorry but having the 24 picture / frame question now yes for a smooth video you need 24 frames (and yes 24 times 202´506´240 bits) US gone with 60 frames for TV, EU for 50 frames but 24 are by far ok for a common video but here is a good catch you actually can make 24 frames/pictures in 1/60 of a second (that dont make it 60 frames or with 1/50 seconds 50 frames) it just read out a picture from this world in 1/60 of a second and stores them 24 times (that looks smooth useally too) in well light you even can make 1/1000 or 1/2000 of a second * 24 times i had some big trouble to explain that in a photo forum after that created a mess and the 2 other things i pointed out (having a larger picture and going backwards result in more pixels) (electronic global shutter) (large sensors vs small sensors) - i actually was banned from that forum dont got me wrong i wasnt rude at all - but still that happend but later a other well known photograf pointed out exactly these things and 2 things happend : global/syncron shutters and bigger sensors nailed it - the images where supreme a big win for all less then 24 frames/picture make the video look odd by the way, you see the picture shutter or the people move like they where time skipped - but again taking picture with 1/60 speed is well - and dont need 60 frames you just have 24 picture taken with 1/60 speed

is that a new problem that apeared now ? in the end it has to be a common RGB buffer, RGB is something like the ultimate but it got a problem 1 picture is already very big 1 picture : 4096 * 2060 (4k) = 3 * 8 (RGB) * 4096 * 2060 = 202´506´240 bits older internet connections like 56k maybe got 3,6 kb/s sometimes 5,6 kb/s the same goes for the old sound formats RAW like .wav where pretty big, so when they came up with a .mp3 it was something a 56k modem can do so going back even with 100kb/s , a RAW file in RGB would be to much thats why they decreased the pixels and use compressions like mp4 RGB also has a lot of colors it can display for 24 bits it are already 16,7 millions (thats a lot of colors for 1 pixel) storerage also plays a role, it make sence instead of 24 GB file to use maybe 700 mb files (what are high compressed) thats why they still use compressions , a combinations of the things i just talked about even a stream service use useally a h.265 or maybe still h.264 codec and youtube also do so what youtube (and other website) actually do they use this address to lead to a certain video file this file in then played with a player (in case of chrome that player runs inside the browser) the player then has to decode the file to a RAW file (aka the RGB buffer) that begins with a single picture or RAW buffer or "RGB buffer" to mention is also the including audio codec file (what also is converted to a RAW audio file - what use tricks and stuff to "reconstruct" the audio) - very similar to a video compression if you ask me i wonder if youtube did something here. they actually tryed to avoid the consumer this to be seen / or known youtube itself rather looks like a commercial tv publisher now - thats bad news - because it suppose to be for the consumer (you! - tube ) - but more and more it goes into a different direction if someone noticed the lawers that apeared now and try to explain "what you now should do and what is right or not" is not a lucky apearence - it happend for this specific reason thats also why you see a lot of ad´s now and payable things the lawers in the past already won the lawsuit vs ad blockers - so i think they will take this one too (if they can - they certainly will try - because they will get money from the ad makers)

well someone opened the image format question over SVG we made it to the heic image format (both software and hardware register based (not gpu (but guess what they are useally the same or the software controlled ones are useally a bit better because you can set them + being upgraded)), the same encoder can encode video too what we should realize that we cant skip the encode timing so easy actually it makes a very big difference how complex (aka slower) you set the encoder someone already did a graph showing that https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/968944/195952757-cd1cdab4-6c8e-46a3-b5ed-de7fcce1371f.png https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/968944/195952806-758d0240-020b-4936-ba09-d79e62bf0d3f.png very easy to see it that the image quality (measured in DB (higher is bigger 42 + are useally very good) increases using slower settings while the "fastest" is going with like less DB the "slow" is going with increasing DB so i actually did not want to have the settings faster faster fast ect. because to me it seems a fault to set these but we have some advantaged not only slow we can set the best (placebo) (strukturag only use slow later on) the increase in image quality increase for both (smaller file sizes) and (more image quality overall) using the slow/or aka the encoder settings that do more complex methods that aka take more time so you can pass jpg in both better image quality and smaller file size what i could do is using a pure RGB buffer (what is lossless) aka the BMP file format but a raw file done to PNG is already lossless, im not certain about all compress settings for PNG but the big one (0) is lossless so either having a .heic file you can convert it to a PNG file and see it lossless in the common windows image viewer, or making the .heic file to a jpg and also can open that file with the common windows image viewer what i came to realize is that the heic encoder also can be done others encoders like the AOM encoder or the SVT encoder (those create a .avif file) the methods are very similiar, i think for video avif might have an adventage now because it can use more methods for video - i do not think that is the case for images - but if someone can fix me up just do it with a BMP file we would have a better editing method, we could make the heic file to a BMP file and overwork that BMP in the common windows editor (and then just compress it again) (+ a editor is exactly doing this (you just dont see it useally)) but having video encoder question actually it was actually more difficult to make an image then a video, i think we could do a video encoder also - but that opens a big question to control all the formats is a little to much but a simple one that supports 1-2 formats and not much of settings would be possible not to say that there are h.265 video encoders already out there but the image encoder for .heic supporting xp was a new thing - and that engines removed up, no files needed at all (while the one from win10 need internal win10+ files) https://msfn.org/board/topic/185879-winxp-hevcheifheic-image-encoderdecoder/

from what i remember there once was a virus called CIH this virus deleted up the bios it was often claimed that the BIOS is a non programmable ROM but it was NOT - it was EEPROM aka a programmable "ROM" (Electrically Erasable Programmable Read Only Memory) therefore a decision was made if the EEPROM bios where deleted then it used a backup what actually then was a real non programmble ROM that backup then was put into the EEPROM again that is actually programmable i do not know if that helps

this might be a good time to point out the 4 GB mem limit with a different example harddrives passed the 4 GB limit far earlier then the ram did (this one almost passed it in 1989) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_hard_disk_drives#1980s,_the_transition_to_the_PC_era so when the common assumtion is "32 wires / 32 bit" are just 4 GB limit that is not fully correct https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/minwinbase/ns-minwinbase-overlapped this structure has 2 , 32 bit (high and low) offset addresses that are combined to a 64 bit address so going with the logic "32 wires are the 32 bit 4 GB limit" -> according to this a 32 bit/wire bus can only address 4 GB - and therefore cant address more then 4 GB is also not correct i think everybody gets the point here, there was harddrives bigger then 4 GB before XP even existed - even a IDE bus with 32 wires+ is not limited to that 1 core of 4 ghz speed (with 1 clock/cycle/1s tick) already would be: 4000000000 * 32 bit bus - that would be 14 GigaByte/s a other good thing with 32 bit is that it is also a PDE question (a page directory entry base register) points to a list of "memory entrys" this PDE is changed every app/process/executable so what this can do is that these entrys point to a different location in the physical memory (and therefore we have 4 GB per each app) these dont use the same memory and can point into other memory - to point other the 2 (pse physical size extension, pae physical address extension) (these also can be combined) but the hardware can have limits or the software is not able to do so so you need both the software performing the code and the hardware having the needs paging and segments where some words in the past

dietmar make sure the chipset is supported intel is known for their incompatible chipsets

well i do not think it makes to many sence to have style questions but actually if you do change your style also the buttons and apearness changes up so in my opinion its not more then a style question - that you actually have also have by "control" panel then "appearance" in the very past if you got a UI from somewhere it might even had a few bugs or flaws as long chrome is working well, it rather seems a lluxury question to me

well i think you might should gonna turn the brightness and contrast settings a little lower, every monitor has that

it would be no wonder when some anti virus is coming and claim that to be either malware, virus, trojan horse, potentional unwanted software in the past that was a discussion when microsoft for example handle all results what are virus are - they decide , in fact many marked sams one core api as virus , or my version changer (while being complete open source)

that with the drive wasnt complicated to program you had a buffer to progress (that buffer being the data that is being written to that hdd disc) the hdd drive itself had certain commands it understand "like write or read" you processed it directly via IO command (aka "in" and "out" assembly) you had to a in BYTE(8 bits each)/WORD(16 bits each)/DWORD (32 bit each) - this got repeated with the REP command (repeat command if easy speacing) so here let me take this approach -> that IN OUT command write/read not directly to the HDD drive rather it write that to the CACHE of the HDD the firmware ... then progress it to a physical movement and electric pulse to the HDD head (ect.) so to make people understand why i have to say this first the CPU is a lot faster then the HDD is and the CPU as might i said in the past can translate assembly commands to a "different progressing" with different progressing i mean it can detect a 8 bit move and translate it to a 64 bite (or a lot more) move so now that we know that the HDD cant progress the speed power the CPU has (and therefore use a cache (+ i must say this method got increased up to fast bigger cache like 12 MB or more cache)) you actually read out the status code for the HDD (the hdd then tells you like "im doing this im busy (do not send me data again for now") this is a direct hardware approach the "new" ones a "engine" - yes engine you heared right - i say so because everything today is going through like 8 engines before doing anything (and yes i say it again stop that bullc... everything it filled up with engines today - use less of engines programmers) this "new" is done via a driver (pre driver) and a IRP https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/ddi/wdm/ns-wdm-_irp this IRP is then being progressed - but it still do that classical IN and OUT command just to say this is not a direct hardware approach but it gives the operating system a "standart code" it can operate with - its far less effective and therefore also have less speed (the reason you dont see this so directly is for example that cache reason) but enough about the disc and back to dietmars problem more directly i dont think we can see the reason so directly without having the right tools but the pci bus is fast enough there are certainly differences between PCI standarts either https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripheral_Component_Interconnect the SATA to IDE was already called out to be a idea that however raise the question what standart or norm for that older cpu is working https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATA/ATAPI https://www.elektronik-kompendium.de/sites/com/0501021.htm https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmed_Input/Output this like we creating our first HDD

i was against discord/teamviewer from the beginning, but noone wanted to hear me this is certainly intensional by discord crew to remove these os´s - 100 % they could keep up a older browser version that only means they on the ride with the others who actually try to make this "spy ride" this is still up to date: there is a reason why they are doing this so guys keep looking if you asked for "real name" "email that requies a real name" "smartphone confirmation" "wants neccesary a server (where your data is logged) someone once said (there is no cloud its someones server)" "wants nessesary win10+" "wants a tpm chip" also keep a watching eye if they try to say we do this "spam" no thats not right there are other ways to have spam under control, the past has proofen so or other crap "you give us your smartphone number - good deal (no its not)" or "just install win10 (oh someone actually did what they want them to do" and it it wants a server in between - again "its not a cloud its somebodys server" -> they can look into this - peer to peer are one of their enemys , or self hosted servers teamspeak is a good example how a such problem can be solved - or how it once has been teamspeak allow you to host a server (not always there server (that is spying on you)) in between so they cant just get rid of the server and say it need this supernew +0 functions server (and discord dont allow you to host a server - why - i belive we know the reason) then they actually force you to do more and more things , more and more data from you , more and more that you should accept and nobody can proof these companys that they looked into your computer or chat (even tho you have a right to speak and no1 is allowed to hear into what you talking there - it is actually the same laws for a phone talk) "but you accepted this the company says" it is hard to proof a company that they did a such thing - near impossible - because they only trust you if you let them look your computer - but what is about their computer if you then figured out you face a lawer that trys to reduce the demage (its not like they dont do this - there are proofen cases that they did exactly this) - witch then end in some kind of talk "ah that wasnt so bad - its over now" (something like that) (just for the people - that they dont do that - or cant do that - or will not do that - no they do!)

i heared there once was a extra release windows 3.2 for chinese country only (useally there is only 3.1 or its better version 3.11)

i looked it up from vista to xp it are more then 130 functions that are missing even for redfox that dont include external dll´s such as d3d11.dll

64 bit: and rax, 0fe000000H 32 bit: and eax, 0fe000000H they did this like that ? the FE is are bits 31-25 ok but rax is a 64 bit registers the entire 32-63 bits would be left out, so they have to be certain that what they are changing here is only 32 bits the same question raise for the rcx move if it contains more then 32 bits the others are skipped the same for the next part , sure it depends what is being done here and what bits are need or not they should know what they are doing

windows wise even in user mode it use that overlappended structure (and this one has 32 bit dwords (high and low part) what result in a 64 bit address room) - drives make a good example why the 4 GB address room limit was already passed , because drives passed the 32 bit limit far ealier here comes the "pipe" question - a pipe simple says "do move me 4 gb 10 times" - pipe defined and thats not even what is happening for the hardware it cant move 4 gb so fast the hardware then it limited to like 10 mb/s (and actually need even far smaller pipes)

well thats why i came up with the idea to use a older cpu to have the most of the results if some dont understand whats going on: the disassembly instruction code is useally shown with 2 methods: method 1 : hexadecimal the instruction set goes like this: (instead of 12345678 or 87654321) it go useally like this: 21435687 (memory storeage) for instruction it useally go like this : 12345678 to (real) 78563412 the disassembler dont show you this on the bit code therefore hex 00 01 translate to 0100 what is bit 9 (or classical if you have the 0 its 0 + 8 (9) bit 8 ) (because bit 1 has name bit 0 (and it still has 9 numbers))) thats why dietmar made it correct "test edx, 100h == F7 C2 00 01 00 00" and "or edx, 100h == 81 CA 00 01 00 00" dietmar pointed out that he has a cache problem actually that raise questions , the cpu dietmar use dont got that command but the OS (winxp) might have used up a cache setting, that CPUID command if present holds cache information i do not know how that interacts with the RAM memory - maybe thats some work for the WRK but i do not want to study the function

useally those checks are not far away from the CPUID instruction itself the other way is to store that 2 results somewhere that can be for both (cpuid and "the mask check" 0x00200000 with the eflags (thats flag 21) ) and read them out later in first case you have to find the checks and make the code ignore them in second case you have to find the checks on other possible places the eflags are different from cpuid command there are some commands to control them such as popf, pushf,popfd, pushfd, pushfq, popfq, STAC, UCOMISD/UMCOMISS, VCOMISH, CLAC, COMISD, COMISS FCOMI, FCOMIP, FUCOMI, FUCOMIP the first is a mask check against the eflags the second is cpuid for CPUID it checks bit 8 in EDX (after the CPUID command) called the CX8 flag however there are many more information that comes with the CPUID command instruction for example the USE OF SSE, windows XP very certainly would use the other flags if they are all not set https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPUID i think i already wrote that somehow, you should change the CPUID result to a old processor result without any features and then let the code continue having that results then the code both can either store that result or make a check direct afterwards having that result flag 21 for eflags is the so called "Able to use CPUID instruction (ID)" flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAGS_register chappells worth to mention again https://www.geoffchappell.com/studies/windows/km/cpu/cx8.htm (and yes where chappel mentions the mask acquired: is actually the same solution i wrote up, this code is not from chappel he readed it out from microsoft code) maybe worth to mention is that 2 commands are not atomic either (i dont think that was the question) or 2 times cmpxchg would not work either

do change the posready registry entry change something ? POSReady is just a xp that had longer updates, it updates up older xp versions too https://msfn.org/board/topic/171814-posready-2009-updates-ported-to-windows-xp-sp3-enu/

i came to notice that in that screenshot i see 256 mb ram, it seems you had more success then the old 32 mb problem ?

to be honest personally i dont think it make sence to have a police issue about a open source software if it is really a company secret it has to be hidden very well, in a diamond mine this is the case for example there have to be security so noone can just put the code open source (then maybe they have the rights to follow the issue in my opinion) if it lays open source around it falls under own fault legally - in this case its their fault not putting it on a safe place, furthermore they even put it out freely in the past no one would have a such idea to release their source code , per example if microsoft would have published their entire source code then it would have been copied ... but lets not forget that lawers/and lawmakers made changes here - but they dont have me on their side and never will i dont like the new lawers and their interpretation - maybe they have written weird rules on the paper but i also still belive im allowed to mod my legit buyed copy of windows - while they will keep telling me that i dont have the right to do this if that is the new world, then sorry i just dont agree very common it was a vs fight too closed source vs open source - or company vs free software the new interpretation is going into a different direction like free software(previous also often called open source software) falls under something like a copy right linux vs windows is a such example from the past, MS having a closed source while linux had a open/free source but let´s never forget the story behind that

i tested that website with a nativ win7 machine (with all upgrades) and a unchanged official chrome 109 supermium is already far above that, as seen even on win7 and on a nativ win10 machine with edge win10´s edge might show a few more, but not all while supermium shows all of them

hmm for some reason i can only type a few words - i removed the links and it is still not doing it edited for not can write the entire text

happy to see chappel again the first function mentioned actually tells a discrete use for that cmpxchg8b command in 32 bit mode making a 64 bit change (ExInterlockedCompareExchange64) the sequence chappel mentions is actually the same as the code i wrote chappel also says microsoft use that code if, if the cmpxchg8b command was not found chappel they says microsoft stopped to use to make that check since windows 5.1 (xp) (so we are a little smarter in that sence now) howeever the next part tells a downside, chappel says that needs a storage object for multiprocessors (that SLIST_HEADER structure actually might be a storage object) but actually i use 2 move for exactly what chappels mentions (64 bit PTE´s, i build up those entrys then move it 2 times (high and low parts) ), and it dont cause a crash for what i did use that that might need a confirm from others, maybe it is worth a try (and dietmar has a 486 cpu that one dont use more processors/hypterthreading - anyways) a thread/processor switch takes time if that would be random the entire kernel would interfere anytime - the biggest BSOD i can think of dietmar might can need the next part from chappel that mentions what microsoft is doing to test if that command is available he says microsoft checks (before winxp) that by masking the eflags with the mask 0x00200000 if that cant be done there is no CPUID command (that information is already "almost" enough to not use the cmpxchg8b command) but microsoft makes it correct if the first mask check can be done, microsoft use the cpuid command and checks for the CX8 flag - this makes certain if the cpuid command is available and also checks for the cmpxchg8b command to be available just in case the cpu dont support chmpxchg8b but actually have the cpuid command) i think dietmar can need that information if he makes his 486 (dll) he mentioned , and want to make the check correct

and the firmware translate this correctly ? it would make sence the the harddrives firmware actually know this and translates these to physical places on the real harddrive if the partition can filled with how you want to have the clusters, what is even the problem ?

Cixert creator of thread this has mentioned other methods it always came in to use bigger sectors, it it was mentioned again by Milkinis some say that already worked for them it is a similiar discussion: https://msfn.org/board/topic/176480-2-tib-limit-size-in-mbr-hard-drives/#comments user-mode wise it dont seems a problem to me since it use that overlapped structure it contain 2 times 32 bits (64 bits) offsets -> those get translated to a physical address on a harddrive (i think recently somewhere i pointed that out somewhere passing to 64 bit via a structure) https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/minwinbase/ns-minwinbase-overlapped that harddrive example makes a good example why and how 32 bit where passed, we know why there already where HDD discs with more then 4 GB - so actually we have a passed method because harddrive reached that areas a lot ealier then the RAM to be honest it dont look hard either since the function already can do that - sure i might not know about the windows driver for now ... but that raise the question why the driver cant do that it looks simple to me up to the point i know about it it just has to convert that 64 bit address given in the overlapped structure to a physical offset on the disc if they are 512 / 4096 /whatever "cluster-sector" size thats easy too , that just means you have more data that you actually can use with the 64 bit offset to make an example if the sector size was 1 you might would have have the 4 GB limit with a 32 bit offset, but that simply didnt use the other 32 bits (that are available) in case the sector was 512 with and now having a 4096 sector that means you have 8 times more space 4 gb (32 bit) * 512 = 2,19 TB GPT is a partion not a disc , a partion is a small file on the disc (in the past it was easy to currupt, you had bad luck if that one got demaged) - thats why you rather dont come to easy to access it