NotHereToPlayGames

Comparison #2: I admit that I find this one to be a tad bit of relief. I would have had to "rethink" a few things if this made any "improvement". Removed test-version 10's desktop wallpaper, restored real Windows mouse icon theme, set OS to custom colors (dark Win but LIGHT APP instead of full dark mode), disabled transparency effect, set accent for start/taskbar/title bars. Didn't think those preference would have an effect, but wanted to cite as changes made. I would have really been between a Rock and a Hard Place if idle RAM jumped just by going from Dark Mode to Custom with LIGHT APP, lol.

Comparison #1: UNINSTALLED StartIsBack - nothing for or against, I just feel that it is "stolen property" when it comes *pre-installed/pre-activated* inside a test-version of Win10. Default Start Menu seems to be an IMPROVEMENT over StartIsBack. Again, nothing for or against, per se. 17 minutes of idle had processes at 40, RAM dropped to 0.7, threads at 413, and handles at 17496.

So I've been using a program called "Directory Opus 9" since 2010 as a FULL REPLACEMENT for Win XP's and Win 10's "File Explorer" (also briefly for Win 7). It was paid for by a previous employer and the license has carried over to other installs. I kind of have been using it more out of "habit" than out of it being my best option. I've always LOVED IT. I'm just recently viewing it as a tad bit "heavy" and maybe, just maybe, something "lighter" will serve my needs better. I have not compared to recent versions, it's just the one I had and so I kept dragging it along as my OS changed over the years. I have always used Q-Dir at work (company IT has a tendency to never catch "portable" software that they did not pre-approve so long as that software never connects to internet). Baseline Frame of Reference: Win10 Pro 22H2 VM with 2 GB RAM, default File Explorer, Start Menu pre-replaced with StartIsBack++ 2.9.19 (pre-installed in the "lite" version of 10 being used for testing). 0.8 GB RAM, 44 processes, 536 threads, 20142 handles. RAM fluctuated and dropped to 0.7, processes dropped to 42, threads dropped to 444, handles dropped to 19057 in 38 minutes of Up Time but not doing anything but watching Task Manager.

Are there any other "common denominators"?

I cannot replicate. Brand new Win7 install, brand new Iron v109. Cleared cache, exited, retried two dozen times. Cannot replicate here.

Must be added only in newer versions. I wouldn't have even suggested to give it a try if I knew people were going to get hit with an ad-based version. It was something I only used in my XP Days and never really needed it in 10.

So it only happens to people with Discord? (I don't have Discord.) I did try to replicate in Supermium on XP and in Iron on XP. Could not replicate. I was hoping to be helpful, but looks like nothing I can do to even try to force this redirect. I'll sit back and wait for the experts to have time to investigate. I may install a Win7 VM this afternoon (for nothing more than curiosity and kind of "wanting" to replicate).

Disregard... It's definitely not tied to Supermium...

What about "certificate" that is being used in Win7 versus what is being used in Win10? Okay, I'll shut up now, I can only speculate as I'm on 10 and not able to replicate.

Not to state an obvious, but it looks like a DNS issue to me. Like the browser is using it's "own" DNS and not the OS's. Other than DNS settings specific to Iron, I wouldn't know how to intercept either.

Are any other Supermium users seeing this sort of behavior? https://msfn.org/board/topic/187750-sometimes-redirecting-to-spamgamble-site-when-accessing-msfnorgboard/

I have an added curiosity though - he's running Supermium, is this happening ONLY in Supermium?

Disregard on extension... I took a second look and that's the guy's Google Profile Avatar.

Agreed. I've never seen this happen either. But even so, the responsible thing to do is for the form owner to investigate. I wish that the video report was better resolution, I can't see anything. But I do see an EXTENSION in the upper right corner that I do not recognize.

Um... Not sure what to read &/or infer into this, to be honest. On one hand, IT IS SUPPOSED TO GO UP EACH AND EVERY YEAR !!! No, it won't be an "exact" amount each and every year, won't be strictly "linear". But over the course of time, IT IS SUPPOSED TO GO UP. I can only speak for my own electric bill (Midwest USA). Here is each and every year's annual cost of electricity dating back to 2008 (the year after I bought this house since the first year wasn't a full year). I could even do previous home or apartments if you really want me to. I'm a spreadsheet nerd, I have these dating back to when I moved out of parents' home. Just going by the linear regression y-intercept trend line, that's $769.69 paid for electricity in 2008 and $1,087.03 paid for electricity in 2025. Annualized, that's only a 2.052% increase per year. That's below annualized inflation for the same time span of 2.940% per US CPI. Now then, on the other hand, just WHERE is your increase relative to that 2.940% US Consumer Price Index? Below? Above? By how much? But as far as "went up last year", I for one would personally HOPE SO. Because deflationary is years like 1926-1933, 1938-1940, 1949-1950, and 1954-1955 - I would NOT want to live through those years! That's REAL LIFE NUMBERS but I can only speak for Midwest USA. (ps - that was FUN!)

I'd submit that "quality" is a different argument altogether. Quality is a function of price relative to inflation. If you build it CHEAPLY because the "market" only wants to spend so much, then of course the end result is going to be GARBAGE. "Junk In = Junk Out!" "You get what you pay for." Both apply.

The "improving steadily" and at "faster pace of progress" is NOTHING NEW, in my opinion. So this should really surprise NO ONE. Think of a 1985 computer compared to a 1995 computer compared to a 2005 computer compared to a 2015 computer compared to a 2025 computer. Think of a 1935 refrigerator compared to a 1945 ... 1955 ... 1965 ... 1975 ... 1985 ... 1995 ... 2005 ... 2015 ... 2025 refrigerator. Here's one that I've always laughed at - think of a 1965 clothes dryer compared to a 1975 ... 1985 ... 1995 ... 2005 ... 2015 ... 2025 clothes dryer. Now think of "lint fires" and a clothes dryer burning down your house. MYTHS ASIDE, if your house fire is traced to your laundry room, YOU ARE INVESTIGATED FOR FRAUD. Because this isn't 1965 and clothes dryers simply do NOT catch your house on fire! No matter how loudly your grandmother claims that they do! Ask any fireman, ask any insurance claims adjuster. Think of any 1935 automobile compared to a 1945 ... 1955 ... 1965 ... 1975 ... 1985 ... 1995 ... 2005 ... 2015 ... 2025 automobile. Think of any 1935 <insert name here> compared to a 1945 ... 1955 ... 1965 ... 1975 ... 1985 ... 1995 ... 2005 ... 2015 ... 2025 <insert name here>.

We're veering off-topic, so I'll make this my closing remark. 10 is plenty for "browsing", per se. And having "fast internet" can sometimes cause more harm than good. I *intentionally* "throttle" my connection when streaming from my "tv provider" (I don't have a "tv", everything is streamed via computer or laptop). I "throttle" all the way down to 100 KB/s [so literally 1/100th of 10 MB/s] (I get buffer-lag at 75 KB/s but ZERO buffering issues at 100). This *forces* my "tv provider" to *STOP* sending me 4k resolution video streams! I have no use for 4k because it pegs my very old laptop's CPU at 100%. Why would I watch an hour or so here and there or an entire Sunday with the CPU pegged at 100% for the entire time? Would KILL this laptop in a matter of days. 100 KB/s seems to be perfect for 720p streaming "on the side" (more than fine for laptop display as "background" to real computer adjacently performing real tasks). That drops CPU to below 28%. 300 KB/s seems to be perfect if I want to "allow" my tv provider to send 1080p. At the expense of bumping the CPU up to around 35% and that's enough for the fan kicking up to a higher RPM occasionally.

10-40 MB/s sounds slow to me. But I had to learn something new... From here: https://www.techcalc.org/blog/mbps-vs-mbps-download-speed-explained My wireless fluctuates between 46 and 66 MB/s. So yeah, 10 on a wired is a definite sad face.

Wow! That was even more OT, random, and out-of-nowhere than even a lot of my posts!

I know, that's why I bought it. But... It did not come with the motherboard on this cheap budget-market eMachine. It was just the *BEST* replacement CPU that I could throw at it to get some life out of it when a piece-of-junk freebie was given to me. I got several years out of it, only for the cost of a CPU that would have been at least a decade old and was pennies to the dollar of what it cost in 2007.

On second thought, and not interested in digging up reviews and whatnot, but I should probably put Acer as "more junky" then eMachine. Both are "budget markets" and both were so JUNKY that the owners that bought them HATED them so much that they GAVE THEM AWAY FOR FREE. One of the Acer's I did buy (WORST MISTAKE I'VE EVER MADE), the other was given to me, this eMachine was also given to me.

Yes, SAME HERE, *flawless, butter, blah-blah*. But no, NOT if I'm doing nine things at once and one of those nine is 1080p. Not a Dell. Two Acer's went to Goodwill. This one is an "eMachine" (far FAR worse than Dell and far FAR worse than Acer).

4.3% with what margin of error ??? Because a different web site reports 3.9%. At any rate, do you really think 4.1 +/- 0.2 is really anything at all ??? And if single thread is more important (some cite it is!), then were talking 0.5%.

And yes, AV1 is the key. Try VP9 and report your findings. :)