Jump to content

NotHereToPlayGames

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,181

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    83

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    United States

 Content Type 

Everything posted by NotHereToPlayGames

  1. NotHereToPlayGames
    A fellow MSFN Member is claiming that the reason that Chrome version 119 works in Windows 10 1507 is because the creators of Chrome read MSFN posts and was afraid of bad PR if they didn't make v119 work in 1507. The claim is that it is just too much of a coincidence for this to have happened without Google reading MSFN posts and making software decisions based on those posts. No taking sides!
  2. NotHereToPlayGames
    I will accept @AstroSkipper's perspective on this - but he cannot "agree with you just because it is you", WAY too much of that going on here at MSFN. Him being a mathematician will surely not accept "theoretical speculative heresay" over mathematic logic and reasoning. That is, if he's even inclined to comment. Totally up to him, of course. This "theoretical speculative heresay" would never hold up "in court of law", as the saying goes. Under a paradigm of theoretical speculative arguments, one must admit that one can claim ANYTHING that they want, no matter how far-fetched, and place it under an umbrella of "theoretical cause and effect" versus a true Scientific Approach. I'm being serious, just ponder for a moment the MOUNTAINS of arguments one could EASILY pass off as "reality" if speculation and "the help of AI" were our Litmus Test. *I* could claim that *I* invented anti-lock brakes because I slid off the road in the Winter of 1970 and posted something at MSFN regarding the incident and that post was THEORETICALLY "data mined" before the term AI ever became mainstream. We like to claim Google reads MSFN and creates google-isms based on that reading - sorry, it's not happening, it's just our minds creating our own reality. The difference between reality, illusion, and imagination is not that big of a psychological concept - the difference exists solely within one's mind. My mind. Your mind. Insert-name-here's mind. I work in Engineering. If there isn't DATA and NUMBERS to "back it up", then it doesn't exist.
  3. NotHereToPlayGames
    I kind of doubt it. I am not positive, but I think that some web browsers (may only be macOS) do convert-in-place conversions and display .webp images even when .jpg was issued. You would have to alter the HTTP "Accept" Request Header in order to prevent this.
  4. NotHereToPlayGames
    Win10+ users also have the option of removing the wepb (pronounced "weppy", if I recall correctly) -- Get-AppxPackage -allusers Microsoft.WebpImageExtension | Remove-AppxPackage –allusers Those familiar with PowerShell will know how to use that line.
  5. NotHereToPlayGames
    Yes, but also just a theory. Without the company's web site saying right there in black and white for all to read, "Due to discussions at MSFN, we have altered our policy so as to avoid any possible bad PR", then this theory is nothing but SPECULATION. And let's face it, if I posted such SPECULATION here at MSFN, we would have a small "gang" of three or four MSFN Members make it their mission to "run me out of town". West Side Story. AI is not a mature technology yet. AI can be "wrong" just as easily as it can be "right". No mature company is going to rewrite corporate policies based on some AI feed giving them "misinformation". But anyway, lol. I'll leave it for the "gang" to settle.
  6. NotHereToPlayGames
    No it isn't. More like proof that you "see what you want to see". And obviously this post is "just as" OT as yours. West Side Story. And no, it's not a "western". Good day, mate.
  7. NotHereToPlayGames
    I'm in the "not concerned" camp.
  8. NotHereToPlayGames
    On your Win10 1511, do you have a "System and compressed memory" process always running at 15% to 30% for CPU when sitting IDLE? Win10 1607 on the same exact laptop idles at 1% to 3%.
  9. NotHereToPlayGames
    Yes. Roughly 5 to 7 seconds in Win 10 1511 (inline with XP). Roughly 14 to 17 seconds in Win 10 1607. First launch and first launch only coming out of hibernate or full shutdown.
  10. NotHereToPlayGames
    I was not citing win32 directly, so unsure why his birthday has any relevance. Our own IT department extends the kernel of embedded XP applications that run some of our factory equipment. Guess my main point was that "knowledge learned" during the whole modding process is never a "waste of time", even if a mod is "short-lived" as far as useful for Year X but no longer useful for Year Y. I do think it is fair for this thread to not be locked in to any specific "older Windows 10 versions and RTM". Or any specific version of Chromium. My experience with Win10 is fairly new. At this stage, it is more of a "hobby project". 1511 not having an LTSB version is a minor concern. It definitely requires much more modding in order to make it a lean and mean OS. I am only one day in on modding my 1511 and already have it very close to my 1607 LTSB. Ungoogled Chromium v114 does work equally well in both 1511 and 1607. Will Ungoogled Chromium v200 still work in 1511? Don't know. Will that be 2 years from now? Or 10 years from now? Will Ungoogled Chromium v200 still work in 1607? Don't know. Will that be 2 years from now? Or 10 years from now? I am leaning on the side of 1607 becoming my new preferred OS. But it's also a bit too early to tell as this "hobby project" is just unfolding.
  11. NotHereToPlayGames
    I don't see it that way. Modding shouldn't be regarded as "time wasted" simply because what is modded today will need performed again 2 or 3 years down the road. Today's Linux is nothing more than modified open-source "mods" of yesterday's Linux. Backporting Opera not intended to run on Vista or 7 and getting it to work on Vista or 7 should never be thought of as "time wasted". An "extended kernel" is nothing more than an evolving set of "mods". Nowhere near "time wasted". Tweaking and modding and optimizing an OS should be regarded as learning experiences, technological evolution, the computer equivalent of hiking a trail in a rain forest opposed to walking a treadmill at the gym. Extending a kernel is never "time wasted". I guarantee you that folks that "extend" kernels were tweaking and optimizing Win98 long before they were "backporting" Win10 functions to Vista, for example. I'm only "just now" migrating some (not all!) of my XP systems to Win 10. I guarantee you that the XP install I was using yesterday is not the same as the XP install I was using 20 years ago. And the learning experiences of tweaking and optimizing XP over the years only assists is tweaking and optimizing 10. Doesn't the gaming community tweak and mod in the spirit of competitive advantage? Should we view that as "time wasted"? (I cite that one as a bit of a pun).
  12. NotHereToPlayGames
    There are days where MSFN is nothing more than a remake of West Side Story.
  13. NotHereToPlayGames
    Can I claim that being an MSFN Member is punishment enough.
  14. NotHereToPlayGames
    I found my 1511. Plan to test it compared to LTSB 2016 [1607] over the weekend. Did a "default" install in a VM and Ungoogled Chromium v114 works, that's the HIGHEST version I will need for the next SEVERAL years (technically v86 still meets ALL of my needs). Will require some very heavy tweaking and modding and debloating compared to LTSB.
  15. NotHereToPlayGames
    Cathedra mea, regulae meae.
  16. NotHereToPlayGames
    So Chromium 119 works on 1511 but does not work on 1507? So far, I'm not sure if I'm going to keep LTSB 2016 [1607]. When (and only when!) I resume from hibernate or perform a full restart, the first (and only first!) launch of any Chrome/Chromium browser (including Opera and Vivaldi) takes 16 to 34 seconds to launch! Sorry, but "unacceptable". Online reading suggests that MS Edge does not have this delay (but there is no "ungoogled" vesion of Edge and this is equally "unacceptable" for my preferences). Official Pale Moon does not have the launch delay but holy d@mn is it SSLLLOOOOOOWWW for EVERYTHING that a browser is supposed to be capable of doing.
  17. NotHereToPlayGames
    Not likely, to be perfectly honest. While I do follow this thread [and respect the knowledge herein] (and basically "all" threads here at MSFN), I don't actually use "security programs" on ANY of my OSs. <side note - https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/feature/Which-is-correct-OSs-OSes-or-OSs > <insert AstroSkipper's "to each their own" gif>
  18. NotHereToPlayGames
    News to me. I didn't think this thread was dedicated to x86 "only". Unsure of what the split is on MSFN Members that run XP as to how many of them are x86 versus x64. I run x64 (Windows XP Professional x64 Edition) but had no clue that there are "two versions" of x64. Interesting. It is safe to say that no MSFN Member is running the "Itanium" edition.
  19. NotHereToPlayGames
    Always makes me HAPPY TO READ. Especially with a very long and growing list of "posts" here at MSFN that like to remind us that much newer versions of Chrome shouldn't even be used. "We know already." Something like that. I have St52 at home and will test this player and "Google-ism" from St52 later today.
  20. NotHereToPlayGames
    I do have an old 15xx LTSB lying around somewhere. May need to resurrect it. I thought it was 1507 instead of 1511 but I really don't remember without reinstalling it.
  21. NotHereToPlayGames
    I feel like a "broken record", but don't care. Sad part is "you already know that".
  22. NotHereToPlayGames
    I did see 6% boost on some benchmarks on LTSC 21H2, but slight decreases in other benchmarks. But I'm also still digging for some drivers before I can officially migrate to LTSC 2021 (if I end up migrating). Overall, it just doesn't seem that LTSC 2021 really gains me anything over LTSB 2016. Process count TRIPLES but even with the much higher process count in LTSC 2021, it does seem to perform "equally" (within margin of error) with LTSB 2016.
  23. NotHereToPlayGames
    For my very old Asus X54C with Win10 LTSB 2016 [1607] - Passmark CPU Mark five-run-average (very tightly clustered, very good for statistics) scored 1343 (like I say, very old Asus X54C). The CPU Mark five-run-average (still very tightly clustered) improved to 1345 by disabling Spectre/Meltdown. Ugh, hardly worth the effort.
  24. NotHereToPlayGames
    I've been recently comparing/contrasting Win10 LTSB 2016 [1607] with Win10 LTSC 2021 [21H2] (not to be confused with LTSC 2018 [1809]). The gaming community forums tend to prefer 1607 over 1809 but don't seem to discuss 21H2. But one thing of interest, the gaming community also often intentionally disables Spectre/Meltdown mitigation (intentionally making themselves "vulnerable") for a gaming performance IMPROVEMENT. Here is one analysis that cites 4% performance boost by running UNPATCHED - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC1WuKdPVCQ Here is a third-party tool to intentionally disable Spectre/Meltdown protection - https://www.grc.com/inspectre.htm Reminder that some of our HARDWARE provides Spectre/Meltdown protection. The added software layer only "slows down our computer" (not claiming "night and day", but there is a performance effect).
  25. NotHereToPlayGames
    Can't! Disabled "feature" on company computers, as it should be I'm sure you'd agree. Can't enable it if I wanted to. But I also assume you were kind of asking "as a joke". Or do you report this type of stuff to Microsoft? I prefer to disable "error reports" on my home computers also. edit - but we are clearly getting further and further off-topic so "moving on", as the saying goes...
×
×
  • Create New...