docR

Hardly surprising given Roytam1's unbranded XP port, but Interlink mail client is also fully functional with the kernel. Nice client, I'll add. I extracted the core folder from the installer and just ran the executable from a local directory. Lightning works with bidirectional Google Calendar support too, but you'll need to enable the Firefox user agent in the configurations editor for that to function properly.

You can smoothen out the fonts in Firefox by switching back to the old font rendering. Go into about:config - > gfx.canvas.azure.backends > direct2d1.1,cairo,skia (old font rendering) gfx.content.azure.backends > direct2d1.1,cairo,skia (old font rendering) (compliments Aris from CustomCSSForFx) Or if you're using CTR in Wf Classic, (the sane man's way to use Australis) navigate to the advanced column and tic the box to use Old Font Rendering. Still, the best fonts I've seen are from Advanced Chrome. They have a custom mask over DirectWrite/Skia that makes it appear suuuuper sharp and crisp. Sadly it's x86 though so the kernel doesn't yet support it. https://browser.taokaizen.com/chrome-directwrite/

Hit a little wall trying to run Chromium 72. (edit) seems I needed to replace all corresponding dlls in system32, not just kernel32. User error.

Can anyone confirm whether or not Windevine components work in Waterfox Classic? Also I noticed Firefox 64 seems to be the last rapid release version to download the address bar search engines without replacing kernel32 in system32. If anyone cares to test ESR 60.9, it has security advisories patched up to last September, nearly a near over 64 RR. https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/60.9.0esr/win64/ psa the update nags / unsupported messages in Quantum can be neutered with Enterprise Policy Generator https://www.ghacks.net/2018/05/21/enterprise-policy-generator-add-on-for-firefox/

Slightly deviating from topic. Curiously, 68 ESR suffers Windevine issues on my Vista7 installs too. The plugin appears to download and show up in the list of installed plugins, but it doesn't actually initialize when called on by a DRM protected webplayer. It's so strange because non-ESR isn't affected. I even tried 78.01 standard v. ESR, and the latter was affected just like 68 ESR while rapid release with the same version number wasn't! Only non-affected ESR I've seen is Wf Current, but they have a myriad of their own bugs rn. Nevertheless I reserve those kind of sites for Chromium.

Out of curiosity, I tried running Passmark Performance Test v. 10 under Vista. It's updated with Server 2008 updates up through January, on build 6003. This is the error I observed after attempting to launch the executable post-installation.

I wouldn't go quite that far. If you were Tim Cook you wouldn't be in pursuit of patching an OS from 2007, you'd be too preoccupied depreciating one from 2017 Fair enough, I didn't take into account the x86/x64 subsystems. It's easy to forget x64 NT 6.x is like 2 OSes.

Sorry to report that TorGuard clients as of late have been experiencing startup failures after installation. It appears to be the version of Qt used by the client software. Furthermore older client versions aren't served on the website, and finding 3rd party mirrors has proven spotty at best. On the bright side, AirVPN is similar in performance-function and even supports as far back as Windows XP at the time of writing.

I like to use a fork called Advanced Chrome in the occasional event I need something Chromium-based. It doesn't include any background services nor auto updater, and the fonts and tab styling is a bit less.. tacky. GDI-style font rendering is applied via custom mask for DirectWrite. One variant is based on 74, other 84. https://browser.taokaizen.com/ There's another project hosted on Discord too which seeks to make bread and butter Chromium 76 compatible with XP too, but the project has long been brought to a halt due to unmet dependencies. It does, however partially load under Vista. The UI will open after several error messages with aero glass frames, but it can't render pages. Not even the settings tab. I can DM the zip file if you're curious to inspect the errors. It's not open source so I'm not sure about redistribution rights, otherwise I'd drop the link here.

Ah, I follow. I have mixed feelings about e10s. In my experience running single process does not fare awfully well with multiple hefty CSS/js tabs. That was really my biggest issue with Pale Moon in the past. (that and there not a being a single modern password manager developed specifically for it, which was rather sad considering its extensive extensions library otherwise) On the other hand, EIGHT default content processes is rather insane. I've really taken a liking to running 2 content processes. It holds up in the long haul without crashing the browser, and RAM usage is reasonable. Not light, but reasonable. Have you tried Auto Tab Discard and MySessions btw? Those extensions are absolutely essential for me. I'm happy to report 78 isn't insane like I was expecting, CSS can really work its magic on the interface. But I'm hoping Alex will do something about that megabar to set it apart from mainstream ESR. I'm sure its at least on his mind with other users on Reddit orbiting him about the topic

What are you missing from ESR 60 if you don't mind my asking? I've mostly noticed old about:config prefs disappearing, but very few changes on the outer shell. I'm on 68-based WF Current atm and am rather comfortable with my userChrome styling. I even tested ESR 78 with an updated version of the same script and replicated the same look almost to the letter. But I don't think customcssforfx is quite optimized for 78 yet having suffered some slight padding issues, that and the megabar looking a bit... Less than stellar. Makes one appreciate ESR since it gives us tinkerers time to patch up Mozilla's quirkiness before it's dropped in our lap. I'll hold on lighting my torch until/if userChrome is completely depreciated. Presumably Waterfox would reverse such a change though, even going so far as to restore some styling properties to allow extension-based themes again. SR is actually working to port their DeepDark from Classic to Current, more info on their Twitter. Nevertheless reading this makes me awfully curious to grab a copy of 60 and test it to compare changes since (bit of an IE7 / FF3 vibe going here)

Well sure, provided its something as meager as DWM or explorer.exe. But when a sound device cannot initialize despite any attempt to manually start it, or the network device fails, heck the Windows Firewall goes haywire. Worse of all is if one device isn't initialized, it's fairly safe to assume something else didn't start. I ran Vista on my Z97 PC Mate for several months and at one point ClearType corrupted itself. This bug is truly nothing short of chaos. Granted, my budget z97 board at the time probably excavated the issue. In my brief testing with my t5810, startup initialization failures were far less frequent. But I didn't keep the install long enough to test long-term stability.

Ah, I follow. So a localized dll would eliminate the need to replace the system file(s)? And what of installers with failed dependencies or calls? Could the installer executables similarly be isolated in a directory with the modded extension file(s)? What about soft-locked installers that check the OS version? Can this extension spoof NT 6.1? That's great to know ESR 68 introduces so few new calls! Ah, the legendary X56 era Xeons. Nice setup! I'm waiting on those v4/Broadwell era Xeons to lose value so I can gain more cores at no expense to ipc. I have my Dell Precision paired with a Maxwell EVGA 970 rn via 3rd party pcie GPU cable, tho in the near future I'll probably snag a 980ti. That would be at the upper limit of this multi-rail 685w PSU, but I'd like to retain as much OS compatibility as I feasibly can. The performance on these Maxwell cards still holds remarkably well.

Fair enough, re: updates. So you recommend only patching up to 2017 to use your extensions for the time being? Strangely, no. My first experience was with an MSI Z97 PC Mate. Virtualization was fine. There are also no virtualization related issues with my new (old?) Haswell-E setup, a Precision t5810 to be precise. I figured that much, WF Classic is more closely to FF 56 so I expected less deviation in the way of new functions being called upon. It's quite a competent browser nevertheless, rather fast with a few content process enabled. Here's hoping you eventually solve the issue with e10s. ESR 68 / or the impending ESR 78 WF will use in the coming months would be amazing too. .......Indeed. Linking an ISO image of a fairly recent proprietary OS seems rather unwise atm. AFAIK even freeware must be shared only from a direct, official source. (pardon my formatting, it's been quite some time since i've used this board)

I say we wrap it up and send it to him as a Christmas gift and find out :^) I haven't been active here in some time, but I just created a new account for this thread. My props to you for this endevour! I never expected a contribution of this magnitude to come to Vista, but I always suspected it would be following 7's EoL if/when it did. Personally I moved to 7 a few years ago, and simply 'converted' it if you will with the help and collaboration of @WinClient5270 among others. I can't say I have any complaints with it, but it still pained me seeing the original NT 6.0 barred from usability by such arbitrary means. Might I inquire which variant of Waterfox you wish to get working first? Current or Classic? Having WF on Vista would be a night and day difference for web browsing on Vista! Also, I do have one question for you. As @WinClient5270 and myself have learned, painfully from experience. Haswell absolutely does not play ball with Vista. Not even my x99 Haswell-E setup. Vista will complete installation, and even support all/or most chipset functions. But it suffers from a rather severe startup issue. Essentially, about 1 in every 5 boots will present with a "timing initialization error" or some such. This will either blacken out the login screen, or login with incomplete services. Explorer might not start, or a network/sound device may not initialize, etc. I was wondering if you could perhaps look into this issue? Also, a friend who wishes to remain nameless created a Vista ISO with all updates slipstreamed, those from Server 2008 up through January of this year included. I'm not sure about the rules regarding sharing ISOs from Internet Archive or similar on this board or I'd link it here. Having said that. Would a pre-updated install medium simplify the process of editing the kernel32 dll? I'd love to share the image here once I have clarity about the rules of sharing such material here. Cordially Imitation NT 6.0 going strong here