Saxon

I officially gave up. Maybe I'll get back to Supermium in a couple of years, I wanted to love it. It's slower and slower with every release. With all those endless fixes, I can't keep up.

Don't post if you don't care, it has nothing to do with anything you wrote. It's just common sense, not everyone can visit the site daily like you do every day, several times per day. Keeping the screens for one month, at least, it's more appropriate and makes sense. You again over-exaggerate about "decades".

"Before update" and "After Update" screenshots to get the idea. Made using the same capture programme, running on the same browser. Also, "Member" is now written two times.

Thanks, actually H265 acceleration with Cuvid suppossed to work in conjunction with DXVA on older OS, did you try the "hybrid" mode?

Not clear, is this using only the native DXVA? Or Cuvid only? Or DXVA mixed with CUVID? No screenshots, either.

It's not true, again. Cent browser release date [2024-06-27]. Researched with a couple of clicks. https://www.centbrowser.com/history.html

Regarding sound, only DD5.1, but nor DDP5.1 is available. DTS on XP is limited to the core component (just the simple, compressed DTS at the max. bitrate of 1509), DTS_HD MA and un-compressed DTS_HD lossless are not available.

D3D11 video acceleration and DXVA/DXVA2 video acceleration are independent techniques, please don't bring confusion, In XP, only DXVA is available, which is of course not suited for anything higher than MPEG, MPEG2, H264 and VC-1.

D3D11 video acceleration (don't confuse with gaming D3D11) is only available in Win8.

The dawn of the BD era would be MPEG2, not VC-1, and I've seen a lot of BD disks, too. The trend to use AVC started when they were re-releasing the old films over and over again, "remastered" bloated with fake grain, etc. XP era hardware would have a hard time playing those bloated AVC streams at 50mbps,

Most original Blu-Rays sold in Europe with popular films are VC-1 in ts container, Nightmare On Elm Street 1984 would be a good example.

Thanks! DISM is not available for Vista, or not?

I'd very much appreciate a link to "cleaning up WinSxS." Thank you!

Is it trendy?

The extension, including its manifest, was completely removed. I can't add since it exceeds the allowed attachment, sorry.

What about the ancient VC1? GT950 doesn't support it, or it's XP's fault?

"Used in the past, no more." option is suitable, no?

I removed/disabled Webstore from/in the pak data (with precise instructions by D.Draker), yet I still see this, too. Ideas?

Those era notes usually had 8MB of real VRAM, the rest was borrowed from the system.

1984 Long Distance Flight by F.R. David

"Pocket — a privacy nightmare Firefox has a Pocket button in its navigation bar, which allows you to "save any article, video or page from Firefox" and "View in Pocket on any device, any time." Let's see how it looks in terms of privacy — quoting from Pocket's privacy policy[3]: "In addition to the information that you provide to us when you register for a user account, we collect information about the URLs, titles and content of the web pages and other information you save to Pocket." So everything you conveniently put in "your" Pocket is being stored (of course, otherwise Pocket wouldn't work). "The types of information we collect includes your browser type, device type, device id, time zone, language, and other information related to the manner in which you access the Pocket Technologies. " So anytime you view a file in "your" Pocket, they know everything about the device you used to do it. "We may also use "pixel tags," "web beacons," "clear GIFs" or similar means (individually or collectively "Pixel Tags") in connection with emails that we send to our users in order to collect usage data." So, they are acting like any old tracking website, even in ways that have nothing to do with their functionality. "We may also share your device ID with third parties in connection with advertising campaigns. " And they work with advertisers too! Describing all of Pocket's violations would take up this whole article. There are similar services with better privacy policies, but in the end, they still store the things you view in "the cloud". A real privacy-based browser would not be integrated with them by default. Can be disabled in about:config[8]" Source link.

"Firefox tracks users with Google Analytics Firefox has been integrated with the spyware platform called "Google Analytics"[1]. Firefox has been confirmed to now send analytics to Google. According to a Firefox developer the spyware in Firefox is "extremely useful to us and we have already weighed the cost/benefit of using tracking." and that Firefox will not remove Google Analytics support entirely. Firefox's position on privacy is made very clear with this quote: "Wanted to address your position though: We don't give the "data directly to Google". See the discussion here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=858839. The short version is: tl;dr: We now have an option to opt-out of Google doing anything with the data that Google Analytics collections on Mozilla websites. GA tracking is anonymous and at the aggregate level and we use it to improve the experience of our websites. We are collecting aggregate and non-identifiable data in numbers to ensure our development/UX changes are met well. We can respect privacy and still have analytics; in fact Mozilla's aim is for an experience that values user privacy and usability (I'd say Apple also wants UX that fits that mold, as an example). We need some data, anonymized and aggregated, to do this. " The best takeaway to this is that Mozilla wants to pretend that including spyware in their program is somehow not a breach of privacy, and that Firefox could possibly be respecting user privacy while simultaneously collecting data on users and sending it to Google. It's strongly suggested reading the GitHub thread and the further anti-privacy statements the Mozilla employee makes while defending the spyware features in Firefox. It's very dangerous to assert that there is somehow a middle ground between respecting user privacy and datamining the user." Source link.

How do we know it?

"Firefox phones home about almost every single interaction you have with its UI Firefox will send information about almost every basic operation that you do back to Mozilla. This is tagged with a unique client ID and an ID for your current session, and any relevant information related to this action. By default, the following uses of the UI are reported to Mozilla[5]: Performing a search Clicking a top site item Deleting an item from history Blocking a site Bookmarking a link Removing a bookmark from a link Opening a link in a new window Opening a link in a new private window Opening the new tab preferences pane Closing the new tab preferences pane Acknowledging a section disclaimer Adding or editing a new TopSite Requesting a custom screenshot preview Session end Impression stats Click/block/save_to_pocket ping Addon initialisation failure Domain affinity calculation Source link.

"Firefox is spyware (extension recommendation scandal)" "Upon visiting a targeted site, Firefox contacts services.addons.mozilla.org to get "extension recommendation" for the site, conveniently disclosing that you've just visited one of these sites." "Mozilla is spying on whether you frequent the following sites: facebook.com, translate.google.com, youtube.com, wikipedia.org, reddit.com. The list can be seen in CFRMessageProvider.jsm where the recommended extensions are listed. If the browser determines you're using one of those sites a lot, it will phone home the next time you've visiting such site by automatically fetching the addon info (even when you don't interact with the recommendation button). If the telemetry is enabled, it should send a lot more info..." https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/anxfz8/firefox_is_spyware_extension_recommendation/