Who here has a Youtube-DL compile for WinXP?

[nicolaasjan]

1 hour ago, cmalex said:

Greetings

It search for "yt-dlp_win7_x86.exe" but "yt-dlp_x86_win7.exe" exists.

Please take look at _get_binary_name() in yt_dlp\update.py 

Best regards

You were right, there was an error in my `update.py` (Locally; not in the source on GitHub yet).

I have uploaded a new x86_win7 file.

[j7n]

So far the WinXP and Win7 versions have equal functionality, right?

"makes my antivirus solution go completely berserk"  That's the trouble with anti-virus, and it uses your computer power to display his berserk behavior.

[VistaLover]

2 hours ago, j7n said:

That's the trouble with anti-virus, and it uses your computer power to display his berserk behavior.

... Your generalised , yet unhelpful  , comment about AVs aside, what I actually meant with "berserk" was that the ZIP archive (and contained yt-dlp.exe binary) shared by nicolaasjan previously here was flagged, more specifically the wrapper DLL file "libxt.dll"; I'm sure this is a false positive, yet many AV engines won't "tolerate" well such wrapper DLLs, which hook and alter system file behaviour  ; on VT, half (31/67) the engines listed there ALSO flag the archive as "malicious": 

https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/6ee52d1561e7ba3fc833eef35673d35b5325b2a5aad4efeeda5a1ae2c08aba41/detection

... but let's NOT turn this into an AV pros & cons discussion; MSFN has a dedicated forum/thread, oftentimes turbulent and cyber-bullied  ... I whitelisted the archive and binary, what I wanted to convey was that the binary wouldn't even launch  under Vista SP2, let alone perform a video download test  ...

[nicolaasjan]

13 hours ago, j7n said:

So far the WinXP and Win7 versions have equal functionality, right?

They should have equal functionality.

Though the Windows 7 version, built with Python 3.13 might be somewhat faster (didn't check).

P.S.

I've fixed the update issue with the .exe versions; no errors and warnings any more:

[debug] Fetching release info: https://api.github.com/repos/nicolaasjan/yt-dlp/releases/latest
[debug] Downloading _update_spec from https://github.com/nicolaasjan/yt-dlp/releases/latest/download/_update_spec
[debug] Downloading SHA2-256SUMS from https://github.com/nicolaasjan/yt-dlp/releases/download/2025.08.16.082053/SHA2-256SUMS
Current version: nicolaasjan/yt-dlp@2025.08.14.072314
Latest version: nicolaasjan/yt-dlp@2025.08.16.082053
Current Build Hash: 3becb2e3a07da4635929c347ef2c2499e30ab1752b55154d7168a47eca0bff66
Updating to nicolaasjan/yt-dlp@2025.08.16.082053 ...
[debug] Downloading yt-dlp_x86_win7.exe from https://github.com/nicolaasjan/yt-dlp/releases/download/2025.08.16.082053/yt-dlp_x86_win7.exe
Updated yt-dlp to nicolaasjan/yt-dlp@2025.08.16.082053

 

[j7n]

Today DL works again without SABR.

[j7n]

YouTube has something new on their end again. No mention of SABR at all anymore. There is new line in the app that says "Sleeping for 5 seconds as required by the site." No big deal about that.

Requesting 720p or 1080p h.264 video gives extremely poor quality compared to how it was before. The bitrates for a talking head segment are 240 kbit/s and 860 kbit/s respectively.

Requesting no/default format gives VP9 in extremely large size and demand for the computer. Best that they have 3840*2160 @ 30 fps, 9500 kbit/s. Google really wants to push their VP9. When nothing works, this still does.

[VistaLover]

7 hours ago, j7n said:

Requesting 720p or 1080p h.264 video gives extremely poor quality compared to how it was before. The bitrates for a talking head segment are 240 kbit/s and 860 kbit/s respectively.

I've also observed this  myself; the other day I DLed a BBC-made 30min documentary off their official YT account (videoID=Pxozxj03l18) and though I initially wanted the 720p25 variant (in h264), I went, in the end, for the 1080p25 one (h264, ca. 1600kbps), because 720p25 was a measly 500kbps  ...

7 hours ago, j7n said:

Best that they have 3840*2160 @ 30 fps, 9500 kbit/s. Google really wants to push their VP9.

... They're probably targeting ChromeOS laptops and/or Android-based UHD SmartTVs; little do they care for "legacy" OS/HW setups; and h264 still costs them patent fees, whereas their own VP9 codec (and av01) is royalty-free...

Edited 3 hours ago by VistaLover

[j7n]

Is ChromeOS powerful enough or has GPU to decode VP9? It gives basically the highest possible resolution, sometimes 60fps.

Example of current quality:

http://j7n.sytes.net/temp/ytqual/

Video 10 MB, audio 5 MB.