Leaderboard

I can understand your frustration, but come back to the ground. Please, if you have a problem with a user, then send him a PM and clarify it. With some far-sightedness it was clear that the Extended XP is not a simple project, at times at the present time the danger exists that updates of MS some files of your package replaced by newer file versions. KB4018556 has been withdrawn by MS, but there will be an update, this concerns Extended XP. An ongoing care of this package is essential. Then let Extended XP once in the alpha phase, so you have won time and no longer this pressure. Communicate it to the users, rather than maneuvering themselves into a hopeless situation and reacting against other users with anger. With the screen print, in a previous post, I wanted to knock you on shoulder and say so continue so great. Yes, my beloved Google Chrome still does not work, so I will not consider you as incapable, it takes time, experience and a learning phase (You hold it in the eye and somewhere there is perhaps a way, with the head through the wall does not go). At your age you tend to overestimate yourself, it is all too human. Many users are grateful for your commitment, only now and then you have to get back to the bottom of reality so you do not harm yourself.

Sometimes you say and do questionable things. If I was wrong, I'm a man and can admit it. It wouldn't be the first time and it won't be the last. I'm human!!!!!!!!!!!!

Allow me to doubt that the Board Supervisor can lay off. Maybe you (and the bunch of people) could make a petition for assigning to Dybia a special license allowing him to post whatever he see fit wherever on the MSFN board, but usually the Mods (and the Supervisor) have this queer attitude about having members post on topic. You know how these old people tend to think along traditional schemes ... jaclaz

@Dibya Unfortunately, people who don't know things are more willing to help, but people who actually know things don't bother to teach 'cause they don't actually really care. It's not their "fault", 'cause this is a community and no one has to reply and share its knowledge if he/she doesn't want to, but still I understand it may be frustrating. Anyway, this is not limited to this forum, but to IT in general, afaik. I have been facing this since the very beginning when I started learning how to code. As a matter of fact, I found more support on MSDN by Microsoft engineers about C#, than on Stack overflow (I was a noob and they didn't bother). That's just an example. Anyway, I don't want to go off-topic.

Wow, thanks a lot! There were 6 OneDrive entries (OneDrive1, OneDrive2, ...). OneDrive is disabled by group policy. After removing its entries, LSE's icon overlays work. There were total of 11 entries under that key, maybe it would work if OneDrive wasn't disabled, I'd have to try and see. Edit: re-enabling OneDrive doesn't seem to change anything.

Hi @Vistaboy and welcome to the MSFN forums Obviously, this is not the right thread to discuss this, but... On Windows 7 and earlier, WD != MSE; I think when you install MSE, WD is disabled by default - WD is a sort of antimalware app, while MSE can be regarded as a full blown security suite . While many 3rd party Security Suites can happily coexist with standalone WD (I know Kaspersky can, but even then it is advised you disable the real-time component of WD), MSE must be the only Internet Security Suite running on your system, to avoid conflicts... And in the case of both WD & MSE, some higher CPU/RAM consumption is expected/justified during the time WU checks for (and installs, according to WU settings) definitions updates (usually once daily) and during the time a scheduled scan is performed. If you did experience quite random significant CPU usage due to MSE, then you should investigate possible conflicts particular to your setup... Just my 2cent here...

The icon overlays LSE adds are working fine here for me on 15063.322 (I tested with symbolic and hard links to a file, and a directory junction). Maybe you're hitting Windows' limit of 15 icon overlay handlers: https://superuser.com/a/1166585

You need a mouse with at least 4 buttons for this to work. Mouse buttons 4 and 5 usually function as back/forward buttons. Navigate to any folder, start renaming a file/folder, right click on the text box to open the context menu, then press mouse button 4 (back). If there is a previous folder to go to, Explorer will crash. Any application that uses its standard open/save dialog can be crashed this way as well. That's right, you can crash one of the core Windows components by simply "pressing the wrong buttons". And the bug isn't present in Vista! And somehow, nobody noticed at MS or maybe even worse, thought it wasn't worth the hassle to fix.

Keep this topic . We can experiment much with browsers

What part of "Opticork is a con artist and his kernelEx is vaporware (= a hoax)" did you fail to understand, @Dibya? How in the world can you still believe in him to this day?

I'd like to help but I have almost no knowledge in reverse engineering and programming kernels etc. Best I can do run it on real hardware. It makes me kinda sad that Wine for Linux is able to run more software than XP now simply due to DLL function names getting renamed/updated in newer windows OS's.

@Dibya: Now you have a thread for browsers on ExtendedXP. Do not - I repeat - do not hijack the other thread which is exclusively for browsers still working on *n*o*r*m*a*l* XP SP3 (with the POSReady trick allowed, of course). Thanks in advance for your understanding and compliance.

Atapi.sys needs to be upgraded. The ASPI interface will need to support READ(16) and WRITE(16) SCSI Commands.

The limit is not in "cluster" size (that is a characteristic of the filesystem), it is "sector" size (that is a characteristic of the hardware). Besides that, there are issues in a number of OS in booting from a non 512 bytes sector size hard disk drive (which does not affect obviously "data only" disk drives). It is not however really a "hoax", the two things belong to different times, the number (of sectors, not clusters) limited by the 32 bit address space in the MBR partition table came out earlier, at a time when disks were still mostly or very largely 512 bytes sectored only and had not actually reached if not maybe in high end disks the 3 terabyte size, and while the disk makers started making the 4k sectored disks (that effectively "move" further the issue to around 16Tb) Microsoft decided to not update existing OS to handle the matter and jumped on the (Intel driven) UEFI/GPT bandwagon (and to mostly 64 bit). In other words, until the disks were 512 bytes sectored the limit was there and it was not solvable, and when later it became solvable it was decided by MS to not fully solve it on MBR scheme and adopt GPT (forcibly coupling it with UEFI without any real technical reason) and the disk manufacturers didn't want (or couldn't) provide support for that. And coupling disks with USB enclosures may provide "funny results", JFYI: jaclaz