Srandista wrote on 2020-05-17, 14:07:

texterted wrote on 2020-05-14, 04:25:

System restore works pretty well, providing you install the date bug patch.

Where I can find that patch?

I guess that "Microsoft Windows Security Update CD, February 2004" includes that patch, doesn't it?

Yes, I have a dual boot WXP/WME machine for playing late 90s/early 2000s games which has no need of DOS.

dr_st wrote on 2020-05-17, 14:17:

WinME seems like the obvious choice for anyone who wants a Win9x system but does not plan to use it for pure DOS mode. I really don't think it's any less stable than 98SE, and it has more features out-of -the-box. It should still be good for running DOS games from a Windows DOS prompt (if the games behave well in such a scenario). Many of the "ultra-high-end" Win98 SE rigs that people build here (without any intent to use them for DOS games) would probably be better with WinME, and the only reason people don't choose it more, is because it's hard to get over one's prejudices (or the idea doesn't even cross their mind due to the crowd opinion).

I think it's like a lottery.
With certain hardware Windows ME may work fine, thus for those who don't need fully-functional DOS, it may be "good enough".
With other hardware, however, there may be no way to make Windows ME stable due to lack of dedicated ME drivers.

Microsoft made a huge mistake there: first they announced they are about to discontinue the DOS-based Windows, but then they released yet another version, with enough changes to break compatibility with earlier drivers and other software.
Now, do you really expect all the hardware vendors providing updated drivers for a product that was pretty much announced "dead" before it got released?

I've added the "System Restore Update" to this post in a .zip file.

kolderman wrote on 2020-05-12, 09:55:

Vista and Me were *hated * when they came out, and there is little reason to try and disprove that opinion.

So was XP when released. It was refereed to as "The ME of NT".

Caluser2000 wrote on 2020-05-17, 16:55:

So was XP when released. It was refereed to as "The ME of NT".

And not without reason.
There was plenty of problems with Windows XP, but some of them were later resolved with Service Packs, and some ceased to be relevant with the advent of new hardware and software, designed primarilly for XP.

But I doubt if there was ever any product designed primarily for ME.
Even Microsoft didn't seem to care, they quickly released XP and aggresively pushed it to the home market, as if they wanted to forget about ME.

Grzyb wrote on 2020-05-17, 15:24:

With certain hardware Windows ME may work fine, thus for those who don't need fully-functional DOS, it may be "good enough".
With other hardware, however, there may be no way to make Windows ME stable due to lack of dedicated ME drivers.

Microsoft made a huge mistake there: first they announced they are about to discontinue the DOS-based Windows, but then they released yet another version, with enough changes to break compatibility with earlier drivers and other software.

What was actually broken in driver compatibility? I have not encountered a Win98 driver that did not work on WinME, but I confess I haven't tried a wide variety of systems. I understand that VxDs are problematic, but why? What changed?

dr_st wrote on 2020-05-17, 21:20:

I have not encountered a Win98 driver that did not work on WinME, but I confess I haven't tried a wide variety of systems.

I'm not sure if there were any Windows 98 drivers which didn't work with ME at all, it's more like they did work, but with some random glitches.
But there surely was some software that worked fine under 98, but not at all under ME - from what I recall from that era, probably the most annoying was incompatibility with Lantastic and Novell client software, I don't know what exactly caused the problem - some drivers? Or some userspace components?

There are things I like about windows Millennium I'd like to share.
More memory capacity - I have run it on a 2GB RAM system; I have patched it to support up to 4gb.
Updated file system features - FDISK FORMAT can see larger disks, windows defrag fastest out of all windows 9x editions.
UPNP - Easily set up with internet router NAT not as good as XP but it does work.
But I found so little unofficial enhancements by the dos windows communities. I decided to step up from it.
An interesting thing I like to do is install windows 98se then run autopatcher 2007 sp2.
I then install windows me step up and totally disable system protection and restore after.(this keeps some goodies from
Autopatcher in the step up process and then allows theme patching)
I patch the themes to have media player 10 skin on media layer 9 and have windows 7 super bar. (only with protection perma disabled)
And thats not all, I get the windows shutdown music from 98plus! for the high colour theme i find it less depressing (will attach later)
By disabling the protection, it brings millennium just over 98se performace score. (a small margin)
importing SFC from 98SE gives the old manual way of system file checking which isn't too much protection.
I may try to enhance shell animations one day but I hate playing with resource hacking its so tedious perhaps someone might like to put those crystal file transfer animations in dialog boxes etc?
Attached picture is my virtual machine version its just so I don't have to run around switching between PC's to show some eye candy.
As clearly shown not quite 2gb ram support as this one I didn't patch the memory capacity support. Notice the size and colour thats in virtualbox not their driver 🤣
I have found a way to unlock full dos mode just when it boots it says "windows millennium emergency boot mode" put up with that on startup its just like good ol 98 dos. Plenty of education on google.

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-18, 09:41:

There are things I like about windows Millennium I'd like to share. More memory capacity - I have run it on a 2GB RAM system; I […]
Show full quote

There are things I like about windows Millennium I'd like to share.
More memory capacity - I have run it on a 2GB RAM system; I have patched it to support up to 4gb.
Updated file system features - FDISK FORMAT can see larger disks, windows defrag fastest out of all windows 9x editions.
UPNP - Easily set up with internet router NAT not as good as XP but it does work.
But I found so little unofficial enhancements by the dos windows communities. I decided to step up from it.
An interesting thing I like to do is install windows 98se then run autopatcher 2007 sp2.
I then install windows me step up and totally disable system protection and restore after.(this keeps some goodies from
Autopatcher in the step up process and then allows theme patching)
I patch the themes to have media player 10 skin on media layer 9 and have windows 7 super bar. (only with protection perma disabled)
And thats not all, I get the windows shutdown music from 98plus! for the high colour theme i find it less depressing (will attach later)
By disabling the protection, it brings millennium just over 98se performace score. (a small margin)
importing SFC from 98SE gives the old manual way of system file checking which isn't too much protection.
I may try to enhance shell animations one day but I hate playing with resource hacking its so tedious perhaps someone might like to put those crystal file transfer animations in dialog boxes etc?
Attached picture is my virtual machine version its just so I don't have to run around switching between PC's to show some eye candy.
As clearly shown not quite 2gb ram support as this one I didn't patch the memory capacity support. Notice the size and colour thats in virtualbox not their driver 🤣
I have found a way to unlock full dos mode just when it boots it says "windows millennium emergency boot mode" put up with that on startup its just like good ol 98 dos. Plenty of education on google.

But didn't it have the same 512MB ram limitation of the cache of previous Win9x? I always used it with 512MB for that reason cause I never liked the many unofficial tweaks for the ram problem cause I don't know how stable they are.

386SX wrote on 2020-05-18, 13:28:

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-18, 09:41:

There are things I like about windows Millennium I'd like to share. More memory capacity - I have run it on a 2GB RAM system; I […]
Show full quote

There are things I like about windows Millennium I'd like to share.
More memory capacity - I have run it on a 2GB RAM system; I have patched it to support up to 4gb.
Updated file system features - FDISK FORMAT can see larger disks, windows defrag fastest out of all windows 9x editions.
UPNP - Easily set up with internet router NAT not as good as XP but it does work.
But I found so little unofficial enhancements by the dos windows communities. I decided to step up from it.
An interesting thing I like to do is install windows 98se then run autopatcher 2007 sp2.
I then install windows me step up and totally disable system protection and restore after.(this keeps some goodies from
Autopatcher in the step up process and then allows theme patching)
I patch the themes to have media player 10 skin on media layer 9 and have windows 7 super bar. (only with protection perma disabled)
And thats not all, I get the windows shutdown music from 98plus! for the high colour theme i find it less depressing (will attach later)
By disabling the protection, it brings millennium just over 98se performace score. (a small margin)
importing SFC from 98SE gives the old manual way of system file checking which isn't too much protection.
I may try to enhance shell animations one day but I hate playing with resource hacking its so tedious perhaps someone might like to put those crystal file transfer animations in dialog boxes etc?
Attached picture is my virtual machine version its just so I don't have to run around switching between PC's to show some eye candy.
As clearly shown not quite 2gb ram support as this one I didn't patch the memory capacity support. Notice the size and colour thats in virtualbox not their driver 🤣
I have found a way to unlock full dos mode just when it boots it says "windows millennium emergency boot mode" put up with that on startup its just like good ol 98 dos. Plenty of education on google.

But didn't it have the same 512MB ram limitation of the cache of previous Win9x? I always used it with 512MB for that reason cause I never liked the many unofficial tweaks for the ram problem cause I don't know how stable they are.

There was apparently a vendor Microsoft listened to that allowed 2G RAM maximum but not all machines could do it. I'd recommend using system.ini tweaks for it (without unofficial patching.)
An engineer known as Rudolph Loew released many patches for win9x that were stable. He has passed away and his family are keeping a memorial website where all his works are now open. https://rloewelectronics.com/
Known to many windows 9x Retro fans some of his patches allowed windows 95, 98, me to run with whopping RAM , native SATA, large file support (an invisible driver that archives files over 4gb linking them into sets on fat32), and ETC. Its a fun time to tinker as more memory means less swapping and less swapping is fantastic for high resolution multimedia. Even Rudolphs sourcecode has been released so anyone can develop ways to run their dos windows on modern hardware.

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-18, 20:32:

There was apparently a vendor Microsoft listened to that allowed 2G RAM maximum but not all machines could do it. I'd recommend […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote on 2020-05-18, 13:28:

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-18, 09:41:

There are things I like about windows Millennium I'd like to share. More memory capacity - I have run it on a 2GB RAM system; I […]
Show full quote

There are things I like about windows Millennium I'd like to share.
More memory capacity - I have run it on a 2GB RAM system; I have patched it to support up to 4gb.
Updated file system features - FDISK FORMAT can see larger disks, windows defrag fastest out of all windows 9x editions.
UPNP - Easily set up with internet router NAT not as good as XP but it does work.
But I found so little unofficial enhancements by the dos windows communities. I decided to step up from it.
An interesting thing I like to do is install windows 98se then run autopatcher 2007 sp2.
I then install windows me step up and totally disable system protection and restore after.(this keeps some goodies from
Autopatcher in the step up process and then allows theme patching)
I patch the themes to have media player 10 skin on media layer 9 and have windows 7 super bar. (only with protection perma disabled)
And thats not all, I get the windows shutdown music from 98plus! for the high colour theme i find it less depressing (will attach later)
By disabling the protection, it brings millennium just over 98se performace score. (a small margin)
importing SFC from 98SE gives the old manual way of system file checking which isn't too much protection.
I may try to enhance shell animations one day but I hate playing with resource hacking its so tedious perhaps someone might like to put those crystal file transfer animations in dialog boxes etc?
Attached picture is my virtual machine version its just so I don't have to run around switching between PC's to show some eye candy.
As clearly shown not quite 2gb ram support as this one I didn't patch the memory capacity support. Notice the size and colour thats in virtualbox not their driver 🤣
I have found a way to unlock full dos mode just when it boots it says "windows millennium emergency boot mode" put up with that on startup its just like good ol 98 dos. Plenty of education on google.

But didn't it have the same 512MB ram limitation of the cache of previous Win9x? I always used it with 512MB for that reason cause I never liked the many unofficial tweaks for the ram problem cause I don't know how stable they are.

There was apparently a vendor Microsoft listened to that allowed 2G RAM maximum but not all machines could do it. I'd recommend using system.ini tweaks for it (without unofficial patching.)
An engineer known as Rudolph Loew released many patches for win9x that were stable. He has passed away and his family are keeping a memorial website where all his works are now freeware. https://rloewelectronics.com/
Known to many windows 9x Retro fans some of his patches allowed windows 95, 98, me to run with whopping RAM , native SATA, large file support (an invisible driver that archives files over 4gb linking them into sets on fat32), and ETC. Its a fun time to tinker as more memory means less swapping and less swapping is fantastic for high resolution multimedia. Even Rudolphs sourcecode has been released so anyone can develop ways to run their dos windows on modern hardware.

Interesting, thanks. I didn't know this story. But at the end the system.ini tweak is enough? Anyway it would not solve the errors during the boot installation of the o.s. when more than 512MB but anyway it'd be a good thing for a multi o.s. machine that run the same amount of ram without changing it every days.

386SX wrote on 2020-05-19, 07:55:

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-18, 20:32:

There was apparently a vendor Microsoft listened to that allowed 2G RAM maximum but not all machines could do it. I'd recommend […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote on 2020-05-18, 13:28:

But didn't it have the same 512MB ram limitation of the cache of previous Win9x? I always used it with 512MB for that reason cause I never liked the many unofficial tweaks for the ram problem cause I don't know how stable they are.

There was apparently a vendor Microsoft listened to that allowed 2G RAM maximum but not all machines could do it. I'd recommend using system.ini tweaks for it (without unofficial patching.)
An engineer known as Rudolph Loew released many patches for win9x that were stable. He has passed away and his family are keeping a memorial website where all his works are now freeware. https://rloewelectronics.com/
Known to many windows 9x Retro fans some of his patches allowed windows 95, 98, me to run with whopping RAM , native SATA, large file support (an invisible driver that archives files over 4gb linking them into sets on fat32), and ETC. Its a fun time to tinker as more memory means less swapping and less swapping is fantastic for high resolution multimedia. Even Rudolphs sourcecode has been released so anyone can develop ways to run their dos windows on modern hardware.

Interesting, thanks. I didn't know this story. But at the end the system.ini tweak is enough? Anyway it would not solve the errors during the boot installation of the o.s. when more than 512MB but anyway it'd be a good thing for a multi o.s. machine that run the same amount of ram without changing it every days.

on the website i mentioned earlier the engineer left behind a windows me and a windows 98se cabinet file that replaces the original one on the windows version CDROM copy. That gives the installation the ability to install on systems of up to 32gb ram. Only up to 4gb is usable being a 32bit windows however it takes away the need to do any system tweaks for it to work before "first time" bootup to completion. You can therefore modify system.ini later on within windows just as a tweak and not a required modification to run at all with over 512mb ram.
There are other tools there that will allow you to use the unused amount of ram beyond the 4gb for a ram disk but who cares i mean to actually use up to 4gb for windows 9x (95, 98,98se,me) so this literally means it will work on a multi boot enviroment with other operating systems that use more memory and that means no more removing ram sticks to conform with the 9x windows memory barrier.
I apologize for answering you the long way but it also explains to the public we can now do what we couldn't do. This genius made drivers to run native SATA on windows 9x and also SATA optical discs even in dos. Hard Disks can now be formatted up to 2TB in FAT32 (if the computers BIOS supports disks over 120gb in size)
So I did my best to keep my comments in context to windows Me but windows 95b to windows millennium are no longer have to be stuck with the age old annoying barriers we all had to suffer with. (i bet he used to make a fortune off it 'ol Rudolph)

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-20, 10:00:

on the website i mentioned earlier the engineer left behind a windows me and a windows 98se cabinet file that replaces the origi […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote on 2020-05-19, 07:55:

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-18, 20:32:

There was apparently a vendor Microsoft listened to that allowed 2G RAM maximum but not all machines could do it. I'd recommend using system.ini tweaks for it (without unofficial patching.)
An engineer known as Rudolph Loew released many patches for win9x that were stable. He has passed away and his family are keeping a memorial website where all his works are now freeware. https://rloewelectronics.com/
Known to many windows 9x Retro fans some of his patches allowed windows 95, 98, me to run with whopping RAM , native SATA, large file support (an invisible driver that archives files over 4gb linking them into sets on fat32), and ETC. Its a fun time to tinker as more memory means less swapping and less swapping is fantastic for high resolution multimedia. Even Rudolphs sourcecode has been released so anyone can develop ways to run their dos windows on modern hardware.

Interesting, thanks. I didn't know this story. But at the end the system.ini tweak is enough? Anyway it would not solve the errors during the boot installation of the o.s. when more than 512MB but anyway it'd be a good thing for a multi o.s. machine that run the same amount of ram without changing it every days.

on the website i mentioned earlier the engineer left behind a windows me and a windows 98se cabinet file that replaces the original one on the windows version CDROM copy. That gives the installation the ability to install on systems of up to 32gb ram. Only up to 4gb is usable being a 32bit windows however it takes away the need to do any system tweaks for it to work before "first time" bootup to completion. You can therefore modify system.ini later on within windows just as a tweak and not a required modification to run at all with over 512mb ram.
There are other tools there that will allow you to use the unused amount of ram beyond the 4gb for a ram disk but who cares i mean to actually use up to 4gb for windows 9x (95, 98,98se,me) so this literally means it will work on a multi boot enviroment with other operating systems that use more memory and that means no more removing ram sticks to conform with the 9x windows memory barrier.
I apologize for answering you the long way but it also explains to the public we can now do what we couldn't do. This genius made drivers to run native SATA on windows 9x and also SATA optical discs even in dos. Hard Disks can now be formatted up to 2TB in FAT32 (if the computers BIOS supports disks over 120gb in size)
So I did my best to keep my comments in context to windows Me but windows 95b to windows millennium are no longer have to be stuck with the age old annoying barriers we all had to suffer with. (i bet he used to make a fortune off it 'ol Rudolph)

Thanks for the info. I suppose the only limit of these Win9x o.s. still remains their usability online if there're no browsers that support new SSL security pages and most sites even with the great 2010 (if we consider how much later is from Win9x o.s.) Opera versions maybe could someway "work" but break at first on the HTTPS check.
I suppose it may be possible, maybe there's just no interest in someone writing a full html5 modern free browser for these 16bit o.s.

386SX wrote on 2020-05-20, 15:38:

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-20, 10:00:

on the website i mentioned earlier the engineer left behind a windows me and a windows 98se cabinet file that replaces the origi […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote on 2020-05-19, 07:55:

Interesting, thanks. I didn't know this story. But at the end the system.ini tweak is enough? Anyway it would not solve the errors during the boot installation of the o.s. when more than 512MB but anyway it'd be a good thing for a multi o.s. machine that run the same amount of ram without changing it every days.

on the website i mentioned earlier the engineer left behind a windows me and a windows 98se cabinet file that replaces the original one on the windows version CDROM copy. That gives the installation the ability to install on systems of up to 32gb ram. Only up to 4gb is usable being a 32bit windows however it takes away the need to do any system tweaks for it to work before "first time" bootup to completion. You can therefore modify system.ini later on within windows just as a tweak and not a required modification to run at all with over 512mb ram.
There are other tools there that will allow you to use the unused amount of ram beyond the 4gb for a ram disk but who cares i mean to actually use up to 4gb for windows 9x (95, 98,98se,me) so this literally means it will work on a multi boot enviroment with other operating systems that use more memory and that means no more removing ram sticks to conform with the 9x windows memory barrier.
I apologize for answering you the long way but it also explains to the public we can now do what we couldn't do. This genius made drivers to run native SATA on windows 9x and also SATA optical discs even in dos. Hard Disks can now be formatted up to 2TB in FAT32 (if the computers BIOS supports disks over 120gb in size)
So I did my best to keep my comments in context to windows Me but windows 95b to windows millennium are no longer have to be stuck with the age old annoying barriers we all had to suffer with. (i bet he used to make a fortune off it 'ol Rudolph)

Thanks for the info. I suppose the only limit of these Win9x o.s. still remains their usability online if there're no browsers that support new SSL security pages and most sites even with the great 2010 (if we consider how much later is from Win9x o.s.) Opera versions maybe could someway "work" but break at first on the HTTPS check.
I suppose it may be possible, maybe there's just no interest in someone writing a full html5 modern free browser for these 16bit o.s.

Retrozilla web browser has been in development lately and would love someone to devote a thread on it in vogons forum. Here is a link to a discussion: https://msfn.org/board/topic/181416-retrozill … comment-1180391
Basically it has the modern protocols bolted onto the simular core behind netscape days and needs love.
So theres a browser to try anyhow 😀

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-21, 06:47:

Retrozilla web browser has been in development lately and would love someone to devote a thread on it in vogons forum. Here is […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote on 2020-05-20, 15:38:

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-20, 10:00:

on the website i mentioned earlier the engineer left behind a windows me and a windows 98se cabinet file that replaces the origi […]
Show full quote

on the website i mentioned earlier the engineer left behind a windows me and a windows 98se cabinet file that replaces the original one on the windows version CDROM copy. That gives the installation the ability to install on systems of up to 32gb ram. Only up to 4gb is usable being a 32bit windows however it takes away the need to do any system tweaks for it to work before "first time" bootup to completion. You can therefore modify system.ini later on within windows just as a tweak and not a required modification to run at all with over 512mb ram.
There are other tools there that will allow you to use the unused amount of ram beyond the 4gb for a ram disk but who cares i mean to actually use up to 4gb for windows 9x (95, 98,98se,me) so this literally means it will work on a multi boot enviroment with other operating systems that use more memory and that means no more removing ram sticks to conform with the 9x windows memory barrier.
I apologize for answering you the long way but it also explains to the public we can now do what we couldn't do. This genius made drivers to run native SATA on windows 9x and also SATA optical discs even in dos. Hard Disks can now be formatted up to 2TB in FAT32 (if the computers BIOS supports disks over 120gb in size)
So I did my best to keep my comments in context to windows Me but windows 95b to windows millennium are no longer have to be stuck with the age old annoying barriers we all had to suffer with. (i bet he used to make a fortune off it 'ol Rudolph)

Thanks for the info. I suppose the only limit of these Win9x o.s. still remains their usability online if there're no browsers that support new SSL security pages and most sites even with the great 2010 (if we consider how much later is from Win9x o.s.) Opera versions maybe could someway "work" but break at first on the HTTPS check.
I suppose it may be possible, maybe there's just no interest in someone writing a full html5 modern free browser for these 16bit o.s.

Retrozilla web browser has been in development lately and would love someone to devote a thread on it in vogons forum. Here is a link to a discussion: https://msfn.org/board/topic/181416-retrozill … comment-1180391
Basically it has the modern protocols bolted onto the simular core behind netscape days and needs love.
So theres a browser to try anyhow 😀

I've never tried that browser but I ask myself if "technically" Opera browser versions supported up to Win ME was better. With Opera 10.63 I think I've seen a results of 140 points or similar without Kernelex in html5test. Not great but for a Win9x enviroment still sounds a lot compared to original browser, IE6 or whatever. 😉 The HTML5 compatibility would obviously still be a limit nowdays but I think if SSL certificates would have been updated for those browsers even if not supported anymore these machine would still have an alternative solution. For example Symbian OS had the great Opera Mobile browser that did render complex web pages on single core ARMv6 cpus in the 2012 if i remember correctly and had an impressive html5test result close to 400 points or similar back in those years. If someone collecting those phones/o.s. would try it they'd have the same SSL problems even if I think web pages beside this and the ram / cpu problems maybe could be rendered somehow. As said it was great that Opera 10.63 still ran on Win ME in the 2010 and obviously at some point we have to expect old software being left in the past, but I like the idea that somehow old software could still be mantained just for their history. For example you can find old drivers of 90's Matrox video cards still nowdays in their pages officially there.

386SX wrote on 2020-05-21, 09:46:

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-21, 06:47:

Retrozilla web browser has been in development lately and would love someone to devote a thread on it in vogons forum. Here is […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote on 2020-05-20, 15:38:

Thanks for the info. I suppose the only limit of these Win9x o.s. still remains their usability online if there're no browsers that support new SSL security pages and most sites even with the great 2010 (if we consider how much later is from Win9x o.s.) Opera versions maybe could someway "work" but break at first on the HTTPS check.
I suppose it may be possible, maybe there's just no interest in someone writing a full html5 modern free browser for these 16bit o.s.

Retrozilla web browser has been in development lately and would love someone to devote a thread on it in vogons forum. Here is a link to a discussion: https://msfn.org/board/topic/181416-retrozill … comment-1180391
Basically it has the modern protocols bolted onto the simular core behind netscape days and needs love.
So theres a browser to try anyhow 😀

I've never tried that browser but I ask myself if "technically" Opera browser versions supported up to Win ME was better. With Opera 10.63 I think I've seen a results of 140 points or similar without Kernelex in html5test. Not great but for a Win9x enviroment still sounds a lot compared to original browser, IE6 or whatever. 😉 The HTML5 compatibility would obviously still be a limit nowdays but I think if SSL certificates would have been updated for those browsers even if not supported anymore these machine would still have an alternative solution. For example Symbian OS had the great Opera Mobile browser that did render complex web pages on single core ARMv6 cpus in the 2012 if i remember correctly and had an impressive html5test result close to 400 points or similar back in those years. If someone collecting those phones/o.s. would try it they'd have the same SSL problems even if I think web pages beside this and the ram / cpu problems maybe could be rendered somehow. As said it was great that Opera 10.63 still ran on Win ME in the 2010 and obviously at some point we have to expect old software being left in the past, but I like the idea that somehow old software could still be mantained just for their history. For example you can find old drivers of 90's Matrox video cards still nowdays in their pages officially there.

I know Opera. I just didn't like it much. I remember Opera on my symbian Nokia and it was the last thing to work on it. I miss symbian. When Nokia went android i though yeah another faceless android phone.

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-21, 11:56:

386SX wrote on 2020-05-21, 09:46:

zapbuzz wrote on 2020-05-21, 06:47:

Retrozilla web browser has been in development lately and would love someone to devote a thread on it in vogons forum. Here is a link to a discussion: https://msfn.org/board/topic/181416-retrozill … comment-1180391
Basically it has the modern protocols bolted onto the simular core behind netscape days and needs love.
So theres a browser to try anyhow 😀

I've never tried that browser but I ask myself if "technically" Opera browser versions supported up to Win ME was better. With Opera 10.63 I think I've seen a results of 140 points or similar without Kernelex in html5test. Not great but for a Win9x enviroment still sounds a lot compared to original browser, IE6 or whatever. 😉 The HTML5 compatibility would obviously still be a limit nowdays but I think if SSL certificates would have been updated for those browsers even if not supported anymore these machine would still have an alternative solution. For example Symbian OS had the great Opera Mobile browser that did render complex web pages on single core ARMv6 cpus in the 2012 if i remember correctly and had an impressive html5test result close to 400 points or similar back in those years. If someone collecting those phones/o.s. would try it they'd have the same SSL problems even if I think web pages beside this and the ram / cpu problems maybe could be rendered somehow. As said it was great that Opera 10.63 still ran on Win ME in the 2010 and obviously at some point we have to expect old software being left in the past, but I like the idea that somehow old software could still be mantained just for their history. For example you can find old drivers of 90's Matrox video cards still nowdays in their pages officially there.

I know Opera. I just didn't like it much. I remember Opera on my symbian Nokia and it was the last thing to work on it. I miss symbian. When Nokia went android i though yeah another faceless android phone.

The modern ones only use the brand but it should be by a different company with license of the brand if I remember correctly. I'd consider the only phone using an android based o.s. by the old Nokia the 2014 X model, before the Win mobile change; nowdays I don't think they have much to do with the modern phones. I miss Symbian OS too, even if at the end some things needed to be optimized and it'd be interesting to discuss, like the hardware choice to run their phones, a never well optimized native browser that beside compatibility couldn't imho compare not only with the others but also with symbian Opera Mobile that as said was more impressive for compatibility and general speed and should have been the official one at first. Also latest phone still had a single core 1Ghz (1,3ghz lately) armv6 core with 512mb of ram (Nokia 808). Similar things for the feature phones sector, one I've always been interested that had speed problems with Java apps, the ones should have been expected to run and with a not-low price (let's remember the Nokia Asha 503, a great idea for a feature phone but not really optimized after with updates, apps, and probably even more limited by the cpu/ram more than the "o.s." itself).

I've got ME on my Dimension 8200 in my sig and the machine's been nothing short of amazing.

There was a happy consensus that Me sucked. You guys are wrecking it 😁