Windows Server 2003 SP2 support

[EgorKuzevanov]

Do you plan to add support for Windows Server 2003 SP2 (server OS based on Windows XP) to the Supermium browser, in addition to support for Windows XP SP3? Windows Server 2003 SP2 has a number of advantages over desktop Windows XP SP3, including:

• support for more than 4 GB of RAM in PAE mode without third-party patches;
• support for GUID Partition Table (GPT) and external USB hard drives with a capacity of more than 2 TB;
• almost complete compatibility with both software and games designed for Windows XP, as well as with old software and games from the times of Windows 95/98/ME/NT4/2000.

[MiraakThuri]

If supermium get to work on XP/NT 5.1 there are no reasons that it could not run on server 2003/XP64/NT 5.2
What Win32 is doing to get supermium working on XP should allow it to run on Server 2003 just fine

[win32ss]

Do you plan to add support for Windows Server 2003 SP2 (server OS based on Windows XP) to the Supermium browser, in addition to support for Windows XP SP3?

Yes.

I am aware that some Chromium browsers for XP didn't work on 2003/XP x64 because the latter lacked some DEP-related functions. I will certainly address this (and 64 bit Supermium will also target XP/2003 x64).

I also want to support Windows 2000 SP4, which also supports addressing large amounts of RAM. I still run it on my main desktop with 96 GB of RAM (I'm sure with patches it can see more than 32) and 32 CPU threads.

[EgorKuzevanov]

I also want to support Windows 2000 SP4, which also supports addressing large amounts of RAM. I still run it on my main desktop with 96 GB of RAM (I'm sure with patches it can see more than 32) and 32 CPU threads.

By the way, if the Supermium browser suddenly acquires support for Windows 2000 SP4, will it be enough to install Update Rollup 1 and Internet Explorer 6 SP1 to launch it? Or will I still need Windows 2000 Extended Kernel by blackwingcat?

[win32ss]

I also want to support Windows 2000 SP4, which also supports addressing large amounts of RAM. I still run it on my main desktop with 96 GB of RAM (I'm sure with patches it can see more than 32) and 32 CPU threads.

By the way, if the Supermium browser suddenly acquires support for Windows 2000 SP4, will it be enough to install Update Rollup 1 and Internet Explorer 6 SP1 to launch it? Or will I still need Windows 2000 Extended Kernel by blackwingcat?

Yes. It wouldn't be proper Windows 2000 support if it needed the extended kernel. When Supermium gets to the point that it runs on XP, it would probably run with the extended kernel anyway (I don't think Chromium uses keyed events or raw input).

I think only NT 4 would be too difficult. GDI and resource/string API is too weak there.

[EgorKuzevanov]

It wouldn't be proper Windows 2000 support if it needed the extended kernel.

By the way, software compatible with Windows 2000 SP4 is 95% likely to work on Windows XP without service packs (aka Windows XP Gold, Windows XP RTM, Windows XP SP0). Most likely, the same will happen with the Win2k-compatible version of the Supermium browser.

[andika207]

• support for more than 4 GB of RAM in PAE mode without third-party patches;
• support for GUID Partition Table (GPT) and external USB hard drives with a capacity of more than 2 TB;
• almost complete compatibility with both software and games designed for Windows XP, as well as with old software and games from the times of Windows 95/98/ME/NT4/2000.

-the PAE patch is pretty stable, unless you open more than 50 tabs at a time you won't need more than 4GB of RAM though

-GPT support could be patched or you can use 4K native drives to create large partitions over 2TB

-complete compatibility ? LOL Server 2003 will require the server edition of most tools out there which are not for free.

[Uber-1]

I think only NT 4 would be too difficult. GDI and resource/string API is too weak there.

Well, there is no sense to use chrome browser with those ancient Windows 95/98/ME/NT4. You even can't use >512 MB ram to boot it without bugs. Even more, these 512 megs could be eaten by chrome just with 2-3 tabs in best condition. The biggest maximum I've reached ever is 896 megs, or something near that. I don't even tell if those old hardware could even get such amount of RAM IRL.
Just those old limitations (ram, gdi, resources) for whole OS and software are STRONGER that any Chromium needs for itself...

[andika207]

I am aware that some Chromium browsers for XP didn't work on 2003

the early release of xpchrome 115 for example #29 (comment)

[bradycodemaster]

theres no way you can do 2000 suport offical chrome never supported 2000

[Win-DVD]

theres no way you can do 2000 suport offical chrome never supported 2000

That's what changing code is for lol

[win32ss]

theres no way you can do 2000 suport offical chrome never supported 2000

It didn't support Windows 2000 by a thread. The workarounds for making the first versions work were not very complex at all, much like most other software that "didn't work" on Windows 2000 at the time.

Anyway, Windows 2000 supports D3D9, OpenGL 4.x (with recent GPU drivers, I think even the last official drivers that support GTX 4xx from 2010) and can address dozens of GB of RAM. From a rendering POV (probably the most fragile part of the browser), it should be pretty good once I remove all the dependencies on DXGI.

[spacedrone404]

I remove all the dependencies on DXGI.

Incredibly huge thank you, for all your work you are doin'.
Hope that you'll apply your SKILLS forwards to Firefox once it reaches its ESR EOL.