Windows 7 Build 695x revealed at WinHEC 2008 China


Recommended Posts

Hmm... nice looking screenshots. I would have loved to watch a stream of that keynote though, is it available on demand yet?

An on-demand webcast of the opening keynote is available here: http://focus.it168.com/200810/WinHEC/index.html

well i got 4GB of of performance rams and i cant seems to break 5.5 yet

overclocked by any chance ?

i get 6.7 with Q6600 @ 3 Ghz

it is the former , as far as i know

i do take what he say over outsiders source since he is affiliated/working for MS

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

The base scores currently range from 1 to 5.9. The Windows Experience Index is designed to accommodate advances in computer technology. As hardware speed and performance improves, higher base scores will be introduced. However, the standards for each level of the index stay the same. For example, a computer scored as a 2.8 will remain a 2.8 unless you decide to upgrade the computer's hardware.

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

yea right , you are better of doing there jobs :rolleyes:

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

It takes time to build a 7.9 machine

Exactly, the way they do the WEI is the right way, your scores won't change now unless you get newer hardware. Your current score won't get dropped or change much when they raise the cap from 5.9 to 7.9, which is the smart thing about it.

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

I'm glad you bring this up which prooves that rating system in Vista is pointless, stupidest idea MS could came up with. I have nothing against benchmarking but they should presented in a way 3DMark Vantage does it. Better hardware higher score, slower hardware lower score and so there is no limit of what your upper score can be. Use that number to measure how fast your hardware is but do not measure your hardware against OS which runs on it. MS should set minimum requirements and if they are not met simply refuse installation, so you send clear message to some idiot who wants to run Vista on 1Gb for example, aint gonna happen buddy cause your machine sucks.

What you said is actually happening sort other way around. My graphic system gets score 5.9 but also 8800GT gets 5.9. Now average Joe goes, Crysis runs on my card really slow and i have same score like Mr. Me with SLI GTX280. It's all because MS way of thinking is so ****ed up...as i said it goes beyond comedy. I have feeling that good idea from somebody there shows up and then upper management ****s it up for who knows what reason.

Solution:

Remove Performance Scoring. Your hardware is either capable of running Vista or not. There is no gray area. Keep benchmarking tool in Vista, extended it and show visually tests to customer. Do scoring as 3DMark Vantage does. Faster hardware gets better score, slower hardware lower score. No upper limit. Average Joe goes, oh my card scores let's say 14 but Mr. Me graphic card scores 25. Average Joe goes, that makes sense...that's why he runs Crysis much faster.

Edited by jjrambo
Exactly, the way they do the WEI is the right way, your scores won't change now unless you get newer hardware. Your current score won't get dropped or change much when they raise the cap from 5.9 to 7.9, which is the smart thing about it.

So GTX280 scores let's say 7.9 but also GTX380. What the hell is smart there about? In short what i said above, if they really want to keep performance rating and scoring they have now, remove uppper limit. Faster hardware higher score, is that hard to grasp?

So GTX280 scores let's say 7.9 but also GTX380. What the hell is smart there about? In short what i said above, if they really want to keep performance rating and scoring they have now, remove uppper limit. Faster hardware higher score, is that hard to grasp?

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

Whoa, calm down and check your facts. WEI was created to help get away from those cryptic game requirements on boxes. Take a look in games explorer - you'll see that the base and recommend WEI for running the games are listed there. The intent was to have those scores on game boxes as well so customers can easily see if their computer can handle it.

jjrambo - you're blowing this issue way out of hand. The score never goes down for a given piece of hardware, but it can be bumped up by simply updating the WEI system to account for higher numbers. This can happen in new versions of WIndows or through a Windows Update. It's not a big deal that its hard limited, and if anything, is advantageous to the customer as it keeps the WIndows team from artificially inflating perceived performance of a component.

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

Now you're contradicting whole story about Windows 7. It means Windows 7 should have scoring from 1 to 3.9 since it's gonna run better on the same hardware running Vista, right?

Open Games Explorer and look at right pane bottom screen for each game you click.

I just took some random name like GTX380 referencing future Nvidia video card which will be faster then GTX200 series.

Score should not have upper limit. How stupid is your argument and MS idea is example of having now scale from 1 to 7.9 so quad 2.6Ghz shows 7.2 so i guess for Windows 7 that CPU is not enough to actually score 7.9, which means it seems that have even higher requirements then Windows Vista.

Seriously your argumentation is EPIC FAILURE.

Whoa, calm down and check your facts. WEI was created to help get away from those cryptic game requirements on boxes. Take a look in games explorer - you'll see that the base and recommend WEI for running the games are listed there. The intent was to have those scores on game boxes as well so customers can easily see if their computer can handle it.

jjrambo - you're blowing this issue way out of hand. The score never goes down for a given piece of hardware, but it can be bumped up by simply updating the WEI system to account for higher numbers. This can happen in new versions of WIndows or through a Windows Update. It's not a big deal that its hard limited, and if anything, is advantageous to the customer as it keeps the WIndows team from artificially inflating perceived performance of a component.

Exactly. Performance rating score is confusing customers about their hardware ability to run games. In my book 8800GT can't have score 5.9 and GTX280 SLI setup as well so when you cross reference that with WEI it seems that Crysis can run on both equally good which is far from truth.

I have no single problem with benchmark MS uses or logic behind getting those numbers as long as they remove upper limit cap. Faster hardware gets higher number, slower hardware lower number. Very simple.

Exactly. Performance rating score is confusing customers about their hardware ability to run games. In my book 8800GT can't have score 5.9 and GTX280 SLI setup as well so when you cross reference that with WEI it seems that Crysis can run on both equally good which is far from truth.

I have no single problem with benchmark MS uses or logic behind getting those numbers as long as they remove upper limit cap. Faster hardware gets higher number, slower hardware lower number. Very simple.

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

+1

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

+1 as well

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

Being able to play a game and playing a game at 2560x1600 with 16xAA/16xAF are two different things. Again, this is not targeted to hardcore gamers with self-built PCs, quad-SLI and Core i7s.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

No. Again, that's not their target.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

But since you're just another person who will criticize any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

Being able to play a game and playing a game at 2560x1600 with 16xAA/16xAF are two different things. Again, this is not targeted to hardcore gamers with self-built PCs, quad-SLI and Core i7s.

No. Again, that's not their target.

But since you're just another person who will criticize any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

I'm talking about almost minimum settings here.

I know it's not their target, i'm saying they are doing it wrong, absolutely wrong.

I don't criticize any **** MS is serving me. I will give you an example. Backup feature in Vista is absolutely perfect solution and as I can see they are adding option to save your Image to some location on network which was missing in Vista i talked about after first day of Vista release. I found myself in situation where i didn't have any media to save my image but network location. As I said Backup Feature is brilliant but it seems nobody talks about it here. Another brilliant feature in Vista? Ability to resize partitions through disk management in real time? It's something i was waiting for since Windows 2000 is released. Again, nobody ever said anything good about it. It seems that majority of people on this forum actually saying that some things are great but actually they are utter crap or really bad or just bad.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

As you seem to have completely missed the point yet again as you did with WARP10, allow me to spell it out for you.

The WEI is a simple benchmark tool to give users a basic indication of the performance of their PC, it's in no way intended to replace or even compete with a tool such as 3DMark.

Each release of 3DMark returns a lesser score on the same hardware, this is fine for powerusers, overclockers and etc, however it is NOT good for the generic joe bloggs.

I'm talking about almost minimum settings here.

Dude I can run Crysis with fine framerates on my 8600GTS @ 1280x1024, and my pc has a rating of 5.2 (medium settings). The ratings are quite good.

jjrambo, the scores are intended as a rough guide for how powerful your PC is. If Crysis' rating was incorrect, take it up with the people who rated it.

The system itself is fine, and makes perfect sense (as long as the ratings are worked out in a sensible fashion).

The idea is for it to be reasonably future proof - the ratings don't change as time passes. However, the upper bounds for the ratings increase. Hopefully the updated stats get backported to Vista (I don't see any reason why it wouldn't).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The Light of Life? We actually do glow till our Death, study finds by Sayan Sen Image by Rafael Rendon via Pexels A study by researchers at the University of Calgary has found that living organisms produce an extremely faint light known as ultraweak photon emission, and that this glow appears to drop significantly after death. The research was published in the Journal of Physical Chemistry in April 2025 and quickly drew widespread attention, leading to more than 200 news stories about the findings. Ultraweak photon emission (or UPE), sometimes called biophoton emission, refers to tiny amounts of light released by living cells as a result of normal biological activity. A photon is the basic particle of light, and researchers say every living system examined so far, including plants and animals, has been found to emit these photons. The glow is far too faint to be seen by the human eye. “I suppose it has a little to do with people being reminded of auras,” says Dr. Christoph Simon, PhD, one of the authors of the study and a professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy in the Faculty of Science. “It is a fact that living beings glow. It’s a very weak glow, but it’s there and visible with very sensitive cameras.” According to the study, the light involved is extremely weak, ranging from 10 to 1,000 photons per square centimetre per second across a spectral range of 200 to 1,000 nanometres. For comparison, a nanometre is one-billionth of a metre and is commonly used to measure wavelengths of light. Detecting emissions at such low levels requires highly specialized equipment. To study the phenomenon, researchers used electron-multiplying charge-coupled device (EMCCD) and charge-coupled device (CCD) cameras. These imaging systems are designed to detect extremely small amounts of light, including individual photons, while minimizing background noise. The technology allowed researchers to capture signals that would otherwise be impossible to observe. The team worked with the Human Health Therapeutics Research Centre at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) in Ottawa to examine photon emissions in mice. Researchers took two-hour exposure images of the animals before and after death and compared the results. “We saw that the level of light that they emit – this biophoton glow – is distinctly different between living and dead animals,” says Dr. Daniel Oblak, PhD, an associate professor in Physics and Astronomy and the corresponding author of the study. The images showed a clear decrease in photon emissions after death across the entire body of each mouse. According to the researchers, this provided direct evidence that living and dead tissue produce different levels of ultraweak photon emission. “It’s a very small amount and it’s, of course, very tricky to detect,” Oblak says. The study grew out of discussions between Simon, whose research interests include quantum biology, and Oblak, whose work focuses on detecting light for quantum communication experiments. Quantum biology is a field that explores whether processes described by quantum physics, which studies matter and energy at very small scales, may also play a role in living systems. “Since I work as a quantum physicist on light detection for quantum communication, I thought that experimentally we have a lot of the tools to be able to detect the light,” Oblak explains. The researchers also investigated UPE in plants and found that the light changed in response to stress. When plants were exposed to higher temperatures or physically injured, their photon emissions increased. Chemical treatments also affected the glow. Among the substances tested, the local anesthetic benzocaine produced the strongest emission response when applied to injured plant tissue. These findings suggest that ultraweak photon emission is closely linked to biochemical and metabolic activity inside living organisms. Metabolism refers to the chemical reactions that allow cells and organisms to stay alive and function. Because these reactions change when an organism experiences stress, injury or disease, researchers believe UPE may provide a way to monitor those changes. The researchers stress that the glow is a physical and biological phenomenon, not a metaphysical one. Oblak says more research is needed to understand exactly how the light is produced and what information it may reveal about the condition of living tissue. “We must understand what that is to figure out what’s happening,” he says. “If we can understand how that relates to certain influences on the body – stress, diseases – then that could be used as a diagnostic tool.” The researchers believe the technique could eventually help scientists study health and disease without invasive procedures. Because UPE can be measured without adding dyes, markers or labels, it may offer a way to monitor whether tissue is healthy, damaged or alive. In plants, it could help researchers better understand how organisms respond to injury, heat and other forms of stress. While the work is still in its early stages, the study demonstrates that ultraweak photon emission imaging can provide a non-invasive and label-free way to observe biological activity. Researchers say the approach could become a useful tool for studying vitality, stress responses and other important processes in both animals and plants. Source: University of Calgary, ACS publication This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Damn, I loved this show back in the day.  
    • Rufus 4.15.2393 Beta 2 by Razvan Serea Rufus is a small utility that helps format and create bootable USB flash drives, such as USB keys/pendrives, memory sticks, etc. Despite its small size, Rufus provides everything you need! Oh, and Rufus is fast. For instance it's about twice as fast as UNetbootin, Universal USB Installer or Windows 7 USB download tool, on the creation of a Windows 7 USB installation drive from an ISO (with honorable mention to WiNToBootic for managing to keep up). It is also marginally faster on the creation of Linux bootable USBs from ISOs. A non-exhaustive list of Rufus supported ISOs is available here. It can be especially useful for cases where: you need to create USB installation media from bootable ISOs (Windows, Linux, UEFI, etc.) you need to work on a system that doesn't have an OS installed you need to flash a BIOS or other firmware from DOS you want to run a low-level utility Rufus 4.15.2393 Beta 2 changelog: Add RISC-V 64 support to UEFI:NTFS Improve the guards for using the "silent" option Improve the ability to cancel during write retries Improve progress reporting for compressed image extraction Fix unrestricted XML entity expansion and integer overflow in ezxml parser (courtesy of @esadowski4) [GHSA-55r2-34wg-8mv9] Fix "silent" Windows installation failing at 75% in most cases [#2960] Fix a crash during boot when using UEFI:NTFS on Snapdragon X based ARM64 platforms [#2934] Fix the first WUE option always being checked by default [#2965] Fix an infinite loop when using Windows ISOs that contain multiple WIMs Fix "Enable runtime UEFI media validation" checkbox not always being properly enabled Other WUE improvements/fixes for OneDrive removal and username validation (with thanks to @christian8641) [#2984, #2991] Download: Rufus 4.15 Beta 2 | 1.9 MB (Open Source) Links: Rufus Home Page | Project Page @GitHub | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Tixati 3.43 by Razvan Serea Tixati is a free and easy to use BitTorrent client featuring detailed views of all seed, peer, and file transfer properties. Also included are powerful bandwidth charting and throttling capabilities, and a full DHT implementation. Tixati is one of the most advanced and flexible BitTorrent clients available. And unlike many other clients, Tixati contains NO SPYWARE, NO ADS, and NO GIMMICKS. Tixati portable version is meant to run on a USB flash drive or other portable media. It stores all its configuration files in the same folder as the executable binary files, and all file paths are stored in a format relative to the program executable folder. It is important you do not delete the "tixati_portable_mode.txt" file within the executables folder. This file is what triggers Tixati to run in portable mode. (The executable binaries are actually the same as the standard edition binaries.) When running the portable edition from a USB flash drive, especially one that is formatted in FAT16/FAT32, you may experience some lag when initially loading a new transfer. This is because initializing and allocating large files on flash-based media consumes a greater amount of time and resources compared to a conventional hard-drive. Tixati has the following features: detailed views of all aspects of the swarm, including peers, pieces, files, and trackers support for magnet links, so no need to download .torrent files if a simple magnet-link is available super-efficient peer choking/unchoking algorithms ensure the fastest downloads peer connection encryption for added security full DHT (Distributed Hash Table) implementation for trackerless torrents, including detailed message traffic graphs and customizable event logging advanced bandwidth charting of overall traffic and per-transfer traffic, with separate classification of protocol and file bytes, and with separate classification of outbound traffic for trading and seeding highly flexible bandwidth throttling, including trading/seeding proportion adjustment and adjustable priority for individual transfers and peers bitfield graphs that show the completeness of all downloaded files, what pieces other peers have available, and the health of the overall swarm customizable event logging for each download, and individual event logs for all peers within the swarm expert local file management functions which allow you to move files to a different partition even while downloading is still in progress 100% compatible with the BitTorrent protocol Windows and Linux-GTK native versions available Tixati 3.43 changelog: Several major DHT improvements Added several screening heuristics to filter malicious DHT nodes, prevent Sybil floods Rewrote DHT search algorithms to add support for multi-path lookups Improved DHT logging, more details in several error messages Extended timeout lengths for outgoing queries over I2P Added incoming query / response per second to DHT table status display Updated Regex engine to PCRE2 Faster Search function, scans channel user profiles in much less time Fixed problems with file name parsing and date handling in RSS Faster and more accurate RSS filtering and episode number detection Several optimizations to global text processing functions, such as UTF-8 cleaning, line splitting, and token parsing Complete update of port-mapping UPNP/NAT-PMP engine, added PCP support, mapping over VPN support, and more Several refinements to default gateway detection on Windows / Android, which is used for port-mapping Support for IPv6 interface-scoped addresses, which is sometimes needed for IPv6 gateway detection and port mapping Full support for PCP port remapping, added backup zero-port query in case requested port is rejected New UPNP/NAT-PMP Monitor in Help > Diagnostics New reflected local port/location tracker that analyzes DHT replies to detect true port/location and NAT mapping type New TCP/UDP Ports monitor in Help > Diagnostics, with several statistic and information tabs, and a detailed event log Calculated/reflected local port is now used for port parameter in tracker queries and peer handshake Fixed several problems with Linux Wayland compatibility Completely replaced tray icon functions in Linux, new SNI implementation is now the default with GSI backup Implemented full DBus-Menu server to be used by new SNI tray icon implementation Replaced Linux tray balloon notification DBus client Rewrote auto-shutdown DBus interface for Linux Rewrote sleep inhibit DBus interface for Linux Dropped deprecated Linux dbus-glib dependencies Completely new Windows asynchronous file handling, now using IOCP model with several block-alignment optimizations Better handling of system network resets and interface down/up cycles Added option to fully clear configuration in Settings > Import/Export Remember last option checkboxes when using Import/Export Fixed minor I2P incoming connection routing problems Much faster I2P vanity host name finder Much faster channel user vanity key finder Raised length limit for torrent tracker remote failure messages to 120 from 64 Fixed problems setting download location on a torrent before the meta info is resolved Added location/MOC paths to category pane tooltips Several minor Web Interface fixes Refinements to static and scrolling ellipsizing layout routines Several fixes and improvements to single and multi-line text edit controls Many other minor fixes throughout the user interface A major overhaul of the Android framework has also been done: API target raised to 35, page alignment set to 16K Rewrote all inset processing routines Full rewrite of foreground service, application, and main activity objects New permission request routines Added multi-cast lock request before UPNP/LPDP discovery operations Fixed file permission and locking problems when loading .torrent from web browsers Fixed problems with Z-ordering of modal / non-modal and popup windows Fixed handling of back gesture on newer OS Added status bar icon adjustment based on status bar background color Added option in Settings > UI > Behavior to continue running in tray when task removed from recents App can be closed by swiping away notification Rewrote IME interface, fixed several problems with auto-correct, on-screen keyboard visibility, and cursor positioning Added full support for Android hardware mouse and keyboard function Added full tooltip implementation for Android hovering via mouse or other cursor device Full rewrite of popup menu widgets to better support hardware pointers and keyboard Added mouse cursor updating framework for Android hovering Added Settings > Import/Export to Android builds Added language file support to Android builds Download: Tixati 64-bit | Tixati 32-bit ~20.0 MB (Freeware) Download: Portable Tixati 3.43 | 114.0 MB Download: Tixati 3.43 for Linux | Android View: Tixati Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Firefox 152.0.1 by Razvan Serea Firefox is a fast, full-featured Web browser. It offers great security, privacy, and protection against viruses, spyware, malware, and it can also easily block pop-up windows. The key features that have made Firefox so popular are the simple and effective UI, browser speed and strong security capabilities. Firefox has complete features for browsing the Internet. It is very reliable and flexible due to its implemented security features, along with customization options. Firefox includes pop-up blocking, tab-browsing, integrated Google search, simplified privacy controls, a streamlined browser window that shows you more of the page than any other browser and a number of additional features that work with you to help you get the most out of your time online. Firefox key features Enhanced Tracking Protection (ETP) – Blocks trackers, cookies, cryptominers, and fingerprinters by default. Private Browsing Mode – Deletes history, cookies, and temporary files when closed. Lightweight & Fast Performance – Optimized memory usage with efficient page loading. Cross-Platform Sync – Sync bookmarks, passwords, history, and open tabs across devices. Customizable Interface – Toolbars, themes, and extensions can be tailored to user needs. Strong Privacy Controls – Options to manage cookies, permissions, and site data easily. Reader Mode – Strips away clutter for distraction-free reading. Pocket Integration – Save and read articles offline with Pocket built into Firefox. Picture-in-Picture (PiP) – Watch videos in a floating window while multitasking. Extensions & Add-ons – Vast library for productivity, security, and personalization. Built-in PDF Viewer – No need for external software to view PDFs. Firefox Monitor – Alerts users if their email is part of a known data breach. Multi-Account Containers – Isolate browsing sessions (e.g., work, personal, shopping). Performance & Resource Efficiency – Uses fewer system resources than some competitors. Open Source & Community-Driven – Transparent development with global contributions. Firefox 152.0.1 fixes: Fixed frequent crashes affecting users with Intel Raptor Lake processors. (Bug 2039575) Fixed an issue on macOS where choosing a PDF option, such as "Save as PDF", from the system print dialog would send the job to your printer instead of saving a file. (Bug 2047850) Download: Firefox 64-bit | Firefox 32-bit | ARM64 | ~70.0 MB (Freeware) Download: Firefox for MacOS | 146.0 MB View: Firefox Home Page | Release Notes Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      AMV earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      514
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      171
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      81
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!