[0] https://www.mypal-browser.org/ [1] https://github.com/DiscordMessenger/dm
Not to mention bloat: I have a keyboard with a dedicated calculator button. On a machine with Core i5 something or other and SSD it takes about 2 seconds for the calculator to appear the first time I push that button. On the Core 2 Duo machine that preceded it, running XP from spinning rust, the calculator would appear instantly - certainly before I can release the button.
But also WinXP was the OS a lot of people used during their formative years - don't underestimate the power of nostalgia.
Also, for some people the very fact that Microsoft don't want you to would be reason enough!
Personally if I were into preserving old Windows versions I'd be putting my effort into Win2k SP4, since it's the last version that doesn't need activating. (I did have to activate a Vista install recently - just a VM used to keep alive some legacy software whose own activation servers are but a distant memory. It's still possible, but you can't do it over the phone any more, and I couldn't find any way to do it without registering a Microsoft account.)
This reminds me that there’s an NBA rule that disallows any basket made after a clock stoppage with 300ms or less in the clock - i.e. if player A managed to pass to player B who then attempted a shot, it’s impossible for all that to occur before 300 ms has elapsed.
Meaning, I’m sure you remember it fully launched, 100% certainly before the key came back up from your press, but that is impossible.
I’m not sure what I can say that will qualify as more than “nuh uh” to you, shy of getting a Core 2 Duo running with XP and the same keyboard as OP. That isn’t possible at the moment, is there anything else I could do?
Keypress duration is likely much less than 300 ms, top Google result claims 77 ms on average. And that’s down and up.
I see it being in cache already as sort of game playing, i.e. we can say anything is instant if we throw a cache in front of it. Am I missing something about caching that makes it reasonable? (I’m 37, so only 18 around that time and wouldn’t have had the technical chops to understand it was normal for things to be in disk cache after a cold boot)
Seagate Momentus 5400.3 manual (2005): https://www.seagate.com/support/disc/manuals/ata/100398876a....
Hitachi Travelstar 5K120 (2006):http://www.ggsdata.se/PC/Bilder/hd/5K120.pdf
WD Scorpio (October 2007): https://theretroweb.com/storage/documentation/2879-001121-a1...
But I think the question was the other way: Why couldn't calc.exe launch in 300ms?
Don't want to clutter too much, I'm already eating downvotes, so I'll link:
I'm not a part of the Windows XP community, but I've gotten close. I love that I can make it look just like Windows 2000 and that I know where all the little knobs and dials are. I can get a Windows XP installation configured to be exactly as I want it to be very quickly and I know it won't suddenly change on me.
And to my surprise, the latest 32-bit release of Nim simply works out the box. But Nim compiles to C, so I also needed C compiler. Many versions of mingw I could find online - they all failed to launch.
After some time I managed to find very old Mingw (gcc 4.7.1) that have finally worked [1].
[0] - https://nim-lang.org/
[1] - https://ibb.co/TBdvZPVt
then run (something like) this:
clang-cl /winsysroot:"" /DWINVER=0x0400 /D_WIN32_WINNT=0x0400 -m32 /GS- -march=i586 -Wno-nonportable-include-path /imsvc"C:\MSVC6\VC98\Include" hello.c -fuse-ld=lld-link /link /SAFESEH:NO /SUBSYSTEM:WINDOWS,4.0 /LIBPATH:"C:\MSVC6\VC98\Lib" user32.lib kernel32.lib msvcrt.lib
Or you could install and old copy of Cygwin or MinGW.
Do you want to run a modern Visual Studio and target XP? Maybe you can make that work if you install an old platform SDK and set WINVER and _WIN32_VERSION and work around all the warnings and compatibility problems that you'll run into. It is fighting an uphill battle and it will continue to get worse with each new version of VS that you want use.
For rust there is Rust9x https://seri.tools/blog/announcing-rust9x/. But I think this is the effort of handful of people. It is behind the upstream rust and it could go away at any time. If you want to write a toy program in Rust then it is fine, but if you want something that's going to be supported long-term you're rolling the dice.
Python 3.4.4 is the last version of Python that will run on Windows XP. That's 10 years old and many things on PyPI now require newer versions of Python so you'd be stuck with old, unsupported versions of those modules, possibly containing security issues.
This was interesting!