YouTube downloads fail all the time

[Rink]

Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).

Both add-ons fail now.

How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

Rink

[Nic]

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

try this one


Easy Youtube Video Downloader Express

<https://support.mozilla.org/1/firefox/113.0.2/Linux/en-US/add-on-badges?utm_source=firefox-browser&utm_medium=firefox-browser&utm_content=promoted-addon-badge>
<https://support.mozilla.org/1/firefox/113.0.2/Linux/en-US/extensions-pb>
No# 1 Rated Youtube Video Downloader for firefox web-browser with MP3
and Full-HD downloads. Instant, one-click Youtube video downloader with
high-quality 256Kbps/128Kbps MP3 and Full-HD video downloading options.
The #1 rated "Youtube Video Downloader" with 1080p Full-HD and 256Kbps
MP3 download capability, one of the oldest Youtube grabber addon here on
Mozilla addon store with fast and easy 1-Click downloads from Youtube
website without loading any external executable.

Major Features :
1) Offers 1080p Full-HD downloads (recent YouTube changes break most
other downloaders that attempt this)
2) Single-click 256kbps HQ MP3 downloads
3) Simple, minimalist download button
4) Works well with the new YouTube design

[Rink]

Post by Nic

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

try this one
 Easy Youtube Video Downloader Express

I tried this one earlier this evening. But it does not come further than
"making a download link". Seen that for minutes (longer than the you
tube video).

Post by Nic
<https://support.mozilla.org/1/firefox/113.0.2/Linux/en-US/add-on-badges?utm_source=firefox-browser&utm_medium=firefox-browser&utm_content=promoted-addon-badge>
<https://support.mozilla.org/1/firefox/113.0.2/Linux/en-US/extensions-pb>

Linux?
I have Windows7.

Your links go to:
<https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-badges?utm_source=firefox-browser&utm_medium=firefox-browser&utm_content=promoted-addon-badge&as=u>

and
<https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/extensions-private-browsing?as=u&utm_source=inproduct>

I do not understand the relation of these pages with my question.
Probably because I do not understand a lot of software issues.

Rink

Post by Nic
No# 1 Rated Youtube Video Downloader for firefox web-browser with MP3
and Full-HD downloads. Instant, one-click Youtube video downloader with
high-quality 256Kbps/128Kbps MP3 and Full-HD video downloading options.
The #1 rated "Youtube Video Downloader" with 1080p Full-HD and 256Kbps
MP3 download capability, one of the oldest Youtube grabber addon here on
Mozilla addon store with fast and easy 1-Click downloads from Youtube
website without loading any external executable.
1) Offers 1080p Full-HD downloads (recent YouTube changes break most
other downloaders that attempt this)
2) Single-click 256kbps HQ MP3 downloads
3) Simple, minimalist download button
4) Works well with the new YouTube design

[B***@XPOnly.org]

On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 23:31:50 +0200, Rink

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

https://www.3dyd.com/

[Rink]

Post by B***@XPOnly.org
On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 23:31:50 +0200, Rink

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

https://www.3dyd.com/

Ben,

As a seperate program it works fantastic!
I even can choose the quality of the video,
but I learned to choose maximum the "transmitted" quality.
And I can choose to download only audio.

Thank you very much.
Rink

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Rink

Post by B***@XPOnly.org
On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 23:31:50 +0200, Rink

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

https://www.3dyd.com/

Ben,
As a seperate program it works fantastic!
I even can choose the quality of the video,
but I learned to choose maximum the "transmitted" quality.
And I can choose to download only audio.
Thank you very much.
Rink

Fellow yt-dlp users:
If I want just audio, I generally download the video and then extract
the audio (I use Pazera, as it's _clear_ from that that it's extracting
the original audio without recoding it to something else, which isn't
always clear - to me anyway - for other extractors. It's based on ffmpeg
etc., like most such utilities). But the other day I decided to try to
use the audio-only function of y' itself: the -x option. So I tried it,
and it failed saying I didn't have ffmpeg or ffprobe.exe. So I copied
those (I did have them) to the y' folder, then tried again; it then said
I didn't have some .dll. So I copied that - now a different .dll
(similar name, just a different number). Tried one more time, then gave
up.

Anyone else (W7-32) using the -x option without trouble? Or, is there
some other _simple_ way of downloading audio only with yt-dlp? ("Simple"
does _not_ include downloading a list of available formats then choosing
one.)

[Paul]

Post by Rink

Post by B***@XPOnly.org
On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 23:31:50 +0200, Rink

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

 https://www.3dyd.com/

Ben,
As a seperate program it works fantastic!
I even can choose the quality of the video,
but I learned to choose maximum the "transmitted" quality.
And I can choose to download only audio.
Thank you very much.
Rink

If I want just audio, I generally download the video and then extract the audio (I use Pazera, as it's _clear_ from that that it's extracting the original audio without recoding it to something else, which isn't always clear - to me anyway - for other extractors. It's based on ffmpeg etc., like most such utilities). But the other day I decided to try to use the audio-only function of y' itself: the -x option. So I tried it, and it failed saying I didn't have ffmpeg or ffprobe.exe. So I copied those (I did have them) to the y' folder, then tried again; it then said I didn't have some .dll. So I copied that - now a different .dll (similar name, just a different number). Tried one more time, then gave up.
Anyone else (W7-32) using the -x option without trouble? Or, is there some other _simple_ way of downloading audio only with yt-dlp? ("Simple" does _not_ include downloading a list of available formats then choosing one.)

You should be using a package with statically compiled executables,
ffmpeg.exe , ffprobe.exe , ffplay.exe

Zeranoe used to build and serve those. Now, it's Gyan.

https://www.gyan.dev/ffmpeg/builds/

In my collection -- package seems well-compressed:

Name: ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build__Nov24_2022.7z
Size: 47,431,656 bytes (45 MiB)
SHA256: 037BDB2183189DC0EFA642B1FDE7D6B33C6114036FA06FAF35F777E8DF07D863

C:\Users\username\Downloads\ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build__Nov24_2022.7z\ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build\bin\
ffmpeg.exe 127,396,864 bytes
ffplay.exe 127,259,648 bytes
ffprobe.exe 127,296,512 bytes

And those are static, as there are *no* DLL files in the bin folder.
All the DLL content (libs) hide inside the EXE file.

Paul

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by Paul

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Rink
And I can choose to download only audio.
Thank you very much.
Rink

If I want just audio, I generally download the video and then extract
the audio (I use Pazera, as it's _clear_ from that that it's

[]

Post by Paul

Post by J. P. Gilliver
based on ffmpeg etc., like most such utilities). But the other day I
decided to try to use the audio-only function of y' itself: the -x
option. So I tried it, and it failed saying I didn't have ffmpeg or
ffprobe.exe. So I copied those (I did have them) to the y' folder,
then tried again; it then said I didn't have some .dll. So I copied
that - now a different .dll (similar name, just a different number).
Tried one more time, then gave up.
Anyone else (W7-32) using the -x option without trouble? Or, is

[]

Post by Paul
You should be using a package with statically compiled executables,
ffmpeg.exe , ffprobe.exe , ffplay.exe
Zeranoe used to build and serve those. Now, it's Gyan.
https://www.gyan.dev/ffmpeg/builds/

Unfortunately, that says "All builds are 64-bit"; I presume those
wouldn't work on my 32-bit system. (I couldn't see any mention of a
32-bit version.)

Post by Paul
Name: ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build__Nov24_2022.7z

So for use to make yt-dlp -x work, you think I'd need the full version,
or would the basic one work?

Post by Paul
Size: 47,431,656 bytes (45 MiB)
SHA256: 037BDB2183189DC0EFA642B1FDE7D6B33C6114036FA06FAF35F777E8DF07D863
C:\Users\username\Downloads\ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build__Nov24_2022.7z\ffmpe
g-5.1.2-full_build\bin\
ffmpeg.exe 127,396,864 bytes
ffplay.exe 127,259,648 bytes
ffprobe.exe 127,296,512 bytes
And those are static, as there are *no* DLL files in the bin folder.
All the DLL content (libs) hide inside the EXE file.
Paul

[Paul]

[]

Post by Paul

Post by Rink
And I can choose to download only audio.
Thank you very much.
Rink

If I want just audio, I generally download the video and then extract the audio (I use Pazera, as it's _clear_ from that that it's

[]

Post by Paul

based on ffmpeg etc., like most such utilities). But the other day I decided to try to use the audio-only function of y' itself: the -x option. So I tried it, and it failed saying I didn't have ffmpeg or ffprobe.exe. So I copied those (I did have them) to the y' folder, then tried again; it then said I didn't have some .dll. So I copied that - now a different .dll (similar name, just a different number). Tried one more time, then gave up.
 Anyone else (W7-32) using the -x option without trouble? Or, is

[]

Post by Paul
You should be using a package with statically compiled executables,
ffmpeg.exe , ffprobe.exe , ffplay.exe
Zeranoe used to build and serve those. Now, it's Gyan.
  https://www.gyan.dev/ffmpeg/builds/

Unfortunately, that says "All builds are 64-bit"; I presume those wouldn't work on my 32-bit system. (I couldn't see any mention of a 32-bit version.)

Post by Paul
  Name: ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build__Nov24_2022.7z

So for use to make yt-dlp -x work, you think I'd need the full version, or would the basic one work?

Post by Paul
  Size: 47,431,656 bytes (45 MiB)
  SHA256: 037BDB2183189DC0EFA642B1FDE7D6B33C6114036FA06FAF35F777E8DF07D863
C:\Users\username\Downloads\ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build__Nov24_2022.7z\ffmpe
g-5.1.2-full_build\bin\
       ffmpeg.exe   127,396,864 bytes
       ffplay.exe   127,259,648 bytes
       ffprobe.exe  127,296,512 bytes
And those are static, as there are *no* DLL files in the bin folder.
All the DLL content (libs) hide inside the EXE file.
  Paul

https://web.archive.org/web/20180102224237/https://ffmpeg.zeranoe.com/builds/win32/static/

ffmpeg-3.3.3-win32-static.zip 43590056 07-Aug-2017 21:09

Higher than version 4.x.x does not run on Windows XP.

Version 3.3.3 is a good general purpose one, and
might keep a lot of people happy.

If you want to test a 4.x.x , you can look at the end of zeranoe
before it quit the business. These 4.x.x won't work on WinXP
(I could see DLL trouble in the nightlies), but will likely
work on Win7 x86 just fine.

https://web.archive.org/web/20200708235238/https://ffmpeg.zeranoe.com/builds/win32/static/

If the very latest have switched to 64-only, that could be ffmpeg.org
doing that, or it could be Gyan cutting the workload in half. Maybe
even the Wiki article, would document an event like that.

Paul

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by Paul

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Paul

Post by J. P. Gilliver
If I want just audio, I generally download the video and then
extract the audio (I use Pazera, as it's _clear_ from that that it's

[]

Post by Paul

Post by J. P. Gilliver
based on ffmpeg etc., like most such utilities). But the other day
I decided to try to use the audio-only function of y' itself: the -x
option. So I tried it, and it failed saying I didn't have ffmpeg or
ffprobe.exe. So I copied those (I did have them) to the y' folder,
then tried again; it then said I didn't have some .dll. So I copied
that - now a different .dll (similar name, just a different number).
Tried one more time, then gave up.
 Anyone else (W7-32) using the -x option without trouble? Or, is

[]

Post by Paul
You should be using a package with statically compiled executables,
ffmpeg.exe , ffprobe.exe , ffplay.exe
Zeranoe used to build and serve those. Now, it's Gyan.
  https://www.gyan.dev/ffmpeg/builds/

Unfortunately, that says "All builds are 64-bit"; I presume those
wouldn't work on my 32-bit system. (I couldn't see any mention of a
32-bit version.)

Post by Paul
  Name: ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build__Nov24_2022.7z

So for use to make yt-dlp -x work, you think I'd need the full
version, or would the basic one work?

Post by Paul
  Size: 47,431,656 bytes (45 MiB)
  SHA256: 037BDB2183189DC0EFA642B1FDE7D6B33C6114036FA06FAF35F777E8DF07D863
C:\Users\username\Downloads\ffmpeg-5.1.2-full_build__Nov24_2022.7z\ffmpe
g-5.1.2-full_build\bin\
       ffmpeg.exe   127,396,864 bytes
       ffplay.exe   127,259,648 bytes
       ffprobe.exe  127,296,512 bytes
And those are static, as there are *no* DLL files in the bin folder.
All the DLL content (libs) hide inside the EXE file.
  Paul

https://web.archive.org/web/20180102224237/https://ffmpeg.zeranoe.com/bu
ilds/win32/static/
ffmpeg-3.3.3-win32-static.zip 43590056 07-Aug-2017 21:09
Higher than version 4.x.x does not run on Windows XP.
Version 3.3.3 is a good general purpose one, and
might keep a lot of people happy.
If you want to test a 4.x.x , you can look at the end of zeranoe
before it quit the business. These 4.x.x won't work on WinXP
(I could see DLL trouble in the nightlies), but will likely
work on Win7 x86 just fine.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200708235238/https://ffmpeg.zeranoe.com/bu
ilds/win32/static/
If the very latest have switched to 64-only, that could be ffmpeg.org
doing that, or it could be Gyan cutting the workload in half. Maybe
even the Wiki article, would document an event like that.
Paul

Thanks for that. I downloaded the "latest" from that page (comes just
after 4.3), and tried a y -x, which gave this:

[youtube] Extracting URL:

[youtube] _prtbj4MtDU: Downloading webpage
[youtube] _prtbj4MtDU: Downloading android player API JSON
[info] _prtbj4MtDU: Downloading 1 format(s): 251
[dashsegments] Total fragments: 1
[download] Destination: My Boomerang Won't Come Back - Charlie Drake
[_prtbj4MtD
U].webm
[download] 100% of 3.36MiB in 00:00:02 at 1.45MiB/s
[ExtractAudio] Destination: My Boomerang Won't Come Back - Charlie Drake
[_prtbj
4MtDU].opus
Deleting original file My Boomerang Won't Come Back - Charlie Drake
[_prtbj4MtDU
].webm (pass -k to keep)

which looks like it's downloading the video (? .webm) file anyway, then
extracting the audio and discarding the video - basically what I'd been
doing with Pazera (though it produced a .opus file, which is one I'd not
seen before!; but my GoldWave can read it). But at least the -x option
works without any error messages.

I might try Stan Brown's "-f 140" suggestion too. Actually I'll try it
now:

[youtube] Extracting URL: http://youtu.be/_prtbj4MtDU
[youtube] _prtbj4MtDU: Downloading webpage
[youtube] _prtbj4MtDU: Downloading android player API JSON
[info] _prtbj4MtDU: Downloading 1 format(s): 140
[dashsegments] Total fragments: 1
[download] Destination: My Boomerang Won't Come Back - Charlie Drake
[_prtbj4MtD
U].m4a
[download] 100% of 3.37MiB in 00:00:00 at 4.73MiB/s
[FixupM4a] Correcting container of "My Boomerang Won't Come Back -
Charlie Drake
[_prtbj4MtDU].m4a"

Interesting, does it without a double stage. Might use that one.

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <$qbJSE2+***@255soft.uk> at Sun, 25 Jun 2023 22:23:10,
J. P. Gilliver <***@255soft.uk> writes
[]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Thanks for that. I downloaded the "latest" from that page (comes just

[]
Latest wrinkle: just the _presence_ of the ff*.exe files has an
unexpected (to me) effect!

If I _do_ want the video, not just the audio - i. e. I'm not using -x
_or_ -f 140, but just "y <URL>" (y is my short-name version of yt-dlp) -
I normally end up with a .mp4 video file. But now, with the three
ff*.exe files present in the yt-dlp directory, _the same command_
produces a .webm video file. Just to be sure, I moved them to a
subdirectory, and tried again - .mp4 video file!

There's obviously more to yt-dlp.exe than I thought!

[Stan Brown]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Anyone else (W7-32) using the -x option without trouble? Or, is there
some other _simple_ way of downloading audio only with yt-dlp?

-f 140

That's for AAC audio (.m4a); use a different number if you want a
different audio type.

I know we should first try with the -F option to make sure the
particular video has a -f 140 stream, but I've stopped bothering
because every video I download seems to have it. (Or if it's being
transcoded, the transcoding is good enough that I can't hear any
problems.)

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Anyone else (W7-32) using the -x option without trouble? Or, is there
some other _simple_ way of downloading audio only with yt-dlp?

-f 140
That's for AAC audio (.m4a); use a different number if you want a
different audio type.

Thanks. I really have been preferring whatever's actually in the file,
but I guess if more than one format are available, that's meaningless.

Post by Stan Brown
I know we should first try with the -F option to make sure the
particular video has a -f 140 stream, but I've stopped bothering
because every video I download seems to have it. (Or if it's being
transcoded, the transcoding is good enough that I can't hear any
problems.)

(-:

[Newyana2]

<***@XPOnly.org> wrote

| https://www.3dyd.com/

So far, so good. How did I never find this in all these years?
It even runs just fine on XP. Thanks.

[solid hyrax]

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

yt-dlp is the program to use to download youtube videos, or any other
videos from most other sites. Many GUI program use it as the underline
software to download. This is the link to the latest release
https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/tag/2023.03.04

[Brian Gregory]

Post by solid hyrax

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

yt-dlp is the program to use to download youtube videos, or any other
videos from most other sites. Many GUI program use it as the underline
software to download. This is the link to the latest release
https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/tag/2023.03.04

+1

It's a little more complicated to use than some fancy plugins etc but it
works well.

First do

yt-dlp -F

to see what formats are available then once you've chosen what format
you want do something like

yt-dlp -f135+140 http://youtu.be/xxxxxxxxxxx

to fetch the video. In this example 135+140 is the format I chose -
Video type 135 with audio type 140.

The URL you use doesn't have to be a youtu.be one you can use the one
from your browser address bar if you wish too. It's usually more like:

http://youtu.be/xxxxxxxxxxx

To update yt-dlp to the latest version just do:

yt-dlp -U

and it updates itself.

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by solid hyrax
yt-dlp is the program to use to download youtube videos, or any other
videos from most other sites. Many GUI program use it as the underline
software to download. This is the link to the latest release
https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/tag/2023.03.04

+1
It's a little more complicated to use than some fancy plugins etc but
it works well.
First do
yt-dlp -F http://youtu.be/xxxxxxxxxxx
to see what formats are available then once you've chosen what format
you want do something like
yt-dlp -f135+140 http://youtu.be/xxxxxxxxxxx
to fetch the video. In this example 135+140 is the format I chose -
Video type 135 with audio type 140.

Although just doing yt-dlp <URL> without specifying a format often
fetches the best available. (And, as I've said before, you can rename
yt-dlp.exe to anything - I use y.exe - to save typing. [I actually keep
e. g. "yt-dlp_86 [2023.03.04].exe" as well whenever I do an upgrade, in
case something breaks, but I don't _use_ that one.]

Post by Brian Gregory
The URL you use doesn't have to be a youtu.be one you can use the one
http://youtu.be/xxxxxxxxxxx

As solid hyrax said, it works with most webpages that have a video on
them - certainly not just YouTube. I wish they hadn't called it
yt-dl(p), as many people think that means it's only for YT; I guess they
first wrote it for YT, and stuck with the name.

Post by Brian Gregory
yt-dlp -U
and it updates itself.

Or in my case, just "y -U"; it is aware of what it's called, and calls
the updated version by the name you've chosen. (Note that the pathname
of where you store it shouldn't have a space in [I have it in
D:\videos\yt-dlp], or the update doesn't work properly. At least, that
was the case with the old yt-dl, and may still be with yt-dlp. The
update worked by making a little batch file [which it deleted when it
was finished], and spaces in the pathnames broke the commands therein.)

[John K.Eason]

*Date:* Sun, 18 Jun 2023 23:31:50 +0200
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

I've been using the free version of 4K Video Downloader under 32-bit Windows 7 for
years now. It's still being regularly updated and shows a list of different MP4
formats (1080p down to 240p for instance) that you can download when you paste the
YT link into it:
https://www.4kdownload.com/products/videodownloader-34
(Checked this evening and it's still working fine.)

[Paul]

Post by John K.Eason

*Date:* Sun, 18 Jun 2023 23:31:50 +0200
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

I've been using the free version of 4K Video Downloader under 32-bit Windows 7 for
years now. It's still being regularly updated and shows a list of different MP4
formats (1080p down to 240p for instance) that you can download when you paste the
https://www.4kdownload.com/products/videodownloader-34
(Checked this evening and it's still working fine.)

It's good that you tested that, because it means the OP
is not being blocked on some OS determination.

An example of a browser user-agent, shows the OS the browser is hosted by,
is included in the string. The first example is a Win11. I think "NT 10.0" is used
for both 10 and 11. In the Linux example, the display software is described
and can be X11 or Wayland perhaps.

https://www.whatismybrowser.com/detect/what-is-my-user-agent/

Your User Agent is:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.10.2
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/111.0

Previous Windows OS versions included 6.0, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3. Vista,W7,W8,W8.1

You can modify the user agent string that Firefox uses. The
preference has been removed from about:config , but you can
put it back

https://www.whatismybrowser.com/guides/how-to-change-your-user-agent/firefox

general.useragent.override STRING <craft a string like the above in it>

about:config is a bit of a nuisance, since if you delete an item you should
not have, there is no backup or undo in the design.

Other potential tripping hazards, are TLS 1.1,1.2,1.3 for HTTPS transactions.
Firefox has CHACHA20 built-in, so I don't think the browser relies on SCHANNEL.
And the certificate chain -- even though Windows 7 is out of support, there
might still be the possibility of certificate revocation.

Tools : Browser Tools : Browser Console

Paul

[John K.Eason]

*Date:* Mon, 19 Jun 2023 05:08:28 -0400

Post by John K.Eason

*Date:* Sun, 18 Jun 2023 23:31:50 +0200
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

I've been using the free version of 4K Video Downloader under 32-bit Windows 7 for
years now. It's still being regularly updated and shows a list of different MP4
formats (1080p down to 240p for instance) that you can download when you paste the
https://www.4kdownload.com/products/videodownloader-34
(Checked this evening and it's still working fine.)

It's good that you tested that, because it means the OP
is not being blocked on some OS determination.
An example of a browser user-agent, shows the OS the browser is
hosted by, is included in the string. The first example is a Win11. I
think "NT 10.0" is used for both 10 and 11. In the Linux example, the
display software is described and can be X11 or Wayland perhaps.
https://www.whatismybrowser.com/detect/what-is-my-user-agent/
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0)
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.10.2
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:109.0)
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/111.0
Previous Windows OS versions included 6.0, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3.
Vista,W7,W8,W8.1
You can modify the user agent string that Firefox uses. The
preference has been removed from about:config , but you can
put it back
https://www.whatismybrowser.com/guides/how-to-change-your-user-agent
/firefox
general.useragent.override STRING <craft a string like the above in it>
about:config is a bit of a nuisance, since if you delete an item
you should not have, there is no backup or undo in the design.
Other potential tripping hazards, are TLS 1.1,1.2,1.3 for HTTPS transactions.
Firefox has CHACHA20 built-in, so I don't think the browser relies on SCHANNEL.
And the certificate chain -- even though Windows 7 is out of
support, there might still be the possibility of certificate revocation.
Tools : Browser Tools : Browser Console

My comment was actually sent from a PC using 64-bit Windows 10 hence the results
you're seeing although YT downloads are done on the W7 PC. I don't use the Win 7 PC
for email.
4K Video Downloader is a dedicated program not a browser addon and is regularly
updated (last one on May 5th) so the browser shouldn't matter.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Post by Rink
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

I use youtube-dl. The latest official release is broken now, but
these daily builds work:
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/

But for people who don't like the command-line, I'd recommend
Invidious, which I sometimes use to browse through all videos from
a particular YouTube account since YouTube started requiring their
Javascript to be enabled in order to use their website directly.

Select a working "instance" from this page, then you can visit
corresponding pages by replacing the www.youtube.com or whatever
YouTube domain name is in the video's URL with that of the instance
you choose. Or just search and find videos via the Invidious
interface in the first place.
https://docs.invidious.io/instances/

[solid hyrax]

Post by Computer Nerd Kev

Post by Rink
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

I use youtube-dl. The latest official release is broken now, but
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/

youtube-dl has been deprecated and is not in active development. I
highly recommend you to switch to the active fork yt-dlp

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Post by solid hyrax

Post by Computer Nerd Kev

Post by Rink
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

I use youtube-dl. The latest official release is broken now, but
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/

youtube-dl has been deprecated and is not in active development.

That is very obviously untrue, just one look at the GitHub page
will show much evidence of active development. Right now it says
the latest changes were made on June 17, 2023.

https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/commits/master

Post by solid hyrax
I highly recommend you to switch to the active fork yt-dlp

The only problem with using youtube-dl is that they haven't had an
official release recently, but that's why I pointed to those
automated releases instead. They still do everything I want, and
work with older versions of Python as well.

[Brian Gregory]

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
The only problem with using youtube-dl is that they haven't had an
official release recently, but that's why I pointed to those
automated releases instead. They still do everything I want, and
work with older versions of Python as well.

Then go where the official releases are:
https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp

[Stan Brown]

Post by Computer Nerd Kev

Post by solid hyrax

Post by Computer Nerd Kev

Post by Rink
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

I use youtube-dl. The latest official release is broken now, but
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/

youtube-dl has been deprecated and is not in active development.

That is very obviously untrue, just one look at the GitHub page
will show much evidence of active development. Right now it says
the latest changes were made on June 17, 2023.
https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/commits/master

Seems to me like a distinction without a difference. If youtube-dl
running on a normal user's PC can't find an update version later than
December 2021, then it doesn't matter whether work is being done
behind the scenes or not. It may matter in the future, if there ever
is a release, but it doesn't matter _now_ because a youtube-dl that
is throttled by Youtube is effectively useless.

Who's making these commits, anyway? I thought the original author had
decided not to keep chasing Youtube's frequent changes. Wasn't that
why someone forked it to create yt-dlp?

In any case, as of right now, and unless I'm _really_ missing
something, if you want to download from Youtube you need to use yt-
dlp, not youtube-dl.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Computer Nerd Kev

Post by solid hyrax

Post by Computer Nerd Kev

Post by Rink
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

I use youtube-dl. The latest official release is broken now, but
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/

youtube-dl has been deprecated and is not in active development.

That is very obviously untrue, just one look at the GitHub page
will show much evidence of active development. Right now it says
the latest changes were made on June 17, 2023.
https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/commits/master

Seems to me like a distinction without a difference.

The difference is that it works, whereas if it weren't still in
development it wouldn't.

If features don't change much then that's a good thing - I want
them to keep working how they have done because they do what I
want. The developers keep it working, I keep using it, yt-dlp is
beside the point - for me it's a fix for something that ain't
broke.

Post by Stan Brown
If youtube-dl
running on a normal user's PC can't find an update version later than
December 2021, then it doesn't matter whether work is being done
behind the scenes or not.

Well the latest daily build can always be retrieved at this link:
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/latest/download/youtube-dl

Or this for Windows:
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/latest/download/youtube-dl.exe

I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

Post by Stan Brown
It may matter in the future, if there ever
is a release, but it doesn't matter _now_ because a youtube-dl that
is throttled by Youtube is effectively useless.

No it's not throttled anymore. Try the latest daily build yourself.

Post by Stan Brown
Who's making these commits, anyway? I thought the original author had
decided not to keep chasing Youtube's frequent changes. Wasn't that
why someone forked it to create yt-dlp?

I have no idea why yt-dlp was created, but whether the original
author is involved still or not, the point is that youtube-dl is
still an actively developed and valid option.

Post by Stan Brown
In any case, as of right now, and unless I'm _really_ missing
something, if you want to download from Youtube you need to use yt-
dlp, not youtube-dl.

YES you're _really_ missing something - the links that I'm posting
right here to working builds of youtube-dl. Jeeze.

[Brian Gregory]

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Alt-space E P (or even Ctrl-V in Windows 10, maybe 8).

[Char Jackson]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Alt-space E P (or even Ctrl-V in Windows 10, maybe 8).

If the question is about pasting text from the clipboard into a Command
Prompt window, it's as easy as a single right-click anywhere in the
window. That behavior probably goes back to the beginning of time.

To copy text from a Command Prompt to the clipboard, highlight it with
the mouse and press Enter.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by Char Jackson

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Alt-space E P (or even Ctrl-V in Windows 10, maybe 8).

If the question is about pasting text from the clipboard into a Command
Prompt window, it's as easy as a single right-click anywhere in the
window. That behavior probably goes back to the beginning of time.
To copy text from a Command Prompt to the clipboard, highlight it with
the mouse and press Enter.

Correct. But for this to work, 'QuickEditMode' must be enabled/ticked
in the 'Properties' of the Command Prompt window.

IIRC, that option was not always set by default. I don't know what the
current (10/11) default is, because I always set it when I see it's
unset.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Char Jackson

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Alt-space E P (or even Ctrl-V in Windows 10, maybe 8).

If the question is about pasting text from the clipboard into a Command
Prompt window, it's as easy as a single right-click anywhere in the
window. That behavior probably goes back to the beginning of time.

Each to his own: I'd actually forgotten (or didn't know) about that one.
But since I'm usually using the keyboard anyway (even if only to type
the "y "), the Alt-space E P comes naturally.

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Char Jackson
To copy text from a Command Prompt to the clipboard, highlight it with
the mouse and press Enter.

Yes, that's somewhat more tedious, but works fine.

Post by Frank Slootweg
Correct. But for this to work, 'QuickEditMode' must be enabled/ticked
in the 'Properties' of the Command Prompt window.
IIRC, that option was not always set by default. I don't know what the
current (10/11) default is, because I always set it when I see it's
unset.

It obviously remains set between uses (or _is_ on my default in 7-32),
as I don't remember having to set it.

[Char Jackson]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Char Jackson

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Alt-space E P (or even Ctrl-V in Windows 10, maybe 8).

If the question is about pasting text from the clipboard into a Command
Prompt window, it's as easy as a single right-click anywhere in the
window. That behavior probably goes back to the beginning of time.

Each to his own: I'd actually forgotten (or didn't know) about that one.
But since I'm usually using the keyboard anyway (even if only to type
the "y "), the Alt-space E P comes naturally.

Post by Char Jackson
To copy text from a Command Prompt to the clipboard, highlight it with
the mouse and press Enter.

Yes, that's somewhat more tedious, but works fine.

I'm sorry, more tedious than what? I don't know of an easier way to mark
(select) text and copy it to the clipboard. The only other way I know of
is via the Command Prompt menu system, either via the keyboard or the
mouse, but that's much more tedious so I'm curious if you know of a
third way.

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by Char Jackson

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Char Jackson
To copy text from a Command Prompt to the clipboard, highlight it with
the mouse and press Enter.

Yes, that's somewhat more tedious, but works fine.

I'm sorry, more tedious than what? I don't know of an easier way to mark
(select) text and copy it to the clipboard. The only other way I know of
is via the Command Prompt menu system, either via the keyboard or the
mouse, but that's much more tedious so I'm curious if you know of a
third way.

No, I just meant it was more tedious than pasting text _to_ the command
prompt, as you have to be quite precise with the mouse when you
highlight it. (As it's a rectangle you are marking, and if it's more
than one line, you can miss getting the whole width.)

[Char Jackson]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Char Jackson

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Char Jackson
To copy text from a Command Prompt to the clipboard, highlight it with
the mouse and press Enter.

Yes, that's somewhat more tedious, but works fine.

I'm sorry, more tedious than what? I don't know of an easier way to mark
(select) text and copy it to the clipboard. The only other way I know of
is via the Command Prompt menu system, either via the keyboard or the
mouse, but that's much more tedious so I'm curious if you know of a
third way.

No, I just meant it was more tedious than pasting text _to_ the command
prompt, as you have to be quite precise with the mouse when you
highlight it. (As it's a rectangle you are marking, and if it's more
than one line, you can miss getting the whole width.)

Understood. Thanks, John.

[Char Jackson]

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Char Jackson

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Alt-space E P (or even Ctrl-V in Windows 10, maybe 8).

If the question is about pasting text from the clipboard into a Command
Prompt window, it's as easy as a single right-click anywhere in the
window. That behavior probably goes back to the beginning of time.
To copy text from a Command Prompt to the clipboard, highlight it with
the mouse and press Enter.

Correct. But for this to work, 'QuickEditMode' must be enabled/ticked
in the 'Properties' of the Command Prompt window.
IIRC, that option was not always set by default. I don't know what the
current (10/11) default is, because I always set it when I see it's
unset.

Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,
but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.

[Ken Blake]

Post by Char Jackson

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Char Jackson

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Alt-space E P (or even Ctrl-V in Windows 10, maybe 8).

If the question is about pasting text from the clipboard into a Command
Prompt window, it's as easy as a single right-click anywhere in the
window. That behavior probably goes back to the beginning of time.
To copy text from a Command Prompt to the clipboard, highlight it with
the mouse and press Enter.

Correct. But for this to work, 'QuickEditMode' must be enabled/ticked
in the 'Properties' of the Command Prompt window.
IIRC, that option was not always set by default. I don't know what the
current (10/11) default is, because I always set it when I see it's
unset.

Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,

Same here.

Post by Char Jackson
but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.

Same here. That's true of 90% of the setting here. Not only do I not
remember whether I changed the settings, but if I did, I don't
remember how I did it. Once something works the way I want it to, I
almost always quickly put it out of my mind.

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Char Jackson
Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,

Same here.

Post by Char Jackson
but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.

Same here. That's true of 90% of the setting here. Not only do I not
remember whether I changed the settings, but if I did, I don't
remember how I did it. Once something works the way I want it to, I
almost always quickly put it out of my mind.

That's why I hate changing machines, and also am not keen on the
smart-alecks who say they can get an out-of-the-box machine to how they
want it very quickly: I presume they just work mostly with the defaults.
In my case, some of the "settings" actually involve third-party utils,
which I will have forgotten not only how to set them up and where I got
them (even assuming they're still available!), but even that they _are_
such and not part of the OS. I image (using Macrium - other similar are
available) my C: partition (which contains just the OS and software;
nearly all data is on D: [which is backed up by a simpler process]; C:
is 50G, and at present less than half full) from time to time - I can be
back up after a disc failure, to how I want everything to be, a lot
faster than finding all those settings (and utils) and tweaking them.

Others can do what _they_ want, of course.

[Ken Blake]

On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 20:25:24 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Char Jackson
Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,

Same here.

Post by Char Jackson
but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.

Same here. That's true of 90% of the setting here. Not only do I not
remember whether I changed the settings, but if I did, I don't
remember how I did it. Once something works the way I want it to, I
almost always quickly put it out of my mind.

That's why I hate changing machines,

Same here. That's also why I hate doing a clean reinstallation of
Windows. It's a lot of work to get it back to the way I want it, and I
almost never succeed in getting it back exactly the way I want. I
reinstalled Windows several months ago. Today, it's almost exactly
back the way I want it, but there are still two or three things that
are not exactly right.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
and also am not keen on the
smart-alecks who say they can get an out-of-the-box machine to how they

Same here. It typically takes me at least two full days.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I presume they just work mostly with the defaults.

Yes, very likely.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
In my case, some of the "settings" actually involve third-party utils,
which I will have forgotten not only how to set them up and where I got
them (even assuming they're still available!), but even that they _are_
such and not part of the OS.

And for me, what their names are.

And for me, it's not just a matter of Windows and third-party
utilities; it's also a matter of configuring application programs.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I image (using Macrium - other similar are
available) my C: partition (which contains just the OS and software;
is 50G, and at present less than half full)

My C: drive is 1TB, much bigger than I need it to be at the moment..
Only 105GB is used.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
from time to time - I can be
back up after a disc failure, to how I want everything to be, a lot
faster than finding all those settings (and utils) and tweaking them.
Others can do what _they_ want, of course.

[Nic]

Post by Ken Blake
I
reinstalled Windows several months ago. Today, it's almost exactly
back the way I want it, but there are still two or three things that
are not exactly right.

Why did you have to reinstall windows? Was it a virus/malware? Some
complex corruption or bloat?

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Char Jackson
Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,

Same here.

Post by Char Jackson
but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.

Same here. That's true of 90% of the setting here. Not only do I not
remember whether I changed the settings, but if I did, I don't
remember how I did it. Once something works the way I want it to, I
almost always quickly put it out of my mind.

That's why I hate changing machines, and also am not keen on the
smart-alecks who say they can get an out-of-the-box machine to how they
want it very quickly: I presume they just work mostly with the defaults.
In my case, some of the "settings" actually involve third-party utils,
which I will have forgotten not only how to set them up and where I got
them (even assuming they're still available!), but even that they _are_
such and not part of the OS. I image (using Macrium - other similar are
available) my C: partition (which contains just the OS and software;
is 50G, and at present less than half full) from time to time - I can be
back up after a disc failure, to how I want everything to be, a lot
faster than finding all those settings (and utils) and tweaking them.
Others can do what _they_ want, of course.

You seem to address two scenarios: (in reverse order) 1) getting back
up after some major event like a disk failure and 2) changing from one
machine to another.

For 1), I use Macrium Reflect image backup and (Cobian Backup) file
backup, i.e. like you do. That gets us back up in a reasonably short
time.

As you mention, 2) changing from one machine to another, is much.
much more time consuming, not 'just' because of having to reinstall all
the software (including knowing what software you had and where you got
it from), but mainly because you need to re-configure all that software
to get it back to the state you had it / liked it.

For the latter part, I keep detailed laptop_install_<model-number>
documentation files (just POA (Plain Old ASCII) text files).

They document, in cronological order, all the download, installation,
configuration, etc. steps, ever since I got the new system. For some of
the more elaborate procedures, I make seperate documentation files,
with a reference in the main documentation file.

For me, this has worked quite well for two decades (XP, Vista, 8.1 and
now 11). Yes, it's a lot of work, but it's a lot of work with little
bits at a time, instead of a massive amount of work at the very moment
you get the new machine, i.e. when it's probably the least convenient to
have to spend all that time.

Yes, I sometimes forget to add stuff to the documentation file, so
sometimes, I need to search for some other documentation file, but my
(keyword(s)/regular-expression) search facilities make that rather easy
most of the time, so no major drama.

Of course none of this is rocket science, but maybe it's food for
thought for some, hence this post.

[Stan Brown]

Post by Frank Slootweg
As you mention, 2) changing from one machine to another, is much.
much more time consuming, not 'just' because of having to reinstall all
the software (including knowing what software you had and where you got
it from), but mainly because you need to re-configure all that software
to get it back to the state you had it / liked it.

It helps enormously to have the old and new machines set up next to
each other, if that's possible. And if you feel like tinkering, you
can copy %APPDATA% from old to new machine after doing the software
installs, rather that making all the settings by typing and mousing.
Firefox and Thunderbird profiles are in %APPDATA% by default, for
instance.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
As you mention, 2) changing from one machine to another, is much.
much more time consuming, not 'just' because of having to reinstall all
the software (including knowing what software you had and where you got
it from), but mainly because you need to re-configure all that software
to get it back to the state you had it / liked it.

There's also the matter of all the new drivers, unless you manage to
find an _identical_ machine. I've been known to spend some time
searching out such.

Post by Stan Brown
It helps enormously to have the old and new machines set up next to
each other, if that's possible. And if you feel like tinkering, you
can copy %APPDATA% from old to new machine after doing the software
installs, rather that making all the settings by typing and mousing.
Firefox and Thunderbird profiles are in %APPDATA% by default, for
instance.

Useful tip, thanks. (I never really accepted the reasons given for
getting away from .ini files - let alone the registry; I always assumed
_most_ of the reason for the latter was antipiracy.)

[Stan Brown]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 01:41:39 +0100, J. P. Gilliver

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Useful tip, thanks. (I never really accepted the reasons given for
getting away from .ini files - let alone the registry; I always assumed
_most_ of the reason for the latter was antipiracy.)

As I understand it, .INI files are potentially slower
because they must be read sequentially. So on average,
each time the program accesses a setting it has to read
half the .INI file, as text (which is marginally slower
than binary).

The Registry, on the other hand, has random access, so
the number of reads is reduced. That's a definite plus.
And I like the idea of programs using a common
structure for their options. But there's a big minus to
the Registry too: if you edit an .INI file manually
you're unlikely to make some other program, or Windows
itself, stop working. But with the registry, if you
don't pay attention to where you are in the hierarchy,
you can really do some damage and potentially make
Windows unbootable. (We're told that all the time, but
I really wonder how often it happens in real life.)

I think by encouraging the %APPDATA% model, Microsoft
is essentially saying that even if accessing a value in
a sequential file, takes an extra fraction of a
millisecond, it makes no practical difference. And
unlike .INI files, program can actually store documents
in %APPDATA%.

[The Real Bev]

Post by Stan Brown
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 01:41:39 +0100, J. P. Gilliver

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Useful tip, thanks. (I never really accepted the reasons given for
getting away from .ini files - let alone the registry; I always assumed
_most_ of the reason for the latter was antipiracy.)

As I understand it, .INI files are potentially slower
because they must be read sequentially. So on average,
each time the program accesses a setting it has to read
half the .INI file, as text (which is marginally slower
than binary).

...

The best thing about .ini files was that you could edit them yourself;
if you did something stupid all you had to do was delete the edited
file, copy the original to work on and try again. I never felt comfy
tweaking the registry -- if you screwed up you could REALLY screw up.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by The Real Bev

Post by Stan Brown
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 01:41:39 +0100, J. P. Gilliver

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Useful tip, thanks. (I never really accepted the reasons given for
getting away from .ini files - let alone the registry; I always
assumed _most_ of the reason for the latter was antipiracy.)

As I understand it, .INI files are potentially slower
because they must be read sequentially. So on average,
each time the program accesses a setting it has to read
half the .INI file, as text (which is marginally slower
than binary).

...
The best thing about .ini files was that you could edit them yourself;

Not only could permission-wise, but they were usually in human-readable
form, though sometimes needing a bit of head-scratching. My main hate of
the registry, I suppose, is the impenetrable strings of hex - not just
for the parameters, which I suppose I accept as quicker for machine use
(such as different bits of a DWORD controlling different things), but
the totally incomprehensible names of the keys, like 1234-567.8910,
rather than understandable names. I suspect that started as mostly
antipiracy, and then became just laziness. On the whole, .ini files were
comprehensible, though sometimes needed a bit of guidance.

Post by The Real Bev
if you did something stupid all you had to do was delete the edited
file, copy the original to work on and try again. I never felt comfy
tweaking the registry -- if you screwed up you could REALLY screw up.

Hence my imaging.

[Andy Burns]

My main hate of the registry, I suppose, is the impenetrable strings of hex

What about the ROT13 sections?

[Paul]

Post by Andy Burns

My main hate of the registry, I suppose, is the impenetrable strings of hex

What about the ROT13 sections?

Don't even suggest that to them :-) There are monkeys listening, for "good ideas".

Not all the obfuscation you see in there, is intended that way.

The license key in Windows for example, that *is* obfuscated with a custom
method, but that is not "encryption". It's just encoding. The algo is short,
and was documented in microsoft.public.windows.general, around 20 years ago.

Even Firefox, with its .jsonlz4, dabbles in wanton obfuscation
(for the fuck of it, not for any other justifiable reason).

Since there is a lz4.dll in Firefox, you can harvest that puppy
and make your own lz4 unpacker.

*******

File paths stored with 16 bit (wide) characters in the Windows Registry,
look like binary to the uninitiated, but if you get out your hex-to-ASCII table,
you can most always re-assemble that into something humans can use. It's
like doing the Time crossword puzzle.

Google: linux man ascii

for your own ASCII table. That's how I get mine, when I need one.

If you want to try your leet skillz, then decoding some TZ related
stuff would be good fun. TZ is Timezone material. There is an application
for putting a TZ into the registry, a process someone running WinXP or
Win2K might have done. I had to do it a couple of times on my Win2K
(I had CAD software that only ran there).

Paul

[Stan Brown]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 10:25:29 +0100, J. P. Gilliver

Post by J. P. Gilliver
My main hate of
the registry, I suppose, is the impenetrable strings of hex - not just
for the parameters, which I suppose I accept as quicker for machine use
(such as different bits of a DWORD controlling different things), but
the totally incomprehensible names of the keys, like 1234-567.8910,
rather than understandable names. I suspect that started as mostly
antipiracy

Sounds like you're talking about GUIDs.
<https://betterexplained.com/articles/the-quick-guide-
to-guids/>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universally_unique_ident
ifier>

I remember 20-30 years ago we learned about them while
learning COM programming. The idea was to create a
unique identifier without any kind of central registry
yet with ultra-low probability of duplicates. Wikipedia
lists some other uses.

I don't recall ever hearing any connection to
antipiracy.

[Paul]

Post by Stan Brown
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 10:25:29 +0100, J. P. Gilliver

Post by J. P. Gilliver
My main hate of
the registry, I suppose, is the impenetrable strings of hex - not just
for the parameters, which I suppose I accept as quicker for machine use
(such as different bits of a DWORD controlling different things), but
the totally incomprehensible names of the keys, like 1234-567.8910,
rather than understandable names. I suspect that started as mostly
antipiracy

Sounds like you're talking about GUIDs.
<https://betterexplained.com/articles/the-quick-guide-
to-guids/>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universally_unique_ident
ifier>
I remember 20-30 years ago we learned about them while
learning COM programming. The idea was to create a
unique identifier without any kind of central registry
yet with ultra-low probability of duplicates. Wikipedia
lists some other uses.
I don't recall ever hearing any connection to
antipiracy.

That could be a reference to CLSID, which is an application indirection.
And yes, that is annoying, having to work backwards with those.

While you can make a "excuse based on theoretical grounds" for
doing that, we all know this is just to flummox the users. It's
to make them see red, and pop an eardrum. That's all it's for.

Paul

[Paul]

Post by Stan Brown
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 01:41:39 +0100, J. P. Gilliver

Useful tip, thanks. (I never really accepted the reasons given for getting away from .ini files - let alone the registry; I always assumed _most_ of the reason for the latter was antipiracy.)

As I understand it, .INI files are potentially slower
because they must be read sequentially. So on average,
each time the program accesses a setting it has to read
half the .INI file, as text (which is marginally slower
than binary).

...
The best thing about  .ini files was that you could edit them yourself; if you did something stupid all you had to do was delete the edited file, copy the original to work on and try again.  I never felt comfy tweaking the registry -- if you screwed up you could REALLY screw up.

The OS, repetitively, can be reading *10,000* registry items
per second, in a kind of polled mode. You can check for this
behavior, with Process Monitor (procmon64.exe).

The Registry is memory mapped, which is why that sort of rubbish
behavior "does not matter".

The hardest entry in the Registry to edit ? why, one
owned by TrustedInstaller. When a malware sets a registry
entry in the BIOS, it uses the TrustedInstaller token,
just to make you miserable. There is a program to give
your Command Prompt window the token, and then you can
launch regedit.exe with TrustedInstaller permissions. Yum.

For the longest while, nobody would tell me whether the
Registry was a database or a file system. "is it a candy mint
or a breath mint?". Then one day I found an article that
claimed it was a file system. And that was one less thing
to think about.

Each registry entry has ownership.
The registry can contain "binary blobs", otherwise known
as "files". But it is not advised to make a monkey out of
yourself by doing that. There is absolutely nothing to be
gained, by bloating out the Registry. Not even for beer bets.
It's possible, for example, that a TZ (timezone) definition,
is a tiny file.

The registry has become pretty slow on search. Don't ask me why.
If we knew why, we could have that discussion about candy mint
or breath mint again :-)

Paul

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Stan Brown
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 01:41:39 +0100, J. P. Gilliver

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Useful tip, thanks. (I never really accepted the reasons given for
getting away from .ini files - let alone the registry; I always assumed
_most_ of the reason for the latter was antipiracy.)

As I understand it, .INI files are potentially slower
because they must be read sequentially. So on average,
each time the program accesses a setting it has to read
half the .INI file, as text (which is marginally slower
than binary).

Yes, but if read in when a prog. starts (the main executable, which also
has to be read when a prog. starts, is usually _much_ bigger), and kept
in memory - presumably in prog.-appropriate form, not the text version -
and written back when you close, shouldn't really be a valid reason.
(OK, changes wouldn't be saved if you crash the prog. - or, it could
save periodically.)

Post by Stan Brown
The Registry, on the other hand, has random access, so
the number of reads is reduced. That's a definite plus.
And I like the idea of programs using a common
structure for their options. But there's a big minus to

That, I think, is the main reason touted for it. But how many prog.s
genuinely share settings? (See also next post.)

Post by Stan Brown
the Registry too: if you edit an .INI file manually
you're unlikely to make some other program, or Windows
itself, stop working. But with the registry, if you
don't pay attention to where you are in the hierarchy,
you can really do some damage and potentially make
Windows unbootable. (We're told that all the time, but
I really wonder how often it happens in real life.)
I think by encouraging the %APPDATA% model, Microsoft
is essentially saying that even if accessing a value in
a sequential file, takes an extra fraction of a
millisecond, it makes no practical difference. And
unlike .INI files, program can actually store documents
in %APPDATA%.

Hmm.

[Paul]

Post by Stan Brown
But with the registry, if you
don't pay attention to where you are in the hierarchy,
you can really do some damage and potentially make
Windows unbootable. (We're told that all the time, but
I really wonder how often it happens in real life.)

Registry entries are addressed by absolute paths.

You know, those strings we paste into this newsgroup all the time.

The file system (NTFS) is journaled.

The registry files are journaled.

This makes the modern registry, robust to switching off the power.

Back when there was no journaling whatsoever, we used to "fear the registry".
Because it could eat our lunch.

An early access to the Registry, is for the value of the AutoChk.
That's the multiline storage containing "how would you like
to check NTFS before we mount it?" (do not ask me how you read the
registry without mounting the stupid file system, so it must already
be mounted just before they do this).

Malware used to like to edit this Multi_SZ (multi-line text thingy)
with additional stuff to launch, such as the .EXE name of the malware.
They would leave the final line of the stanza set to "autocheck autochk *"
as a joke (because they would not want to prevent the system from checking NTFS).

https://www.thewindowsclub.com/bootexecute-autocheck-autochk-windows

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE > SYSTEM > CurrentControlSet > Control > SessionManager
BootExecute Multi_SZ autocheck autochk *

Hardly any malware does this today, but it pays to not forget the past.

Same as goes for "flushing/deleting all your System Restore points when
malware is onboard". Yes, malwares still inject themselves into SR.

Paul

[wasbit]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Stan Brown

  As you mention, 2) changing from one machine to another, is much.
much more time consuming, not 'just' because of having to reinstall all
the software (including knowing what software you had and where you got
it from), but mainly because you need to re-configure all that software
to get it back to the state you had it / liked it.

There's also the matter of all the new drivers, unless you manage to
find an _identical_ machine. I've been known to spend some time
searching out such.

Snappy Driver Installer Origin.
Especially good for after an install of Windows where you don't have the
motherboard driver CD
- https://www.glenn.delahoy.com/snappy-driver-installer-origin/

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Stan Brown
It helps enormously to have the old and new machines set up next to
each other, if that's possible. And if you feel like tinkering, you
can copy %APPDATA% from old to new machine after doing the software
installs, rather that making all the settings by typing and mousing.
Firefox and Thunderbird profiles are in %APPDATA% by default, for
instance.

Useful tip, thanks. (I never really accepted the reasons given for
getting away from .ini files - let alone the registry; I always assumed
_most_ of the reason for the latter was antipiracy.)

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by wasbit

Post by J. P. Gilliver
There's also the matter of all the new drivers, unless you manage to
find an _identical_ machine. I've been known to spend some time
searching out such.

Snappy Driver Installer Origin.
Especially good for after an install of Windows where you don't have
the motherboard driver CD
- https://www.glenn.delahoy.com/snappy-driver-installer-origin/

[]
I've seen so many "we'll help you update/get your driver" utilities,
most of which are either excellent malware gateways (drivers get past
most protection), or at least lead you round in circles, trying to sell
you things at each lap, that I'm very dubious of them. Is this one any
different? I note it doesn't include the "driver packs"; one wonders how
comprehensive those are, especially for new hardware on older OSs.

[Ken Blake]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 01:41:39 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
As you mention, 2) changing from one machine to another, is much.
much more time consuming, not 'just' because of having to reinstall all
the software (including knowing what software you had and where you got
it from), but mainly because you need to re-configure all that software
to get it back to the state you had it / liked it.

There's also the matter of all the new drivers, unless you manage to
find an _identical_ machine.

I've never switched to an identical machine. Every time I've gotten a
new machine, it's been an upgrade, almost always both of the hardware
and the operating system.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I've been known to spend some time
searching out such.

Post by Stan Brown
It helps enormously to have the old and new machines set up next to
each other, if that's possible. And if you feel like tinkering, you
can copy %APPDATA% from old to new machine after doing the software
installs, rather that making all the settings by typing and mousing.
Firefox and Thunderbird profiles are in %APPDATA% by default, for
instance.

Useful tip, thanks. (I never really accepted the reasons given for
getting away from .ini files - let alone the registry; I always assumed
_most_ of the reason for the latter was antipiracy.)

As far as I'm concerned, there have never been good reasons. I still
think having a registry with settings for all programs rather than
separate ini files for each was a very bad idea. The registry should
be the "ini" file just for Windows, not anything else.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Frank Slootweg
As you mention, 2) changing from one machine to another, is much.
much more time consuming, not 'just' because of having to reinstall all
the software (including knowing what software you had and where you got
it from), but mainly because you need to re-configure all that software
to get it back to the state you had it / liked it.

There's also the matter of all the new drivers, unless you manage to
find an _identical_ machine. I've been known to spend some time
searching out such.

Yes, I contemplated to do that when my Windows 8.1 laptop broke beyond
(economically feasible) repair and got replaced by a new laptop which
came with - as yet uninstalled - Windows 11.

I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
- to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
it,

[...]

[Stan Brown]

Post by Frank Slootweg
I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
- to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
it,

I bought a Win 10 desktop late in 2021, and a Win 11 laptop this
spring. I would have preferred Windows 10, so the two would have the
same OS, but that wasn't an option. I thought about "downgrading" the
laptop to Win 10, but didn't because I was worried about drivers for
new hardware.

But I wouldn't have worried about losing the installed Windows 11.
Microsoft is so keen to foist Windows 11 on everybody that they let
you install Win 11 over Win 10 and -- if I remember correctly -- use
the same license before and after.

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <***@ID-201911.user.individual.net> at Fri, 30 Jun
2023 14:44:22, Frank Slootweg <***@ddress.is.invalid> writes
[]

Post by Frank Slootweg
I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
- to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
it,
[...]

I always create my images by booting from cold from the Macrium CD; I've
always assumed that that would backup (image) more or less anything,
including nothing. Yes, I'm aware that it probably wouldn't work if the
unknown had partitions formatted with something Macrium doesn't know
about.

[Paul]

[]

 I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
- to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
it,
[...]

I always create my images by booting from cold from the Macrium CD; I've always assumed that that would backup (image) more or less anything, including nothing. Yes, I'm aware that it probably wouldn't work if the unknown had partitions formatted with something Macrium doesn't know about.

Macrium backs up the 15MB Microsoft Reserved on a UEFI installation.

Linux gparted will not deal with the 15MB partition, because...
it contains no file system. Macrium on the other hand, knows
it has no file system, and uses "dd" to back it up. It uses
a sector-by-sector approach. On the Linux side, that 15MB partition
is "like a turd", it causes so much trouble :-)

Macrium can back up a Linux EXT partition. It uses smart copy
for that (only backs up inodes containing files and so on).
20GB of EXT files, requires about 30GB of backup-drive storage space.
Some disk structure (super-blocks) could be involved, not sure.

But if you were to present a BTRFS, it does not know what
that is, so it could resort to "dd" for that. I have not
tested it for such test cases (used a BTRFS just to try
and break Macrium). The 15MB Microsoft Reserved observation,
is good enough as a start at a characterization.

You could "dd" the original 15MB yourself, checksum it, then
see if the restored Macrium image has the same checksum
for that partition. That would tell you that the restore, worked.

Paul

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Frank Slootweg
I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
- to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
it,
[...]

I always create my images by booting from cold from the Macrium CD; I've
always assumed that that would backup (image) more or less anything,
including nothing. Yes, I'm aware that it probably wouldn't work if the
unknown had partitions formatted with something Macrium doesn't know
about.

I was mostly worried about whether it would work at all, mostly
driver-wise. Would a 'Rescue media' USB memory-stick, made for the old
system, work on the new system?

In hindsight, I could of course just have tried. If it wouldn't work,
it would be unlikely that Macrium Reflect would have done any damage to
the contents of the new 'disk' (SSD). (Now I'm writing this, I realize
that the (driver for) SSD might have been a problem, as the old system
had a HDD. OTOH I probably could have added a SSD driver to the old
Rescue media.)

Anyway, I'm glad I took the route I took (Windows 11 on the new
laptop). It took a lot of work, but now I'm on an OS which will be
supported for quite some years, (sofar) runs all the old software I need
and - contrary to popular belief - is actually somewhat bearable! :-)

[Paul]

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Frank Slootweg
I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
- to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
it,
[...]

I always create my images by booting from cold from the Macrium CD; I've
always assumed that that would backup (image) more or less anything,
including nothing. Yes, I'm aware that it probably wouldn't work if the
unknown had partitions formatted with something Macrium doesn't know
about.

I was mostly worried about whether it would work at all, mostly
driver-wise. Would a 'Rescue media' USB memory-stick, made for the old
system, work on the new system?
In hindsight, I could of course just have tried. If it wouldn't work,
it would be unlikely that Macrium Reflect would have done any damage to
the contents of the new 'disk' (SSD). (Now I'm writing this, I realize
that the (driver for) SSD might have been a problem, as the old system
had a HDD. OTOH I probably could have added a SSD driver to the old
Rescue media.)
Anyway, I'm glad I took the route I took (Windows 11 on the new
laptop). It took a lot of work, but now I'm on an OS which will be
supported for quite some years, (sofar) runs all the old software I need
and - contrary to popular belief - is actually somewhat bearable! :-)

SATA SSD and SATA HDD should be similar enough to use the same driver.
They different in SMART definition, which is not critical to the main function.
They support read/write the same way.

NVMe SSD would be a different driver, if not present.

When you make Macrium boot media, that's a WinPE made from a WADK kit
or similar. One of the Macrium options is to use a WinRE and not bother
with downloading a WADK kit. The other options use the WADK kit and
build a boot OS from that.

If you had a really old WADK, like something WinXP era, that would be
unlikely to have an NVMe driver.

It's similar to potential issues with USB3 and XHCI drivers. If a WADK
was Win7 or older, there wouldn't be USB class style support for USB3.
Some Win10 WADK would have it. If you wanted to do backups to a USB3
external drive, you'd want to use a new enough WADK (or use the default
WinRE).

The eMMC in a laptop/tablet, I have no idea what standard that is :-)
It's supposed to be "SD-like" but the circuit here shows an eight bit bus.
There might be other modes of operation, using one data line or four data
lines, versus all eight. To get a copy of the spec, costs $327. I'm
really surprised Wiki does not have a better writeup.

https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/imx8mp-eMMC-interface-pull-ups/m-p/1361415

*******

If you build 32-bit media when making your Macrium CD or Macrium stick,
it will run a select few win32 applications. There may be occasions
where some technical problem arises, and a certain tool is only available
for windows, and you need it to run in the WinPE environment. The 32 bit media
stands the best odds of running win32 applications. A 64-bit Macrium media,
is unlikely to help at a time like that (WOW might be missing on it, dunno).

There are a number of software subsystems missing in a WinPE, so not just anything
will work in there. VSS is missing, and Macrium does not mind, since the
partitions are all at rest and no files would be locked anyway. when Macrium boots,
the OS is ramdrive letter X: and all the other drive letters are at-rest (like C: ).
It is possible, if something uses X: , it could run out of space.

I'm kinda shocked, that the Macrium media is as functional as it is :-)

The old versions of Macrium media, did not have a Shutdown option, only a Reboot.
The newer ones, you can select shutdown. Since the OS is ramdrive based, you
can pull out the media (open CD tray and remove CD, close tray), before clicking shutdown.

Paul

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
As you mention, 2) changing from one machine to another, is much.
much more time consuming, not 'just' because of having to reinstall all
the software (including knowing what software you had and where you got
it from), but mainly because you need to re-configure all that software
to get it back to the state you had it / liked it.

It helps enormously to have the old and new machines set up next to
each other, if that's possible.

Yes, I try to do that as much as possible. The last time - from a
Windows 8.1 laptop to a new Windows 11 one - the old laptop was quite
sick (heavily flickering display which could only be temporarily 'fixed'
with great difficulty), but I managed anyway.

And if I don't have the old machine, I try to use another machine -
mainly my wife's - to mount the old images/backup-drives.

Post by Stan Brown
And if you feel like tinkering, you
can copy %APPDATA% from old to new machine after doing the software
installs, rather that making all the settings by typing and mousing.
Firefox and Thunderbird profiles are in %APPDATA% by default, for
instance.

Yes, that can help, but settings/data tend to be all over the place
for different programs. Some in %APPDATA%, some in \ProgramData, some in
subfolders of \Users\<users> *other* than %APPDATA%, some in the
Registry, etc., etc., ad infinitum.

Bottom line: Windows is a mess. (But you already knew that, didn't
you!? :-))

[Ken Blake]

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Char Jackson
Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,

Same here.

Post by Char Jackson
but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.

Same here. That's true of 90% of the setting here. Not only do I not
remember whether I changed the settings, but if I did, I don't
remember how I did it. Once something works the way I want it to, I
almost always quickly put it out of my mind.

That's why I hate changing machines, and also am not keen on the
smart-alecks who say they can get an out-of-the-box machine to how they
want it very quickly: I presume they just work mostly with the defaults.
In my case, some of the "settings" actually involve third-party utils,
which I will have forgotten not only how to set them up and where I got
them (even assuming they're still available!), but even that they _are_
such and not part of the OS. I image (using Macrium - other similar are
available) my C: partition (which contains just the OS and software;
is 50G, and at present less than half full) from time to time - I can be
back up after a disc failure, to how I want everything to be, a lot
faster than finding all those settings (and utils) and tweaking them.
Others can do what _they_ want, of course.

You seem to address two scenarios: (in reverse order) 1) getting back
up after some major event like a disk failure and 2) changing from one
machine to another.
For 1), I use Macrium Reflect image backup and (Cobian Backup) file
backup,

Why do you use two? Are they different from each other? Is one better
than the other?

I use AOMEI? Do you recommend that I switch to one of the two you use?
Both of them? Why?

Post by Frank Slootweg
i.e. like you do. That gets us back up in a reasonably short
time.
As you mention, 2) changing from one machine to another, is much.
much more time consuming, not 'just' because of having to reinstall all
the software (including knowing what software you had and where you got
it from), but mainly because you need to re-configure all that software
to get it back to the state you had it / liked it.

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. And remembering what you reconfigured and how
you did it. And finding all the needed product keys.

Post by Frank Slootweg
For the latter part, I keep detailed laptop_install_<model-number>
documentation files (just POA (Plain Old ASCII) text files).

That's a very good idea. I've tried to do it more than once, but when
I make changes, or install something new to try it out, I invariably
forget to do it, so it's never worked well for me.

Post by Frank Slootweg
They document, in cronological order, all the download, installation,
configuration, etc. steps, ever since I got the new system. For some of
the more elaborate procedures, I make seperate documentation files,
with a reference in the main documentation file.
For me, this has worked quite well for two decades (XP, Vista, 8.1 and
now 11). Yes, it's a lot of work, but it's a lot of work with little
bits at a time, instead of a massive amount of work at the very moment
you get the new machine, i.e. when it's probably the least convenient to
have to spend all that time.
Yes, I sometimes forget to add stuff to the documentation file, so
sometimes, I need to search for some other documentation file, but my
(keyword(s)/regular-expression) search facilities make that rather easy
most of the time, so no major drama.
Of course none of this is rocket science, but maybe it's food for
thought for some, hence this post.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Char Jackson
Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,

Same here.

Post by Char Jackson
but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.

Same here. That's true of 90% of the setting here. Not only do I not
remember whether I changed the settings, but if I did, I don't
remember how I did it. Once something works the way I want it to, I
almost always quickly put it out of my mind.

That's why I hate changing machines, and also am not keen on the
smart-alecks who say they can get an out-of-the-box machine to how they
want it very quickly: I presume they just work mostly with the defaults.
In my case, some of the "settings" actually involve third-party utils,
which I will have forgotten not only how to set them up and where I got
them (even assuming they're still available!), but even that they _are_
such and not part of the OS. I image (using Macrium - other similar are
available) my C: partition (which contains just the OS and software;
is 50G, and at present less than half full) from time to time - I can be
back up after a disc failure, to how I want everything to be, a lot
faster than finding all those settings (and utils) and tweaking them.
Others can do what _they_ want, of course.

You seem to address two scenarios: (in reverse order) 1) getting back
up after some major event like a disk failure and 2) changing from one
machine to another.
For 1), I use Macrium Reflect image backup and (Cobian Backup) file
backup,

Why do you use two? Are they different from each other? Is one better
than the other?

Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.

The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.

I would advise doing the same, i.e. an image backup of all your
partitions - except a pure 'data' partition if you have one - and a
file-oriented backup of stuff you think might be needed to restored
without restoring the system itself.

Post by Ken Blake
I use AOMEI? Do you recommend that I switch to one of the two you use?
Both of them? Why?

Use whatever suits you best.

While I like Cobian Backup a lot, I can't really recommend it, because
it's very powerful and hence not easy to use. Strange tidbit: It doesn't
have a restore facility! Why? Because the backup are just plain Windows
folders/files with a bit of timestamps and backup type
(Full/Incremental) thrown in in the folder/file names.

[...]

[Char Jackson]

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Ken Blake
Why do you use two? Are they different from each other? Is one better
than the other?

Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.
The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.
I would advise doing the same, i.e. an image backup of all your
partitions - except a pure 'data' partition if you have one - and a
file-oriented backup of stuff you think might be needed to restored
without restoring the system itself.

Do you not trust the Macrium images to act as your file backups?

I do, which is why I'm curious.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by Char Jackson

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Ken Blake
Why do you use two? Are they different from each other? Is one better
than the other?

Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.
The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.
I would advise doing the same, i.e. an image backup of all your
partitions - except a pure 'data' partition if you have one - and a
file-oriented backup of stuff you think might be needed to restored
without restoring the system itself.

Do you not trust the Macrium images to act as your file backups?
I do, which is why I'm curious.

[Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]

Yes, I trust the Macrium Reflect images to retrieve files if
neccessary. I have done so (restored a file / some files) at least once
(because the files were not in the 'Files' list of my Cobian Backkup
backup).

I do have the Free version of Macrium Reflect. At some time, I
probably will buy the full version, because the Free version is no
longer updated, but I find the price rather high, especially for our two
computers. (To Stan:) So I can not do file backups with Macrium Reflect
Free (but I can restore files, read on).

(To Stan:) Yes, I know I can mount the images. I do so after a backup
and verify that I can open a file and restore it.

Why do I use both (Macrium Reflect Free) image backup and (Cobian
Backup) backup?

For historical (hysterical? :-)) reasons. I already made file backups
a very, very long time before I got (was aware of?) something like
Macrium Reflect. In the XP days, I had some other disaster-recovery
software (can try to find its name), but it was a pain.

Second reason for having both is that I make file backup much more
frequently (daily) than image backup (monthly). The latter is also
caused by backing up to NAS (i.e. network) via Wi-Fi (i.e. slower than
hardwired) and by Macrium Reflect Free having only Differential backup,
not Incremental.

I hope this answers your questions.

[Stan Brown]

Post by Frank Slootweg
[Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
I hope this answers your questions.

Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
fault; I was just genuinely curious.

For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
be compensated for the program.

[Char Jackson]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
[Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
I hope this answers your questions.

Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
fault; I was just genuinely curious.

Same here. Just curious.

Post by Stan Brown
For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
be compensated for the program.

Again, same here. I bought a 4-license bundle since I had 4 systems that
would benefit from regular backups. Before buying Macrium and setting up
a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

*that's on my primary laptop. The other 3 PCs were never getting backed
up at all, but all 4 are on a regular schedule now.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Char Jackson
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown

[]

Post by Char Jackson

Post by Stan Brown
For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
be compensated for the program.

Again, same here. I bought a 4-license bundle since I had 4 systems that
would benefit from regular backups. Before buying Macrium and setting up
a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)
can be restored - and data certainly needs more often than that.

Post by Char Jackson
*that's on my primary laptop. The other 3 PCs were never getting backed
up at all, but all 4 are on a regular schedule now.

I was on about once a quarter, but have now set a reminder (I use System
Scheduler - I started using it under XP, and although 7 has a built-in
one, still prefer it - it's a lot simpler) and do an image of C: and a
backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
into my genealogy lately, I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).

[Ken Blake]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Char Jackson
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown

[]

Post by Char Jackson

Post by Stan Brown
For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
be compensated for the program.

Again, same here. I bought a 4-license bundle since I had 4 systems that
would benefit from regular backups. Before buying Macrium and setting up
a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)

That depends on what hardware has failed. If the whole computer is
replaced, I agree, but if it's just a single component, that may or
may not be the case.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
can be restored - and data certainly needs more often than that.

Yes. I regularly backup data in three ways.

1. Backup to the cloud, using a paid-for service that backs up daily

2. Backup to my three backup drives (one external, two internal)
weekly.

3.Back of my most critical data (Quicken), alternating between using
one of two thumb drives, whenever there are significant changes
(every day or two).

That means I always have at least six copies of my Quicken data (and
my financial advisor has a seventh copy of most of it). Am I being
paranoid? Yes. But I can survive the loss of anything else. I'm not so
sure I could readily survive the loss of my Quicken data.

And are all those levels of backup of the rest of the data necessary.?
Almost certainly not. But I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Char Jackson
*that's on my primary laptop. The other 3 PCs were never getting backed
up at all, but all 4 are on a regular schedule now.

I was on about once a quarter, but have now set a reminder (I use System
Scheduler - I started using it under XP, and although 7 has a built-in
one, still prefer it - it's a lot simpler) and do an image of C: and a

To me, an image of C: isn't as critical as backup of the data files on
D:, so I do it when I get around to it--probably also around once a
quarter. I know--I should do it more often.

Can I do it with a built-in Windows 11 tool? What's the name of the
tool? Is that a good choice? If I can do it, I know next to nothing
about it. Should I look into that before I look into Macrium reflect.?

What I've been thinking about doing is using one of my two internal
backup drives that are being backed up by Bart and instead use it to
backup an image (or clone? Is one a better choice than the other?) of
C: Can I do that with a Windows 11 tool, or would Macrium reflect be a
better choice? The advantage of using an internal drive to do that is
that I could have it scheduled to automatically run at a reasonable
frequency, and don't have to remember to do it.

Yes, an internal drive for backup isn't as safe as an eternal drive,
but as far as I'm concerned, that's much more important for data files
than for C: If I lost all my data files on D, that would be a
catastrophe, but if I lost everything on C: without a backup, it would
be a pain in the ass (arse), but I'd survive.

All thoughts about what I currently do and my plans for what I'll do
in the future, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
into my genealogy lately,

I have no genealogical records. I have four living relatives, as far
as I know (one son, one grandson, one first cousin, one second cousin)
and I remember only seven dead relatives--mother, father, two aunts,
one first cousin once removed, one maternal grandmother, and maternal
grandfather--so I have no interest in knowing more about people who I
met at most only a handful of times, and don't remember at all.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Char Jackson
a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)

That depends on what hardware has failed. If the whole computer is
replaced, I agree, but if it's just a single component, that may or
may not be the case.

Very true.
[]

Post by Ken Blake
What I've been thinking about doing is using one of my two internal
backup drives that are being backed up by Bart and instead use it to
backup an image (or clone? Is one a better choice than the other?) of

Each has its advantages. If it's a clone, assuming it's been made
correctly and whatever takes out your C: drive doesn't also take out the
drive you're cloning to (that of course is a concern for imaging too!),
then in the event, you can just switch the drivers over and be back up
in minutes - the mechanical work of opening the case and fiddling with
the connectors and screws probably taking longer than anything else. If
imaging, you need to have/obtain the replacement drive, _and_ have
something to boot from (CD or USB) that has the necessary software on it
(Macrium, Bart?, the Windows one) to restore from the image. Conversely,
you can probably have a lot more images on most drives these days,
especially if you keep your C: partition small - you could even have
images for the C: partition of several different machines on it; whereas
if cloning, it's obviously just one drive.

Post by Ken Blake
C: Can I do that with a Windows 11 tool, or would Macrium reflect be a
better choice? The advantage of using an internal drive to do that is
that I could have it scheduled to automatically run at a reasonable
frequency, and don't have to remember to do it.

I don't know what Windows 11 comes with - there probably _is_ some such
utility, since I think there was/is even with 7. I just find Macrium
easier - plus, I feel a slight greater ease in having something other
than the OS do it. Although I always do my imaging (I image rather than
clone) by booting from the Macrium CD, Macrium _can_ run (at least the
imaging/cloning part; obviously not the restoring!) from within Windows.
(I don't, as I feel uneasy backing up a running system.) I'm pretty sure
the part-of-the-OS utility can be run from within Windows too.

Post by Ken Blake
Yes, an internal drive for backup isn't as safe as an eternal drive,
but as far as I'm concerned, that's much more important for data files
than for C: If I lost all my data files on D, that would be a
catastrophe, but if I lost everything on C: without a backup, it would
be a pain in the ass (arse), but I'd survive.

I often hear US folk talking about their tax affairs in this respect,
and I understand. (The _majority_ of UK folk - certainly those employed
by an employer - don't _do_ tax returns most years.)

Post by Ken Blake
All thoughts about what I currently do and my plans for what I'll do
in the future, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
into my genealogy lately,

I have no genealogical records. I have four living relatives, as far
as I know (one son, one grandson, one first cousin, one second cousin)
and I remember only seven dead relatives--mother, father, two aunts,
one first cousin once removed, one maternal grandmother, and maternal
grandfather--so I have no interest in knowing more about people who I
met at most only a handful of times, and don't remember at all.

Well, it's a hobby - I'm sure many of us have a similar hobby that
involves a lot of data we'd hate to lose a few months/weeks/days (select
as appropriate) ' work from. (I like finding new cousins, and telling
them how they're related to me - sometimes they're interesting people
anyway. Same as in any hobby, I suppose.)

Post by Ken Blake

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).

[Ken Blake]

From: Ken Blake <***@invalid.news.com>
Subject: Re: YouTube downloads fail all the time
Newsgroups:
alt.comp.software.firefox,alt.windows7.general;alt.comp.os.Windows-11
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186

I've added alt.comp.os.Windows-11 to the newsgroups cross-posted to.

I screwed up doing that, so I'm reposting

[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Char Jackson
a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)

That depends on what hardware has failed. If the whole computer is
replaced, I agree, but if it's just a single component, that may or
may not be the case.

Very true.
[]

Post by Ken Blake
What I've been thinking about doing is using one of my two internal
backup drives that are being backed up by Bart and instead use it to
backup an image (or clone? Is one a better choice than the other?) of

Each has its advantages. If it's a clone, assuming it's been made
correctly and whatever takes out your C: drive doesn't also take out the
drive you're cloning to (that of course is a concern for imaging too!),
then in the event, you can just switch the drivers over and be back up
in minutes

Yes, but only if you've cloned to an internal drive.

However that wouldn't be the case for me, since my drive is an M2 SSD
and I would clone it to a spinner. I'd want to keep C: on the M2. The
M2 and spinners are also two different sizes.

So if I cloned it and C: died, I would need/want to copy the clone
back to the M2. How would I do that? Does the free Macrium come with a
bootable utility that can do that? How about the part-of-the-OS
utility? Can it do that?

- the mechanical work of opening the case and fiddling with
the connectors and screws probably taking longer than anything else. If
imaging, you need to have/obtain the replacement drive, _and_ have
something to boot from (CD or USB) that has the necessary software on it
(Macrium, Bart?,

No, Bart doesn't do that. It does nothing but just copy files; that's
fine for D:'s data files, but not for C:. I like Bart because it
starts with the previous backup, adds any new files, replaces any
changed files, and deletes any files no longer on the drive being
backed up. The result is that it's very fast.

the Windows one) to restore from the image. Conversely,
you can probably have a lot more images on most drives these days,

But not clones, since they would be the full size of the drive, not
the size of just the used space?

especially if you keep your C: partition small

It's a 1TB partition with about 100GB used.

I've never imaged or cloned before, so I'm a beginner when it comes to
this. Am I right that an image would take up 100GB, but a clone would
take up 1TB? If so, I think, an image would be the better choice for
me (see below where I talk about keeping multiple generations).

I would image it to a 2TB spinner.

you could even have
images for the C: partition of several different machines on it; whereas
if cloning, it's obviously just one drive.

There's just one machine I'd want to image or clone--my desktop. My
wife is no longer able to use her desktop, and I have no laptop.

I'd want to have it done with a batch file that would delete the
current image or clone, and make a new one. Or better, maybe delete
the one that's two generations old, rename the one that's one
generation old, and create a new one.

Or considering that the spinner is so much larger than the 100GB used
for C:, perhaps I could have the batch file keep the three or four
most recent backups.

And I'd like to have that bat file scheduled to run automatically at
night once every week or so.

So given my situation, what do you (or anyone else here) think would
be the better choice for me--image or clone?

Post by Ken Blake
C: Can I do that with a Windows 11 tool, or would Macrium reflect be a
better choice? The advantage of using an internal drive to do that is
that I could have it scheduled to automatically run at a reasonable
frequency, and don't have to remember to do it.

I don't know what Windows 11 comes with - there probably _is_ some such
utility, since I think there was/is even with 7. I just find Macrium
easier - plus, I feel a slight greater ease in having something other
than the OS do it.

Just curious, why?

Although I always do my imaging (I image rather than
clone)

Just curious, why?

by booting from the Macrium CD, Macrium _can_ run (at least the
imaging/cloning part; obviously not the restoring!) from within Windows.
(I don't, as I feel uneasy backing up a running system.)

Just curious, why? Is there a risk in doing that that I'm not aware
of?

I'm pretty sure
the part-of-the-OS utility can be run from within Windows too.

Can some who knows "the part-of-the-OS utility" for Windows 11 jump in
here and provide some more information? What's its name? Can it be run
from within Windows? How does it compare to Macrium Reflect? Can it do
either an image or a clone? Given my situation described about, which
would be a better choice for me--Macrium Reflect or the part-of-the-OS
utility.

Again, I'm a newbie when it comes to imaging and cloning, so I would
greatly appreciate any additional help from you, John, or anyone else
here who knows more about this than I do,

Post by Ken Blake
Yes, an internal drive for backup isn't as safe as an eternal drive,
but as far as I'm concerned, that's much more important for data files
than for C: If I lost all my data files on D, that would be a
catastrophe, but if I lost everything on C: without a backup, it would
be a pain in the ass (arse), but I'd survive.

I often hear US folk talking about their tax affairs in this respect,
and I understand. (The _majority_ of UK folk - certainly those employed
by an employer - don't _do_ tax returns most years.)

My taxes have become much more complicated in recent years. I used to
do it myself with TurboTax, but I now have an accountant do it for me.
But I do need my Quicken files to supply data for the accountant,

Post by Ken Blake
All thoughts about what I currently do and my plans for what I'll do
in the future, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
into my genealogy lately,

I have no genealogical records. I have four living relatives, as far
as I know (one son, one grandson, one first cousin, one second cousin)
and I remember only seven dead relatives--mother, father, two aunts,
one first cousin once removed, one maternal grandmother, and maternal
grandfather--so I have no interest in knowing more about people who I
met at most only a handful of times, and don't remember at all.

Well, it's a hobby

Yes, of course. I understand that. I was simply pointing out why I
wouldn't find it a hobby of any interest. I don't want to start
finding third cousins and introducing myself to them.

My paternal grandparents must have seen me when I was an infant, but I
have no memory of ever meeting them; my parents were divorced when I
was two. I didn't even know their names until a friend who was an
expert in genealogy found them for me .I didn't even know how to spell
"genealogy" before then.

- I'm sure many of us have a similar hobby that
involves a lot of data we'd hate to lose a few months/weeks/days (select
as appropriate) ' work from. (I like finding new cousins, and telling
them how they're related to me - sometimes they're interesting people
anyway. Same as in any hobby, I suppose.)

Post by Ken Blake

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).

[Ken Blake]

Post by Ken Blake
Subject: Re: YouTube downloads fail all the time
alt.comp.software.firefox,alt.windows7.general;alt.comp.os.Windows-11
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186

I've added alt.comp.os.Windows-11 to the newsgroups cross-posted to.

I screwed up doing that, so I'm reposting

[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Char Jackson
a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)

That depends on what hardware has failed. If the whole computer is
replaced, I agree, but if it's just a single component, that may or
may not be the case.

Very true.
[]

Post by Ken Blake
What I've been thinking about doing is using one of my two internal
backup drives that are being backed up by Bart and instead use it to
backup an image (or clone? Is one a better choice than the other?) of

Each has its advantages. If it's a clone, assuming it's been made
correctly and whatever takes out your C: drive doesn't also take out the
drive you're cloning to (that of course is a concern for imaging too!),
then in the event, you can just switch the drivers over and be back up
in minutes

Yes, but only if you've cloned to an internal drive.
However that wouldn't be the case for me, since my drive is an M2 SSD
and I would clone it to a spinner. I'd want to keep C: on the M2. The
M2 and spinners are also two different sizes.
So if I cloned it and C: died, I would need/want to copy the clone
back to the M2. How would I do that? Does the free Macrium come with a
bootable utility that can do that? How about the part-of-the-OS
utility? Can it do that?

- the mechanical work of opening the case and fiddling with
the connectors and screws probably taking longer than anything else. If
imaging, you need to have/obtain the replacement drive, _and_ have
something to boot from (CD or USB) that has the necessary software on it
(Macrium, Bart?,

No, Bart doesn't do that. It does nothing but just copy files; that's
fine for D:'s data files, but not for C:. I like Bart because it
starts with the previous backup, adds any new files, replaces any
changed files, and deletes any files no longer on the drive being
backed up. The result is that it's very fast.

the Windows one) to restore from the image. Conversely,
you can probably have a lot more images on most drives these days,

But not clones, since they would be the full size of the drive, not
the size of just the used space?

especially if you keep your C: partition small

It's a 1TB partition with about 100GB used.
I've never imaged or cloned before, so I'm a beginner when it comes to
this. Am I right that an image would take up 100GB, but a clone would
take up 1TB? If so, I think, an image would be the better choice for
me (see below where I talk about keeping multiple generations).
I would image it to a 2TB spinner.

you could even have
images for the C: partition of several different machines on it; whereas
if cloning, it's obviously just one drive.

There's just one machine I'd want to image or clone--my desktop. My
wife is no longer able to use her desktop, and I have no laptop.
I'd want to have it done with a batch file that would delete the
current image or clone, and make a new one. Or better, maybe delete
the one that's two generations old, rename the one that's one
generation old, and create a new one.
Or considering that the spinner is so much larger than the 100GB used
for C:, perhaps I could have the batch file keep the three or four
most recent backups.
And I'd like to have that bat file scheduled to run automatically at
night once every week or so.
So given my situation, what do you (or anyone else here) think would
be the better choice for me--image or clone?

Post by Ken Blake
C: Can I do that with a Windows 11 tool, or would Macrium reflect be a
better choice? The advantage of using an internal drive to do that is
that I could have it scheduled to automatically run at a reasonable
frequency, and don't have to remember to do it.

I don't know what Windows 11 comes with - there probably _is_ some such
utility, since I think there was/is even with 7. I just find Macrium
easier - plus, I feel a slight greater ease in having something other
than the OS do it.

Just curious, why?

Although I always do my imaging (I image rather than
clone)

Just curious, why?

by booting from the Macrium CD, Macrium _can_ run (at least the
imaging/cloning part; obviously not the restoring!) from within Windows.
(I don't, as I feel uneasy backing up a running system.)

Just curious, why? Is there a risk in doing that that I'm not aware
of?

I'm pretty sure
the part-of-the-OS utility can be run from within Windows too.

Can some who knows "the part-of-the-OS utility" for Windows 11 jump in
here and provide some more information? What's its name? Can it be run
from within Windows? How does it compare to Macrium Reflect? Can it do
either an image or a clone? Given my situation described about, which
would be a better choice for me--Macrium Reflect or the part-of-the-OS
utility.
Again, I'm a newbie when it comes to imaging and cloning, so I would
greatly appreciate any additional help from you, John, or anyone else
here who knows more about this than I do,

Post by Ken Blake
Yes, an internal drive for backup isn't as safe as an eternal drive,
but as far as I'm concerned, that's much more important for data files
than for C: If I lost all my data files on D, that would be a
catastrophe, but if I lost everything on C: without a backup, it would
be a pain in the ass (arse), but I'd survive.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I've correctly read what a web search
found, Windows Backup can not back up to an internal drive. So I'll
rule that out as a possibility and look into the free Macrium Reflect.

Post by Ken Blake

I often hear US folk talking about their tax affairs in this respect,
and I understand. (The _majority_ of UK folk - certainly those employed
by an employer - don't _do_ tax returns most years.)

My taxes have become much more complicated in recent years. I used to
do it myself with TurboTax, but I now have an accountant do it for me.
But I do need my Quicken files to supply data for the accountant,

Post by Ken Blake
All thoughts about what I currently do and my plans for what I'll do
in the future, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Post by J. P. Gilliver
backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
into my genealogy lately,

I have no genealogical records. I have four living relatives, as far
as I know (one son, one grandson, one first cousin, one second cousin)
and I remember only seven dead relatives--mother, father, two aunts,
one first cousin once removed, one maternal grandmother, and maternal
grandfather--so I have no interest in knowing more about people who I
met at most only a handful of times, and don't remember at all.

Well, it's a hobby

Yes, of course. I understand that. I was simply pointing out why I
wouldn't find it a hobby of any interest. I don't want to start
finding third cousins and introducing myself to them.
My paternal grandparents must have seen me when I was an infant, but I
have no memory of ever meeting them; my parents were divorced when I
was two. I didn't even know their names until a friend who was an
expert in genealogy found them for me .I didn't even know how to spell
"genealogy" before then.

- I'm sure many of us have a similar hobby that
involves a lot of data we'd hate to lose a few months/weeks/days (select
as appropriate) ' work from. (I like finding new cousins, and telling
them how they're related to me - sometimes they're interesting people
anyway. Same as in any hobby, I suppose.)

Post by Ken Blake

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).

[Stan Brown]

Post by Ken Blake
2. Backup to my three backup drives (one external, two internal)
weekly.

For my weekly backups I also have three, but all external. One lives
in my desk drawer, one lives in the safe, and one lives in the car.
(In this rural area, if I'm not home then I'll be in my car, so
that's effectively an offsite backup.)

[Stan Brown]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)
can be restored - and data certainly needs more often than that.

Are you sure about that? I was under the impression that an image
could e restored to pretty much any disk, assuming of course that the
disk is big enough.

[Ken Blake]

Post by Char Jackson
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
[Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
I hope this answers your questions.

Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
fault; I was just genuinely curious.

Same here. Just curious.

Post by Stan Brown
For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
be compensated for the program.

Again, same here. I bought a 4-license bundle since I had 4 systems that
would benefit from regular backups. Before buying Macrium and setting up
a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

I used Macrium Reflect a while back. I don't remember why I stopped,
but since you and others here like it, I just put trying it again (to
backup C:) on my calendar. I'll probably try tomorrow or the next day.

Post by Char Jackson
*that's on my primary laptop. The other 3 PCs were never getting backed
up at all, but all 4 are on a regular schedule now.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
[Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
I hope this answers your questions.

Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
fault; I was just genuinely curious.

No worries. Your (and Char's) interest was perfectly clear and
perfectly fine.

And it gave me another opportunity to blabber to my heart's content,
so win-win! :-)

[...]

[Ken Blake]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
[Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
I hope this answers your questions.

Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
fault; I was just genuinely curious.
For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
be compensated for the program.

I keep all of my data file backed up on a separate partition from C:
(D:) I use Bart regularly to back up D: to three places: an external
drive and two internal drives. The backups to internal drives are
perhaps overkill, but I do it because Bart is very fast and I had the
two extra drives lying around without any other use for them,

What's on those three drives are simply copies of the files, so
restoring a file is simply a matter of copying it from one of the
backup drives.

[Stan Brown]

Post by Frank Slootweg
Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.
The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.

Are you using Macrium Reflect Free or the paid version? Free can't,
but the paid version can do file backups also.

[Paul]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.
The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.

Are you using Macrium Reflect Free or the paid version? Free can't,
but the paid version can do file backups also.

Yes, the paid version has *two* modes, but as freeloaders,
we don't get to see the other one.

Macrium has always been "file-aware". On its face, when you're
using the Volume Shadow Service (VSS) to snapshot a partition,
it just looks like "record the busy clusters, ignore the rest"
is all that you need to know. But if you watch Macrium,
it also keeps a file manifest.

Now, if, on a restore, you resize-on-the-fly a partition in
Macrium (make it 1GB smaller), the fragmentation on the volume
is significantly reduced. This means it is putting back some
files in file-order and not rigidly in cluster-order. Which means,
even when operating in a non-file mode (freeloader version),
it actually knows where the files are, and it can squeeze them
into a smaller partition, by writing out the files one at a time.

One of the reasons NTFS partitions are never "perfect", is because
the reserved area for $MFT expansion gets in the way. And perfectly
good opportunities to write out a contiguous file, they have to
"leap over" the reserved zone, giving two fragments. In addition,
when directory entries get too big, the directory needs to be enlarged,
so it can fragment too. While Macrium makes a good effort, when
restoring into a shrunken partition, it still has to deal with
these Windows realities. Since "Macrium is not a defragmenter",
it cannot reach in and "give things a shake". That would be forbidden.
It only gets one opportunity to write on restore, and it does not
fiddle with stuff once the file has been laid down.

*******

How I distinguish backup utilities, is by their track record when I
test them. It takes a long time, to build confidence in a product.
It could take me a year, to conclude "product X is safe".

From a speed perspective, AOMEI is in the same class as Macrium.
Then, you have to Google your ass off, for cases where some
backup/restore failed.

One of the places backup applications can fail, is they don't do
enough "CHKDSK-like" activity, and they back up "broken goods".

Then on a restore, some shit hits the fan, and they get a bad name.
If you're a backup writer, that's an area that deserves significant
attention. Anybody can write a backup application (even you could,
using VSS and dd), but it takes a genius to make sure that what
you're backing up, is a flake-free file system.

This is why Macrium puts a red "Error 9" on the screen, when
it takes a sniff, and does not like your metadata.
It won't start a backup, unless the partitions present themselves in
good working order. It can still be flummoxed by a bad (unreadable)
sector later in the backup -- it does not read-verify your 1TB partition,
before doing an additional 1TB of reads for a backup. While it is
annoying to have a backup aborted like that, you would absolutely
hate the application if it checked for bad sectors, first.

Paul

[Stan Brown]

Post by Frank Slootweg
Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.

I won't quibble about "mainly". But an image backup can be mounted
just like a file backup, and you can extract individual files from
it. (I just tried that, with Macrium Reflect 8.1.)

So, like Char, I'm left wondering why you use two different backup
programs.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.

I won't quibble about "mainly". But an image backup can be mounted
just like a file backup, and you can extract individual files from
it. (I just tried that, with Macrium Reflect 8.1.)
So, like Char, I'm left wondering why you use two different backup
programs.

I accept the need to backup invisible boot partitions, and so on, which
Macrium can do - restore a set of partitions to recreate a system. For
just pure data, I like to be able to access the backups without having
to load the software that knows how to do the "mounting": as far as I'm
concerned, it's just like a fancy version of ZIP - I'd rather not need
the extra layer.

For much the same reason, since I keep my C: (and the other arcanery)
small, I tend not to use any compression when making the image of it.

Plus - though I haven't got round yet to implementing it this time round
- I can do my plain data backups with something like SyncToy, thus
saving time - which might not work through an extra layer.

[Ken Blake]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 21:47:50 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Frank Slootweg
Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.

I won't quibble about "mainly". But an image backup can be mounted
just like a file backup, and you can extract individual files from
it. (I just tried that, with Macrium Reflect 8.1.)
So, like Char, I'm left wondering why you use two different backup
programs.

I accept the need to backup invisible boot partitions, and so on, which
Macrium can do - restore a set of partitions to recreate a system. For
just pure data, I like to be able to access the backups without having
to load the software that knows how to do the "mounting": as far as I'm
concerned, it's just like a fancy version of ZIP - I'd rather not need
the extra layer.
For much the same reason, since I keep my C: (and the other arcanery)
small, I tend not to use any compression when making the image of it.
Plus - though I haven't got round yet to implementing it this time round
- I can do my plain data backups with something like SyncToy, thus
saving time - which might not work through an extra layer.

You might want to look into the free Bart. It's very fast and very
easy to use.

[Ken Blake]

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Char Jackson
Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,

Same here.

Post by Char Jackson
but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.

Same here. That's true of 90% of the setting here. Not only do I not
remember whether I changed the settings, but if I did, I don't
remember how I did it. Once something works the way I want it to, I
almost always quickly put it out of my mind.

That's why I hate changing machines, and also am not keen on the
smart-alecks who say they can get an out-of-the-box machine to how they
want it very quickly: I presume they just work mostly with the defaults.
In my case, some of the "settings" actually involve third-party utils,
which I will have forgotten not only how to set them up and where I got
them (even assuming they're still available!), but even that they _are_
such and not part of the OS. I image (using Macrium - other similar are
available) my C: partition (which contains just the OS and software;
is 50G, and at present less than half full) from time to time - I can be
back up after a disc failure, to how I want everything to be, a lot
faster than finding all those settings (and utils) and tweaking them.
Others can do what _they_ want, of course.

You seem to address two scenarios: (in reverse order) 1) getting back
up after some major event like a disk failure and 2) changing from one
machine to another.
For 1), I use Macrium Reflect image backup and (Cobian Backup) file
backup,

Why do you use two? Are they different from each other? Is one better
than the other?

Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
John mentioned.
The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.
I would advise doing the same, i.e. an image backup of all your
partitions - except a pure 'data' partition if you have one - and a
file-oriented backup of stuff you think might be needed to restored
without restoring the system itself.

Post by Ken Blake
I use AOMEI? Do you recommend that I switch to one of the two you use?
Both of them? Why?

Use whatever suits you best.

Sure, but especially when it comes to backup programs, it's hard to
know what suits me best without spending a lot of time and effort
trying everything out. That's why I asked you, someone whose opinions
I respect.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Paste it into a .bat script along with the Wget command then just
run that (although I actually do the Linux equivalent).

[J. P. Gilliver]

In alt.comp.software.firefox Brian Gregory

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Paste it into a .bat script along with the Wget command then just
run that (although I actually do the Linux equivalent).

That's fine if you're always wanting to use the same URL. I think Brian
was thinking it'd be a different one each time (as per the original
thread subject). [A couple of us have shown how to paste into a command
line though - either alt-space E P or right-click then P/select paste.]

[Char Jackson]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

In alt.comp.software.firefox Brian Gregory

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Paste it into a .bat script along with the Wget command then just
run that (although I actually do the Linux equivalent).

That's fine if you're always wanting to use the same URL. I think Brian
was thinking it'd be a different one each time (as per the original
thread subject). [A couple of us have shown how to paste into a command
line though - either alt-space E P or right-click then P/select paste.]

With QuickEdit Mode enabled, pasting text is a single right-click. I'm
not sure what "then P/select paste" refers to.

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <***@4ax.com> at Tue, 27 Jun
2023 11:48:40, Char Jackson <***@none.invalid> writes
[]

Post by Char Jackson
With QuickEdit Mode enabled, pasting text is a single right-click. I'm
not sure what "then P/select paste" refers to.

Thanks! I just discovered I _didn't_ have QuickEdit mode enabled. Now to
see whether I remember to use that paste method!

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Char Jackson
With QuickEdit Mode enabled, pasting text is a single right-click. I'm
not sure what "then P/select paste" refers to.

Thanks! I just discovered I _didn't_ have QuickEdit mode enabled. Now to
see whether I remember to use that paste method!

Newer systems - at least Windows 11, but probably earlier - can also
Copy/Paste with Ctrl+Shift+C/V. Obviously can't use it without the
Shift, because Ctrl+C is already taken (abort current command or some
such).

[Char Jackson]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Char Jackson
With QuickEdit Mode enabled, pasting text is a single right-click. I'm
not sure what "then P/select paste" refers to.

Thanks! I just discovered I _didn't_ have QuickEdit mode enabled. Now to
see whether I remember to use that paste method!

Mystery solved. Good luck. :-)

[Stan Brown]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

[quoted text muted]
Paste it into a .bat script along with the Wget command then just
run that (although I actually do the Linux equivalent).

That's fine if you're always wanting to use the same URL. I think Brian
was thinking it'd be a different one each time (as per the original
thread subject). [A couple of us have shown how to paste into a command
line though - either alt-space E P or right-click then P/select paste.]

Ctrl+V works too (I just tried it), and it's hard to imagine a
shorter key sequence.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by J. P. Gilliver

[quoted text muted]
Paste it into a .bat script along with the Wget command then just
run that (although I actually do the Linux equivalent).

That's fine if you're always wanting to use the same URL. I think Brian
was thinking it'd be a different one each time (as per the original
thread subject). [A couple of us have shown how to paste into a command
line though - either alt-space E P or right-click then P/select paste.]

Ctrl+V works too (I just tried it), and it's hard to imagine a
shorter key sequence.

I think that's one of the differences between 7 and 10. (Not sure about
the 8s.)

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

In alt.comp.software.firefox Brian Gregory

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Paste it into a .bat script along with the Wget command then just
run that (although I actually do the Linux equivalent).

That's fine if you're always wanting to use the same URL. I think Brian
was thinking it'd be a different one each time (as per the original
thread subject).

It's not, because I used 'latest' instead of the version number in
the URL that I posted:
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/latest/download/youtube-dl.exe

It will download the youtube-dl.exe file from the latest daily
build. No need to touch the URL again after pasting it into a .bat
file (or Linux equivalent) because it always points to the latest
one.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Computer Nerd Kev

Post by J. P. Gilliver

In alt.comp.software.firefox Brian Gregory

Post by Brian Gregory

Post by Computer Nerd Kev
I can use Wget to download new versions like that from the command
line just as easily as running it with the "-U" option anyway. Not
that I need to do so often.

How can that big long line with a URL in it be just as easy to type?

Paste it into a .bat script along with the Wget command then just
run that (although I actually do the Linux equivalent).

That's fine if you're always wanting to use the same URL. I think Brian
was thinking it'd be a different one each time (as per the original
thread subject).

It's not, because I used 'latest' instead of the version number in
https://github.com/ytdl-patched/youtube-dl/releases/latest/download/yout
ube-dl.exe
It will download the youtube-dl.exe file from the latest daily
build. No need to touch the URL again after pasting it into a .bat
file (or Linux equivalent) because it always points to the latest
one.

Not the URL of where to download yt-dlp.exe - the URL of the video
you're trying to download _using_ it (which would be different every
time you wanted to download a new video)! I think Brian was questioning
any command line method rather than a GUI utility, as you'd have to type
the URL of the video; however, two of us have posted means of pasting
that, rather than typing it.

[Paul in Houston TX]

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

Several years ago I got tired of messing with ever changing formats and
software so I started using online downloaders.
Currently this one:
https://yt5s.com/en169

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <u6okg1$1vp7q$***@dont-email.me> at Sun, 18 Jun 2023 23:10:19,
Paul in Houston TX <***@Houston.Texas> writes
[]

Post by Paul in Houston TX
Several years ago I got tired of messing with ever changing formats and
software so I started using online downloaders.
https://yt5s.com/en169

I (Windows 7) have no trouble using yt-dlp - my fingers are so fast at
it (and I have pinned a shortcut to a command window in the folder I
keep for it, though I usually leave that open anyway) that I suspect I'd
be slower with a gui or online one. (You can rename it from yt-dlp.exe
to whatever you like - I use y.exe, so I only have to type y space
<paste>.) Whenever it doesn't work, I just do y -U, and it updates
itself (it keeps the short name!). [I just tried, but it said it was up
to date anyway.]

I do use one online downloader: https://twittervideodownloader.com/, for
- well, guess.

[Stan Brown]

On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 10:06:57 +0100, J. P. Gilliver

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I (Windows 7) have no trouble using yt-dlp - my fingers are so fast at
it (and I have pinned a shortcut to a command window in the folder I
keep for it, though I usually leave that open anyway) ...

Ditto. I have a couple of aliases for it, so that I
don't have to look up options for my most common
settings. Frex,
ytdmus {url}
downloads just the music, in iTunes-compatible AAC
format, with chapters (if any) as separate files.

[Big Al]

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube_downloader_webx/
This has been working for me.

[justaW]

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?
Rink

Consider using jdownloader. I use the video downloadhelper for some
things, but it does seem to take a very long time to download a youtube
video (and it adds a watermark).

Jdownloader will allow you to download the video, thumbnail, and audio
of any youtube link.

[Torsten Villnow]

Post by Rink
Since one week I cannot download video's from YouTube anymore.
I have the add-ons Ant-video-downloader and VideoDownloadHelper.
on Windows7-SP1.
Firefox 100.0.2 (64-bits).
Both add-ons fail now.
How can I "repair" this?
Or is there another download add-on or program?

Try this: https://www.any-video-converter.com/en7/for_video_free/