Leaderboard

It was in this thread https://msfn.org/board/topic/178283-how-you-really-browse-the-web-on-98me-in-2019/page/3/#comments https://github.com/rn10950/RetroZilla/releases/tag/2.2

JFYI Just in case some of you are interested on FFU format, I started a thread about this subject on reboot.pro: http://reboot.pro/topic/22182-capture-and-apply-windows-full-flash-update-ffu-images/ Where you can see more info about the use of this format, and about DismMountService a GUI tool for Dism (from Retokener) capable to capture/apply on FFU format, and recommended version of Dism (10.0.17763.1 on 10 v1809) for this task, since Dism Version 10.0.18362.1 ( on 10 v1903) seems to have some bug related to this feature. Best Regards alacran

Of course. But even I who am very aware of such EoS dates (even if they don't mean much to me, since I keep using Word 2000 and Acrobat Reader 9.5.5, not to mention Shockwave 12.3.5.205 and Silverlight 5.1.50918.0) was somewhat taken aback when the latest Chrome (on Win 8.1, at work) started nagging more than one year in advance. Of course I'll keep Flash on my machines! And it'll be a "long goodbye", no doubt, but it's sad, even when one believes firmly that EoS != EoL, like I do, to see such a good piece of software being put away like a rabid dog, isn't it?

Out of curiosity, I downloaded that MS update from the link in the KB article; that fetched file "excel2010-kb4484164-fullfile-x86-glb.exe", sized 36.1 MB (!). I can confirm this is only SHA-2 code-signed: You'll have to test file code-signing signatures in a fully updated Win7 system (or higher) or, in my case, in Vista SP2 with one of the WS2008SP2 updates which give the OS SHA-2 code-signing verification support... Trying the Windows Update Catalog link (mentioned in that same KB article), http://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=KB4484164 I ended up with a different file, excel-x-none_a5b150722cca4d6d9b062063747b02df0eaaaf51.cab (sized 19.8 MB); extracting it yields an excel-x-none.msp file (Windows Installer Patch, sized 40.3 MB), which is also only SHA-2 code-signed; notice that on the MUC, only a generic version is offered, regardless of the OS on which Office 2010 is installed ; perhaps the .exe and .msp files check OS version when launched, but it didn't occur to M$ that XP+Vista don't support SHA-2 code-signatures; there was a specific update on Vista (KB2763674) that allowed for .exe file execution even in the case the .exe was only SHA-2 signed, I guess a similar one might exist in XP (as part of the POSReady ones?) ... The deal breaker here is that Windows Update on both XP and Vista was never patched to deliver updates signed with only sha-2 code signatures - for WS2008SP2, such an update does exist, but when that's installed on Vista, it changes the build number of Vista to 6.0.6003 - but that cuts off Vista completely from WU servers , because they were only configured to serve Vista 6.0.6002 builds; it emerges that WU servers are intelligent enough to tell apart Vista 6.0.6003 (blocked) from WS2008 6.0.6003 (supported); so, starting with Nov 2019 (and for the remaining updates till Oct 2020), users of Office 2010 SP2 on XP/Vista should manually install applicable updates from either MS Download Center/MUC... ( ... and you thought M$ would screw Office 2010 only on XP, by sending incompatible mso.dll files... )

Direct links to official Adobe Flash Player distribution packages version 32.0.0.293 with SHA-1 signature released today (should work with Windows XP SP3/Windows XP x64 SP2) Internet Explorer ActiveX: http://fpdownload.adobe.com/get/flashplayer/pdc/32.0.0.293/install_flash_player_ax.exe Mozilla Firefox NPAPI (also for Opera Presto/Google Chrome 44 and earlier): http://fpdownload.adobe.com/get/flashplayer/pdc/32.0.0.293/install_flash_player.exe Google Chrome 45 through 49 PPAPI: http://fpdownload.adobe.com/get/flashplayer/pdc/32.0.0.293/install_flash_player_ppapi.exe

That isn't a problem only for users of older OSes; it's a problem for anyone who prefers a platform other than Google's Chromium! Opera switched to Chromium long ago. Micro$oft switched from IE to Edge a little less long ago, but the "new" M$ Edge for Win 7/8.1? It's Chromium-based. It's gotten to where Chromium is the new IE monopoly! (But at least M$ wasn't using IE to spy on me or to dragoon me into helping train their AI.) I sometimes wonder if I should have a SSUAO for Google sites, claiming to be Chrome, just so Google's reCaptchas don't bug me quite so much, but then I remember I'd have to update the SSUAO almost as often as @looking4awayout updates the UOC Patch! No, he means New Moon, as the Pale Moon folks will angrily tell you if you ever make that innocent mistake on one of their forums. "Pale Moon" is only one of the browsers officially released by Moonchild Productions. Pale Moon does not run on OSes considered "obsolete," like XP or Vista, and woe to the poor soul that mentions XP or Vista on a Pale Moon forum. Anyone else's build is "New Moon" unless they develop their own branding (e.g., MyPal, Arctic Fox) for their own fork of Pale Moon. Edit: Doggone it, @VistaLover beat me to it again! Foiled by a page break....

... A pain? In what way? Re-installing on top of an existing installation should leave the app's settings intact, AFAIAA; if the app is "properly" installed, then all (custom) settings are stored in the registry; the GUI of the app provides a very handy feature to export its settings as a .reg file, which can be imported (merged) later, after a new (re-)installation, to restore the player's settings like before: Another scenario is if you're using a "portable" installation, where you selected the setting "Store settings into .ini file": In that case, you only have to back-up that .ini file (in my case, it's PotPlayerMini.ini, but I'm on Vista...) found in the "installation" folder, to be put back in place after a new (re-)installation... So, me thinks you're just exaggerating... Best wishes