Leaderboard

Sad news for everyone here at MSFN. One of our forum supervisors, Dencorso, passed away on October 24th, after a long and courageous battle with cancer. Apparently he was still upbeat and optimistic about the future a few weeks before he passed. My memories of Den go back quite a few years. He was incredibly helpful to me with technical problems, which is what this board is all about of course, initially mainly with Windows 98, and latterly with Windows XP. He was immensely supportive too when I first became a moderator here, something I will always be grateful for. He was definitely one of the good guys, and will be sorely missed here. Please add your memories here of working with Den. Thanks, Dave.

I just want to make sure I am spared any trouble. When you provide something voluntarily, you don't want to be punished for it.

Agreed. But one of them was a guy we know as "MAT" and the Pale Moon versus New Moon saga. I'm sure that Astro doesn't want involved with one of these drama scenes so better safe than sorry by dotting i's and crossing t's.

TikTok comes in two flavours, Android and iOS, I wonder which version of Kaspersky you run on your iOS/iPhone.

Maybe the expectations were too low. The article you linked to is an opinion by an analyst written while Vista was made available, january 2007, compare with these (written two years after launch): https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1898610_1898625_1898627,00.html https://www.technologizer.com/2009/08/10/sixteen-reasons-the-windows-vista-era-never-quite-happened/ Vista was not a success for Microsoft (no matter if rightfully or wrongly people did whatever they could to avoid it). Windows 7[1] release was accelerated as much as possible, hoping to replicate the success of XP. jaclaz [1] please read as Vista SP3

For whom it was "failure"? As an example, Vista's business sales were even stronger than expected! https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/report-vistas-business-sales-stronger-than-expected/ Vista RTM ran perfectly fine on several of my Siemens computers, I still run RTM without updates on a Haswell PC from 2013.

Hello, @cmalex! How are you? I hope in any case you are well and, above all, healthy and unharmed in these still difficult times. As you know, you compiled the great programme ProxyMII, dated from 2022-07-17, based on OpenSSL 3.0.5, dated from 2022-07-05, and Cryptography 3.4.8, dated from 2021-08-24. That was a year ago. OpenSSL is now available in version 3.1.2 and Cryptography in version 41.0.3, both dated from 2023-08-01. In terms of Cryptography, there was a big version bump after 3.4.8 directly to 35.0.0. Link: https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/tags?after=37.0.0 Do you know if these versions are still compatible with Windows XP? If not, which are the last XP-compatible versions? Would it make sense to update ProxyMII in terms of OpenSSL and Cryptography for the use under Windows XP, especially to support more modern ciphers? TBH, who else could assess this better than you, the creator of ProxyMII? Or, have you perhaps already updated ProxyMII? Anyway! What do you think about all that? Greetings from Germany, AstroSkipper

xpmgr is a license manager for Windows XP and Server 2003 (and hopefully Office and PLUS!), inspired by slmgr for Windows Vista and newer. It can: Get the system's product ID Change the system's product key Generate an Installation ID Send a Confirmation ID Get the # of days until activation is required Get the # of days until the evaluation period expires, for evaluation copies of Windows https://github.com/UMSKT/xpmgr Credits to diamondggg for making the magic numbers, ICOMLicenseAgent interface, and LoadLicenseManager() function, which were taken from [REDACTED] and modified to work in a CLI. This tool supports all x86 and x64 editions of Windows XP, Server 2003 and other one-off editions. Itanium editions are not supported, as they don't have Windows Product Activation in the first place. This tool does not facilitate piracy. This tool is made for power users to have an easier time with license management on older versions of Microsoft products, before Microsoft made slmgr. All that xpmgr does is use API's that the OOBE (or Office's first run) uses.

... Going by his recent post , equally unhelpful as it consisted only of screengrabs with "the browser" localised in Russian, I'd hazard a guess and say it's New Moon 28 ... @Slavich : Please , when filing "not working" reports: 1. Provide details of OS and its architecture 2, Provide details of the browser used (name of, bitness, build version) 3. Post actual links of misbehaving websites 4. Describe in more words the exact nature of the error(s); what were you expecting to happen and what actually happens... 5. If the website in question requires a registration for the "bug" to be witnessed, then understand that other members here and/or the browser maintainer won't be able to replicate the bug without such a website account... 6. Because of "current world situation" (won't say more, politics is NOT allowed in this forum), Russia-based websites/services might be inaccessible to "the rest" of the world, this fact imposes additional hurdles for "us" to troubleshoot your reported "bugs"... 7. This is an English "speaking" international forum, try to refrain from posting "localised" debugging info (let alone inside images ) ... 8. Resort to posting images where absolutely necessary (and images should be accompanied by "explaining" text) As a rule of thumb, whenever possible, avoid UXP-based browsers to conduct financial transactions on line, as those "services" (banks, etc.) are known to be "pretty particular" with the user-agents/clients they allow ... In closing, it's now the second half of 2023, you shouldn't treat the roytam1 offered browsers as a "panacea"; they can accomplish many things, but not everything you throw at them (especially on older H/W); while the "upstream" devs try to tackle UXP's shortcomings as best as they can, often times these efforts (commendable as they may be ) are not enough to compete with recent Chromium/Firefox (many websites/services are designed against) ... Many XP users here have attested they have to resort to a recent browser on Win7+ or on Android to complete successfully all of their online tasks; I. personally, have come to consider, especially in recent years, the UXP-based browsers I use (St52/NM28 & St55) as more of a "palliative" on my 'legacy" Vista laptop rather than full-blown browsing "solutions" (no disrespect intended at MCP devs and Roy ) ... Best regards .

The new taskbar is awful. Maybe Tihiy will be able to reimplement it like with the Start Menu. I'll gladly pay an upgrade fee for all of my licenses for something like that. I truly believe SAB is underpriced for the functionality it gives.

I don't know, post the link in the dedicated forum thread? Have you read this? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/2.0/FAQ/ Also, extensions aren't compiled executables, so technically most of the source is already in the .xpi file, so you're already providing the source that way, exception being binary components (if any exist) and I guess whatever other resources that aren't code. At least that's my understanding, taking into account the past drama between Mozilla/Debian developers and MCP/FreeBSD developers/roytam1/feodor2. Hosting it on GitHub or the like would allow the public to see the history of code changes that were made and the ability for users to get future updates to the extension directly through browser's Add-ons Manager. The latter requires update.rdf to be hosted on some web server, not necessarily GitHub, though if you use the latter to host the code repo, it makes sense to also use it for clients' ability to check for updates.

I'm very sorry to hear that. I personally had several conversations with this remarkable man and he seemed very nice and clever. May he rest in peace.

None that I'm aware of. But honestly, I have the impression that there's only a handful of people out there that are nitpicky to the last detail about licensing and branding when it comes to these extensions, eg. there's a fork of DownThemAll! and GreaseMonkey out there adapted for SeaMonkey, none of them have their name or icons changed and nobody makes a fuss about it.

Just for information: stunnel 5.70 requires the SSE2 instructions set but not stunnel 5.60... Regards

Hi, if you have problems, or any suggestions please write exactly what is your problem.

Well, it could be, yes. I'm just going on past experience: so far, Google has been behind far more UXP-breaking changes than Mozilla, so I figured the odds are pretty good that the next one will be Google again. (And my usual disclaimer: Not all UXP-breaking changes are "egregious;" i.e., serving little purpose other than to break older browsers. Some are quite useful to Web designers. Many do strike me as quite egregious, but I don't know enough about all this new CSS stuff to have an informed opinion yet.)

That's what I've been saying for years. It's now literally every crappy store is "protected" by them. Can't order sandwiches without captcha, now G captcha is replaced with CF. A good, corporate VPN might still help, but for how long? You and your friends already started to boycott?

Hogwarts Legacy, looked promising, but alas. Requires a 64-bit Windows 10 DirectX: Version 12

What would be the easiest way to make a fork of an extension available to the general public without creating a GitHub repo? I already made a proper fork with my own branding and identification. I also kept the reference to the MPL-2.0 licence. And I would provide links. One to the original source files and a second to the changed files. What other information would have to be provided in order to avoid trouble? And what is the most simple way to do this all under the MPL-2.0 licence? Further ideas and opinions are still welcome.

Simmer down. No need to be offended. I did say that Vista redeemed itself with service packs. You'll also notice that I had several upvotes from seasoned forum members, which tell you that many fully agree with my assessment. The original notebooks I setup were DuoCores with 4 GB of RAM. That's what Vista was sold on, and it ran terribly. By the way, I use Vista Home Basic on a 2 GB of RAM Dell Notebook today, and it runs swimmingly. So the original RTM version showed its warts. So no, I don't think Vista users should get offended by performance assessments. I'd be embarrassed to admit such a thing, and I'm a sensitive person to most that know me personally.

Hi! Ever wondered Vista users might get offended? You are expected to be mature and polite on this forum. So, you gave no articles? Of course. Did you use it on XP era computer? Please tell the specs, I never encountered anything similar with RTM x86. Worth to mention, I switched off indexing and ready boost. In fact, SP are slower. It could also be your defective HDD. Example: boot duration increased with each SP added! https://news.softpedia.com/news/Vista-RTM-vs-Vista-SP2-99960.shtml

I've submitted a PR to Pale Moon to add a User Agent Override for this site: https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/Pale-Moon/pulls/1927 I've also added a User Agent Override to Basilisk: https://repo.palemoon.org/Basilisk-Dev/Basilisk/commit/54ebc66d9d00449d0ad89572f912cef9a8e87d84 On my personal machine I use Basilisk, Pale Moon, LibreWolf. I do have Ungoogled Chromium installed but I only use it if I run into a site that does not work in any of the aforementioned browsers. On my work machine I use Librewolf and Ungoogled Chromium. On my phone I use Mull and the version of Chromium included with Calyx OS. On my Windows 2000 machine I use Serpent and MyPal 68.

Yeah, no problem. Btw, i'm looking for someone who trying to install Vista Extended Kernel on modern hardware especially with Intel CPUs

this is the outcome of building all browsers with the same source code. if dad google says something all other sheeps have to follow up

It was @VistaLover, it's not the first time I see his attachments show up like this, No offence, I don't read his posts, mostly because we don't share the same interests, it's just an observation. This time I decided to look at them.

They show like that for me, if I go there directly, they say you got a view limit on them. "The HTTP 429 Too Many Requests response status code indicates the user has sent too many requests in a given amount of time ("rate limiting")."

Hello @UCyborg! Thank you very much for sharing your "mediamarkt.de | saturn.de quick fix" userscript! I tried it in New Moon 28, Serpent 52 and 55. Although there are issues with images in the item lists as already reported by @VistaLover, it works and makes these websites readable again. In Palefill 1.27, martok also made fixes for mediamarkt's login area. Nevertheless, I hope there will be a solution of all these issues one day coded in NM and SP themselves. BTW, I am a customer of Media Markt's online shop and I am glad to be able to use this site in NM and SP again. Thanks again!

That's why I wanted to hear other opinions. But there's a thing, I can confirm, all versions of Comodo (XP ones, too) will glitch out, if the rules list is too long. "The bug is that Comodo cannot handle long list of HIPS rules and will suddenly delete them all without notice."

''Note that Comodo staff whitelisted a malware twice, so I don't trust it much.'' https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/comodo-firewall-for-windows-10.413789/

CF makes a series of fingerprints, and canvas isn't the main. They look at CH, WebGl, , System Fonts, Clientrects, IP, device CPU cores count, RAM amount, audio API fingerprint, even if you change the canvas, the rest will stay the same.

Hello @Saxon! As I already wrote here, users reported in the Comodo Forum that the last error-free working version under Windows XP has been Comodo Firewall 8.4.0.5165. Have you really tried this version? Actually, it should work under Windows XP.

Thank you, interesting observations. I am of the same opinion, it was fine up to 2015. I wonder if upgrading even makes sense.

Hi @AstroSkipperand all others, sorry for the delays, despite what they say about 8.xxx to be the last for XP, I have only been able to use Comodo 5.xxx and 6.xxx under XP. Newer versions simply didn't work good for me, despite what they say! I even had missing icons! As you may see on the screen, 5.5 works, but modern programmes have no problems to just go through it! When checking for updates, for example. Conclusions: I do not recommend the 5.xxx range for the modern days usage, It's simply too old. I'll go on with the investigations.

Update notification! CurrPorts has been updated on 05.06.2023 and is now available in version 2.75. It is still listed to be compatible with Windows XP. Accordingly, I'll update my article as soon as possible. Cheers, AstroSkipper

I added the official link to the offline updater spybotsd_includes.exe for antispyware definitions and corresponding update instructions to my article about SpyBot - Search & Destroy Free Edition. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Update notification! Malware Hunter has been updated on 17.07.2023 and is now available in version 1.169.0.787. It is still listed to be compatible with Windows XP. Accordingly, I updated my article. Cheers, AstroSkipper

FYI, Ultra Adware Killer has been updated to the version 10.7.9.0 on 20.07.2023. I tested this version under Windows XP. Unfortunately, the versions 10.7.8.0 and 10.7.9.0 are no longer compatible with Windows XP although some websites, as for example Softpedia, still list the most recent version 10.7.9.0 falsely as compatible. Therefore, the last XP-compatible version seems to be 10.7.7.0. Accordingly, I changed the provided download link, which would otherwise point to an XP-incompatible version, and updated my article completely. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Panda Antivirus is great, free of charge and even offers a real-time protection. I used Panda some months, was totally satisfied and didn't have any problems with it. Unfortunately, I can't install more than one antimalware programme with real-time protection in a Windows XP partition, though. And I personally prefer Malwarebytes inevitably due to my lifetime licence. And just for clarifcation, I always mean what I say or write, contrary to some others. Anyway! Ultimately, however, the mature reader must decide for himself what he wants to use or not. And this also applies to me, of course. In this thread, I only provide information and in a few cases either warnings or recommendations, all to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Hello, all loyal readers! I am very happy to have loyal readers who still use Windows XP and are interested in security programmes which work under this OS in these days.

Still work for me ! Archived drivers from the official Intel page. http://web.archive.org/web/20171008142049/https://downloadmirror.intel.com/20758/a08/GFX_Win7_32_8.15.10.2761.exe http://web.archive.org/web/20171008142245/https://downloadmirror.intel.com/20758/a08/GFX_Win7_64_8.15.10.2761.exe The forum rules say I must include the source page too : http://web.archive.org/web/20171008141948/https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/20758/Graphics-Intel-HD-Graphics-Driver-for-Windows-Vista

This is really strange because I trust this experienced user @UCyborg . He just helped me with Riva Tuner on Vista . What is their framework level ?

Would also be very good to find a standalone version installer (or portable) of Riva tuner without MSI. I know there's one inside , but I guess not everyone will figure that out. Is there a site with various older versions ? EDIT: Your version works with Vista , thank you lots ! If I don't bother you that much , perhaps you know how to switch OFF this stupid "cannot connect to update server". Of course I blocked it with the firewall , since I can't allow it to update (obviously). Switching off the update checker in the settings doesn't help . EDIT-2 : It really shows fps count only with *some* games , but no crashes like the OP described, so older versions are still needed. EDIT-3 : Quit showing FPS at all . If I look at the main window - it's just stuck at the highest monitor refresh rate. But in the games there is no FPS counter at all. EDIT-4 : Finally got this to work with Vista ! I had to frankenstein the hell outta the both versions . So nevermind , all is OK now. Thanks again for your help.

Oh , that's bad . I'm kinda gamer too . Are there any other alternatives ? (please not from kaspersky or the such) , thank you.

Actually , no. Microsoft says : available from Win 2000. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/ddi/wdm/nf-wdm-interlockedcompareexchange

And for 64-bit https://drivers.softpedia.com/get/GRAPHICS-BOARD/INTEL/Intel-HD-Graphics-Driver-815102639-for-Vista-Windows-7-x64.shtml

Here you go : https://drivers.softpedia.com/get/GRAPHICS-BOARD/INTEL/Intel-HD-Graphics-Driver-152250642509-for-Vista-x86-Windows-7-x86.shtml

@UCyborg , please tell us if you know what was the last working version for Windows Vista and 8.1 respectively. Thank you.

You're very welcome to try it with NT 4.0 and Win 98 then and report back to us.

Well I've tried (just now) to run on Vista without the extended kernel , like you suggested . It was easy , simply because I do not use that kernel. I'm getting : "Cannot load RTSSHooks.dll library" "Failed to initialize main window" This is with the same Net 4.5.1 and VC Redist 2015. Now it seems to be intentional to me too , and they definitely lie about the requirements.

Version 7.3.1 works just fine with 7 and SP1 , I know there are literally millions of updates' fans here , so I installed a quick rollup update pack with all of the most popular updates "windows6.1-kb3125574-v4-x64" just for you ! And all is absolutely good with "Show in On-Screen Display" ON , "On-Screen Display support" ON too , shows FPS just fine , no glitches , nothing. Oh , and the framework is 4.5.1. Perhaps you need to remove the newer framework ? I dunno . I cannot attach screenshots 'cause my monthly limit is up. Perhaps I should try with Vista too ?