Leaderboard

None of this is really helpful. Deactivate the Avira Scan Engine and check the Windows security center again! What is the status then? Next, let the programme scan a folder with files! Is a connection then established to the servers where the cloud scan engines are installed?

On which OS this exact error you observed?

GIMP 3.0 will ultimately not be available on Windows 7 (at least out of the box; the latest v2.99.18 released last month now requires Windows 10, because Python 3.11). For the Installer you'll need to spoof OS version as Windows 10. BUT I noticed that the main app itself works without any workaround, just you need to have VxKex enabled (version spoof is not needed) to prevent the crash of one dependency and to stop Python from throwing dozens of "cannot locate xxxxxxx.dll" errors. I tested how GIMP runs and everything works, even the non-destructive editing. A more deep test is needed tho, to ensure everything is working as expected. Images: https://imgur.com/a/sBsauRD

I'm up to version 2.14.305 as of now. (The Photon-like UI works fine but looks a little "alien" to my eyes. If you're using a Photon theme, though, it may look like it fits right in.) My guess is that 3.0 will be the first version that doesn't work - but they do have a "legacy" build of 3.0 that might. I'll keep you posted. Localization "should" work - the updated pdf.js looks for its localization files in ./web/locale and should ignore the built-in en-US locale (which I didn't bother to delete). But I haven't tested it. Of course this is all with Serpent, which now supports newer JS constructs than the last XP-compatible Seamonkey version did. The extension developer may have stopped at 2.3.200 because that's all his SeaMonkey version could handle - or it could be that he just got tired of the project; I don't know. That said, an extension is much simpler and easier to install than replacing the version built into omni.ja, so I may experiment with updating that extension, @AstroSkipper style

The initial implementation has issues correctly displaying emojis under Windows XP, e.g. on GitHub: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/333 A hack-y "fix" has been made available by the author: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/333#issuecomment-1982403569 (will ONLY render monochrome emojis in Win<8.1 )

This is really very helpful, thank you for the detailed and such factual report!

The third post contains an "Alphabetical list of programs that need to be tested for compatibility, features and support or whose installers have been lost". I think you mean the fourth post which contains the"Alphabetical list of programs that have recently been abandoned or should be avoided". But does 360 Total Security Essential 8.8.0.1119 really not work any longer? I personally assume it is still working but only cloud-based. Am I right? @shelby Is 360 Total Security Essential 8.8.0.1119 still working or not? Have you checked whether the cloud scan engines are still being used by the programme? I need more detailed information to maintain the list. Unfortunately, the information you have provided has been known for a long time and does not clarify the support status of this programme.

Spoof to another fake agent, go here, and you will see - spoofing of UA is obsolete these days. https://chromiumchecker.com/

In details, why my Vista Nvidia drivers porting is a success? Because they had to let the old code from Windows 7 still be there, and Windows 7 parts are similar to the ones of Vista, despite being of much lower quality, poorly written code parts. Again, it's all public knowledge, anyone (even a bit knowledgeable) can check. For XP one would need to write new drivers from scratch. Period.

I can post and edit topics with links to official technical related web sites without troubles, example. https://msfn.org/board/topic/181987-list-of-software-that-doesnt-support-windows-7/?do=findComment&comment=1259497

only got little time this week for updating, so some issues can't resolve and changelog is a bit short.

Who cares what the security center of Windows is able to recognise. Disable the corresponding notifications respectively the antivirus monitoring! What's more important is that it works and how it performs.

Drive C was in Caution for about a year before I ran into some slowdown and Bad Blocks, so it had to be replaced. The replacement disk is the same size, but it already has 128,673 hours (14 years) on it. My two PATA disks are at 177527 and 177682 (20 years) And an odd-ball situation, this disk was not in the original post but it has the wrong hours showing at just 1487 which is a couple of months. This disk is over 10 years old so not sure why the hours are showing at such a low number. EDIT: Mystery solved regarding the low hour drive. What ended up happening was that I have both the C and G disk in an enclosure, and both were WD800AAJS. I got the serial number of the C drive and marked it on the disk, but I didn't mark the G drive. I was counting on being able to tell which were the original disks by the amount of dust on them. BUT one of the potential replacement disks was also a dusty WD800AAJS. I ran into problems cloning the C drive because Clonezilla was not erasing the destination disk and had multiple partitions, so the clone was always failing. And then when it did work, the OS booted into startup repair because it had the bootloader from the replacement disk and the OS from my disk. Eventually I got it sorted but in the end what ended up happening is that I put one of the potential replacement disks into the enclosure and ended up imaging my C disk to my G disk. And the new G disk is low hours because it was the actual replacement disk I was supposed to be cloning to. I have the data backed up so it didn't turn out to be a problem in the end but I was sweating for a bit once I realised what happened. Moral of the story: mark all of your disks before doing this kind of work.

What is it about vanilla Chrome that makes you dislike it? What data, specifically, do you not want Google to lay its prying corporate hands on? Or is it a religious/political thing? Serious question, since i use Chrome, YT & Google search.

Maybe useful, maybe not: https://github.com/adang1345/PythonWin7 jaclaz

There exists a project (now, seemingly, an "abandonware" ), last updated in June 2020, which offers "pdf.js" in the form of a "legacy" XUL extension: https://github.com/IsaacSchemm/pdf.js-seamonkey/releases/tag/v2.3.235 The release notes of the last version state that it's based on pdf.js-v2.3.200, so you got further than them ; the provided XPI file comes with l10n support , which was the main reason I had tested it back then in my "dirty" St52 profile ; after some days of testing, I bumped on some incompatibilities (the details of which evade me now ), so I ended up uninstalling it and reverting to the St52-embedded (English-only) "native pdf.js viewer" ...

If this starts up again, this thread will be locked too. Back off please.

Besides, sites may simply crash or not work at all when they discover the function they requested is absent in chromium 86. I once used an android mobile UA with this browser, many sites tolerate the old mobile Chrome agent much better. Something like: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; insert phone model) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) SamsungBrowser/xx.x Chrome/xx.x.xxx.xx Mobile Safari/537.36 xxx replace with the Chrome/browser version you want.

On some websites, to some extent - yes, but you always leave a unique fingerprint behind.

No, I meant the code inside the divers, not the OS, I think I wrote about it pretty clear, no?

I explain with very simple words. There can't be "porting" or "modding" of existing drivers, be it AMD or Nvidia, XP code (along with the code that was bearing older cards gens) was simply removed. It's public knowledge, and this one of the reasons why you all don't see "backports".

Confirmed! The MSFN forum editor hasn't been working properly for months especially when it comes to inserting of certain links. Here is my report: https://msfn.org/board/topic/186048-msfn-forum-editor-inserting-of-certain-links-impossible/

I can take a wild guess - the OS is XP, I fail to understand why not just leave it be, that member had been explained many times - there's no such thing as "DirectX10 on XP". Win32 wrote on github - everything in Supermium falls back to DirectX9 while on XP.

I wonder would that fact include telemetry, calling home to the developer. Or a timebomb of some kind, even if not now, but maybe later? Stock up on it while you can.

Obviously it would require a newer version of Windows because the minimum supported client for that function is Windows Vista. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/processthreadsapi/nf-processthreadsapi-initializeprocthreadattributelist

So you aren't gonna share with people here?

The dev needs proper motivation, I fully support it. Is there a comparison somewhere with and without the "plus" (paid) package. Thanks.

360 Total Security Essential 8.8.0.1119 will never get any Avira database updates again. As already stated in my quoted post, there were (and hopefully are) still some further antivirus engines which were used by this version. However, these were cloud-based. Therefore, no local updates are needed anymore. The last date of your updating from 12-12-2023 was probably the day when you got the obsolete Avira defintion updates from 2021. Other updates you'll presumably never see. All in all, this version is no longer what it used to be, and I haven't used it for a long time. Maybe, it is time for you to switch to another antimalware programme.

Thanks, that's good to hear, although I will stick with 121 for the moment! I still can hardly believe that a browser with the latest Chromium version will actually work on XP. It's far from perfect, but the fact that it works at all amazes me!

Thanks for reporting! Unfortunately, your report is a bit unspecific. Which version of 360 Total Security Essential do you refer to? And what exactly is no longer being updated? The programme or the virus definitions or even both? FYI, please be aware of what I have already investigated and written here: https://msfn.org/board/topic/184730-antimalware-firewall-and-other-security-programs-for-windows-xp-working-in-2023-and-hopefully-beyond/?do=findComment&comment=1253715

I adjusted the report. I had only included the common items modified. Kaspersky Embedded Systems Security 3.3.0.87 modifies much more on Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 3. With regards to the official government warnings, depending on the governments, that in itself should not be enough cause of concern; governments are often not truthful in various reports nor are many of the major software vendors align with various government. Many of the security software vendors should not really be trusted, but some are still competent (some more than others) in finding and handling other threats.

But if you still insist there could be ordinary (1066MHZ), "officially" specced Hyper X found, please give us the link.

Well, since we don't have that problem, I'm starting to lean towards external (questionable?) third party content ban. As the last resort, can you try to login from another location, maybe? As an example, see, they can't add youtube URL to their post. https://msfn.org/board/topic/5150-what-are-you-listening-to/?do=findComment&comment=1259491

I've just tried. I have zero troubles clicking on "Edit Topic" in my intro posts/topics. It allows me without any problems.

That's really nice of you to say, but what good are these screenshots going to do me? As I said, I installed RogueKiller on my computer many months ago. I know the interface very well, and your screenshots are unfortunately pretty meaningless without additional information. Much more important would be experience in using RogueKiller, information about the version you are using (portable or not, premium or free), your operating system, RAM and CPU utilisation, when RogueKiller is running, in terms of possible loss of performance, and in any case, to list both positive and negative points.

Thanks for your suggestion! RogueKiller has been on my internal list for a long time. I installed it on my second Windows XP partition many months ago. This programme will also be the content of an article when the time is right. And that is unfortunately the problem.

Zemana AntiMalware Zemana AntiMalware is a second opinion malware scanner designed to rescue your computer from malware that have infected a computer despite all the security measures one has taken. There's no need to tinker with confusing settings. With years of experience built-in, it just works "out of the box". Zemana AntiMalware is highly optimized and lightweight with virus definitions stored in the cloud, not cluttering up the local drive. Zemana AntiMalware can be used in two versions, Free or Premium. A valid license is only needed for the Premium version. Zemana AntiMalware 2.74.2.150 is the last compatible version with Windows XP. The more recent version v3 are no longer XP-compatible contrary to the information on the Zemana's homepage. Feature comparison Free vs. Premium: Homepage: https://zemana.com/us/antimalware.html Version number: 2.74.2.150 Date of release: 21.08.2017 System requirements: Windows 10, Windows 8, Windows Vista, Windows, Windows 7, Windows XP Release notes: https://zemana.com/us/whats-new3aa7.html?ProductID=2 Reviews: https://davescomputertips.com/zemana-antimalware-review/ https://www.wizcase.com/antivirus/zemana/ Download link: https://softradar.com/zemana-antimalware/2.74.2.150/ Screenshots: Zemana Anti-Malware is indeed a lightweight tool and IMHO, rather meant to be used as an additional security layer. It is definitely not a fully fledged antivirus or antimalware programme. Therefore, I personally would use it only as an on-demand scanner to get a second opinion even though the premium version offers a real-time protection after all which is either paid for or realised through a giveaway license. Zemana Anti-Malware uses cloud engines for local scanning. Thus, no local definition updates are needed but logically a working internet connection. What kind of scan engines it uses in these days is kept rather secret. There seem to be several, but the company's information policy is modest and rather disinformative. I have the impression that they don't want to show their cards anymore contrary to the past. Furthermore, the current version 3.2.28 is listed as XP-compatible. This is simply nonsense and misleading. All versions 3.x start directly with an error message under Windows XP and are therefore not XP-compatible. The good is the much older version 2.74.2.150 still works flawlessly under Windows XP in these days which has just been tested again by me. Cheers, AstroSkipper

I have tested Malware Hunter in version 1.176.0.796 on my system, and it is still compatible with Windows XP. Accordingly, I updated my article and my list. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Update notification! Panda Free Antivirus has been updated on 31.10.2023 and is now of version 22.02.00. Thus, I'll update my article and my list in terms of Panda Free Antivirus. Maybe. one of you can test the new version under Windows XP SP3 32 bit only to be sure it is still compatible as advertised here: https://www.pandasecurity.com/en/homeusers/windows-antivirus/ This is a quotation from this website: Such a confirmation would be great. Because, as we all already know, the proof is in the pudding. Cheers, AstroSkipper

you may edited as much as you like, your confession stays on the server forever.

Scared your accounts price goes down?

Finally you acknowledged you and your friend stalking/offensive behaviour, now everyone sees it.