Leaderboard

The last Windows XP compatible installer of SUPERAntiSpyware Free Edition is the version 10.0.1254. Install it and use the internal updater! Then you will get the latest version 10.0.1266. Here is a screenshot: And here is the download link for the installer: https://download.filepuma.com/files/spyware-removers/superantispyware/SuperAntiSpyware_v10.0.1254.exe. Accordingly, I have updated my article. Cheers, AstroSkipper

No, I didn't. Like somebody else alluded to, it seems you are seeking strife where none exists. I'll take guidance from that other person and conclude this discussion herein.

Wrong. Their is no Client Hints in 360Chrome v13.5. And Win10 doesn't change that fact. At least, not in my releases. Do not recall if they existed "upstream".

I've encountered many modern sites do let you in with old browsers, but only if you live in a first world country with a clean IP. Twitter had been a good example, members had troubles with Twitter's feed on Chrome 86, while Dave_H and I - hadn't.

Wrong again, Moneypenny. (from Bond with T. Dalton) I've only assumed the site probably didn't know whether it should block that unknown version and let you in. I never wrote I had doubts it let you in, your "distinct impression" is better be called distinct overimagination. And be careful with your thoughts/wishes, some day may come true. The fact Chrome 86 works for points out to Client Hints engaging on Windows 10.

127th version isn't released to public, yet.

No wonder, Supermium has a newer engine, the fact Firefox works with just spoofing could point to its inability to transmit Client Hints sneaky "feature" info. Check here. https://browserleaks.com/client-hints

2004 Astronaut by Duran Duran, Vinyl E2 92900

I forgot to say, it's on Vista, and I too Vlited it, but even Siamese doesn't show squares.

You're welcome! But the issue seems to be interesting, indeed. I just checked, and I have no troubles with South Korean hieroglyphs. They all are shown properly.

SUPERAntiSpyware Free Edition works absolutely fine here. No issues. No DLL problems. I can access all features. I think your system is the causer. You can alternatively try the installer version 10.0.1250 as this version was the one before incompatibilities with the programme appeared the first time. BTW, I have been using SUPERAntiSpyware since 2007 without any serious issues. So, please check your system first before posting issues one can't confirm!

@AstroSkipper Be careful with SUPERAntiSpyware Free Edition 10.0.1254. After installation, at launch I have many issues: DLL can't be initialized Can't create a file that already exist ... I can't access to the interface of the software. I think that for XP it's game over since long time for a new install. Regards

My 13.5.1030 Redux is dated November 2023. I was XP and XP Only way back then. (Well, not at work, but XP and XP *ONLY* at home.) It was only "months" ago that I switched from XP to 10 (at home). But my Acer Aspire One is still on XP at home (but I use Serpent 52 on it).

Thanks all, the user agent modification has indeed fixed it. Very bad design though for it to just not load with the original version. Most incompatible sites put up a page saying that you need to update your browser. Doing what they were doing just looks lake some other type of fault.

Did you intend to link to an ht-tp instead of to an ht-tpS? Other than that, it would not load for me in my default setup for v13.5.1030 either. But DOES LOAD when I use my default alternate UA - which is Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/77.0.3865.120 Safari/537.36 Generally speaking, whenever I bump into a site that does not work (and if I remember to change the UA at all!), I DROP TO AN EVEN OLDER v77 THAN TO TRY "NEWER" OR "MOST RECENT" UAs. And that works in this case too, the site LOADS WITH A V77 UA.

Another Supermium 124 release made it to the GitHub Releases Section: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/releases/tag/v124 Though it is still labelled as "Pre-release", the author claims it's "the main release of Supermium 124"; among the Release Notes: The distributions bundle (official) progwrp.dll-v1.1.0.5018 ; and before any member of the known "family" asks anew, no, the "not-possible-to-disable-the-CH-API-on-Sm122+" issue hasn't yet been addressed (else, it would surely have been mentioned inside the Release Notes ) ... Kind regards to all ...

... But it did work in my posted test; FWIW, 127 just made it to the Windows BETA channel: https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2024/07/chrome-beta-for-desktop-update.html The emphasis on my previous post was on "current Cr version", I didn't specify a Cr channel, did I? (... Why is it my distinct impression you just posted with an intent to discredit me? Please, don't answer, since I won't answer back myself...) @66cats: I don't know what to tell you , with the default Cr86 UA I get this (Vista SP2 x86):

Hi Dave ; I wish I were over at your part of the planet, where you currently have a pleasant 18C, while here we're in the middle of a never-seen-before July heatwave, about to last at least until the 27th (to get an idea, it's 23:34 now and the outside temp is at 35C ! ) ... Back on topic: Your ex-colleagues are simply blocking the version of 360EE you're using (on XP) due to the User-Agent-String it broadcasts; I suppose you're using one of the @NotHereToPlayGames's mods, so inside its loader you'll find the cmdline switch below: --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.198 Safari/537.36" They outright block Chromium 86, so when the browser tries to load that page, it gets served an "errorcode337" and the tab ends up blank... This is a bad practice altogether, since Cr86 is perfectly capable of loading+rendering that site; to circumvent their block, just spoof a current Cr version: --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36" ... and Bob's your uncle: ... Might I also add that the page has a sub-optimal web design, not fit for desktop browsers and without any consideration for older, low on resources, hardware (e.g., it contains in its top part a constantly animating huge video/gif that consumes far too many CPU cycles on OSes without native H/W decoding, via GPU) ... Apologies for the rant, cheers and best wishes ...

@genieautravail My advice to you is to find the last XP-compatible installer of SUPERAntiSpyware Free Edition and install the programme. Then try to update the programme using the internal updater.

Personally, I am using the Professional X Edition which is working fine under Windows XP. I have installed the latest verson 10.0.1266 on my Windows XP machine (via the internal updater). Look at my screenshots! However, I didn't try the Free Edition. I thought it was also XP-compatible, especially if the Professional X edition is still XP-compatible. But first, try an older installer version from here: https://www.filepuma.com/download/superantispyware-17/versions/ I would try the version SUPERAntiSpyware 10.0.1250 first as I had compatibility problems with the version 10.0.1252 I already reported here. Maybe, only the installer of the more recent versions is no longer XP-compatible.

One entry of my internal list of security programmes is Comodo. I already wrote about Comodo Antivirus in the old antivirus thread: https://msfn.org/board/topic/177099-which-antiviruses-are-known-for-a-fact-to-be-working-on-xp-sp3-as-of-2019/?do=findComment&comment=1241826 https://msfn.org/board/topic/177099-which-antiviruses-are-known-for-a-fact-to-be-working-on-xp-sp3-as-of-2019/?do=findComment&comment=1241854 Is anyone here who has been using Comodo Antivirus or Comodo Internet Security under Windows XP in the last time? I need information, user experiences and test results together with the name and the number of the used version. It is particularly important how up-to-date these versions still are with regard to programme and virus definitions updates. It would also be interesting to know whether the programmes for Windows XP that are still advertised on the Comodo websites are actually XP-compatible and still work today. Here is a link: https://antivirus.comodo.com/security/windows-xp-free-antivirus.php In any case, my research from last year revealed that the last error-free, XP-compatible release of Comodo Antivirus was the version 12.0.0.6818. However, I don't know whether it is still working today or not. BTW, Comodo Firewall will also be looked at. But only at a later date.

Regarding SUPERAntiSpyware I forgot to mention two additional facts in my article. First, it was certified by AppEsteem in 2023. Here is a quotation from SUPERAntiSpyware's homepage: And another interesting fact is that SUPERAntiSpyware has been added to VirusTotal's scan engines (I don't know when this exactly happened). I will add these facts to my article later as they may be helpful for potential users in their decision whether to trust this software or not. Especially for those who have never heard of it or never used it before.

Thanks Dixel. It does work in Supermium so at least I'm covered on the Vista notebook.

Exactly! For me, looks like they simply want to make noise in a desperate attempt to draw a couple of more users.

No chance in Hell. It doesn't even work with Chrome 121. The wheel is constantly spinning, that's it. I didn't look into the error console, sorry.

As for Kaspersky Virus Removal Tool 2015, you are absolutely right. A potential user has to be very careful. Let's be clearer, this piece of software should be avoided in any case. Kaspersky Virus Removal Tool 2015 is of the really bad kind. To call it spyware would almost be trivialising it. Kaspersky shows its true colours with this tool.

I wouldn't go that far, but .rar files packed in .zip files would make me sit up and take notice.

I too had a problem with one of my drives and Millennium. CD drive BIOS update solved it. Flashed from within DOS environment, of course.

Don't forget that Panda is cloud-based and not a real offline scanner! The main definitions and the scan engine are located in the cloud. Therefore, it actually needs an internet connection to work as designed.

Confirmed. My article and the list from the second post have been updated.

Yes, if have doubts, just make a backup.

Funny, I find 121 to be very fast, close to 110. I guess it drastically changes when someone runs them with all at default.

Client Hints API is becoming the new detection standard very fast. A good example would be Nvidia gaming site which blocks old browsers with the use of that API, Or streaming sites, like our local one. (can't post the link because it may be seen as an ad).