Leaderboard

for the may version you need updates untill april 2017 (i don't know if it works with just kb4467700) + kb4474419 and kb4493730 + updated root certificates

The Hubble Space Telescope was launched in 1990, it is both ancient (modern standards) and awesome. It's provided us humans with so much information and knowledge over many years. I remember reading once that it uses a 486 processor. This intrigued me, makes sense, however, based on it's age. To help put 1990 in perspective, the year the Gopher protocol was developed at the University of Minnesota. Also the year the first search engine 'Archie' was released from McGill University in Montreal, Canada. I'm no expert on the Hubble or old computer hardware. Some of the computer components are discussed on page 5-8, section 5.1.3 (Data Management Subsystem) of the PDF linked below. It reportedly utilizes a 'DF-224 computer' and an 'Advanced Computer'. The Advanced Computer is, in fact, based on the Intel 80486 microchip. It is reportedly 20 times faster with six times as much memory as the DF-224. https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/archive/sm3a/downloads/sm3a_media_guide/HST-systems.pdf The Advanced Computer is configured as three independent single-board computers. Each of these has two megabytes of fast static random access memory and one megabyte of non-volatile memory. Only one single board computer may control the telescope at a time. The others boards can be off, idle state or performing internal tasks. Just skimmed so far, haven't seen any mention of the operating system. Probably something custom in-house but what's it based on, curious minds want to know. Computer Hope has really nice computing history information if anyone is interested. https://www.computerhope.com/history/index.htm

Forgive the bluntness, but not interested. All of these privacy concerns coming from a guy with an Instagram and Twitter account? If these sort of things concerned me as much as you want us to think they do you, then I WOULD NOT OWN A COMPUTER as opposed to being a tech-savvy geeky dude with SEVEN of them. I wish you the best, @Dixel. But I find these conspiracies, KGB rants, anti-Russian, can't-spell-Google, can't-spell-Cloudfare views to be too extreme for my blood. Maybe it's cultural and being from different countries? Maybe it's the Instagram/Twitter persona that I've never been accustomed to? No clue. But anywhoo...

Not "too" . you only need one update for that kernel . I'm sorry I do not know anything about the "May" release , simply because I didn't try anything later than December and it was in December (obviously). The December release worked absolutely fine with that one [ KB4467700 x64 ]update . Or wait for the author to answer.

In case of need http://www.marriedtothesea.com/030306/gracious.jpg jaclaz

Oh c'mon, it's just an innocent word. I don't see how it doesn't accurately describe preferences of the folks here in the context in which it was used. Communicating in this world seems to be getting increasingly difficult since it happens so often that someone is offended so easily. It's undeniable that the most forum sections are more or less deserted and that the place is a famous hangout for those that prefer running older OS, despite the forum structure hinting at the more balanced discussion ground. A'ight, I'm off before I'm convicted of murdering someone with words.

Only official Mozilla applications are entitled/authorised to use the Mozilla (Firefox) Sync infrastructure (and are thus allowed to carry the Mozilla-specific "authentication key" that enables connections with MozSync servers) ... In its initial life, Basilisk 52/UXP by MCP did have that auth-key, so its users could (ab)use Mozilla Sync servers (and sync between mobile Fx, too); but at a later point, Moonchild decided to "right the wrong" (basically, to keep Mozilla out of his back yard ) and newer Bk52 builds lost the ability to connect to MozSync... In any way, as Bk52 progressed further away from FxESR 52.9 (while Fx itself was moving quickly into its "Quantum" days), what could be synced safely between the two applications (via MozSync) was reduced to bookmarks, browsing history, browsing session, perhaps passwords; full profile sync (e.g. include installed extensions) was not possible, what was indeed probable was profile corruption if a user did not pay attention... As Basilisk 52 was eventually transformed into a "clone" (minus a few bits) of Pale Moon (but with the Australis interface), the two MCP apps now use Pale Moon Sync (MCP-maintained/owned) and can sync data between them; since mobile versions of the two do not exist, that leaves out syncing between a mobile device... UXP-based @roytam1's browsers, like NM28/Serpent52, also use the Pale Moon Sync infra (I suspect MCP aren't that enthused), but there exist at least two other "roytam1's browsers" that, AFAICT, are able to use Mozilla Sync: His Firefox 45esr fork, aimed at old hardware (CPU without SSE2) users, and his Serpent 55 fork ! Serpent 55 was initially based on MCP's Basilisk 55/Moebius project, later abandoned in favour of Basilisk52/UXP; despite the "55", it was forked off a Mozilla Firefox 53.0a1 code snapshot... St55 currently is a "test" application, code from UXP and a few other projects is being applied to it; is updated by Roy at least once every month... It currently has better features compared to Fx 52esr, especially in the TLS/HTTPS section (has support for final TLS v1.3), has more Web Extension APIs compared to Serpent 52, but doesn't carry many of the recent WebAPIs St52 does; e.g. , https://d3ward.github.io/toolz/src/adblock.html doesn't work in St55 (because of missing AbortAPI) ... And since Bk55 was "touched" () by MCP, St55 has been "optimised" to work as single-process application (I say this in case you are running FxESR 52 under XP with the "e10s hack"...). So, you can at least "trial" Serpent 55 on your XP partition without (hopefully) losing your Mozilla Sync "workflow" . In the longer run, you should definitely consider migrating to Serpent 52, sooner rather than later... A member in the official PM forums has recently posted that Basilisk 52 supports the third-party Sync solution called "EverSync", and the same stands true for St52: https://www.everhelper.me/synchronizer.php https://www.everhelper.me/everhelperplans.php https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/fvd-synchronizer/ Their "For Firefox" extension is compatible with St52, you have to register an account with them (but the same is true for MozSync); they advertise that you can sync data between "any computer and any browser"; the same, supposedly, is true for mobile devices, once you install there their Android app - their free plan looks promising... BTW: I have no affiliation with them in the slightest, nor do I use any of their offerings (); just pointing out that Sync "solutions" do exist outside of MozSync... My best regards

This is an old hardware issue, but one that remains with us. Most manufacturers (at least Microsoft, Logitech and Razer, but probably most others, too), if not all, use Omron D2FC-F-7N microswitches in their mouses, at least for the two classical upper buttons, and usually for all buttons in many-buttoned mice. So the Omron D2FC-F-7N became a de-facto standard (for instance, see the pic collection here). This is a good and sensitive microswitch, based on a single-piece copper-plated steel leaf-spring, which, however wears out due to material fatigue, and starts to behave unreliably. Since it's, by far, *the* most used mouse button, the left upper button is usually the one in which the problem manifests itself, causing double-clicks to occur when one tries to single-click. There are various solutions around the net for this problem, assuming one does not want to replace the mouse: 1) Of course, the definitive one is to substitute the misbehaving microswitch. Since the Omron D2FC-F-7N microswitches are available on e-Bay for under US$5 a pair, that's the solution I favor, and have used to keep my three Intellimouse Optical v 1.1 mice working (I have already substituted the left upper button microswitch twice in each of them, and still have not seen the problem happen with any of the other buttons). 2) Then, there is the leaf-spring remove-retension-reinstall solution, which is pretty well described here (how to fix the 'double-click' problem on your G7 mouse), but which I was never able to do (all I accomplished was to make the already bad microswitch completely unresponsive). If one manages to perform it correctly, it should prolong the life of the microswitch somewhat. 3) Finally, there's an interim software solution, which really helps overcome the double-clicking on single-clicking issue, in its initial stages, although it gets innefective as the spring gets worse. This is the freeware program MouseFix (direct download), by Daniel Jackson. His MouseFix page (please scroll way down) is worthy of reading, and also offers the program's source code. The usual way of running MouseFix is simply to add a link it to the Startup folder in the Start Menu... however, since MouseFix hooks one of the mouse events, this leads to the cursor becoming unresponsive at times, due to it being run at Normal priority. My solution is to set it to High or, even better, RealTime priority. To do this automatically on startup, edit the Target field in the link to MouseFix, so that it becomes: C:\WINDOWS\system32\cmd.exe /c start "" /B /REALTIME "C:\Program Files\MouseFix\MouseFix.exe"if your copy of MouseFix is at C:\Program Files\MouseFix\, or adjust the drive and path as needed, and set the Run field to Minimized. This'll start MouseFix with RealTime priority, eliminating all unresponsiveness. BTW, there's KB266738 (and its 2003 version), but IMO that MS document induces one to check many things pointlessly, inspiring false hopes, before coming round to realize it, in fact, is a hardware problem. There's also a still open thead, from 2005, at neowin about it, and I cite it here as one of sources of part of the info above, and for its historical value.