dencorso

If 39 has been good enough for you, up to now, I think you'd be best served to move on to the current 45.x.x ESR, on which you're sure to get H.264 working... You've asked for opinions, so those're my 2 ¢. HTH.

Nobody needs WhatsApp: that's just another nuisance aimed at making people waste time.

It seems to me just right: WhatsApp and Win 8+ deserve each other. SMS and e-mail are more than enough for all needs. All the rest are no more than just fads fit to be forgotten.

And if it happens, it's just a matter of removing the offending update, and warning others to avoid it. No big deal at all!

Well, make sure you do provide us with a good how-to, when you consider it good enough, so that we can learn from your hard work. This sure is an important step into ensuring a long life for Win 7 Ultimate SP1 (the last decent NT-OS in the family). Keep on the great work!

IMO, > 1.5 GiB is the moment where RLoew's RAM Limitation Patch becomes an absolute must, but as already said, it'll give much added stability to anything from 0.5 GiB on, and also allow the use of some Video and/or LAN cards which are otherwise a no-no.

Have you solved it already, Dave? Does this link maybe help?

Moonchild's iron-clad decision never to support prprietary H.264 content will be the demise of Pale Moon (forsaking XP users also helps speed that, of course)...

You know XP cannot see all the 4 GiB. The amount actually seen depends on the actual hardware present and on how the BIOS is configured. Much more info at this link, do take your time reading it all. In fact, even among the various NT-OSes, the amount seen may vary, for the selfsame machine.

jre-8u121 has been released.

Read this: Updating Win 7 SP1 with the Convenience Rollup and having Win and MS Update actually still work after

Were I you, I'd include 7 ultimate on the near side of the line in the sand. I, myself, did so and don't regret it. A great thing about 7 is XP-Mode. But this are just my 2¢, of course. YMMV.

That might be due to user fingerprinting. Visit https://panopticlick.eff.org/ and see what I'm talking about.

Against facts, there is no argument. And the 2nd law of Thermodynamics describes such a fact. Moreover, with all due respect to you, the best arguments are lost on you: jaclaz provided you with references galore... did he convince you? No. Why should I think I'd fare any better? So I decided not to even try, but gave you my opinion, nonetheless. No offense intended, though. Beside my opinion, however, as per your request, I provided you a precious link to a file named killdisk2.zip, which contains the active@killdisk v. 4.1 without an installer (later versions are provided only in installer form). Inside that file you'll find an Extende DOS version, a real-mode version and a Win32 version of the free killdisk. The windows version kd_win.exe runs on any PE from Bart PE to the PE from Win 8.1 (I didn't try to use with any from Win 10), and runs on normal Windows from 2k to 7 for sure, and probably on newer versions, too. It can perform a single-pass full-disk zeroing. It saves its configuration in a file on the same folder it's started from, without writing anything to the registry. And I find active@'s license very poetic. If one believes a one-pass full-disk zeroing is enough, one can do it for free. If, instead, one wants or needs to comply to the DoD standards for safe erasure or any other yet more byzantine schemes, one can do it, too, but needs the paid-for version to do that. There are later versions of the Win32 program and linux versions of those later versions, too, and they are available in the current active@ download page. The licensing policy remains the same.

Nonsense! One single pass writing zeroes throughout the HDD is all that is needed. All the rest is dust in the wind. The old free version of Active@ KILLDISK for Windows (Console) v.4.1 or the corresponding DOS version ought to be enough for that.

It, however, installs flawlessly on my 5 machines. I suggest you uninstall, clean-up, then reboot and reinstall.

Welcome to MSFN!

MSE v. 4.4.304.0 runs perfectly on XP SP3 and 7 SP1 Ultimate x64, so I'm confident it ought to run perfectly also on Vista. It's relatively easy to find, and signed by MS, so it's trivial to verify the copy one downloaded is authentic and untampered with. Here's some info on the EN-US (aka ENU) language version of them: MSE v. 4.4.304.0 x86 is 11,125,072 bytes long, has MD5 = F406BAC9CFB876EFF01314F18CDA746C and is Digitally Signed by MS on Thu, Oct 24, 2013 5:26:44 AM and MSE v. 4.4.304.0 x64 is 13,670,584 bytes long, has MD5 = D2F12B426A7DC6848AD91ADE1FAB2B52 and is Digitally Signed by MS on Thu, Oct 24, 2013 5:26:30 AM It's quite possible that v. 4.6.305.0 also work right for Vista, but since it is the 1st to nag XP, that is far from certain.

I don't know the answer to your other questions, but I do know the answer to the quoted one: the performance slowdown is negligible.

You might try to install with "setup /ip", which you've proven to work, and then remove ACP and APM, from the installed system. It should work, as long as you can get to the desktop after the initial install and are able to run regedit.

Never mind, @jaclaz: @Damnation wants to solve it through sheer lucky guessing, not by any type of scientific troubleshooting, obviously.

It's not a bug, it's "by design"... They're giving Vista die-hards some of the love they give us XP die-hards on a daily basis, but to be even more insulting they pretend they don't even notice Vista isn't XP...

Sometimes, yes! You see: HID is what the device does, while USB is one possible way it can connect to the machine (PS/2, serial, parallel, FireWire and game connectors are other alternatives), so that, when a Kbd is not connected via a PC, AT or PS/2 connector, or when a mouse is not connected via a serial port or bus card, then they belong to the umbrella class for all other devices that is HID. And since this is the 1st time I reply to you this year, do have a great 2017, submix8c!

The only king nowadays is Don King, all the others are wannabees...