Mathwiz

The Autoconfig method seems to work for me. However it's a bit of a PITA; if you get anything wrong the browser refuses to start and tells you to contact your IT administrator (or words to that effect). Here's how it works (if everything's set up right): You need to set two prefs in your "main" pref file to invoke Autoconfig: pref("general.config.obscure_value", 0); pref("general.config.filename", "myuseragents.js"); (As you can tell, I'm using this trick for my SSUAO list, since it lets me override SSUAOs built into the browser, whereas the built-in SSUAOs take precedence if doing this the "normal" way, much like the problem you're having with the prefs you listed.) Then you put the file named above (myuseragents.js) in the same directory as the browser (firefox.exe, palemoon.exe, or whatever.exe), and it has to look like this: // Needs to start with a comment line defaultPref("webgl.enable-draft-extensions", true); defaultPref("webgl.enable-privileged-extensions", true); defaultPref("dom.ipc.plugins.asyncdrawing.enabled", true); Notice the mandatory comment line at the top, as well as the use of defaultPref() vs. pref(). In an Autoconfig file, pref() works like user_pref(), while defaultPref() works like pref(). If you get everything right, the browser will start, and if you check about:config, you'll see the prefs above all default to true now (which you can still override back to false if desired). But since it's so easy to break this with a typo, and since the browser is completely unhelpful in troubleshooting problems, it's still not an ideal solution.

Ironically the above was one of the changes suggested by Feodor2: ... so I guess despite the negativity expressed at the time, MCP decided to go with it and remove that row of info from the about:support page. This latest issue doesn't sound too serious to me. If @roytam1 incorporates the latest change, I don't see it preventing the about:support page from working, even if e10s is forced on. Should be tested, of course, but it looks to me like that row of info will simply disappear from NM 28's and Serpent 52's about:support pages, so language pack compatibility between his builds and the official builds will be maintained. It does have the drawback that, on Serpent, the about:support page will no longer provide an easy way to tell whether e10s is functioning, but I for one could live with that. Nevertheless, I like the suggestion of having separate "custom" branches for NM and Serpent. Actually, it would be possible to just compile NM 28 from the "master" branch, but that would lose the branding customization we recently did for NM, so it's probably best to have two "custom" branches.

Well, we went over the question before: @dencorso replied: That's basically what I understood the words to mean too, so any "anti-malware" would also be an "anti-virus" by definition. But then I saw the posts I quoted above, which implied otherwise.... Maybe the confusion arose because there are programs that are more specialized, like Spybot S&D, and Windows Defender (at least pre-Win 10) that try to protect against spyware (a particular type of malware) but not other types of malware like viruses. These came about because early anti-virus programs ignored spyware, so these programs were developed to fill in the gap. But AFAIK, anti-malware programs try to protect against both spyware and viruses.

What do you two believe is the difference between anti-malware and anti-virus software? Malware is just "bad software you don't want on your PC," and a virus is a type of malware, is it not?

I wonder if the old 16-bit Hearts game from Windows for Workgroups 3.11 will still work over modern networks? If so, will it work over a VPN too?

Well, I figured out why I'd hidden it - it wouldn't install on my system. So rather than hiding it again, I downloaded it and extracted it with the /extract flag. This pulled out a .msp file, which I ran. That did seem to install quite a few updates, although it eventually failed with one of Micro$oft's meaningless error messages - but apparently nevertheless did the trick, as I don't see it offered any more. Now I'm installing today's three updates.

I've now done this: https://github.com/Mathwi/binoc-central At this point I've only touched MailNews. Moved two prefs to branding so I could split official & unofficial builds, and changed the unofficial prefs as follows: app.releaseNotesURL changed, in order to redirect Help / Release Notes to @roytam1's blog. app.support.baseURL changed, in order to redirect Help / Help Contents (as well as the "support website" link found in Help / Troubleshooting Info) to a placeholder page @roytam1 set up, vs. BinOC's IRC. Both changes are consistent with previous changes to NM and Serpent. Yet to do: change the link "The Open Source Community" in the Help / About MailNews pop-up window, which currently points to http://binaryoutcast.com/. I could use some help locating the source of this link.

@dencorso, I wonder if this thread and the "Antivirus for XP" thread could/should be merged? They seem to be covering the same ground, even to the point that posts in one are getting answered in the other.

It's important to be precise here. The bug isn't that typing file:///c:/ in the address bar shows your C: drive - that's what it's supposed to do. The bug is that an HTML document in C:\ can access any other file on the C: drive. This isn't easy to fix though, as Mozilla explains: A fix would probably involve treating certain locations as special cases: drive root directories, "C:\Program Files," the desktop, etc., which are likely to contain "unrelated things." (Mac/Linux would have different exceptions, of course.) Probably along with a new set of prefs so users could control it on a spectrum from Chrome-tight to "anything goes." Unfortunately it would take a much better programmer than I to make a change like this. Probably best to just wait and see what Mozilla and/or MCP come up with. In the meantime, just avoid saving Web pages or other HTML documents to the desktop or similar "high-level" directories. Even if you use your browser's or email client's default "downloads" directory, all anyone will be able to steal is your other downloads.

They actually went overboard, by changing the SSUAO to report Win 10. Reporting Win 8.1 is sufficient, and by the time whatsapp.com actually requires Win 10 they'll need to change it again anyhow. @VistaLover: it sounds like Github has added the same annoying second-level security that many financial Web sites use: when you successfully sign in, they set a cookie; but if that cookie isn't found you have to go through an annoying "we'll verify this is really you by sending an email to 'your' email account" procedure. When money's involved, I can understand; it wouldn't take long to steal your bank account and the bank would be liable. But I just don't think Github is that critical; IDK why M$ has implemented this for Github's login.

The man needs to look more at what was posted and less at who posted it. Even misspelled "concerned" - uncharacteristic for him. He must've really lost it. And Feodor2 merely suggested removing some code that's no longer relevant, given what MCP has already removed. Anyhow, it's interesting that PM (& presumably NM) don't have Web application support either. Serpent seems to, although components like service workers have to be manually enabled - then locked down to prevent abuse. Maybe that's why?

Probably the last one for XP ever since the Windows Update servers XP uses will be shut down this month. Well, I take that back - you might still be able to get Office 2010 updates via the Windows Update Catalog. But I'm not sure they'll install if they change the signature algorithm. Office 2010 updates may become a tedious process of downloading, extracting, and installing the updated files manually.

Bumping this thread to let everyone know I changed myuseragents.js on page 8 to spoof Chrome 49 for web.whatsapp.com, so it will work with FF and Serpent again. Keep in mind Palemoon/New Moon have their own built-in SSUAO for web.whatsapp.com that will take precedence over myuseragents.js; for those browsers you'll have to change the SSUAO manually in about:config to: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/49.0.2049.0 Safari/537.36

Doesn't seem possible:

This isn't quite the same thing, but NirSoft's WinUpdatesList will show installed updates from Win 98 forward.

Or @roytam1's SSE build of Firefox 45 ESR

Doesn't work in Serpent 55. No luck changing user agents (so far). Works OK in Serpent 52 (on XP) and official Basilisk (on Win 7). Mouse wheel works at https://www.miplo.pl/?c=0#showmap even in Serpent 55.

Instead of trying to perform major surgery on this thread, perhaps we could have a subforum dedicated to Mozilla Firefox and other browsers derived from it. This thread, and the link to it, would then remain the same as now, so the links in NM 28 and Serpent 52 wouldn't be broken; it would just be the first pinned topic in the new subforum. Folks could then create other threads in that subforum to discuss issues with "official" FF, Seamonkey, @roytam1's builds, etc., thus reducing the "clutter" in this thread going forward. (Sometimes folks do that now, but the thread winds up in the larger XP forum, so it can quickly get lost among all the other XP topics being discussed.)

Well after installing all Office 2010 updates offered, then restoring mso.dll, Excel 2010 works again. However there's one nagging problem left. There were three updates that wouldn't install: KB2881030, KB2999465, and KB3213638. Every time I try to install them, the installation fails, then they are offered again! I suppose I could just hide them, but the latter two are security updates. I assume there are log files somewhere which might tell me why they fail to install. How can I find the install logs? Update: Well, I managed to get them all installed, by downloading them all manually, then in two cases extracting the updated files with 7-Zip and moving them to my Office14 folder (and in some cases, renaming them). In the third case, KB2881030, for some reason it was looking for ofv.msi, which is included in the Office 2010 File Validation Add-In installer, which I didn't get a disk for, but can be downloaded and installed online. So even though it was already installed, I downloaded the installer again, extracted ofv.msi with 7-Zip, and told the patch to use that file. Now Windows Update shows no more updates needed, except for KB2553347 which I'd hidden long ago. Now I'm trying to remember why.... Was it one of the updates that's incompatible with XP?

I got an unexpected bonus for my $7.75: An Office 2010 Home and Student disk with a valid product key! I just installed it, and to my surprise, it activated online! Didn't even need to call. I'm now installing about a bazillion updates though. (Of course, I made a copy of the last working MSO.DLL first, so I can put it back after 4462223 breaks it .)

Yes, that is true. My main complaint with AVAST is that it slows down file deletion, sometimes to a ridiculous extent. And it's a bit more paranoid than MSE, requiring some exceptions to be created (although nowhere near as bad as Symantec!) That said, even MSE was getting to be a pain toward the end. I had to exclude browser files from it, and rely instead on MBAE, in order to get adequate performance. Ironically I haven't had to do that with AVAST yet. (Also still running MBAE, although I probably don't need to any more....)

palemoon-27.6.0a1.win32-git-20170929-bc251e93-xpmod.7z is the oldest New Moon 27 version at https://o.rths.cf/palemoon/. Roytam keeps every version on his website, but that one probably has several bugs. Unless you have a specific reason for running an old version, you'll probably have better luck running the current version of NM 27. Try one of these instead: palemoon-27.9.6.win32-git-20190615-b33dced90-xpmod-ia32.7z palemoon-27.9.6.win32-git-20190615-b33dced90-xpmod-sse.7z palemoon-27.9.6.win32-git-20190615-b33dced90-xpmod.7z Try #3 first; if it doesn't run, try #2; if it doesn't run either try #1. #3 is for newer CPUs; #2 and #1 are for successively older CPUs.

We use SEP at my workplace. Unfortunately I've found it to be way too paranoid, triggering on various files from @roytam1's browser builds, for instance. This is a problem because if one of his browsers truly were infected by malware, you'd ignore it thinking it was just another false positive! It's probably a good AV for someone who only runs well-known software, but I think it'd be too much of a hassle for most of the folks in this forum.

I remember that issue being discussed in the XP browser thread circa January. Maybe now's a good time to grab the latest reasonably stable build of Edge, before Google ruins it.

MCCES = MSSECES? See and subsequent discussion. To make a long story short, no one figured it out, and we all pretty much gave up and moved on to other free AV products.