Mathwiz

security.tls.enable_0rtt_data is false (value recommended by above site) by default in Basilisk (both latest Win 7+ build, 2018.11.07, and @roytam1's latest build). I had created the security.ssl.disable_session_identifiers Boolean and set it to true when this discussion started. It does slow down browsing a bit, but I haven't seen anything more serious than that. I don't recommend setting privacy.firstparty.isolate to true unless you have an add-on that can substitute content typically downloaded from CDNs (JQuery, etc.) as it will break many web sites. I did set security.ssl.enable_false_start to false as recommended at the above web site. I'll report back if it causes any issues.

It's still early but it appears KB4466388 (released today) finally includes a permanent fix to these OLEAUT32.DLL issues.

Patch Tuesday brings us another Office 2010 update: KB3114565. Don't yet know if it breaks Win XP compatibility though. Update: PowerPoint Viewer 2010, at least, works fine with the update on Win XP.

IIRC XP SP1 was the last XP service pack that could support PAE....

You may want to include 'avformat-55.dll' also. It looks for this at startup; unfortunately the latest version of ffmpeg uses avformat-58.dll, so it doesn't find it

True; the latest version of urllib3 that works with the latest version of Python that works with XP SP1 will likely include an older version of OpenSSL that may have security vulnerabilities that have been eliminated in the current version. So I wouldn't recommend it unless you absolutely need XP SP1 compatibility. But if you do, that may be the best you can do.

I rarely use Win 98SE any more. I did try to put ProxHTTPSProxy on 98SE but the latest version of Python that runs on 98SE was too old to run it. (Python v2.7 IIRC) As for XP SP1, it might work; you'd need to figure out the latest Python 3 version that will run on it and try to compile it with that.

Yes, the PM team will target Win 7; but @roytam1 has some experience in modifying their code for XP/Vista (don't forget Vista!), so at least there's hope.

I hate when things break on update day. The natural inclination is to blame the update, but half the time it turns out to just be a coincidence. In this case, todoist.com no longer works with Abine's "Blur" tracking blocker add-on. (I can still block Google Analytics with Privacy Badger, though, so all is not lost.) They just happened to change it this AM, so it seemed like the 2018.11.10 build broke it. But when I reverted, it still didn't work, forcing me to dig deeper....

In fact that's exactly why M$ created "Windows XP Mode" for Win 7 Pro users. Even Win 7 broke way too many more XP apps than it should have (zero).

It looks like these both got posted at the same time, and I think @dencorso answers @Jody Thornton's question. It's not really a matter of being "over," so much as just noticing you're using the old OS less and less, and the new OS more and more, until one day you realize you're not really using the old OS at all. Many of us don't abruptly "break up" with an OS; it just sort of falls away over time. But as long as it gets used at all, I still appreciate help from forums like this one. I've noticed the same phenomenon in other areas. A couple of years ago I replaced a Channel Master-brand DVR with their new model. The combination of "UI shock" (having to figure out the new DVR's way to do practically everything) and a few annoying limitations in the new DVR led me to track down another one of the old DVRs on eBay! But eventually, I got used to the new DVR, and the old one gets little use these days. (Now I'm going through those same migration pains again, trying to move to an Android phone from a BlackBerry....) M$ has much to answer for here; they've made OS upgrades way more of a pain than they should be. Really, it should just be: Put the new OS DVD in the drive Boot from the DVD Wait Enjoy! Everything still works just like it did, but now you can run all the new programs that wouldn't run on the old version. But M$ never does that! There are always apps that won't run anymore, folders that got moved around, etc. None of this was necessary to create a more feature-rich OS; a lot of it was just "flash" to try to attract folks' eyes in the hopes they'll be enticed to upgrade to a "hot" new OS. All of that said, however, I don't support the petition to Mozilla. To me it seems there are two related, but different issues: Should Firefox still support legacy extensions? Then why bother Mozilla? Just switch to PM or Basilisk. They (especially Basilisk) are the "extended FF 52" the petitioners say they want. Should Firefox, PM, or Basilisk still support XP/Vista (why does everyone forget Vista's in the same boat as XP where browsers are concerned), instead of both being limited to Win 7 and up? (Then why not just use MyPal or @roytam1's builds? Mozilla and the PM team have enough to do.) Edit: @Mcinwwl's point about upgrades and language packs is well taken. As I mentioned in the NM thread, not everyone is as technically savvy as the average MSFN reader; some of us have to help out our parents. So MyPal and @roytam1 aren't a complete solution. But I see no reason why someone with a little free time can't fill that gap. I'm sure that, at some point, either the Web will evolve to the point where PM and Basilisk can't keep up with FF, or Feodor2 and @roytam1 can't make either work on XP anymore. (We've already hit that point with much DRM-protected media.) But that's probably even further off than Win 7 EOL! In the meantime, I'm pretty happy with what XP users have.

"Official" Basilisk builds (that run on Win 7 & up) released a new version yesterday, only 3 days after their previous release on Sunday. Looks like they fixed @Alex654's issue: So the fix will probably be in @roytam1's next set of builds too.

I don't have Office 2010, but I do have PowerPoint Viewer & M$ Access database engine, which use Office 2010 components, so I typically get the Office 2010 updates offered. Weirdly, the yellow shield appeared and asked me to download the two Office 2010 updates published yesterday. I did so - but it never offered to install them! After seeing this thread I decided to check Add/Remove Programs to see if either had been installed. As far as I could tell, they had not. So I ran M$ Update, hid KB4461522, and selected KB2863821 to be installed. Then, as I was installing the update, the yellow shield popped up again and asked me to install! (It went away after the install completed.) Weird....

Sounds like M$, uh, "forgot" that Office 2010 is supposed to run on Windows XP. I bet the updates are fine if you're on Win 7. (Vista could go either way, I suppose; someone will just have to try them and see.)

I would guess something added in the latest version conflicts with some other software you have installed. Are both NM 28.2.0a1 and Basilisk (Serpent) 52 failing, or just one of them?

But you can add it yourself easily. Just right-click on the about:config page, select New / String, enter the name (general.useragent.override.github.com) then the value: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 (Pale Moon)

I replaced Adblock Plus with uBlock Origin some time ago. Facebook doesn't seem to have a problem with uBlock Origin. (I'm not actually using FF 52.9, but I'm using Basilisk, which for all intents and purposes can be thought of as FF 52.10; I even pretend to be FF 52.9 with my user agent) Edit: I forgot to mention! I send Facebook this user agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:57.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/57.0 So I pretend to be FF 57 to Facebook

I never really liked Windows Search 4.0, for the reasons you mentioned. It was one of those Microsoft products that, yeah, was better in some ways; for example, it lets you search the body of emails in Windows Live Mail. But it's worse in other ways, and for me at least, it's harder to use. Why can't Microsoft just add new functionality without taking something away at the same time? I had it on my old XP system but regretted installing it. When I got a new Win 7 system, I downloaded & installed XP mode, but I hid Windows Search on Microsoft update just so I could keep the classic search.

You know, that's what Basilisk does too; it just adds the "compatible" strings rather than replacing the incompatible ones. I knew Basilisk did that but I wasn't where I could check PM or NM without downloading & installing again, and I assumed PM/NM worked differently. That's what I get for assuming. Anyway, that's why on Basilisk I just use a global "general.useragent.override" and make the UA look exactly like FF 52.9 on Win 7. (Some sites complain about the OS as well as the browser.) Surprisingly, Chase doesn't (yet) seem to have a problem with FF 52.9, even though it's been out of date for almost two months; if/when they do at some point in the future (all too likely), I will of course update "general.useragent.override.chase.com" (probably to /60.something) and see if a newer version will avoid the dreaded "your browser is out of date" without pushing incompatible Javascript onto the page. I assume (there's that word again) the PM team will keep both PM and Basilisk compatible with future Web technologies to the extent that's feasible, and that @roytam1's builds will incorporate all the same enhancements to the extent it remains feasible to do so on XP. I'm sure at some point, there will be something that just can't be made to work anymore (reCAPTCHA seems to be falling into that category already); but for now I seem to be doing OK with a little help from my friends at MSFN. BTW, it's interesting you were able to get Greasemonkey 4.1 working with @roytam1's Basilisk version. The problem with my setup may just have to remain a mystery, since it looks like the WE version of the downloader will work if I just exclude chase.com, and that seems like the simplest solution for me at this point.

I don't know this for a fact, but I'll hazard a guess: Google keeps changing reCAPTCHA code and only tests it thoroughly with their own browser, Chrome. Maybe also the latest version of FF, if we're lucky. But Pale Moon and Basilisk, both based on an older FF version, 52.9? Fuhgeddaboudit. My guess is, they're trying to stay ahead of the bots, so it's not totally nefarious; but they also have no incentive not to break older browsers. After all, it just might drive more users to Chrome in the process. What a lucky happenstance for them! After all, FF will keep up. Eventually Pale Moon and Basilisk will probably catch up too, but by then Google will probably have changed something else and broken them yet again.

I'm not positive, but I believe "Gecko Compatibility" replaces "Goanna/4.1" with "Gecko/20100101" in the user agent string (for the benefit of sites that don't know what the "Goanna" rendering engine is). "Firefox Compatibility" does that too, but it also replaces "Pale Moon/28.2" with "Firefox/52.9." Again for the benefit of sites that don't know about (or don't like) Pale Moon. About the only advantage of "Gecko Compatibility" over "Firefox Compatibility" would be that sites that do know about Pale Moon won't report version 28.2 as "out of date," but may report Firefox 52.9 as out of date. In my experience though, you're less likely to run into problems using "Firefox Compatibility" than using "Gecko Compatibility." (But as always, YMMV.)

But curiously, GM 4.1 does work (at least well enough to download Youtube videos) on the "official" Basilisk browser (version 52.9.2018.09.27); just not on @roytam1's XP builds (always say version 52.9.0). I'd think both versions would have the same WE APIs Nevertheless, since I reverted to the WE add-on for Basilisk on XP, I think this is the best solution: I'll try it when I get back to my work PC on Monday and let you all know if it solved the problem. Edit: Ugh. Chase has made some annoying changes to their Web site: network.http.sendRefererHeader must be set at the default of 2 now; otherwise you don't even get the login prompt! User agent must be a "classic" FF UA (no mention of Goanna or Basilisk), or you get their "your browser is out of date" nonsense and are redirected to Chase's mobile site. ("Official" Basilisk mentions both Gecko and Goanna, and both Firefox and Basilisk in its UA when FF compatibility mode is set to "true;" this is fine for most sites but not Chase's.) Oh, well, the option to disable SF.net for the Chase website seems to work, at least on "official" Win 7 Basilisk; so I'm hopeful it will work on Roytam1's XP builds too. As I said, I'll find out Monday.

New Moon uses different config options than Basilisk. In NM you have to set it in Preferences / Advanced / General / Compatibility:

So, I installed the web extension in Basilisk and Greasemonkey and the sf-helper user script in NM. Both work fine. However.... ... the web extension version prevents me from logging into Chase.com on Basilisk! I would never have figured that out, except I have the "official" version of Basilisk for the Win 7 side of my PC, and I didn't install the web extension there. The user script version didn't block me from logging into Chase from NM 28, so I'll try it on the Win 7 side and see if it gives me the best of both worlds.... Edit: The script seems to work with Greasemonkey 4.1, and without interfering with me logging into Chase. So now I'll try it that way on the XP side. Edit 2: No joy. Greasemonkey 4.1 installs on @roytam1's Basilisk XP build, but doesn't seem to work for some reason. So I guess the easiest solution on Basilisk XP is still to use the web extension, and just disable it when I want to log into Chase, and re-enable it when I want to download Youtube videos.

This problem has been reported since August. Changing the user agent usually seems to be enough; apparently Twitter likes to feed Basilisk (but not FF) a format it won't decode properly. IIRC @dencorso reported that installing Adobe's PrimeTime CDM and disabling ffvpx also fixed this strange problem, in case changing the user agent isn't your thing (or doesn't work for some reason).