AstroSkipper

I deleted the default download links pointing to .NET Frameworks installer files higher than 4.0 inside WSUS Offline Update 9.2.6 and then enabled their download. No errors anymore. After the download of all updates for .NET Frameworks, I additionally removed all downloaded updates for higher versions than 4.0 just before the iso image was created. This measure significantly reduces the overal size. Personally, I do not really use anymore Microsoft Office but I assume that the dowload of Office updates will also work in the same way as it does for Windows XP updates. I mention this as Office 2007 was actually the topic here.

After deleting all certificates in the folder Certs and updating the certificate cacert.pem, all certificates will be generated by ProxHTTPSProxy once again. That means my certificate chi.uk2.net.crt was updated 2 days ago. It has a validity from 28.07.2024 to 28.07.2034.

To be sure that WSUS Offline Update 9.2.6 really works I ran it a second time and activated some more options as, for example, the download of Windows Service Packs. Works. Only if you enable .NET Frameworks, the downloads can't be done as some links don't match anymore. The log file shows the code 404 in the end. So, some scripts would have to be updated regarding download links for .NET Frameworks and maybe for more. But generally, WSUS Offline Update 9.2.6 works great with a few modifications, even in 2024.

WSUS Offline Update 9.2.6 does not do anything good from scratch under Windows XP in these days. So, I modified the DownloadUpdates.cmd file in line 206 located in the sub folder cmd where I added an additional option to the downloader wget.exe: set DLDR_PATH=..\bin\wget.exe --no-check-certificate Furthermore, I replaced the wget.exe file by the last XP-compatible version 1.19.4. Then, I configured WSUS Offline Update 9.2.6 to use ProxHTTPSProxy to avoid any possible connection problems, especially certificate related. But one can also try to download all updates without it, of course. And I inserted the last XP-compatible version Sigcheck 2.30 to avoid any verification problems although I didn't enable the option "Verify downloaded updates". And what shall I say? WSUS Offline Update 9.2.6 still works under Windows XP even today. Of course, only if such modifications were done I listed above. Here is my log generated after a successful download of German Windows XP updates under the OS Windows XP : TBH, I did all that here to show that even today these updates can be downloaded under Windows XP. Personally, I do not need to download those updates anymore as I already did it in 2014, 2019 and 2022. And I archived all installed updates I got from Windows Update from the very first including all POSReady updates. Cheers, AstroSkipper

First of all, the most recent version is MyPal 68.14.3b. So, why do you want to install an older one? Regarding the updating of Mypal 68, there is no updater. You simply copy all new files over the old ones, or you create a new programme folder. Via the profile manager, you can call up your old profile, or you can create a fresh one. In any case, all has to be done manually. Personally, I usually edit my profile.ini file manually to my needs. If you create a fresh profile, you can copy, for example, your bookmarks file from your old profile to the new one. The same applies to other important files so that your data is not lost.

Indeed, it would be interesting to see what kind of Windows XP projects you made so far. Did you already release some of your projects, for example, on GitHub? Are your projects open source?

You should use New Moon 28 or Serpent 52 in combination with uBlock Origin Legacy and suitable filter lists enabled. A more recent user agent can't hurt, either. Mypal 29 and Firefox 52 are much too old.

Yep, a bit strange. But as I have already described, my 360Chrome 13.5 Build 1030 Redux initially also reported no secure connection to the website https://chi.uk2.net/ using ProxHTTPSProxy, i.e. no green padlock. Only after I had deleted all certificates in the Certs folder and updated the cacert.pem certificate inside the ProxHTTPSProxy installation, 360Chrome immediately reported a secure connection after a restart and showed the green padlock. However, recognising valid certificates has always been a problem in almost all 360Chrome versions for Windows XP. TBH, I very rarely use 360Chrome only to check sites for browser compatibility. I generally surf with Mypal 68 (is now running great ) and New Moon 28, and I try to open the more modern, very bloated sites with Thorium. If all else fails, I use my Android tablet.

Hi @TheLeftOldComputer! Many antimalware programmes are no longer compatible with Windows XP but ClamWin has always been. Unfortunately, it does not have a real-time protection. Only an additional tool called Clam Sentinel which has no longer been developed for years and never was a good one. It could only use ClamWin to scan downloaded files. So what about a programme based on the open source ClamAV with its virus definition databases which offers real-time protection? Or a fork of ClamWin with real-time protection and still compatible with CPU's only having the instruction set SSE? Kind regards, AstroSkipper

That's good. But in your original screenshot there wasn't a green padlock.

Ok. No problem.

@sparty411 Are you sure about your specifications regarding your internet speed? The unit mb/s does not actually exist. You wrote 300 mb/s. Did you really mean 300 MB/s or perhaps 300 Mbit/s? If you really had a speed of 300 MB/s, then that would be a line with 2400 Mbit/s, which I have never heard of existing for a normal citizen. At least here in Germany. I assume you rather meant 300 Mbit/s (Mbps in English, and very rarely can also found the unit Mb/s).

Or have I overlooked something?

@Dave-H Just for fun, I tried to open the website https://chi.uk2.net/ in 360Chrome 13.5 Build 1030 Redux. I got no green padlock and the hint the connection is not secure when connected in both ways, directly or via ProxHTTPSProxy. I then closed the proxy, deleted all certificates stored in ProxHTTPSProxy's Certs folder and performed an update of the cacert.pem file. I then started the proxy and called up the website https://chi.uk2.net/ again. Now, the connection is reported as secure with a green padlock. Here is a screenshot: I don't know why your credentials are no longer filled in automatically when connected directly but I assume it is certificate related due to the age of 360Chrome. In any case, you should not forget to maintain your ProxHTTPSProxy installation in terms of its certificates, i.e, purging the Certs folder and executing the cacert Updater from time to time.

Just an idea. Have you already patched and removed the limit on TCP connection attempts in the tcpip.sys file in your Windows XP installation? And don't forget to adjust your MTU and RWIN values as Windows XP does not do it automatically! This can be easily done, for example, with the tool SpeedGuide.net TCP Optimizer, currently in the version 4.1.1. The correct MTU value mainly depends on your internet provider and can even be determined with the SG TCP Optimizer tool in the corresponding tab. A suitable RWIN value can also be manually calculated and set in the registry, of course. All values should be then tested to find the optimal ones. In any case, be aware that such fast connection speeds as you are using today didn't exist when Windows XP was developed and still maintained. TBH, I don't know whether Windows XP with its very old network drivers is at all able to handle such high speed you mentioned above. The old Internet tariff I booked years ago has a speed of 25 Mbit/s only, which I can achieve in full on my Windows XP computer, but only with optimal settings mentioned above. However, my old processor wouldn't be able to cope with any more, either. And regarding the QoS Packet Scheduler, I deactivated it from the very first on my standalone Windows XP desktop computer long, long time ago.

Just an idea. Have you already patched and removed the limit on TCP connection attempts in the tcpip.sys file in your Windows XP installation? This can be done, for example, with the tool xp-AntiSpy, or manually following the instructions here: https://www.speedguide.net/articles/windows-xp-sp2-tcpipsys-connection-limit-patch-1497/p-2/ There, you can find a further tool for patching called Event ID 4226 Patcher: http://www.lvllord.de/?lang=en&url=tools Long time ago, I did it with xp-AntiSpy which also creates a backup of the original file.

Resource Hacker is unfortunately no longer compatible with Windows XP. Resource Hacker 5.1.7 is the last XP-compatible installer release. Resource Hacker 5.1.8 is the last XP-compatible portable release. As this thread targets Windows XP only, the original links in my initial post point to the most recent versions which no longer work under Windows XP. Therefore, I'll edit my post to get the correct versions again via archived links from the Wayback Machine. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Update notification! Malware Hunter has been again updated on 08.07.2024 and is now available in version 1.186.0.808. It is still listed to be compatible with Windows XP. Accordingly, I will update my article as soon as I can confirm its XP-compatibility. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Did you also try the most recent version Mypal 68.14.3b? As @feodor2 mentioned in a previous post, he has made a lot of changes and corrections in this new version.

Ditto! I think you've overlooked something again: Cheers, AstroSkipper

You sound arrogant and conceited, was that your intent? Is the forum getting renamed in your honor? This is a quote taken out of context. If you want to quote me, please do it correctly in context! Here is my original statement: What sounds arrogant and conceited about this factual statement? The answer is: nothing. But your subsequent comment is simply inappropriate and superfluous.

Correct. The browser Thorium is in different versions available but none of them is compatible with a CPU SSE only. It works perfectly in New Moon 28 and Serpent 52. Thus, it's a very good recommendation. Try to lower the minversion to 27.10.0 in the install.rdf file inside the xpi archive! Maybe, it works then in New Moon 27.10.0, too. BTW, it was indeed a typo in the user agent string I already corrected.

If you don't have or use an old, weak computer, for example, with a Pentium 3 or 4 CPU, you can't say anything here. The OP has an even older CPU than me. It's a Pentium 3 733 MHz SSE only. Therefore, your observations and assessments are not relevant and unfortunately missing the point. On my old machine with a Pentium 4 2.8 GHz, the Google Search works much faster when using a moblie user agent. And I only refer to the output in the browser. The performance on Google servers are of no interest and has nothing to do with the mobile user agent of the requesting browser. BTW, the difference in speed with or without using a moblie user agent is much more noticeable in Thorium on my computer. But you can only check my statements if you own a comparably old computer.

We are talking here about using a mobile user agent only on google.com. And iin this case, Google Search performs much faster on old, weak computers. Especially in Thorium, it works great. All tested by me on my old machine.

As I already mentioned, you can also test mobile user agents. The advantage of a mobile user agent is that the offered version of a website is very often (but not always) much lighter. Here is a Firefox based mobile user agent originally used by Firefox on Android: Mozilla/5.0 (Android 9; Mobile; rv:125.0) Gecko/125.0 Firefox/125.0 You can lower the Firefox version of this string to a value you like, of course. In New Moon 28, @roytam1 has recently changed the default user agent to the following string: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.7) Goanna/6.7 PaleMoon/33.2 On my Pentium 4 2.8 GHz 32-bit computer, Google works fine with this user agent. In general, one can say that more recent user agent strings lead to a website version with full functionality but unfortunately very often more cumbersome on old, weak computers. But one thing is clear. It is always a game of trial and error. That said you should use a user agent extension for experimenting. Here is a very good one called User Agent Status: https://msfn.org/board/topic/183923-extensions-and-custom-buttons-for-uxp-browsers-corrections-modifications-adjustments-and-special-recommendations/?do=findComment&comment=1250958 At this point, I should mention that I additionally use several user scripts on Google websites in my browsers as, for example, Return Pagination to Google to make it the way I like it. If you have questions to extensions or user scripts, please do that in my thread Extensions and custom buttons for UXP browsers - Corrections, modifications, adjustments, and special recommendations as our conversation here has unfortunately become off-topic. Any browser related things should be requested in @roytam1's browser thread. Cheers, AstroSkipper