Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


vipejc

Member
  • Content Count

    312
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by vipejc

  1. What other files? There's no Office Professional 2013 version on the pages you provided, and I made it clear that's my version in 32-bit. Your guess is as good as mine. Microsoft's not smart enough to write an article telling us. You're probably right. Knowing Microsoft, they made an MSI version only for Professional Plus. LOL What a bunch of morons. That's okay because worst case scenario, I will just use OpenOffice 4 and delete Office Pro 2013 if Microsoft gives me any issues with the install when it's time. But I mean it when I say, I'm forever done with Microsoft after Windows 7 64-bit.
  2. It's okay. I know what you're saying. These legacy SSE1-only CPUs are very slow to render video in 480p and up through software. They either drop frames, are choppy, or freeze the computer too long (CPU usage spikes to 100%), and make it impossible to play them. I download them to watch offline with my video card that supports 1080p using hardware acceleration.
  3. How would I take an unbranded build of Firefox 48.0.2 and add H.264 video and AAC audio to it? What are all the other benefits of your FF ESR 45 build, Roytam? Security is not a concern for me, VistaLover.
  4. Is Mozilla telling the truth when they say Firefox 48 and newer will not allow you to override required extension signing, or is that developer lies? The preference xpinstall.signatures.required set to false no longer works. I tried adding 2 scripts here: https://winaero.com/blog/disable-add-on-signature-enforcement-in-firefox-49-and-above/ This method did not work and reset my browser to its default settings, which caused me to need to reconfigure it. I heard you can take the source code, remove the extensions from the signed types file, and recompile the source code to disable the frustrating required extension signing, but how do we do this? You could also just use an unbranded build.
  5. How do we make Internet Explorer 8 into a modern-day, standards-compliant web browser with H.264 video and AAC audio? I know we need to add new code to it, such as IE9.js, jQuery, Selectivzr, Modernizr, and/or CSS3Pie. Which of these scripts do we need? What do these scripts do the same and differently? Do we just copy the code into an existing IE8 file, or new Notepad file? If an existing file, which? If a new file, what should we name it? Does the filename even matter? Where should the file be placed to work?
  6. I will donate a little something just as soon as I have the funds. Right now is a very bad money time. This place is invaluable and I would feel guilty to keep using it without paying anything to help pay the server costs. I don't know when I can donate, but I promise I will do it asap, even if it's just $5.
  7. That's not completely true. Yes, some people may be stranded without any way to let the world know about the problem because that's their only OS, but others will have a smartphone capable of connecting or find another desktop or laptop computer to use to get us the message so we can start working on a fix. I'm pretty sure nobody here would ever want to use the public library on a daily basis with no privacy to access the Internet, so that's not a good idea. Displaying and accessing are the same here. But what happens if your favorite sites, say YouTube for example, can no longer display the page. How would you workaround something like that? Would it be possible to still use YouTube or some other favorite site?
  8. The first link you provided for X18-65189.iso may be correct, but it says that's for Office Professional Plus 2013, not Office Professional 2013; they're different versions. Will my license key for Office Pro 2013 work on an Office Pro Plus 2013 DVD?
  9. Jaclaz, I really appreciate how hard you worked to find these links, but the only offline download is still not for a basic MSI, but instead an IMG, not basic ISO, file. And that IMG file still requires Microsoft's annoying Click-to-Run technology, so it's not even really an offline installer. The link to order a Microsoft replacement disc was removed by MS. Do you want to keep trying? Any Office Pro 2013 users that have an MSI installer they wouldn't mind sharing?
  10. If this post is in the wrong location, please move it to the right one. What happens when all supported web browsers for a Windows OS no longer display certain webpages and changing the UA string fails? Can that computer never access those webpages? What if they can't display any webpages. Would that computer never be allowed to connect to the Internet again, which would probably make the computer useless and force it to be retired. Do the Windows 98 and ME diehards have these problems with much older IE6 or older browsers? Will they ever face a problem in the future where their ancient systems can no longer use the Internet because all webpages no longer display? Do you guys have a plan or workaround in place?
  11. Microsoft good guys? You mean id*** with no logic or commonsense who killed the desktop PC after Windows 7? :buehehe: The link you shared is just for a very small 1.07 MB setup file, similar to the Click-to-Run version I already downloaded from my Microsoft account, which I cannot download on my Windows XP computer, saying it's not a valid Win32 application, when it's 32-bit Windows. LOL I want the full-size MSI installer. Where is this file? Does the link provide an updated copy of Office 2013 with Service Pack 1 preinstalled, or do I have to install that myself? When I try to run the setup file on my Windows XP computer, it says it's not a valid Win32 application, again. I know Office 2013 is not supported by Windows XP; I just want to download the offline MSI installer for Office 2013 Pro on my Windows XP computer to be installed on my Windows 7 64-bit computer, but how? Do I need the Office Deployment Tool to install this copy of Office 2013 Pro, or it that optional?
  12. According to Microsoft's 3 different sets of instructions for how to install Office 2013 LOL using an offline MSI installer, it says to sign into your Microsoft account, select your language and 32-bit or 64-bit Windows, and click the download offline installer link (I don't see any of this info), but there's no links and none of these instructions are even accurate! Every time I click the Install button, I get a pop-up saying Go Premium. Microsoft says you'll get this pop-up if they can't associate your Microsoft account with your copy of Office, but I have already verified my copy twice, including my license key. The only download offered to me is always the Click-to-Run online installer I don't want. Microsoft has taken something that used to be so simple (installing Office) and made it a painful and frustrating process. I am so done with Microsoft. Windows 7 and Office 2013 are it for me. Does anybody know where I can find the MSI offline installer Microsoft claims is available but I can't find anywhere they say for Microsoft Office Professional 2013?
  13. @VistaLover: Google Chrome 49.0.2623.112's installer gives me an error that it's encountered a problem and needs to close. This is because the last SSE1-only version of Chrome is 34.0.1847.137, which installs fine. I never said you said FF 48 definitely supported the VP9 codec. I was saying it was a general possibility, but I needed to research it, and yes, I can confirm FF 48.0.2 does support the WebM VP9 codec. ;^) Yes, the problem is just H.264 video will not play in FF 48.0.2. I highly doubt FF 48.0.2 is the problem because the Adobe CDM clearly works with multiple versions from 45 to 52.9.1. There shouldn't be any change between versions that would break that compatibility. I've checked all my about:config preferences and file locations and everything is correct. I even tried experimenting with other preferences not in your instructions that deal with video, but nothing worked. It's funny you said that my problem may be that the Adobe CDM v17 may require an SSE2 processor because I was just about to suggest this. I will definitely try the Adobe CDM v15 and share my results. After dealing with this annoying issue with many different newer versions of software that will not install, I never considered this could be the problem because there's no usual errors by the Adobe CDM. Good idea. Let's get another AMD Athlon XP user running FF 48.0.2 on Windows XP to confirm if the processor missing SSE2 is the problem or it's something else. HTML5 tests show FF 48.0.2 does not support H.264 video or AAC audio, while Chrome 34.0.1847.137 supports both codecs, and it's two years older than FF 48.0.2! (Mozilla Firefox just keeps getting worse.) It's interesting how both browsers have features the other doesn't, which is why I'll keep them both installed. All videos are playing in H.264 in Google Chrome 34 as expected, but it's very inconvenient opening Chrome just to watch a video I should be able to watch in FF 48.0.2. Not to mention it sucks up double my less than 1 GB of system memory should I have both browsers open at the same time. According to the YouTube HTML5 tests, Chrome 34 has all five features, but Firefox 48 is missing H.264, and MSE and H.264, and the problem may be my legacy SSE Athlon XP CPU, so I will install the Adobe CDM v15, test, and recheck the page to see if these 2 features are then supported. And you're right about why YouTube removed their original HTML5 tests page. Nowhere in your walk-through did it mention anything about you using a SSE2 processor. If it did, I would've considered that the problem long ago. I have an idea: is there any way to take the H.264 (MP4) video codec and AAC audio codec from Google Chrome 34's installation files and copy-and-paste them to FF 48's appropriate folders? Would that solve my missing H.264 video and AAC audio issues, even though I should already have H.264 video with the Adobe CDM, but it's not working for some stupid reason. I also have an AAC codec from a codec pack, so shouldn't FF 48 also have AAC audio support? Tried older v15 Adobe CDM and still fails. Tried activating QuickTime plugin, which also shows support for MP4 video and AAC audio, but failed, too. If it works for FF 45 to 47, it should work for FF 48. This doesn't seem like it has a solution. I tried editing the media.gmp.decoder.h264 preference from 2 to 1, disabling WebM, OGG, and Opus video formats so just H.264 was enabled, disabling Flash Player, and the OpenH264 Video Codec by Cisco. The problem may be some kind of unique incompatibility on my system. It could be anything. I'll wait until Looking4AWayOut and any other Athlon XP users test this issue and see how they do. Thanks for the browser suggestions, but I'm going to stick with FF 48 and Chrome 34 until I retire Windows XP within the year and switch to Windows 7 64-bit, which will be my final Windows OS for life. You did help a lot. Thank you.
  14. You may be right about some YouTube videos playing that use the VP8 codec but others not playing because FF 48 does not support the VP9 codec. But even if that's true, how do you explain some of my music videos playing and others not, when they are all encoded and uploaded the same exact way? The Adobe Primetime CDM is shown under my plugins, enabled, and set to Always Activate. I even tried disabling Flash and my ad blocker for testing. Yes, the SSE1-only AMD Athlon XP 3000+ CPU I'm using will not run on FF 49 or newer according to Mozilla and those versions will issue me a warning that if I try to install it, that version of FF is not supported by my CPU. The Adobe CDM is supposed to work on FF 48, too, is it not? I'm considering installing the last version of Google Chrome to support Windows XP (49.0.2623.112), which should have H.264 video and audio support, exclusively to watch H.264 (MP4) videos, but I really don't want to.
  15. No, all the YouTube videos that play and don't play all use the HTML5 player and have the same right-click menu. YouTube completely removed Flash support a few years ago because the Flash Player will no longer play any YouTube videos. I have all the files and they're in the correct locations. I even tried checking the file version of the eme-adobe.dll to make sure the version Firefox automatically downloaded and installed was not a newer version causing a Windows XP incompatibility, but both file versions are the same. According to an HTML5 test, my browser does not support H.264 (MP4), even though both MP4 preferences are set in about:config. I just don't know.
  16. None of this is working for me on Windows XP SP3 32-bit with Firefox 48.0.2. I can play most YouTube videos fine, but some just will not play, which is strange because you'd think they would all play if one plays. I can't watch any other videos on any other webpages that are HTML5, and every video on those sites gives me the error "No video with supported format or MIME type found." What the hell am I doing wrong?
  17. I tried another software called Video Card Stability Test, and within minutes after opening the program, the computer crashed to a Blue Screen of Death and said Windows shut down your computer to prevent damage and the problem is either a specific ATI driver or the physical video card. Do you know if you uninstall OEM video card drivers if Windows will use its vga.sys driver with the video card and not by itself so I can test if the ATI drivers are the issue?
  18. Well... Seems to me just a tad too much incompetence... I'd say it may be a convenient response policy, which can, if necessary, be attributed to incompetence, if and when challenged, but which may, otherwise, mislead some into letting go of XP... I think the same thing. And get this...when I started taking like a lawyer and told a third and final WPA agent about the Microsoft EULA, he acts very helpful, asks for the installation ID, and Plus! activated. So if WPA give you a hard time, let them know you know your rights and they should comply. But I totally agree with you that they probably know they legally have to reactivate XP, but they just give customers a hard time to pressure them to buy Windows 7 or beyond.
  19. LOL No, when Plus! didn't activate, I called WPA and heard the automated recording, which made me think maybe Microsoft stopped all XP OS and Microsoft XP software reactivations. And then when I asked the 2 WPA agents, they said sorry we no longer can reactivate your Plus!. Then I asked them if Microsoft just stopped reactivation of certain Microsoft XP software, or the XP OS, too. And both WPA agents said no more reactivation for XP OS or Microsoft XP software. Sorry for their incompetence.
  20. I want to test the X1650 using Windows' vga.sys, which will run the system at 640 x 480 resolution in 8-bit color. But if I enable VGA mode, Windows will still use the ATI video card drivers at 640 x 480 resolution. My question is if I uninstall Catalyst Control Center and the catalyst driver, will Windows use its vga.sys driver with the X1650 so I can run the system for 45 days and see if the ATI drivers are causing the crashes, or something else like the GPU or power supply is?
  21. I have a very flaky HIS ATI Radeon X1650 AGP video card with the latest drivers that crashes and freezes intermittently lots when browsing the web and doing different tasks, such as scrolling a page or copying and pasting text. I need to run some tests. I'd like to try disabling the video card in Windows' Device Manager. If I do that, will the video card still be used and the fan on the card still run? Does disabling a video card this way just stop the video card drivers and use Windows' VGA graphics mode, or does Windows stop using the video card entirely?
  22. Honestly, I don't know or really care. Microsoft makes things so confusing for the end user. Once I figure out my setup, I stop caring. No, Microsoft never said they'd continue to activate Plus! and their other software. This is why I hate software that requires activation, because the company can stop supporting the product and kill the activation servers. Software that requires a serial number are fine, because as long as you have a valid serial number, the software will always reactivate. WPA stinks.
  23. You see, how different perspective can be? I would be happy about that as it could be a sign that the reply came from an actual human being (though not informed or misinformed or however providing a non-answer or an answer to a question that was not asked) as opposed to an automatic copy-paste-reply program. jaclaz Yes, that's why I love this place. I know things you don't, and you know things I don't, but when we work together and use our different minds, there's no computer problem we can't solve. ;^)
  24. How surprising. How surprising. How surprising. (would that make a "How surprising3"? About the misspelling, IF your name is Eric and Jitin wrote Erik instead it's not IMHO that much an issue, on the other hand, if your name is Jean-Philippe it would sound preoccupying... jaclaz It is a big deal. You have to act professional. And when a customer tells you their name, you better spell it right. You don't see me misspelling his name, do you? And I don't know too many Jitins. LOL
  25. I heard back from Microsoft. Instead of Julie or Terry replying directly to me with a clear explanation, they forwarded my e-mail to Jitin, who is a tier 3 Technical Support Agent in India who seems confused himself. LOL Here's his official response, which contradicts the WPA automated recording: Hello Erik, (He misspelled my name when it was the first thing in my original letter. LOL) I am Jitin Singh from Microsoft Answer Desk Tier 3 team and I will be helping you with the case #private. Microsoft will continue to allow activation of existing, legitimate Windows XP/Office 2003 licenses. The allowance of activation does not apply to future versions of Windows, and has no impact on Windows XP/ Office 2003 end of support. Please let me know if you have any further questions. But remember, the automated recording says Microsoft will only allow reactivation of existing legitimate XP licenses when customers transfer their full-package-product license to a new system, or install on a currently licensed system. Two people have reported being able to reactivate OEM Windows XP, but I have that, and they don't usually require reactivation, as they're tied to the motherboard. Somebody with a retail Windows XP needs to back up their current system, reinstall XP, see if WPA works as expected, and restore your backup image after testing. The reason why I feel Microsoft really is blocking XP reactivations is because last week I attempted to reactivate Microsoft software called Plus! Digital Media Edition with a genuine product key, but the WPA wizard said it couldn't connect to the Microsoft server. Then I called WPA, and when both Microsoft WPA agents told me they no longer can activate XP licenses, I was sure. I know Plus! Digital Media Edition isn't Windows XP, but it's Microsoft software for XP and also uses WPA, so unless this is opposite week, I'm still not convinced Microsoft representatives will reactivate XP, especially deep into the future. If I am wrong, blame Microsoft for making me throw a false flag.
×
×
  • Create New...