Jody Thornton

Just one lone update from Server 2012 to apply for December 2020: KB4592497 Still going strong with Windows 8.

But the more compatible you make it, the more RAM it will take up. Websites, data sets and scripts are just too large to run in small amounts of RAM. I'm running Windows 8 with the old Vista mail client Windows Mail kludged in. Right now, it occupies 25.5 MB. Notepad, teensy weensy Notepad with a blank page takes 1 MB. What you want is something with the overhead of Windows 95, that yet can browse the modern web - WILL NOT HAPPEN

In Windows 8, I just want to keep the integrated Flash engine (which I believe is ActiveX) for local offline use. I like to play Yeti Sports games. Hopefully that isn't time bombed.

I had used Vista with an HP xw8200 workstation, running with 7 GB off DDR2 RAM, and two Xeon 3.68 GHz CPUs. The system had two 73 GB Fijitsu U320 SCSI disks at 10 K RPM.

I have seen those topics for Vista and other OSs; that's what prompted me to ask for clarification. Well, here goes: I use an HP xw8600 PC (which looks like my old xw8200, but it's a tad beefier), and it contains Two Intel Xeon Core2 Quad 3.2 GHz Processors 16 GB DDR2 800 MHz Memory nVidia Quadro FX 3800 PCI-E Video Adapter Realtek HD Audio Adapter (Integrated) Two Seagate Cheetah 300 GB SAS Disks (15 K RPM) Two CPU Fans and a Larger Case Fan for cooling Two LSI 3000 SAS Adapters Samsung SyncMaster 213T 21" 4x3 Flat Screen (at 1600x1200 resolution) I have my system configured with Classic Shell to, not only provide a Start Menu, but to conceal the Metro Start Screen. For browsing, I use Waterfox G3.0.2 (based on Firefox ESR 78.6) I run Softmaker Office 2016 for productivity. Superfetch is disabled, but Prefetch isn't. I've integrated Windows Mail and Calendar from Vista to be used on Windows 8. In a few weeks, I'm replacing Windows Mail with Interlink Mail and News. I had used Vista x64 SP2 for two years between February 2014 to December 2015. I was going to migrate to Windows 8.1 after installing it and setting it up on a friend's PC. I initially hated Windows 8x because of the common excuses: Metro, flat looks, no Start Menu, yada yada. Except the more I configured his system, the more I really enjoyed using the desktop portion of Windows 8.1 It ran exceptionally smooth. So I decided to move to it. But on my xw8200, the netburst Xeon I was running could not boot Windows 8.1 x64. However, Windows 8 x64 DID boot, so I settled on that instead. I finally settled on a newer machine to run with it, and couldn't be happier. I use Server 2012 security patches to maintain the system with.

Are you talking about hardware configuration? Use? Problems? What exactly are you wanting to hear about? Does it count if I use Windows 8, as opposed to 8.1?

OK cool. Then I guess I should stick to the native release. I'm planning on running the Photonic theme to give a flat, up to date look, so you've answered my question

I'm not. I'm running Windows Mail (originally pulled from Vista) on Windows 8. I'm replacing that once my mail is organized and backed up.

How do you find it better DanR20? I'm moving to Interlink Mail and News in January. I would run Roytam1's version but there is no interest (last that I check) in making an x64 build yet, is there?

I actually forgot that was indeed the original reason I chose Windows 8 x64. I was using an HP xw8200 system with Dual Xeon 3.68 GHz CPUs. They were the Netburst architecture.. At the time, it ran Windows 8 just peachy, but I went back to Vista on that system, before I decommissioned it.

Except CPU blocking due to some updates. Those don't affect Windows 8, while using Server 2012 patches.

So what are you able to browse on Windows 98 SE with that configuration?

Unfortunately. I think that is true. I wonder about updates for Windows 8 Embedded?

Can I attach here? Moderators: if I send a compressed file of themes and other support files, will that breach the rules of the board?

I used a theme editor to modify the background buttons and colours. I can send it to you. I use a few home-made modified themes. I hate when background windows have no colour.

I apologize if it's already been referenced, but the thread is just too long. But is there a way to extend the compilation life of x86 Basilisk 52? My mom runs real Basilisk x86 on a 32-bit Windows 7 installation. They run a lot older 16-bit Windows and BOWEP games from the early 90s, so 32-bit Windows 7 is just easier for them. I suppose they can just continue to run the final 32-bit Basilisk release, but I just want to keep browsing safe for them. Should I post this in the Windows 7 forum instead? XP compatibility is no longer needed, but I figured this was the best thread to discuss all things Moon-Matt. https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=25397

And the latest Flash update (KB4580325)

So is New Moon 28 dead in the water? I was going to download an update for my folks, and all of these forum pages are difficult to decipher. Thanks Guys!

Well I loved ESR 60 because I could still allow single-process without the use of environment variables. It ran quite solid. It was modern enough to like using with an OS like Windows 8, but it was customizable using userChrome.css to make it more like a modern-looking classic browser. I liked ESR 68 too, but for quite awhile when saving a file on Windows 8, the browser would freeze for as much as twenty seconds while creating a new folder in the process. This made me start really wanting to revisit ESR 60. It was just so trouble free. I am also using Waterfox Current right now, with good results, and it's on ESR 68 right now. In fact the file/save issue seems to have been remedied for the most part. But in September, Alex will rebase on ESR 78. At that point, e10s CANNOT be disabled AT ALL. Plus I will have to hope that Alex will reverse the new address bar simplifications.

Yes but SeaMonkey has a completely classic/vintage browser look. My goal was to still have the Quantum/Photon appearance of ESR 60. Anyway I'll see how Waterfox Current goes. 😊

I'd say that yes, my system would be like a flatter, faster, modern Windows 7. But honestly, I think people make out native Windows 8x to be more shocking than it actually is. Minus the Start screen, and add Classic Shell, my installation is pretty much like the native desktop of Windows 8.

At one time I thought that Windows 2000 Professional was the overall best, most stable version of Windows. In 2011, I felt that Windows XP x64 Edition beat it out on slightly better hardware. There was some setup snafus but once every thing was tucked and away, XP x64 just sang nicely. Now with Windows 8 (minus the Start screen and metro interface on a desktop), I find I have the best the combination of performance, modern looks (sorry but I want a screen to look like at least 2012), stability, and ease of use. Now I find XP a bit archaic looking and dated feeling.

Maybe - just maybe, I'm looking for what is provided with IceCat. It seems to only be updated to ESR 60.7. But I want to see if security updates are backported. It appears the last update in mid-2019, but no one is declaring the project dead either. EDIT: Forget that - it appears that Windows and MacOS development was dropped - Crap!

No you misunderstand. Quantum in ESR 60 is WAY more customizable than the newest Firefox. It looks the same to the untrained eye. Waterfox Current (based on ESR 68) has disabled a lot of the telemetry and even included a method of placing tabs underneath the address bar, all without userChrome.css modification. But I did like ESR 60 way better. I don't like the newer features and increased information gathering that has taken place since ESR 60. I also liked ESR 68, but there was a file/save bug in Windows 8 when creating an new folder. That may be solved however. And as for Edge, I tried it a lot during the preview stage, but I don't really care for it now.

Well I could just install the last ESR 60 revision and just not update. I'm testing out Waterfox Current 68 right now, and it's working pretty good. Thanks @asdf2345