Jody Thornton

Very funny @jaclaz, again this all came up because of the Firefox 52 petition. I wasn't coming to poop on XP. But really, I must know why is it OK to poop on Windows 10 (in a Windows 10 Forum), and I hate it too by the way, but even the slightest criticism of XP's continued place in IT use is not acceptable? There seems to be a disconnect there. EDIT: moving threads made it seem like I just came back to crap on XP, and that was not the context my statements from yesterday were made.

No it's not well said. XP-x64 Lover. This thread is ALL ABOUT criticism of Windows XP and whether or not it should be used now. My posts are actually ON TOPIC and relevant here. Anyone accusing me of trolling is being a hypocrite. You're telling all I can do is agree with the rest of you (that's being sheeple). No one learns anything that way.

Ah jeez - the reason this came up was because of a petition to extend Firefox support and force Mozilla's hand. Stop saying I'm trolling. Only you are acting aggressive now. There are others here (also long-time XP users who get just what I'm saying. Oh and by the way, this thread was specifically meant for criticism of XP or at least critical analysis, so why are you here p***ing in my corn flakes now? Seems your pot calling the kettle black. If we're allowed a thread called "Windows 10 is Crap" then CERTAINLY one can question the longevity of support for an old OS. EDIT: Oh and by the way, go and look at my response to @FrancesBB. He actually did go and change my mind somewhat. So stop saying I'm asking a question for no reason at all.

@MikeyV"As it should be" was only meant from the standpoint of a a business cycle, so as to say "hasn't enough time now gone by?". That's what I meant to say. (by the way that could be ten years)

Oh see, I took your earlier comment as friendly but disagreeing discourse. Now that I see you've labelled me as manipulative, I see that you aren't as open to conversation as I thought. That's good to know and I'll remember that in the future. See, not allowing anyone to have differing opinions and showing both sides, is WORSE than me disagreeing with your stance. That's too bad. And your calling me "manipulative", is absolutely distasteful. By the way does my response to @FranceBB above, sound like manipulation? I even agreed with his point. So I'm not here to be disagreeable.

Because I wondered initially how sound the idea of extending XP support was. My points have a perfectly valid place. And up until you posted your comment, we were having friendly discourse, even when we disagreed. And I even admitted on the last post to agreeing to a concept I hadn't even considered. That's why I post on such a question. There is NOTHING WRONG with disagreement.

Now see that I had not considered. I get that completely. The only thing then would be, if I'm Microsoft, and I want Windows to represent something completely different that what XP, Vista or 7 ever was (almost like visual branding, if you will). But you idea is completely sound as well.

@Mcinwwl completely understand, and it wasn't meant as an argument. I was really just wanting to understand when an XP fan can realize that "OK it's really over now for XP, and should be over". That was all. I think there should be a time when Microsoft, Mozilla or any other vendor be allowed to move along and jettison their old product. after all, it IS Microsoft's product. If they wanted XP to do nothing more than collect dust on a shelf, don't they have that right? Additionally, don't they have the right to say, "If you want to use Microsoft services, they should be something on which we can monetize"? So again, nothing argumentative intended at all. I think I do have a valid point though, and I hope it's received in it's intended, friendly tone. Have a good day.

Problem is though guys, that you're asking a company to not move forward with a vision for the future, one that XP cannot be part of because of technical limitations. Maybe the limitations of Firefox on XP and NT 5x systems are "fake" ones right now, but down the road that won't be the case. There will be architectural limitations that cannot be overcome. Two things I would ask XP fans: (a) How long do you expect Mozilla to support XP for? (b} When sites become incompatible with an XP-supported Firefox, what should Mozilla do then to satisfy you? These aren't slags or insults being thrown at you. I want to really know when is it OK for XP to be dead OS (for online applications and use)? Because one day, that will have to be accepted.

Good a New Moon 27 update for my mom's PC. They are still afflicted with that XP illness :p

Just read about this on Ghacks. Holy Jeepers, I'm starting to miss the Windows days of old, but I get that Microsoft is going in a new direction: Cloud Services, and Windows is simply one of many conduits to those services. So I guess the older Windows model isn't really representative of today.

Same here. But there were also prefs in about:config to do it. Also for the new tab page, I use the WebExtension called New Tab Tools

I thought the question was referring to the latest ESR being v60. I am using that version/ Quantum is quite nice and fast, I applaud Roytam1's efforts at extending the life of Pale Moon and classic Firefox on XP/Vista. But after disabling all of the telemetry and activity stream on Quantum. It runs nice. Very Nice!

Well it's nothing to do with bold and daring. I wouldn't install any rollups now, only because the Spectre and Meltdown mitigations are integrated. I really wonder if @NoelC's 8% slowdowns are because he's only disabled the mitigations, but they're still installed when being disabled. Not sure. I want to learn some day that I'll be able to utilize all of the security-only updates up until the current month, only skipping the April 2018 update (or whichever one has the mitigations), with virtually no performance hit. I'm not sure how I'll find out or confirm that, but we'll see.

Well I managed to get it working (or more accurately get Windows Updates set to be manual). HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\WindowsUpdate\Auto Update was the key I needed to edit. I set AUOptions to "1" and cached AUOprions also to "1". Updates won't be sought after automatically, but you can search manually. I also disabled Windows Defender completely since on an ARM tablet, they'll not likely run, and that really increases perfomance. I'm really enjoying this Surface tablet Am I actually the FIRST person to post anything about Windows RT? I wondered if the Windows 8 section was the correct area to post.

Hello! I've acquired a Surface RT tablet, which works quite nicely for what I'm considering using it for (mostly tablet use with Metro apps). I've learned that "officially", Automatic Updates cannot be defeated. Yes, I realize that I can turn off the Windows Update service, but I want to be able to be notified of updates, but choose when to download and install them. Apparently that is not an option. And using Group Policy to disable Automatic Updates is not compatible with Windows RT. Now a number of pages describe editing the registry by going to the key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\WindowsUpdate\Auto Update (I ihad to create the last two keys). Then there were two suggestions. Adding the REG_DWORDS "AUOptions" and "StopAutoUpdate" - setting both to "1". Still after a reboot, Windows Update is still set to download updates automatically. Has anyone any experience in trying to get this to work in RT? By the way, is the Windows 8 Forum the best spot to post RT questions?

You've given me a lot to think about over the last few months when it comes to updating. My system is running terrific right now, though I have to say, it's weird knowing that in a month from now, my newest update to the core OS will not have been issued since a year ago. I had planned to run Windows 8 for five years, since I could update it until October 2023. But yikes, should I leaved it at November 2017 update level for THAT long? Wow! But so far @NoelC, you seem to be on the money.

No I understand they were 27.9.1x (but that's what I meant is that they were beyond 27.9.4 level - that's fine) So I'm not running Pale/New Moon on my Windows 8 box. I was just curious for my mom's PC, and they're still on v27.x, so we're good there. I haven't seen a post for a new one since late August. Is that correct?

@roytam1I was trying to go back and find when your last Tycho build was. I recall you had one that was post v27.9.4, but were there any after that?

So next I was attacking automatic Defrag that shows up in Event Log. It completes a boot optimization, even though I disabled Automatic optmization. I use "My Defrag" anyway for boot optimization, so I disabled the "Optimize Drives" services. That should do it :) Knocking off these little bug-a-boos one step at a time :)

You're both right. So yes I removed the Custom Trigger. That allowed me to edit the properties of the Scheduled Start task. Then I removed the "One Time" event trigger. I saved the task, and then disabled it. Then I applied a Deny permission to the System Account on the file itself.

We have success. I have updated Windows Defender. and attempted running a manual update. BITS and Windows Update come on as needed, and then go back off eventually. Both services are set to Manual. But most importantly, the Scheduled Task entry never regenerates or starts. It has remained "Disabled" I want to thank everyone for their help. @UCyborg, @dencorso and @HarryTri, I appreciate all of your help.

Funny - I posted this question over at the DM Windows 8 forum. They're friggin' useless over there. Not even a single thread comment. Just in case you want to hear what crickets chirping sounds like: https://www.eightforums.com/threads/task-scheduler-cannot-remove-scheduled-start-task.78706/

I gave the SYSTEM account "Deny" access to the task file. So far, the task has remained disabled. Windows Defender does allow manual update checks. No updates since 8:25 am EST. And the Windows Updates service does start as needed.

Hmmmmmm - now we're cooking. I shall let you know!