Jody Thornton

I'm at work and we have two XP machines in use here. I tried using Windows Update and cannot. The Automatic Updates service is running. But the page won't render in Internet Explorer 8. Also getting to the Update Catalog in Firefox ESR appears to be problematic from these XP machines.

Sure they can. This has been practiced for years. Warranties expire. Terms and agreements expire. Where is this against the law? And so what that 15% uses it. What makes you specifically say it's FUD? That just baffles me. Even I agree that I'm on my own with Windows 8, but that's also a much newer, modern system.

And one other thing? Why is it not OK for Microsoft to say, "sorry we gave you 13 years of support, so now please let's move along". Why is that a bad thing? Microsoft needs to sell products to stay in business. So if they aren't going to patch on older OS, then it's vulnerable. It's not their responsibility to bail out companies that won't switch. And yet, we call that FUD here. No, it's just progress.

But how is this FUD though? This has now been demonstrated as a reality. I realize most here run POSReady 2019 updates, so that's good, but that's not most XP users (as you've mentioned)

I remember back when I was considering moving off of XP x64 to Vista, because I was worried about the lack of updates forthcoming. I took a lot of flack here because I wanted to continue speculating worst case scenarios if I stayed on XP x64 Edtion. Apparently, I was going on and on ad-nauseum and giving in to FUD. Well, this was the very type of situation I was worried about. I'm not sorry I was worried about it now, or that I was going on and on about. I feel a bit vindicated in my concerns today, and I think this really REALLY demonstrates why people shouldn't feel easy about running unsupported products. From what I'm reading, if there is no use of SMB or file sharing on a network, you're likely fine. If you have port 139 closed, then great. I have File and Printer Sharing removed. So, I think I'm overall pretty good. But it's at this moment I'm glad that XP is in my rear-view mirror.

Actually, I don't think (if you did updates) that 7, 8.1 or 10 are affected. I run Windows 8 RTM, and the update didn't install for me, only because it was previously patched on a Server 2012 update.

I'm surprised since it was said that the worm was targeting out of date systems. From what I understood, Windows 10 was not affected.

So what basically are the conditions to getting infected at home? I just have a DSL router/modem, and I'm wired directly.

You'll want to follow greenhillmaniac's instructions. Basically, I'll be installing Windows 8 updates until January 2016 (and remember there's an update you'll want to block because it nags you to update your version of Windows). After that, I'll go through all of my updates manually (which is nearly fourteen month's worth). Also yesterday's patch for the WannaCrypt issue, was not compatible with Windows 8, likely because the issue was previously patched from a Server 2012 update recently.

I was just thinking about that. Perhaps it can be adapted from XP's update.

Interestingly, even though there's a patch for Windows 8, there was already a patch installed from Server 2012 that adresses the same issue, so I guess I'm not affected.

Obviously a doozie. Patches provided by Microsoft for XP, Vista and Windows 8 https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/13/Microsoft-WindowsXP-WannaCrypt-NHS-patch/

Whew! Checked Help -> About in Windows Defender. It appears I'm good.

Thanks Dencorso. I'm not currently running Vista either, but I'm closely watching this

What is the final verdict on this? Can MSE be still used with Vista? I was sorta confused with all of the multiple threads going on ....lol

I think it uses the same current definitions as MSE or Defender, and does a system scan on your HDDs. It works fine on XP and above (at least it did last spring). Just a simple window with a progress bar.

That was especially good news. I'm getting a new machine to eventually transfer my Windows 8 license to. Makes me wonder if I want to put my Vista Ultimate x64 installation back on, and run it, until I get my new PC.

Posted the good news on the DM Vista Forum. Let's see if this brings that forum out of the doldrums. There were some naysayers regarding the ability to continue updating Vista.

Only KB4014577 did not install (likely because I don't have that .NET revision installed.) However, for the fifteenth month, we have lift off. Yay! Windows 8 updated for May 2017.

Woohoo! At least we have all of the Security updates. Sounds great! Hmmmm! Maybe I should go back to Vista - just for a short while ...lol

April showers bring May .... updates. It took awhile for KB4019214 (Security Only for 2012) to appear, but it's now on the Update Catalog. So are the IE 10 update (KB4018271), the Adobe Flash update (KB4020821), and the .NET updates (KB4014577, KB4014589, KB4014586, and KB4014597) for each version. I guess I'll just run the one I need for v4. Ahoy Mateys! Let's install and boot!

Has anyone attempted this today? Just curious.

So see? Isn't that just as "condescending" to someone who does engage in modern-day social media? But I don't see that statement as trolling. I wholeheartedly disagree with it, but Nomen should have the right to say it. This is precisely what I'm getting at. So why is it any different when I've expressed my views? I think it's an important point to make.

OK so Lone Crusader. Let's be friendly about it then shall we? That are many who are legit experts in the IT field that would not see calling Windows 9x being a "threat" to others online, an arrogant theory. IT experts would fired en masse if they ever recommended it in the business world. How is that arrogant? Just because you don't agree with it? And further more, I did use Windows 98 SE and ME extensively for many years, so I do indeed have authority to speak on it. The system does have its limitations. It's not a stable protected mode memory model. Those aren't lies Lone Crusader. Those are facts. If I really, genuinely thought something was a poor decision to do (as in running Win9x online), why can't that be expressed? If someone new came along and read this thread, I wouldn't want them to just read all good things about Windows 9x in 2017. People should have a fair and balanced view of all sides, including those who disagree with the bulk of the views here. Besides, many of you balk at Windows NT 6x systems. There's one fellow who calls Windows 10 the "terrorist edition". Really? I loathe Windows 10, and even I think that's ridiculous. So come on, everything should be fair game. Strong opinions are not equivalent to trolling. If you're just wanting everything to be all nicey-nicey to Windows 98 users, isn't that equally biased? There's no hate or anger being expressed on my part. Just strong opinion, and that never hurt anyone.

See Guys? I'm not the only one. I was never trolling. If you want to use Win9x to run older local software, go for it. I even use XP as a media jukebox. But I never put it online. And there was never anything wrong with saying so.