Jody Thornton

I went and bought two sealed Windows 8 Pro DVDs from a local IT support retailer. The first one was in November for $60.00 (as opposed to $80.00). And I went back to the same guy and purchased the second one just a few weeks ago for $50.00. I was able to talk him down more, by "emphasizing" he was still stuck with them, and no one wants Windows 8 anymore (except me).

Go to page 2 of this thread, and scroll halfway down. MY CPUs apparently lack the PREFETCHW instruction, and that disallows running the x64 version of Windows 8.1 and Windows 10. The CPUs were all launched prior to 2008 Plus, if you go to the Windows 8 Forums linked below, you'll see many had issues with the upgrade. I'm surprised this is news to so many. http://www.eightforums.com/installation-setup/33167-8-1-upgrades-says-wont-work-pentium-4-prescott-630-a-2.html

That's odd Noel, because you posted in that very thread back at Christmas time. Let me go find it. It was well known that many had hardware issues and could not upgrade to Windows 8.1

I'll go find it later. But yes, it's in there.... lol

Now that would be a fun game for another thread Noel. My wishlist OS ...lol.

Actually not exactly Harry Tri. I have come to prefer Windows 8 because of it lacks telemetry updates and GWX. However, it started out because I use a system that runs on a pair of Netburst (P4--style) Xeons. These CPUs lack some of the security components needed to run the x64 version of Windows 8.1. So at Windows 8 I must stay, or replace the system. But now that all of that telemetry crap and updating crap came to light. I do prefer Windows 8. So if and when I acquire a newer system, I will still use Windows 8. This was the thread (below) where I discovered all of this:

That's why i prefer Windows 8 and Vista. They seem to roll beneath Microsoft's radar, but yet Windows 8 stll has a healthy measure of compatibility with modern-day applications. Vista still tends to run what I want.

Haaaaa! Now there's a clever response (but more true than I might think ...lol)

Now that I have to try. I do like the Windows 8 flat look, but no Metro AT ALL is quite tempting.

Where can I find out more about using the Windows 7 explorer.exe process? Basically I just use a Windows 7 shell on 8?

For me I posted my findings in my "2012 updates" thread sometime back, but here goes: If you aren't using Metro/Modern apps or the new UI, basically all of the Windows 8.1 improvements are for nigh. Aside from some extra parameters in the DISM command used to clean the Component Store, there isn't much change to the Explorer-based section of Windows. I can run all of the same applications in Windows 8 as I can for Windows 8.1. Classic Shell allows me the same benefits in Windows 8 of booting directly to the desktop with a Start Menu. And even if I were to use Windows 8.1, I'd still be installing Classic Shell. Plus I can conceal all of the Metro-esque stuff quite nicely. No Telemetry: since Windows 8 is not eligible for the Windows 10 upgrade. Even though GWX woes have passed, I didn't get bombarded with that nonsense either. I can run Windows 8 x64 builds on older, but still reasonably fast processors, like my twin P4-style Xeons. My system cannot run the x64 builds of Windows 8.1. There are oh-so slight extra security requirements. Hope that helps Arnold!

Hi Folks: I was searching to see if there was a 4.9 release of Windows Defender for 8x and 10. I received some "credible-looking" results from the PC Mag site. But there was no direct link for a client download on Microsoft's site. For those running Windows Defender on Windows 8.1, what is the latest revision you're running now?

Well, Windows 8 will definitely be "excluded". I guess what we mean to say is one of two things. Let's hope that Windows Server 2012 (classic) gets either: (a) rollup security and .NET updates -OR- (b) continued access to individual updates ... in both cases, let's hope we can apply them to Windows 8. Now bringing up Vista, I am going to research whether or not there is any software, web-based or locally installed, that allow me to NetFile my tax returns on Vista next year (apparently the is a new security protocol required in Microsoft's TCP/IP stack that is required by the Canada Revenue Agency to permit this, which is ONLY included in Windows 7 or higher. That's what prompted my move to Windows 8 in December. But if there is software that works on thw web with Vista, well that opens up my options. Should this good fortune of applying updates to post-supported Windows 8 collapse, I might just return to Vista x64. Using Server 2008 updates, we should be able to give Vista the same royal treatment after April 2017 that we gave Windows 8. That would provide "support" until January 2020. Besides everything else that I want to run would work in Vista.

Well no worries. What we DO know is that Server 2012 WILL get these rollups. So the question is, can these rollups be applied to Windows 8? October will tell us.

Speaking of this, you might want to read my post on Windows Update changes for Windows 7 and 8.1, on this page

You folks might just want to read this: https://sur.ly/o/blogs.technet.microsoft.com/windowsitpro%2F2016%2F08%2F15%2Ffurther-simplifying-servicing-model-for-windows-7-and-windows-8-1%2F/AA010667 Now while I'm sure that this may be viewed negatively, I can see a benefit here. I can simply download Server 2012 update rollups for Security and .NET Frameworks (it targets all installed versions) and then just manually install those on to my Windows 8 system. Just two rollup updates a month. That's provided of course they don't introduce checks to make sure I'm running Windows Server 2012. That would stink. Also for Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 users, it means you can no longer disect the telemetry updates. That's crappy. The latter issue doesn't affect me, but still you would have my sympathies. Now I wonder what the difference is between security-only rollups and the regular cumulative rollup offered by Windows Updates? What is missing in the security-only updates? Since Windows 7 and 8.1 (I think) are both now in extended-phase support, would they not be both only receiving security updates and no new features?

Haaaaaaaaaaa!

My dual Xeons are 3.6 GHz P4-style CPUs. Even my Ram is slow DDR2 memory. But I have 7 GB of it, so the system works well. Going on ten years old now, and I've had my system for six years.

Yes - and even that doesn't quite make sense. In the end POSReady updates can be applied to XP Home

One thing now is that there really isn't a workable 64-bit option for browsing on XP x64 Edition. I used an unofficial SeaMonkey build for awhile from 2011 to 2013. The builds that are available now target Windows 7 or higher because of the Visual Studio version that they use. The developer could easily put in an XP compatibility flag prior to compiling his code, but won't. Note that even Vista is out of the running here. There was a chromium browser who's 64-bit build still worked, but it appears that will be short-lived. The x64 build of Pale Moon for XP bit the dust a year ago. Also note this one for Pale Moon, because it's a BIGGIE. Once v27 rolls around, the Atom version will be discontinued, and no current version of Pale Moon will be operational on XP any more. For now, Firefox works (personally I detest Australis, but it does run well at work)

So submix8c, would the POS Ready trick be back news for Home Edtion too? See I never realized that.

Now KB3172729 did not install on my system (likely because I have Secure Boot not enabled on my system). However all of the other updates installed with aplomb. That makes it seven months of post-support updates for Windows 8.

So I will be installing the following updates for Server 2012 on to my Windows 8 installation: KB3172729, KB3175887, KB3177108, KB3177725, KB3178034 Plus this update for Internet Explorer 10: KB3175443 Rebooting now ...... in 3 , 2 , 1 ......

Awww - How dare I forget my duties LOL. I forgot that I had an important MSFN assignment due. (no worries: greenhillmaniac called me into his office and gave me royal ca-ca. I was told that if I got to work right away on this Windows Update thingy, he and will be able to (wait for it ....) "patch" things up (har har) I'll get to it in a few minutes.

I have an old HP DC5100 of similar specs, except it has 1 GB of RAM installed. XP was on it, so I just updated it with the unofficial SP4, stripped out the .NET stuff, and put an automated radio station software on it. I hooked up an FM transmitter, disconnected the Internet, and it's good to go. Despite XP being a tad outmoded, the Internet should still be within grasp on such a machine. What do you consider it poor at running?