Jody Thornton

But what good is it to Opera Software, if they have now shifted to WebKit?

Signed!

Actually I tried installing v10.10 on my work PC (XP sp3). A few things don't work, but Facebook does. Google and Duck Duck Go search has some misalligned graphics.

So how compatible with the modern web (HTML5, etc...) is Opera 9x and 10x? (I liked v10.10). Is it good enough to get around in?

I use v9.20 on XP and Vista. It works with RAR format too, so now I don't even install WinRAR. Wow, so it works on 9x/Me too.

I find good results on x64 systems with Auslogics, but just don't click on any of the "System Scan" or "Upgrade" links. As a utility it cleans well, but not too abrasively.. Then I just use Ccleaner. I always backup the changes it makes first. Never, EVER, EVER user RegSeeker. Albeit terrific in the 2000/XP days when you wanted to search out that last remaining remnant of a program, you can seriously damage an x64 system since it doesn't understand the tree underneath Wow6432Node. I also use NT RegOpt as a registry compressor. There have been times where I've noticed a slight improvement, but not often. For the most part, I wonder if registry cleaners bring about THAT much improvement over and above the risk you take with such apps.

Just a curiosity. Does 7-Zip have compatible versions, or is that just unicode/NT? And are those AVG versions still able to be updated?

I don't know (I have mixed views on this). On the side of Microsoft, I can see them saying from a marketing perspective, "Look folks, Windows XP no longer represents what Windows is in 2014. In fact Vista and Windows 7 no longer convey that image. When you think Windows, we want you to imagine a tablet-firendly, compatible OS that can run your existing modern or desktop applications. XP is not in line with that." And since you are licensed the use of the OS, cannot Microsoft take that away as they feel? If they own XP, don't they have the right to say, "Stop using it please?", so should they not be allowed to kill activation? However, on the side of the user, Windows 2000 users have been already going through what XP users face since 2010. Why is this such a new phoenomenon with XP (Activation concerns aside).?

See I'd be tempted to go back to say, Win 98SE or Win ME on a second system if only I could get modern browser support on it. I can still use Seamonkey v2.9 on Windows 2000 but that's more of a security risk. How do you find getting hardware support on those old OSs? Can you use any moden equipment?

But running a scan on a Windows partition from another OS won't necessarily pick up security holes or exploits in the OS kernel that are an issue while Windows is booted. Security holes are not just trojans or files or virusses. There are other system exploits too. By the way, who currently supports hybrid Windows systems (9x/Me)? ClamWin? Yikes - too many false positives there. I like MSE better than I like ClamWin....lol. Would you still really want to use dated versions of Avast or Spybot, just because they get definitiion updates? I dunno. They can't as effectively utilize what's in the definitions. That's why they update the apps themselves. I just want to be able to use Windows as a comprehensive single working unit. I want to boot Windows, run my apps, browse in a secure compatible envirionment (using HTML5, modern technologes), have a scanner that stays out of the way like MSE, and then fugettaboutit! LOL Until next month I could still do that with XP. After that, if I were to keep running XP x64 Edition, I'd have to find a way to kludge the updates from Server 2003 x64 and apply them, and eventually SeaMonkey and Firefox will stop providing updates to XP, so there will be no current browsers to traverse a modern web with. Whereas, with Vista, I can go back to just using my system. There. Done!

Hmmm I understood that, while it may be supported, there are not going to be post April 2014 updates on POSReady2009. Isn't that correct?

I have just finished doing such a migration after months of preparation and asking questions (which I'm sure annoyed some people here and elsewhere, yet I will make no apologies for it). However I have migrated from Windows XP x64 Edition to Vista Ultimate x64 Edition. My hardware consists of an HP xw8200 Workstation with the following specs: Two Xeon 3.68 GHZ CPUs Two CSI Logic Ultra 320 SCSI Controllers each with a 73 GB 10,000 rpm disk attached An nVidia GeForce 3200 PCI display adapter (my weak link bottleneck but it suits a workstation just fine, and that's what I had on hand) 7 GB ECC DDR2 400 Memory Integrated audio, LAN and Sata (original) driving a DVD Burner I found that initially there were some video issues (acceleration problems and artifacts), but I have sorted those out Keep in mind that I DID NOT have the video issues with a lesser PCI card that the system came with which is an nVidia GeForce MX 4000, when I performed a test installation of Vista last year. I no longer have that card though. Overall, I have Vista running quite quickly. Now I've vLited out certain features like Indexing (I'd rather have those resources back and I don't mind the odd search taking longer), and I've turned off SuperFetch which I found contributed to slightly sluggish performance (but I do have conventional Prefetch running quite briskly). I have to admit that I really miss XP x64 Edition. It ran sooooooooo well. I only migrated for extended phase supoort updates. Many here think I am making too much of that factor, but I don't think that running an unsupported Windows version for heavy Internet use and everyday work is too wise. So I moved along. And sooner or later, I won't be able to run an updated browser or security browser. In all, Vista is working well enough that I'll srtick with it.

I like Kingsoft Office 2012. You get EXCELLENT Office comaptibility (especially on DocX and XlsM files) and you can choose between traditional and Ribbon interfaces.

So here's how I solved this issue (at least to to my satisfaction.) I downloaded (upon advice to someone else posted on an old forum) the 81.38 nVidia Forceware (I think that was the version number). It contained an x64 driver for the GeForce 6200 for Windows XP x64 Edition from 2005. I had my doubts, but sure enough!.............. .................. It worked! The video redraws flawlessly with no hesitation, jerkiness, or delay. It detects the OS as Longhorn. There are a couple of catches (none of them that directly affect me however) - a - No Aero support (I wanted Windows Basic anyway) - b - Don't try running the Performance Index (WEI) application. You'll get a BSOD. D'oh! - c - The Square boxes in Ccleaner have an odd black shadow behind them. But that's no biggie. So it appears my problems are solved for GOOD! Thanks everyone for your help!

With all due respect to tomasz86, but sorry dencorso; tomasz86 does kind of make it sound as if 2KPro updates are easier to find than we would have let on. The way he says it, or implies it, I would have thought there had been more updates too. I can't help but feel though that the bulk of users here think that my concerns about security on unsupported Windows OSs are silly ones. Why is that? I know I've repeatedly brought up the topic ad-nauseam - HOWEVER; one thing I have learned is to keep asking similar questions again and again, because sometimes that is the ONLY way to get absolute clarity on things. That's why it seems I bring up the same topic on different angles. I believe in dotting I's and crossing T's when doing fact checking. And you only can do that by challenging opinions and "facts".

I actually found the last ones but they were just for IE6 SP1 (I think it was Novemeber 2012). So they're there. This isn't something Microsoft should keep close to it's chest though. This should be something that's well known. Additionally, there should have been way more updates if this were a comprhensive set of hotfixes. Being that XP and 2KPro share a wealth of similarities, you'd figure that the same vulnerabilities would need patching. A couple of posts ago, I was told that I seemed unable to be reassured that running an unsupported OS would be safe. One thought that occurred to me since that time tomasz86. Do you still perform online banking and other secure stuff online with Windows 2000?

Windows 9x/Me were the last operating environments that I needed to ever do that with. Most NT class operating systems usually can stay up and running for three weeks plus, maybe even lots longer. I only restart after Patch Tuesday.

That's a good song. I am enjoying some 2009 memories from La Roux. "Bulletproof" reminds me of Depeche Mode. Great song!

I find it hard to gather from the website. Is ClearOS an xNix type system? What is it based on? When it says it's web-based, do they mean akin to ChromeOS?

Never mind. I didn't see that tomasz86 typed "last year" as the final updates for Windows 2000. I should find them now.

No that's precisely what I didn't see. That's exactly what I looking for. I extracted a few ISOs and most of them were for Server 2008, Windows 7 and a couple XP if I remember. None the matter, I just wondered how you were recognizing Win2KPro updates if they weren't labelled as such.

So I checked out the links you gave me, and I even went back through the archives (I have visited there before). How in heck do you validate that there are any Windows 2000 updates there without it being specified on the site? It only appears to be supported Windows versions listed. How do you find your Windows 2000 updates then?

I appreciate your views (however it seems you appear to think of Microsoft warnings as instilling fear, while I guess I take them more legitimately). In fairness, you actually cannot "guarantee" that everything will be fine in an unsupported environment, it's just (as you stated) your opinion. And while I don't agree that the OS is key to a security solution, I do think it plays a substantial role. I never got the impression either that I'm the only one here who has concerns or even an interest in running unsupported OSs. I have plenty that agree with me about the view of security through obscurity (as in I don't agree with that premise), so I will be very interested in this topic for some time to come. By the way, how many reponses do you see in this thread? They're not all mine, so I am certainly not alone in my concerns. Besides, I've already moved to Vista. But it doesn't mean I cannot maintain an interest from the "other side of the fence" so to speak. I do wonder how XP users will fare in a few months (despite your opinion, which I do respect by the way), and I thought Win2K users might be able to shed a light on it from their experiences. Again just interested. Cheers my firend! Jody

Bump! Can we do that? Also I wondered if anyone out there still running Windows 2000 Professional in 2014 can chime in on a related topic. You folks have been running an unsupported OS for nearly four years, and it's VERY SIMILAR to Windows XP Professional (sans Visual Styles, Firewall, WLAN Support, and Clear Type Font Smoothing). Since Windows 2000 is so similar, perhaps we can get a glimpse into the future and see how they fare running Windows 2000 unsupported. That may tell us what to expect by choosing to run XP unsupported without updates. Have the 2000 bunch ran into security issues running 2000 as a primary OS? This is important because before now, most people running an unsupported Windows OS were running some 9x flavour. Windows NT 3x and 4x never amassed mainstream use and lack too many now needed features like USB. So this will really be the first time that MOST people running unsupported Windows OS, will be running an NT based build.

Well I appreciate the help JorgeA. The ATI card has been stable in the PCI-E slot. What I did differently this time was enable the option ROM on the PCI-E slot. It wasn't before. Maybe that's stopping the crashes. But the display artifacts have disappeared. And I have all 7 gb of RAM accessible.