NoelC

What I meant was that with a local account, I was still able to use such Apps as Feedback by starting them, then responding to the "you need to log in" by carefully following the prompts and logging in to my Microsoft account only for the duration of that application. You have to be careful not to follow the path of "convert my account to a Microsoft account", which will change the local login to a cloud account. This is doable but you have to learn the terms. Oh, and I misspoke a bit... I've just learned, by testing, that you CAN use System Restore to return your system to a local account after having converted, BUT... They don't make a restore point for you automatically before the account conversion (nice, eh?). You have to do so yourself, or be lucky to have installed a desktop application that caused one to be created, or have a nightly backup process that makes one. -Noel

Tarun, if you're unwilling to debate using a hosts file in the thread I've started on the subject, then I suggest it is inappropriate to counter my suggestions here with language intended to discredit them. If you can't back up your claims with real information then your claims cannot be justified. I have provided both the theory and the measurements that say the hosts file is both effective and does not cause undue overhead. In this particular case, I further assert that the advice I gave in the original post of the thread I linked above quite likely would have prevented Browncoat's infection. And, further, if such infection was introduced by his running a download despite recommendations to test in an isolated environment, the hosts file would serve to block subsequent attempts to send sensitive information to those servers. -Noel

Sorry, fgrep is a tool I get from the Gnu Toolkit. That doesn't come with Windows. The MVPS hosts file I mentioned is obtained here: http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm The intent is to redirect URLs to known parasite/badware/adware web sites to an IP address that cannot work. I do not suggest disabling the DNS Client service. Adding those entries to your hosts file could block further infections. It seems to me there are/were problems with using 127.0.0.1 instead of 0.0.0.0 though I've forgotten what they are. -Noel

While I STRONGLY agree that no one should ask you for your password - nor should you give it out - on the other hand, your IT guy might perceive a refusal as an attempt to make his life difficult. Thing is, he has FAR MORE capability to make yours more difficult. So be very polite and say that you're embarrassed at what it says or something to throw him off guard. And be prepared for the eventuality that you might end up in a hard place for a little while as a result of refusing to give it out. Just to add another 2 cents to back up Tarun's good advice above, imagine if an IT guy wanted to make your life really miserable. He could log on as you, using your password, and do something disruptive. All indications would be that YOU did it. -Noel

For what it's worth - and I know this doesn't help after the fact - a couple of URLS for that domain are blocked by the MVPS hosts file. See also: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/173660-anti-malware-suggestions/ -Noel

Thanks for your response, GrofLuigi. I'm not sure what's different about our systems, but on mine attempts to access 0.0.0.0 are aborted immediately. There's no timing out. At one time I had Subversion Server running on this system, so I thought maybe that was causing the immediate kill of such requests, but that's gone now and I'm certainly not seeing anything that could be called a timeout. Thing is, not only is having a big blacklist hosts file like this without practical downside on a modern system, this is such a good way to block parasite web sites (not to mention ads) that it's worth working through however many arguments people make against it. -Noel

I have VMware workstation and the ability to create virtual machines, so I test Win 10 virtually. This has the advantage of my being able to continue to use my workstation with the OS I have now (8.1) and be able to test when it's convenient. It also allows me to throw away or revert an installation in an eyeblink. With the release of build 10074 things got interesting. -- Initially I installed Windows 10 build 10074 afresh with a local account. The ability to do so is there, but all but hidden in plain sight and behind misleading nomenclature. First I tested with a local account and UAC enabled (but turned all the way down via the UI). I was able to verify that all the software development and other tools I use are available to me, and it actually seems to be quite possible to make the desktop into something usable. There are ongoing niggling irritations with UAC, and you occasionally have to dodge "convert to a Microsoft account" prompts and find the "log this application in only" type capabilities. Summary: Irritating ongoing UAC prompts that can't be averted, some things that ought to be direct need UAC workarounds, but all in all it's usable. No problems running Modern Apps, signing in as necessary. -- Then I continued testing with the local account and UAC fully disabled (i.e., with EnableLUA set to 0 in the registry). That had the obvious effect of disallowing the running of Modern Apps, and had the upside that it really does give you admin privileges full time - but it also came with a few quirks, such a bit longer bootup/login time (I suspect something couldn't run and the system had to time out waiting for it), as well as some things that ought to work (e.g., a direct link to Windows Update) not actually working. But I *could* get to the Modern control panel replacement, and the system was usable, especially for someone who's used Windows 8.1 that way up to now (as I have been doing). Summary: No UAC irritation, No Modern Apps, minimal amount of processes running. -- Finally, I re-enabled UAC, booted up, and went through the "Convert to a Microsoft Account" process, which was utterly painless (I guess that shouldn't be surprising - it's what Microsoft has no doubt tested the most). Everything I had already set up just continued to work. Not terribly different than the first case, above, except that to use the Feedback App or whatever App I don't need to separately log in. In this mode I tried out Cortana (which unfortunately I had neglected to do in step 1 above), and found it to be just about as disappointing as I thought it would be. There's simply nothing I can't do with Google in an IE window. Summary: UAC irritations return, Modern Apps work more seamlessly, but not practically better than using a local account for the minimal amount of App running I need. There's no going back to a local account once this step has been taken, though! -- The plan for my main workstation, knowing what I know now and if not much changes in Windows 10 Since I have yet to find a Modern App that does anything for me that I really need, I think once Win 10 is released and if it proves to be stable I'll do a fresh, clean install and set up with a local account, then immediately switch off UAC. This is the least irritating to use, and will minimize the influences of both the Modern side - even though running Apps in windows is a step in the right direction there's still no Apps worth running - and it will also avoid the potential downsides of full cloud integration. If I want to see how the state of the art in Modern Apps looks from time to time I'll be able to run a virtual machine (as I do now with VMware) and check there. Should anything show up that becomes a "must have", I can either switch UAC back on (keeping the local account) and try to get used to my system second guessing me, or ultimately switch to a cloud account. I was rather happy to find that all the software I need works fine in all three of these scenarios. -Noel

Hm, I wonder if anyone's managed to install Windows 10 TP in the free VMware Player... I haven't run it that way; I have the pay-for VMware Workstation, under that it runs solidly. -Noel

Microsoft provides a free download that creates an XP virtual machine. The intent is to provide a somewhat integrated environment to run old software that can't be run in Windows x64 or on a modern OS - just the situation you're in. It adds a fair bit of overhead to your system (essentially it's running a whole virtual XP system behind the scenes), so unfortunately it won't be as quick to run as if your application were running natively. You're lucky you're on Windows. Old software becomes obsolete and unrunnable in a MUCH shorter time on Mac. -Noel

Possibly old news, but info straight from the horse's... mouth that Windows 10 will not wipe the slate clean for folks who do not have a legitimate Windows 8.x or 7 license... http://www.windows10update.com/2015/05/microsoft-emphasize-the-need-to-have-a-genuine-windows-license/ One thing I find interesting is this bit of speculation... So here I am... I never, ever upgrade, I always buy a full new license for each new Windows release (e.g. for the advantages of being able to install afresh from media, for being able to reinstall without jumping through hoops). Will I be paying more than someone who's currently got a pirated copy of Windows? -Noel

Clearly you need a Surface tablet that just happens to be able to replace your laptop. Windows USED to be about multitasking using multiple windows. The name is "Windows". But now it's best to do just one thing at a time. Microsoft USED to be a software company. Their name has "soft" in it. That reminds me... Does Microsoft sell cell phone service? I'm sure they will... -Noel

To be fair, it takes especially well engineered software to be able to run properly in an environment where some things change, and some other changes are blocked. That's a ticking time bomb in all practical senses. I sense not a lot of especially well engineered software in Windows. What's funny is at the same time Microsoft has been SAYING that they're embarking on a new approach to OS functionality where things are purely modular, so they can be updated independently from other things, and this constant roll out of small changes can be accomplished. Isn't it clear that Microsoft doesn't think they're going to lose any business? They firmly believe everyone's alternative to running the new Windows is to run the old Windows, which they will make more and more difficult. Monopoly mentality trumps all. Edit: I find it interesting that right at this time - the first time in history that *I've* chosen to hide several optional updates (the ones that will shill upgrading to Win 10) - Microsoft is embarking on making doing just that impossible going forward. I'm reminded of the ancient show, "The Outer Limits". "Do not attempt to adjust your set. We have control..." -Noel

I noticed - after having "upgraded" it. The "non-discoverable" interface did me in for a while when I needed to find out how to rotate pages. Turns out a bit of text that says "Tools" on the screen over to the right is a "button" from which a menu drops. The function is nowhere in the standard menus. And the menu is captive inside the application. This kind of thing has changed computing from doing things intuitively, to having to think about HOW to do things. That may be okay for people who do things that don't stretch their abilities, but for those who derive value from working at or near their mental limits this chaotic user interface, where essentially you have to train for each app using external influences (e.g., a help file in my case), is setting the state of the art back. Try to talk about this with pretty much any younger person and they'll label you a "hater" and "dinosaur". -Noel

Microsoft made it impossible to run 16 bit software on their 64 bit systems. What does the application do for you? Is it strictly a dictionary lookup program? If so, are you online all the time? Maybe you could use http://dictionary.reference.com or a similar site? Alternatively, does the original author offer a version that's compatible with modern operating systems? -Noel

Good idea, buying an off-cutting-edge workstation. That's what I do as well. I have no specific experience with HP workstations, but I have Win 8.1 x64 Pro upgraded to MCE on a Dell Precision T5500 workstation (same general genre but I prefer Dell to HP) and it works great. This system has dual Xeon x5690s, and just BIOS - no UEFI capability. I had to do nothing special to install Windows on it, which I did from a Win 8.1 DVD back at the end of 2013. I'd suggest that if you're going to invest in a workstation that you put some budget aside for some big SSDs and don't even consider booting from an HDD. Ideally, make a RAID 0 array of them and run everything from it - OS, swap, scratch, applications, and data. That's what I do and it yields an unbelievably interactive experience. Everything happens pretty much instantly and it's difficult to load up a system like this with so much work as to even notice the slightest slowdown. Try to get the workstation cheap with a junk video card (outdated workstation cards are generally not that good), and get a new low- to mid-range "gamer" video card, such as an ATI R9 270 or nVidia GTX 960 for a couple hundred dollars. -Noel

Change the name of license.key to donation.key and it will work. -Noel

Look in your debug.log, extract the part I did, and post it here. -Noel

Big Muscle, I also see this: [2015-05-15 23:27:01][0x8E4:0x1F34] Aero Glass for Win8.1 v1.3.1 x64 correctly loaded (C:\BIN\DWMGlass.dll). [2015-05-15 23:27:01][0x8E4:0x215C] DBGHELP: Symbol Search Path: .;SRV*C:\BIN\symbols*http://msdl.microsoft.com/download/symbols [2015-05-15 23:27:01][0x8E4:0x215C] dwmcore.dll version 6.3.9600.17795 [2015-05-15 23:27:01][0x8E4:0x215C] udwm.dll version 6.3.9600.17415 [2015-05-15 23:27:01][0x8E4:0x215C] Symbols loaded from patterns: 0x7FF -Noel

Specular, did you read the post just above yours? -Noel

I think the real issue is that he's related to someone inside Microsoft, and his posts are all biased toward fanboyism. -Noel

Not intending to minimize the information from the others in any way, but just wanted to mention that Classic Shell brings several other improvements to the party that may be interesting to someone transitioning from XP to Win 7... It does several very nice things for Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer... For example, it can be used to make Windows Explorer display more information, as well as work around some shortcomings with the navigation pane. By more information, I mean you can have it space the items together vertically more closely, as well as replace the standard Status Bar. It also works around some long-standing screen update issues with Explorer. One of my favorite things is that it will turn the content of the Address Bar in Explorer back into a real path, instead of the Bread Crumbs Microsoft introduced without option. Classic Shell even adds an optional toolbar, if you like that (I don't use that particular feature personally). With Internet Explorer it can be employed to force a display of the web page title in the title bar and also provide more information in the Status Bar such as zone and a progress bar. I think the best part of it is that ALL of its features are configurable options. Exactly what Microsoft is taking away. By the way, another good tool for reconfiguring parts of Explorer, which is nicely complementary to Classic Shell, is called "Folder Options X". That one can be used to improve the spacing in the the Files pane. -Noel

Drew1903 is a real missing link. -Noel

That's a PUP. And it's obvious why it should be blocked. -Noel

-Noel

Perhaps not for Win 8.1 until now... I have kept my system up to date, and the last set went in just 2 days ago. -Noel