WinClient5270

Goodness, the list is getting quite long now! Added those to the list, and as usual, thanks for the information.

Speaking of that, I took a look at the update .MSU files for Powershell 3.0 for Windows Server 2008 and Powershell 2.0 for Windows Vista by extracting them with 7zip. I got two .CAB files for each update, along with an .XML file in each. Here's a screenshot of the .XML files from each update opened in Slimjet side-by-side for comparison: http://prntscr.com/er0kug If you look closely, the build number specified for each OS is different. My guess is that Microsoft used this to differentiate between Client (WinVista) and Server (Win2k8) when releasing updates for each OS to prevent installation of Server-only updates on Client and vice versa. If this is also the case with security-only updates released for Server 2008 post April 2017, Server 2008 updates more than likely won't work under Vista and will require modification of the .MSU/.CAB files (assuming someone here knows how/is willing to do that...) and even then, I'd imagine it would be a huge pain in the neck to have to perform that for each individual update... Taking this information into account, the future of Windows Vista doesn't seem too bright. We can only hope...

Thank you once again Werewolf for the very detailed and informative additions! Added 'em to the list as per usual

Which updates in specific did you try? I believe that security updates will work, but anything beyond that might not... There are a few Server 2008-exclusive updates that don't work on Vista, such as Powershell 3.0 for Server 2008, and there's a whole separate version of the Platform Update for Server 2008 that won't install under Vista (not applicable to your OS). Also, Microsoft Security Essentials doesn't show any EOL-warning prompts under Server 2008 as it does under Vista, so I'd say that the situation may not be 100% parallel to the Server 2012/Win8 situation... It all depends on if MS utilizes version/edition checking in the .msu files, and I won't be surprised if that is the case. If so, Vista users might be out of luck

If you could do that (if the updates work in Vista), it would be much appreciated! My internet upload speed sucks, so... Thanks, lol.

I used Vista until I built an Intel Haswell-based machine, and that caused me to have to stop using it as my primary OS... For whatever reason, Vista totally bugs out when attempting to use the OS on Haswell and newer architectures from Intel, with all kinds of weird symptoms like random services failing to start, intermittent failed boot attempts (Interactive logon process initialization has failed), and the decline in third party application support wasn't helping either. I do keep Vista on my AMD FX 8320 based system, and it works flawlessly there (dualbooted with Server 2003 R2). I'm actually curious to know how Vista would handle running on AMD's new Ryzen architecture, but I don't have access to such hardware at the moment so I'm not able to test it. I actually quite enjoy running 8.1 here though - I have it tweaked to my preference with a nice looking Vista UI and the system runs fast and stable. 8.1's UI is annoying out of the box, but Classic Shell fixes that. It's easy to customize and tweak, and I feel like I'm in control of my system. I can't say I'd feel the same if I were running Windows 10, though... XPclient's brilliant rant should tell you all you need to know about Windows 10 As for getting Server 2008 updates installed on Vista, I think it's possible. However, perhaps using WSUS Offline to download the Server 2008 updates would be a better solution than trying to "trick" Windows Update into fetching for Server 2008 updates. @JodyT uses it to download Server 2012 updates for his Windows 8.0 RTM system, or at least at one point he did before @greenhillmaniac created a convenient update repository on MEGA. I might try creating something like that, assuming Server 2008 updates actually do work on Vista... here's hoping...

You're probably right about that... Vista does have the advantage of being of the same kernel revision as Windows 7, 8.x, and 10, however, making it an easier target platform to develop for... We'll just have to wait and see. Yep... This is a problem that Windows 9x users are running into at the moment I believe. I'm pretty sure Windows 2000 (with @blackwingcat's extended kernel) will run Firefox 52.x ESR though, which is pretty interesting. Without the community's help though, Windows 2000 would still be stuck at Firefox 10.x ESR/Firefox 12.x, and I'm afraid Vista will probably hit that same wall (with Firefox 52.x) and will remain stuck there, perhaps for good... Yes, that is true. However, it'd be nice to have an "all-in-one" solution like a Service Pack or rollup. Wouldn't it still most likely reduce the time needed to get a Vista system up-to-date compared to what we have now? I've also had an issue with Vista where the Windows Update service hangs (at random) while trying to use WSUS to install the updates , and I have to end up stopping WSUS, manually restarting the Windows Update service, and then running WSUS again to get the updates to continue installing, otherwise the update installation window hangs at "Searching for updates...". It could be a problem with just my system, but it's still annoying nonetheless. WSUS is still a great solution though, and definitely beats dealing with Microsoft's total careless and negligent attitude towards Vista. ...In other news, the topic just hit 10K views! Good to know that people are getting use out of the list.

That's great to know! I hope MS decides to keep MSE support afloat on Server 2008 up until at least 2020... This is a good indicator of that happening. Thanks for testing this!

Thank you for all your additions and links! Added them to the list, of course. Too bad there aren't any more ONG browsers to add... If you ask me, the all-around best browser for Vista at the moment would be Pale Moon. It's based on Firefox, but is totally independent of any decisions/code changes that Mozilla makes, so it's exempt from the recent decision to pull the plug on XP and Vista support. The UI is also much more pleasant than the australis UI in modern versions of Firefox. I spoke with the head developer around a year ago, and he had no reason to drop support for Vista, but if you ask me, they did sort of mistreat XP users by totally dropping support - before even Mozilla. However, one could argue that XP is a totally different platform to develop for vs. Vista+, so it does make sense (at the application level) to keep supporting Vista over XP, but I think they should've at least waited until Mozilla dropped support and perhaps provided some sort of "security updates only" solution for XP users (much like Mozilla, Opera, and Slimjet has). But I do respect them for continuing to support Windows Vista and hope they support it for as long as they're able. If you want/need Chromium, Opera 36.x and Slimjet 10.x are great options, as each continue to receive security updates and support modern web standards just as well as the latest versions. Slimjet 10.x actually has features that are lacking in newer Chromium versions, such as support for Java, silverlight and all those NPAPI plugins... The only issue is, some sites are starting to drop support for Chromium 50.x (which SJ 10 is based on), but Slimjet 12.x (based on Chromium 53) should help with that, at least for a period of time. Like I said before, I expect Vista to become about as usable as vanilla Windows 2000 within the next 5 years, unfortunately. I highly doubt anyone is going to create "unofficial" updates to help with compatibility, due to the sheer fact that Vista is so hated. Hell, even an unofficial Service Pack 3 containing all Vista updates released since SP2 (2009) would be very convenient so we could skip having to run Windows Update a million times and spending countless hours dealing with the broken mess that it has become, but I don't see it happening any time soon... I just don't have the knowledge to take on such a project myself, or I would make it happen

Sorry, I should've made this part more clear... 1. Download the Adobe Reader DC distribution installer from here: https://get.adobe.com/reader/enterprise/ 2. Once downloaded, the file will come in .exe format. Extract the .exe file with 7zip or whatever extractor you use. After doing so, you should be able to access the .MSI files. 3. Modify AcroRead.msi with Orca, following what @jumper said to do, and it should work. The last version I could get working on Windows Vista with @smeezekitty's wrappers was Reader DC version 2015.007.20033... Since you're more experienced at this kind of stuff than I, you may have better luck.

Oops! I felt like I was forgetting something... Fixed that! That's unfortunate to hear about WSUS offline... Added to the list in a new (Third party system utilities) section. I also thought to put in the last version of Classic Shell for Vista, too. Thanks again for your help! A side note... the amount of (ongoing) supported browsers on Windows Vista is getting shorter too, sadly

My goodness; thank you for all of those additions, and welcome to MSFN! Added all of those to the list (or at least I think so, lol)

As indicated on the website you posted, the drives come pre-formatted with the exFAT file system, which Windows Vista does support. Also, the drives come with the WD Backup, WD Security, and WD Drive Utilities applications, and according to these links, Windows Vista is currently supported under the latest version of each piece of software: (WD Backup): http://support.wdc.com/downloads.aspx?p=249 (WD Security): http://support.wdc.com/downloads.aspx?p=172 (WD Drive Utilities): http://support.wdc.com/downloads.aspx?p=171 Taking all of this into account, I'd say the drives will work just fine with Vista. Good luck!

Sort of a late response, but thanks for the additions. Added them to the list. Similarly to Autodesk AutoCAD 2013/2014, I'm wondering if the 2013 suite of applications that you mentioned will also run on Vista by running the software in Windows XP compatibility mode. I'm willing to bet that it would, but I'm not able to test that software as I don't own it.

I'm sure it's very difficult, and perhaps a "KernelEx" type of project would be a better solution for Windows Vista. But even then, I don't expect anyone to take on that project any time soon. Agreed about Microsoft needing to change their direction. However, I'm using Windows 8.1 (albeit heavily customized to look like Vista), and I'm quite satisfied with it. Just how long 7/8.1 will last under Microsoft's incessant pushing of Windows 10 remains to be seen, though. I will never EVER use Windows 10, and will do whatever it takes to avoid it, even if that means switching platforms altogether (I'd probably consider macOS due to the superior third party support compared to Linux). Microsoft has completely dumbed down the OS to the point where it's basically a toy instead of a tool, and the whole OS is designed under the "mommy Microsoft knows best" philosophy, and with things like the completely broken updating system, it definitely shows. As for Wine vs KernelEx, I don't really know... Perhaps a "KernelEx" kind of project would be an easier and overall better solution for Vista, since (as Dibya pointed out) Windows Vista doesn't really need that much work to be compatible with 7+ software, just as long as it would be stable and able to run most new software without too many issues. It would also be quite nice if someone could figure out why Vista misbehaves so badly when trying to run it on Intel's Haswell platform, where the OS randomly fails to boot up and random services fail to start. This has been proven on several different Haswell/Broadwell machines of mine, so I know it isn't exclusive to any one machine. AFAIK, Windows 2000 and XP have been used (by fellow MSFN members) on the Haswell platform before without any issue like this, so I'm completely stumped as to why only Windows Vista suffers from it... It's basically the only thing at this point that prevents me from continuing to use the OS as my main anymore. Changing BIOS settings does nothing to fix the issue and even installing Intel's own chipset drivers that they released for Vista also doesn't help, so something else is really, really wrong...

I believe instead of porting WINE to Windows, someone could just create an "Extended Kernel" for Vista, just like Blackwingcat has done for Windows 2000. However, that's obviously easier said than done, and due to Vista's minuscule usage and poor reputation among most users, I don't see anyone doing it any time soon (and this is coming from a long time former Vista user & advocate...). However, the same can be said about Windows Millennium Edition (arguably to a higher extent, I might add), and it received projects such as KernelEx and I believe two unofficial service packs, so it isn't impossible that Vista will get the same love, but if you ask me, it's highly improbable (at least for the time being). As for Windows 7, I can see third party developers continuing to support it for many more years to come (much like they did with Windows XP until very recently) because Windows 7 has something that Vista has never had: a large install/fan base and an almost 100% positive reputation among users, in contrast to Vista. I doubt it will need any third party "fixing" for a while and when it does, I can see at least one person stepping up to do the deed. However, Microsoft's efforts to kill it off are already starting to take a toll, as Intel's new Kaby Lake and AMD's new RyZen platforms don't and won't be supporting Windows 7, from what I've heard. That could change if sales are dramatically affected by this, though, since Windows 7 is still in high demand. Just my two cents.

The Platform Update(s) did add many APIs from 7 to Vista, but the Platform Update for 7 added APIs from Win8/8.1 that remain missing from Vista, so many programs still don't work with Vista, not to mention there's still some Win7 APIs needed that didn't get added to Vista (such as GetThreadErrorMode, K32GetProcessImageFileNameW, SetWaitableTimerEx, etc). Also, it's worth noting that many programs require Windows Installer 5.0, and Vista only received v4.5, so a lot of MSIs (i.e. VMware Workstation 11+ and Sketchup 2017) refuse to work in Vista. Perhaps it would be possible to somehow port Windows Installer 5.0 to Vista, but I don't see anybody doing it anytime soon...

Thank you for the information, and welcome to MSFN! I ran Vista from 2007 to 2015 with minimal issues, I only upgraded to Windows 8.1 due to the lack of proper Haswell support under Vista, but it isn't 8.1 as you know it: http://prntscr.com/dxh3ka I didn't even know that Reader XI supported Server 2008, I figured it only worked on Vista because XP was still supported (gotta love Adobe logic). Good to know that Server 2008 is supported; I'll update the list to reflect that. As for Foxit, I tested the latest version of it on Vista a few weeks ago and it worked flawlessly, but I'll test it again to make sure this still holds up. Thanks for clarifying the DEP error w/ iTunes, I wasn't sure what version exactly started this issue but I do recall getting it somewhere in the 11.x series, hence the "around" 11.1 that I emphasized in the list. I'll fix that. Thanks for the AV list, I'll add those to the list in a new AV section (not in ONG section). If you can think of anymore AVs (or any other programs for that matter) that aren't listed, let me know and I'll add them. EDIT: the list has been significantly updated. You should check it out.

I really liked Vista (SP2) and wish I could continue using it, but I doubt anyone will make any kernel extensions for it, simply because of its reputation. If you really enjoy the UI in Vista, it's quite easy to "transform" Windows 7 or 8.1 to look like Vista. Just look at what I did with my 8.1 install here: http://prntscr.com/dxdxh0 I made a tutorial for 7 too, which can be found in my signature, if you're interested. I'll make one for 8.1 too eventually, I guess.

I'd actually recommend Waterfox over that, as it is still officially supported on Vista. But Cyberfox works too, for now. They'll probably both stop updating once Mozilla finally throws in the towel come Firefox 52. Also, looks like the new Slimjet 13 beta doesn't work on Windows Vista, throwing up a BEX "stopped working" error when attempting to run it. So it looks like Slimjet 12.0.15.0 is the end of the line for Vista (they might push out one or two more minor updates to Slimjet 12 before 13 final comes out). I guess the Chromium world on Vista has finally come to an end. Supposedly, Slimjet 10 and Opera 36 are supposed to still continue to receive security updates to a point on XP and Vista, but they're infrequently updated, with the last update to Slimjet 10 being in October 2016 and Opera 36 being in April 2016, which really only leaves Pale Moon or SeaMonkey as the only viable options (K-Meleon is also infrequently updated, at least for now). Unless someone miraculously comes out with unofficial updates for Vista to add missing Windows 7/8.x kernel functions, I think we can expect Vista to become about as usable as vanilla Windows 2000 in the next 3-5 years or so, unfortunately.

I wonder if this also affects Windows Server 2008, since it's essentially the exact same OS as Vista, the only difference being that it is due to receive security updates until January 2020. So it should be eligible for MSE support for another 3 years. Guess that's something I'll need to test.

By the way, I noticed that you're running Vista on a Skylake system, as evidenced by the Core i7 6700HQ listed in System Properties. This is the first time I've seen Vista on a Skylake system so I have to ask you something: Does Vista have the same symptoms that it does when trying to run it on newer Haswell systems? The symptoms I'm referring to are frequent failed boot attempts, random services failing to start, and overall system instability. I often get errors just before the startup orb appears, with the following message: "Interactive logon process initialization has failed. Please consult the event log for more details." It is for that reason that I had to stop using Vista altogether, since the bug makes it completely unusable. So I ask again, does your Skylake system show the same or similar symptoms? Thanks in advance.

Great find, burd! I find it rather strange that the normal NVIDIA drivers just kept on giving me Code 39 errors, but glad to know there's a solution. I'll be sure to add this to the Last versions of software for Windows Vista/2008 list.

Well, we also have Waterfox, but it's likely to stop supporting Vista when Mozilla does, since the browser is essentially a Firefox clone. Cyberfox 64 bit also works on Vista albeit not officially supported, but at least the developers were generous enough to still allow installation on Vista. I feel like Chrome and Firefox 64 bit would've been able to run on Vista, but Google and Mozilla were too stingy to support it, IMO.

Sorry, I didn't know if you had noticed it or not, lol Glad to hear that Moonchild is at least making an effort to keep Vista support going though. Flashpeak tried with Slimjet (and Slimjet 12 does run under Vista as a result of the rerouting/disabling a lot of APIs performed by Slimjet devs that were introduced in Chromium 53.x that caused Vista compatibility to break), but the head developer informed me via their Facebook page that Slimjet 13+ would not be tested/made to work on Vista, since Chromium, with each update, just keeps on requiring more and more dependencies that aren't in Vista, so Pale Moon, SeaMonkey and K-meleon will soon become the only options for Vista users, if you don't count Slimjet 10/Opera 36/Firefox 52 ESR (security updates but no new features).