WinClient5270

I tried modifying the latest NVIDIA driver .INF files for Windows 7 and installing them under Vista, and they don't work, returning a code 39 error when attempting to install them, much like the 15.7+ AMD drivers. So I guess GTX 10xx support under Vista is a no-go.

I already asked them about Vista support back in January of last year, and they told me that they found no reason to stop supporting Windows Vista, since it was basically no different from supporting Windows 7, which seems to be their favorite OS. Here's the link to that thread: https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10680&p=74587&hilit=Windows+Vista+support#p74587 Hopefully, they'll continue to support Windows Vista until perhaps 2020, but we'll see.

I completely forgot about that- yes, secure boot is more than likely at fault for all of this.

Windows Vista does support GPT: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/dn640535(v=vs.85).aspx#gpt_faq_win7_boot "Can Windows 7, Windows Vista, and Windows Server 2008 read, write, and boot from GPT disks? Yes, all versions can use GPT partitioned disks for data. Booting is only supported for 64-bit editions on UEFI-based systems" The problem here is that your system may not support UEFI booting of Windows Vista or 7, which is required in order to use GPT. It looks to me like you're going to need to use Windows 8 or later in order to be able to boot in UEFI/GPT mode, from what information I can gather. Can't hurt to try Windows 7, but I wouldn't bet on it working.

According to this article: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh824898.aspx Windows Vista SP1+ and 7 support UEFI: "on Class 2 systems running in legacy BIOS-compatibility mode by using a CSM, so they can use the legacy BIOS INT10 features." "Are not supported on Class 3 systems, because these operating systems assume the presence of legacy BIOS INT10 support in the firmware, which is not available in a Class-3 UEFI implementation." Assuming your system is Class 2, you'll need to enable legacy support in the BIOS before being able to boot, from what I can tell. Vista initially didn't support UEFI, but as the article states, Vista SP1 does, but your system must meet the criteria laid out in the article.

I can't guarantee that. What I can say is that it ought to be more likely to work than say the newer AMD drivers, as NVIDIA's minimum requirement is Windows 7 RTM, and AMD's minimum requirement is Windows 7 SP1. SP1 for Windows 7 introduced new dependencies/APIs that aren't found in Vista SP2, even with the Platform Update, whereas Vista's Platform Update ported much of the functionality/APIs in Windows 7 RTM to Vista. This probably explains why the newer AMD drivers (post 15.6) don't work in Vista anymore. I can test the newer drivers themselves when I get my secondary Vista machine back up and running, but that system has a GTX 760, so I won't be able to test using an actual GTX 1000 series GPU. This should show us whether the drivers even work at all, though.

What you need to look for is the column for Windows 7, which would look something like "NTAMD64.6.1". What you must do is change that to 6.0. Just make sure to do this in any .inf files that you see. Then manually install the drivers via Device Manager. Don't bother with XP drivers; you're not going to get Aero or proper 3D acceleration if you install them.

This is incorrect. CS5.5 is the last release to *officially* support Vista, and CS6 is the last release to *officially* support XP, but it still runs on Vista anyway. Photoshop CS5 system requirements: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/system-requirements.html#main_Older_Versions "Microsoft® Windows® XP with Service Pack 3; Windows Vista® Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, or Enterprise with Service Pack 1 (Service Pack 2 recommended); or Windows 7" Photoshop CS6 system requirements: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/system-requirements.html "Microsoft® Windows® XP with Service Pack 3 orMicrosoft Windows 7 with Service Pack 1. Adobe® Creative Suite® 5.5 and CS6 applications also support Windows 8 and Windows 8.1. See the CS6 FAQ for more information about Windows 8 support.*"

Thank you. Added those to the list.

You could probably try, but I wouldn't bet on it, at least without a compatibility layer or wrappers. I don't have the equipment to test it, so I can neither confirm nor deny. Although it is worth noting that in contrast to AMD, NVIDIA still supports Windows 7 RTM (AMD's drivers require at least 7 SP1), so this may substantially increase your chances of the drivers working on Vista, as there aren't quite as many API differences between Vista SP2+Platform Update and 7 RTM vs 7 SP1, since much of 7 RTM's functionality was backported to Vista via the Platform Update.

I second this. Despite Vista's higher number of similarities to Windows 7 compared to XP, most vendors have decided to drop XP and Vista support simultaneously, such as Google, Intel, Mozilla, AMD, NVIDIA, Microsoft (with Office), and there's probably more. If you want to create a separate list for Windows XP, refer to my list for Windows Vista here, as much of the information here is also applicable to XP (SP2+):

Hmm... I think I might've found XP drivers for Intel HD 4000. Have you tried this yet? Here's the link (for XP 32 bit): https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/22642/Intel-HD-Graphics-Driver-for-Windows-XP-exe-?product=81499 Just to clarify, this is for Intel HD 4000 ONLY. It WILL NOT WORK with Intel HD 4200 or 4600, for example. From my understanding, Intel HD 4000 series graphics is included in the Ivy Bridge family of processors, which is supposed to support Windows XP. It was not until Haswell (HD 4200 and later) that XP support became half-baked (there are chipset drivers for XP on Haswell, but no USB 3.0 or GPU drivers, if I'm not mistaken). As for Vista, you might want to make sure you have SP2 installed if the installer isn't working. Judging by the driver installation exe filename containing "Win7", this tells me that Intel most likely backported the Windows 7 drivers (and lazily at that, I might add), and if your install of Vista is lacking updates, it may also be lacking some dependencies needed for the drivers to work. The link I sent before really ought to work, as I along with a few others here have used this driver before and it works just fine on Vista (SP2). If you already have SP2 installed or if you install SP2 and still get the error, you might have accidentally downloaded the incorrect version of the driver, as there are 32 bit and 64 bit versions available, and you need to ensure that you download the correct version pertaining to your version of Vista (I've accidentally downloaded the wrong drivers before, it happens ). If anyone is curious, here's where I found the XP driver: https://downloadcenter.intel.com/product/81499/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000 They are clearly listed here. If they don't work, Intel has some serious issues to work out with their site, because it clearly says Intel HD 4000 at the top... Notice how the Windows Vista drivers are nowhere to be found... Like I said, needle in a hay stack. Hope I helped.

Hello. It looks like the Celeron N2830 has Intel HD 4000 series graphics, which can be downloaded for Windows Vista here: https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/20758/Graphics-Intel-HD-Graphics-Driver-for-Windows-Vista For some reason, Intel made the Intel HD 4000 series drivers for Vista extremely difficult to obtain. This is basically a needle in a hay stack...

I'm sorry, I was not aware of that... lol I've installed 7 on several broadwell/skylake systems for friends and family members, so I try my best to help with that when I can, since many people seem to believe it's impossible, and Microsoft trying to force people to use the abomination that is Windows 10 by setting all these confusing "end of support" deadlines for 7/8.1 on Skylake and then backtracking on them doesn't help This reminds me of the Vista days when SATA was starting to become more ubiquitous and XP became more difficult to install on modern systems, forcing people to integrate SATA drivers... Except in this case it's USB 3.0 drivers. It may be a minor inconvenience if your system lacks USB 2.0 but it sure beats settling for 10 Anyway, good luck (again)!

You're welcome! Also, according to this: https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/Z170-PRO-GAMING/specifications/ your motherboard should have a combination of USB 2.0, 3.0, and 3.1 ports. So basically, to install Windows 7, just be sure to plug your peripherals into the USB 2.0 ports (they're normally grey, whereas 3.0 ports are blue. Also, if you're installing Windows 7 via a thumb drive, be sure to plug that into a 2.0 port as well) and the installation should work fine. Then after installing Windows 7, just install the drivers from the second link I posted in my previous reply, and everything should be good to go. Good luck!

The Core i7 6700k should work fine with Windows 7. It is of the Skylake family of processors and chipsets, and Intel continues to provide driver support for Windows 7, so I think you'll be fine. Installing Windows 7 may be a bit of a challenge though if your motherboard lacks USB 2.0 or PS2 ports (Windows 7's installer lacks built-in USB 3.0 drivers so your mouse and keyboard won't work out of the box on USB 3.0-exclusive systems), but I believe several motherboard manufacturers have "Windows 7 usb 3.0 patcher" programs that integrate the needed drivers to allow Windows 7's installer to detect USB 3.0 devices, as well as guides on how to overcome this restriction. For Asus, this may be of use to you: https://www.asus.com/us/support/FAQ/1015837/ https://www.asus.com/support/Download/1/50/1/5/JIM9ojJyz4lZRy4k/30/ Hope I helped

Added those to the list, thanks. Well, I decided to somewhat overhaul this list, and I have done research and testing and have added quite a bit more software to the list, especially in the ONG section, and I cleaned up the layout a bit. Similarly to the LVSFW 98 and 2000 lists, this list now specifies whether the software is paid or free, and open or closed source. If you ask me, this is packed with much more information compared to before, and the layout is much more clear. As for testing, I have virtual machines and one PC still running Vista, so leave it to me-- although if you want to and are able test something, that's fine too! Hopefully, Windows Vista users/enthusiasts/system admins can get better use out of this list compared to before.

Thank you for reminding me of Clamwin. I totally forgot about it. Added to the list in addition to a few other AV programs I forgot to add (I have been neglecting this section since browser compatibilty has been shifting more than anything-- I apologize). Please, if anyone sees anything else I overlooked or may not be aware of that is still supporting or has dropped support for Vista, feel free to let me know. Unfortunately, the ONG section for Vista is slowly getting shorter as the EOL date gets closer, so any additions are welcome.

From my testing, Firefox 53 Nightly build 2016-11-21 works perfectly fine in Windows Vista... how long this will continue, I don't know. I'm not sure why it isn't working for you, but here it is... Didn't need to copy over any DLLs or anything, as Windows Vista should already include AVRT.dll, according to MSDN: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms681975(v=vs.85).aspx (see minimum supported client and DLL in the chart at the bottom of the page)

@smeezekitty Sorry to bother you about this yet again, but Adobe Reader DC will no longer run on Windows Vista as of somewhere around v.2015.007.20033, as it is looking for GetThreadErrorMode and SetThreadErrorMode, which obviously it can't find since these functions are exclusive to Windows 7. Would it be possible for you to stub these calls in your kernel32.dll wrapper? Thanks a ton for the work you've done so far for Vista, it's really appreciated.

I know this is late, but I couldn't get it to work, unfortunately. Even running the application as an admin, after setting it to the desired OS, it just simply did nothing on Vista. I guess it was intended solely for use on NT 5.x., hence the name. Also, I thought I should give this thread a bit of a bump, as I've updated it to include quite a bit more useful information that may be of some use to some users, and this thread is quickly getting buried due to inactivity. As more and more applications drop support for Windows Vista, a lot of system admins and IT pros that still have to service Vista systems or even just enthusiasts that are interested in using Vista may find this thread useful (and yes, believe it or not, they're still out there ). It is also worth noting that a lot of this information is also applicable to Windows XP, since a large number of developers dropped XP and Vista support simultaneously. Also, since Server 2008 is essentially the same OS as Vista, I've added that to the list, so anyone looking to run that OS should also find some use in this thread.

Don't worry, I'm pretty ignorant about it all too, but from what little I've learned, I don't think it would be reasonable due to a number of factors: Windows Vista is NT 6.0, 7 is NT 6.1, and XP is NT 5.1. Windows Vista, while it may have some striking similarities with XP in some areas compared to 7, as an OS and under the hood, it's much, much closer to Windows 7. The driver model, the kernel, task manager, explorer, preinstallation environment, desktop window manager, DirectX (both Vista and 7 have DirectX 11 support, although Vista needs the platform update to obtain it), everything. Windows 7 is only a minor revision of Vista, while Vista was pretty much a complete overhaul coming from XP. Even Windows 10 and Vista are more alike than Vista and XP, due to the kernel architecture (Windows 7, 8, and 10 are all Vista based, just look at the NT number and the level of backwards compatibility between these OSes compared to XP). From my understanding, bringing XP up to par with 7 (in terms of compatibility) usually requires adding the missing API calls to the corresponding XP DLLs, and also figuring out a way to bypass OS checks (if required). The latter could probably be programmed for Vista, if it were just a script like the Application Compatibility Launcher for Win2k, but as for the former, someone would have to separately add the API calls into Vista's DLLs, which would be a totally separate project in itself. If I recall correctly, according to Dibya (I'm not sure how accurate this is, and I can't remember exactly where he posted this but I have seen it on here somewhere), there appears to be less than 30 missing calls that have been added to Windows 7 from a fully updated Vista w/ platform update which does make sense given how 7 and Vista are so similar. Getting Vista up to par with 7 would probably require minimal effort compared to getting XP up there, but the problem is finding someone able and willing to do it, which seems unlikely to happen to me, given the bad rep Vista has. Maybe one day, somebody somewhere will prove themselves and take on this project, but for now, Vista is quickly becoming a thing of the past, and I'd say by the end 2017, it will be pretty much totally done for.

Be sure to check out (and follow, if you want to) my "Last versions of software for Windows Vista" thread, as it gives useful information about the current state of compatibility with third party software for Windows Vista. There are quite a few alternatives to Firefox listed in the ongoing support section on there that may be of interest to you. The link for the thread is in my signature, and lately has been updated quite often, since I keep a VM of Vista around and regularly test software to see what (still) works and what doesn't.

Well, I hate to say it, but Windows Vista continues to die at an alarming rate, and still next to no one really cares Mozilla now recently announced that they will cut off XP/Vista support after Firefox v51.x mainline, and 52.x ESR. Yes, Vista is closer to 7 than XP and should be on the same support level as 7 rather than XP, but that fact didn't seem to matter to AMD, Google, NVIDIA, and now Mozilla. Although there's still a few months left until this occurs, it will be here and gone before you know it. As I mentioned a while back, NVIDIA finally quit developing Vista drivers with version 365.19, and XP was developed on slightly longer but eventually they discontinued that too, which was another instance of Vista being unfairly left out. However, it may be possible to feasibly mod the latest Windows 7 drivers and successfully install them on Vista since Windows 7 RTM seems to still be supported, but I haven't tried it, and it will more than likely become a dead end soon, just like the AMD drivers. Also, Intel Haswell/Skylake compatibility is still ridiculously broken on Windows Vista to the point of near unusability, so if you had any plans to try and run Vista on that hardware, you might as well forget it. I know I have a sad, hopeless outlook on the future of Vista at this point, but it's true... Windows Vista is dying and will continue to do so, and while Vista does have its fans and admirers (I'm one of them!), the fact of the matter is and as I've said before, pretty much no Vista admirers have the knowledge or experience to make Windows Vista work with this new software and hardware, and anyone that does doesn't care a thing in the world about Vista at all, and they most likely hated it and have probably forgotten about it by now. I don't want to "rain on your parade" (for want of a better term) or make you lose interest or your enthusiasm for Vista, but the point I'm trying to make here is that I wouldn't get my hopes high for Vista, because it looks to me like it's going to die a quick, quiet death alongside Windows XP, and no matter how much we express our frustrations about this whole situation, it might as well be falling on deaf ears. Efforts to keep XP alive are currently being conducted by @Dibya and @Blackwingcat, but they don't seem to care about Vista, unfortunately.

The way I see it (and I know people are going to disagree with me on this, feel free to), Windows 8.1 is currently the all-around best Windows version you can use today. It's faster than Windows 7/Vista, has a much wider range of compatibility with modern software and drivers compared to Vista and below (or Linux), and will be supported for another 7-8 years, vs Windows 7 which will end in roughly 4 years, or Vista which will end in less than a year. Windows 8.1 is also exempt from most of Windows 10's annoyances, such as the lack of update control, ugly UI, etc., and if you dislike the default UI, @NoelC has a guide that makes Windows 8.1 nice to use. Here are links to his guide and a screenshot of it working on my system: http://prnt.sc/cen6d2 However, as in @JodyT's case, there are some instances where your processor lacks the support for some instructions which Windows 8.1 requires. If this is the case, I suppose Windows 7 would have to be your OS of choice, or if you don't mind having to manually install updates, Windows 8.0 might work and you'll probably find it to be faster than Windows 7. Visit the "Server 2012 updates on Windows 8" thread for more info: