Mcinwwl

It would have been if the world ended on rich western countries. Here, in the former soviet block, people exchange their hardware less often - a case of cost. And we are still far away from a really poor country.

Treesize Free - utility to check which files and folders consume space on your drive. Last Version for XP is 3.4.5 to be downloaded from here: http://www.filehorse.com/download-treesize-free/24574/

As xper announced in the original topic, the possible takedown was postponed into far and undefined future :>

Well, we have three cases over here to discuss: 1) If resold Windows XP OEM licence key will work. And for that we have many confirmed examples from this topic's commenters. XP licence keys is officialy gone form M$ shopping catalog, so they have no reason to cause problems for users. Most will get what they have bundled with new Laptop anyway. 2) If resold Windows XP OEM licence key is legal - and by the way, that was the original topic's question. For what I know reselling retail, boxed Windows is legal, as long as you previously uninstalled it from the machine it was installed on, or the original machine is broken. And, as far as I know, this does not apply to OEM keys. The problem goes further, as my knowledge is most likely compliant with European Union legislation. Licence terms are not applicable, when they are not permitted by national/state/local laws. and if you are not copyright lawyer, good luck finding that out. As far as I'm concerned, Microsoft does care about being in terms with law, and I suspect their licence terms are applicable to US law. You know, it is US company, and US is the biggest market worldwide, so I'd say, that most likely in @Glenn9999 case buying used OEM licence is not legal. Whether you wanna get on well with licence terms, is a case of your ethics. 3) If copyright/licencing laws that forbid reselling no-longer-used OEM licences are sane and ethical - Well, M$ put a lot of effort and money for lobbying certain laws, but trying to discuss that out if it is right or not is an entry to an endless debate, which is danger close from a political debate on MSFN. As far as I know, previously it was tied to processor, but after M$ lost some anti-trust cases, it was forbidden for them to do it any more, so, well, Mobo was good enough replacement ^^ I'm nearly sure I found this piece of trivia somewhere over here, but I cannot find the particular article.

But only for the ones with older firmware -> not connected to the internet for months.

Yep, another program that helps to prevent Windows 10 from automatically update. this one comes from NoVirusThanks, a software developer that gave the world a few programs like Exe Radar Pro. that I've read a lot good about on security-related sites. Some might find it handy. http://www.novirusthanks.org/products/win-update-stop/ Personally I didn't test. It says it supports all 32/64 bit Windows from XP to 10, but I find Win7 built-in tools for that purpose quite better than the one in Win 10 Wilders Security thread (quite brief at the moment of posting).

Oh, hey. Hello. Have a good time here :>

Well, sorry to interrupt your grumpiness, but as someone mentioned in another topic: So, for this case we should start with 1)Is the software you are trying to update installed on your machine? So yes, patches listed were noticed by users to slow down MU/WU if the software they are for is present, and installing them helps to solve the issue. If this what you needed, case solved. Actually you could have solved the mystery yourself by running MU and checking out if it runs for minutes or for hours. In any other case when your MU is a slow hog and none of these patches apply to your system configuration, we can start investigating the issue and probably expanding the list.

This topic should be listed in harkaz's post list https://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171814-posready-2009-updates-ported-to-windows-xp-sp3-enu/?tab=comments#comment-1077785 That's my 2c.

Well said! As this might be very bad for cloud services providers and critical infrastructure, targeted by APT attacks, normal user won't likely see this used against him. Vulnerability is too sophisticated, and too many hardware/system combinations to care about, especially when it's enough to make fake Facebook lookalike site to gain what's needed.. Spam campaign, ransomware - this are easier are far more profitable. So if anyone has a skill to exploit the flaw, I guess he'd rather be attacking big organizations to massively obtain credentials, rather than targeting Your Mom. Personally, my old machine has AMD processor, so meltdown is off and spectre is far less dangerous and is said to be affecting AMD under very specific circumstances. I don't even bother checking if my CPU is on any list. And hey! Spectre affects some ARM devices! So i hope y'all will get updates for your home routers, smart TV's and other IoT devices, yes? No. Probably not even your one-year old Android phone.

dencorso? http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/173752-how-to-avoid-being-upgraded-to-win-10-against-your-will/

New reports show AMD is also affected ^^ 'Other processors' are also suggested, which may mean some vendors providing hardware for industrial systems, that normal people never see. Or maybe vulnerability was exploitable on old Cyrix processor on Windows XP? Don't know. I suggest keeping tight to the news, as more and more details pop up, and major media most likely will end on quick note reprinting top google search (It ended this way with WannaCry). As for how does it affect XP and POSReady, we can expect M$ to drop patches on us during next Tuesday, and then we'll know.

Glad I've read that just before the armaggeddon. Avast! Has online installers here and there, I wasn't able to find offline installer for older version within no time. However, Simply installing in limited set of defences (I didn't install e-mail protection and browser protection this time). So far it works. If you have goodlink for Avast offline install for 17.5.3585.0, paste it here, so lamers like me can have easy job. Thanks.

Thumbs up for the recommendation and the reminder as well. Turning TeamViewer on only when needed is the simplest way to make the connection more secure.

Welcome one another retrolover form far-far-awayland!

Hmm... before 2008, in most cases, I've still been seeing CRT's and AFAIK, and sources you provided confirm that, companies moved 16:10 ->16:9 because they were cheaper to produce, thus cheaper to sell... and 5:4 were usually also cheaper than the 500$ I found here: https://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/review/asus/vw222/220539/ That might be the case why I hadn't them see them, as even these days little non-professionals in my vicinity are willing to spend 500$ for PC monitor. Whack, this is still more expensive that my current double monitor display, including separate 2.0 speakers (and will get even worse if we include inflation). not to mention, my 17" Acer V173 from the era for less than 150$ :> So I should go back to old fighting gear? hmm. Besides, I think I'll stop replying, as I suddenly felt guilty for going far too off-topic.

Test performed by other forum member. Actually, app let too many ransomware to work, to be considered a fire and forget tool. As per my request, he did additional test to see, how Shadow Copy protection will work. App passed the test, but it was performed only on 1 sample. Original thread: https://safegroup.pl/thread-11275-post-216392.html#pid216392

The clue might be, that I've seen many 5:4 monitors (including the one still working with my XP machine), but I first stumbled upon 16:10 monitor in 2016. And believe me, if it happened earlier, I'd never bought 16:9 monitor, despite significant price difference. Never thought any different.

Not a challenge. Rather a mention, that out of all formats that were common at the time you didn't mention this particular one. I have never said that you had said they weren't available. they were just worth mentioning, when speaking about popular display formats for Desktop PC monitors.

10 years ago 5:4 was still available and not-so-unpopular ^^

No photos this time :> but this evening, at a local grocery/mini market, or however you'll call it, I've heard some glorious XP's login, notification and error sounds coming from store's radio speakers However, which version was it, remains a mystery... I wanted to buy some fresh dill leaves for fried cod, and they got all sold-out this day, so I had to get away with dried one... but at least I stumbled upon XP :>

Well, at work I use three devices with Windows 10 (including Surface Laptop ^^) and on all of them work the way you want - mouse pointer stays on screen. And all are on pretty standard settings. I'll try to investigate that tomorrow. EDIT - it turns out that I was dead wrong, and on all devices mouse cursor hides when I touch the screen. The sad part is that for month I haven't noticed that, and that I thought that it was the opposite...

As long as your router, or any other device do not forward the port 445 or 139 (default ports of the SMB) to the open internet, and SMB is used only on LAN, you should be safe. As Shodan shows, there are over million SMB connections visible from the open internet :> There is no well known and reliable way of running SMB v2 or v3 on XP, and, personally, I'd be more afraid of testing some shady implementation, if the security is a concern. So, from my point of view, I'd personally make sure that these ports are running only locally and not visible to the open internet. This website contains a lot of links how to do so. Second, If you are still afraid, you can try to disable it on the mobile devices using, for example, some firewall rules like 'allow connection only in this particular local network'. I don't know how to do it on Macs, I highly doubt it is possible on iPod/iPad if they support the protocol at all, not even saying about Kindle. Or limit allowed connections only to some particular devices. So, SMB v1 runs in my local network, and yet I'm much more concerned about potential e-mail phishing or malwaretising hooking my relatives attention.

As above - link from the first reply HAS the information you need. It is big and overwhelming, but still better than splitting it into two parallel topics covering nearly the same.

Problem is, that you see the problem in a very binary way. Yes, knowledge and habbits are the best for safety, however, they require time, interestand persistence, which you won't get from most people. And even the interested ones, well, our skills aren't limitless, and there is always some point of failure. As for the zero day attacks, if they are well crafted, nothing can protect you, unless you disassemble and analyze every program before running. Never said that AV will make you fully protected. But it might be part of the defence line, the more important, the less experienced you are - as it will most likely protect you from obvious traps, that power users tend to fall into less likely :> And I'll end with that, as I think we were far too off-topic.