Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


Radish

Member
  • Content Count

    130
  • Donations

    $30.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Radish last won the day on September 10 2018

Radish had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

18 Good

About Radish

Profile Information

  • OS
    Windows 7 x64
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

1,988 profile views
  1. Thank you very much for this information, erpdude8. Greatly appreciated. For a non-expert like me could you clarify the following: (1) Does this update completely replace the previous versions of KB4474419? (2) Should I uninstall the previous version of this KB4474419 before installing this new one (v3)? (3) If I was rebuilding my system from scratch would it be okay to install this 'v3' version and forget about installing any previous versions that I have before installing the v3?
  2. Another app for setting up programs to bypass the UAC prompt by using Task Scheduler is UAC Pass I use it myself on Windows 7, it is pretty good at what it does. However, a program that is launched via Task Scheduler is started with Below Normal Priority. That would be okay mostly but if you want to set it to a higher priority then you have to edit the Task Scheduler .xml file for the scheduled task in question. Fortunately this is easy to do. Instructions are here: Setting a scheduled task process priority Also you can set up a Context Menu shortcut for getting an elevated prompt for CMD. How to set that up is detailed here: Add or Remove "Open Command Window Here as Administrator" to Context Menu Note that if you download the .reg file offered there then check the keys it modifies in the registry before merging the .reg file. Reason is that the .reg file does some deletions and you would want to check there is nothing in the keys that get deleted that will regret losing.
  3. I think fairly recently Firefox added built-in trackers and cookies blocking to the browser (the shield symbol to the extreme left of the address (url) bar). The default setting for that is to 'block', to unblock for site 'x' requires manual intervention - easy to do on a site-by-site basis. Maybe this has something to do with the disappearing ads. I only noticed this a while back myself because the then new blocking 'broke' a website I commonly visit, forget what site, but turning the Firefox in-built blocking to 'off' for that site fixed the site display issue. Should say that I have my UBlockOrigin and AdBlockPlus disabled for this site, and also Firefox's built in blocker disabled and I have never since I joined this forum ever seen an ad on it, and that's going back a couple of years. Maybe Google realises I'm one of the unwashed poor and saves bandwidth by not wasting ads on me.
  4. Argh! It's happening again and has been that way for months - don't get email notifications. I do occasionally get one or two over last few months but it just seems utterly random. This is a really serious problem and very frustrating for usage of this forum. Okay so there are contortions that users can use as described above to maybe, possibly, perhaps, get a temporary fix for this. Problem, if the 'fix' works at all, is that it pretty quickly devolves to not working again. So I really plead to the admins of the forum -- I think @xper is the person that attends to site problems - please, please, please, pretty please even, can the admins get this recurring issue fixed once and for all? This is an Achilles' heel for this forum and really does need fixed.
  5. I'm thinking it depends what the 'real world' means - would mean different things for different people. My own computer use is nowadays fairly limited, write documents, deal with email, play a movie and audio files, and surf the internet covers most of what I do. I find that for most things my system, with only (seemingly) essential updates, works just fine. Until I hit slight issues, rare, and things get generally interesting and not too difficult to solve - so far, so good. That said, and though it definitely doesn't qualify as an essential update (but it damn well should) I wouldn't be on Windows 7 at all if it wasn't for Classic Shell. Without that I'd be either on Windows 8.1 with Classic Shell, or off to Linux Mint which I used for a couple of years. Mint was fine but always felt a bit lacking just because of software developed for Windows systems that I really liked and missed, which in the end drove me back to Windows. However, as far as Windows goes, if it ever got to the bit where my only option was Windows 10 then I'd migrate to Mint and never look back. Windows 10 - no way!!! To that extent that is my 'real world' and that Windows 10 line draws an absolute limit on it.
  6. @bphlpt I've been very busy so haven't been able to respond quickly. However, something you said lead me to curing a very recent problem that surfaced when trying to play some recently released videos on a Vimeo 'channel' that I follow. The 'channel' has the title "Common Weal". I could play every video in that 'channel' in Firefox without issues with the exception of the two most recently released videos. The videos that I couldn't get to play were: An Investment-Led Economic Development Framework For An Independent Scotland Know Your Growth Commission: Financial Regulations At the time I puzzled over this and thought that Common Weal and/or Vimeo changed something and made the videos no longer playable in my Firefox browser (I also checked this with a portable Opera browser that I keep for trying to troubleshoot any internet related problems. I got the same results using Opera - and because of that I thought it possible to discount notion of an issue with Firefox itself.) I contacted Common Weal about the problem but the woman I was communicating with was clueless, said no one else was having the problem, but that she'd pass the information to their web developers. So I waited for a couple of weeks and further response never came. Then I read your comment: When I read that an intuitive bulb lit up concerning the Vimeo videos and I thought to test the intuition out. So, cutting a long story short, to update my IE 8 (which I never use) to IE 11 (which I never will use) I had to install some prerequisite KBs into my Windows 7 SP1. The prerequisites were listed here (along with 3 Optional KBs): https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/2847882/prerequisite-updates-for-internet-explorer-11 So, I started to install the KBs as listed in that table, working from the top of the table down. (On trying to install KB2533623 I got an error message saying "This update is not applicable to your computer." On doing some research on that it turned out that that KB was actually for a Windows Vista computer; so Microsoft goofed in listing it as a Windows 7 SP1 prerequisite. So this update got skipped.) For each update that installed I rebooted the computer and then tried to see if I the two Vimeo videos that wouldn't play started to play with the following results: KB2729094 - No change, videos still would not play KB2731771 - No change, videos still would not play KB2533623 - Wouldn't install - intended for Windows Vista KB2670838 - Success! Once this was installed the two videos that wouldn't play started to play in Firefox. (So the installation of one, two or three of these KBs, or some combination thereof, was what was required to get the Vimeo videos to play.) I then installed the other 2 prerequisite KBs in order: KB2786081 KB2834140 Then I updated my IE 8 to IE 11 and then installed the 3 Optional KBs. So your comment on the advisability of keeping IE up to date because it might have a background effect on the OS turned out to be the solution to recent Vimeo videos in as much I had to install some prerequisite KBs to get them play. So as far as KBs go I have now increased my count of 'essential' KBs installed by an additional 5 now (discounting the Vista one, of course). Or you could say by 8 if counting in the 3 Optional ones - but those probably don't full under the 'essential' label. So thanks very much for your comment, @bphlpt. That off the cuff remark enabled me to sort a very recent problem that I encountered and that was niggling me for a couple of weeks. One question though. When you say you chose to keep IE up to date what do you mean precisely? Like you just install security patches for it? Or something else? Also I think I read elsewhere on this forum that MS were planning to ditch IE in favour of Microsoft Edge. So what would be your thoughts on that? Is that about to become a critical matter for folks trying to avoid, as much as possible, updating Windows 7 SP1? Hope the above helps someone else sometime.
  7. For folks that might still be bedevilled by this certificates problem Mozilla has now released add-on fixes for older versions of Firefox. Versions covered are: Firefox versions 61 – 65 Firefox versions 57 – 60 (not including Firefox 60 ESR) Firefox versions 47 – 56 That should cover most folks, we hope. Full details and download links here: Mozilla - Add-ons disabled or failing to install in Firefox The links are in the Updates section near the top of that document. (Haven't had to use any of them myself.) On cross-checking at the webpage https://www.jeffersonscher.com/ffu/armagadd-on_2_0.html I see that the author has updated that document to now include links to the add-on fixes. So in all I'm just posting this update here in case some folks have missed the new information in that updated document.
  8. I have had this occasionally happen to me. Usually it's just a faulty Windows attempt to mount the disk. On every occasion just pull out the disk and, usually, on the second or third attempt at reinserting the USB plug the drive starts to work again.
  9. I was just stepping through my Options settings after the install of 66.0.4 and noticed that 66.0.4 had in the 'General' settings enabled the setting "Automatically install updates (recommended)". I never ever allow Firefox to do that, I only ever use the setting "Check for updates but let you choose to install them". So 66.0.4 must have reset that setting to the Mozilla default on install. Same thing happened in my Firefox Portable (PortableApps) 66.0.4 So if you don't want Firefox automatically installing updates best go check that setting and put it back to your own preference if it was altered.
  10. Found the requirements for 60.6.2 - same story: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/60.6.2/system-requirements/ - Windows 7 minimum.
  11. Seems that updating to Firefox 66.0.4 might not instantly cure the problems with addons for everyone - manual intervention might be necessary. Details are in the now published Release Notes here (follow the links): https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/66.0.4/releasenotes/ I would think it won't run on XP SP3. I couldn't actually find system requirements for 60.6.2esr but did find for 60.6.1esr Windows 7 or higher seems to be the minimum requirement for that: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/60.6.1/system-requirements/
  12. Firefox 66.0.4 released now. Have installed and tested it, seems to fix the issue. Well done, Mozilla! Don't put us through that again. https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/66.0.4/
  13. See this page direct from Mozilla on the bug and possible temporary fix; https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/05/04/update-regarding-add-ons-in-firefox/
  14. Temporary and easy fix is detailed here: "Missing something? Some extensions are no longer supported" Rumour is that Firefox 66.0.4 is in close to release and will fix the issue.
  15. Secure Hash Algorithm To be sure the technical details are beyond my pay-grade. However, in short, signing installer software with a SHA code allows the system to check if an installer file is valid, or has been somehow corrupted or perhaps (maliciously) altered in some way. If the file checks as valid the system attempts to install the software. If the file is not valid then, one would hope, the system aborts the attempt to install the software. This aborting happened with one piece of third-party software that I tried to install ages ago and doing that led to me researching, and with magnificent help from others in this thread and some information from other forums, identifying which MS Updates to install that allowed me to install the software I otherwise couldn't install. The reason the software wouldn't install in the first place was that its installer had been signed only with SHA-2 and Windows 7 SP1 does not natively support validating SHA-2 signed software, as far as I'm aware, natively, it only supports SHA-1 (which Microsoft and third-party companies are now abandoning in favour of SHA-2, which is more secure than SHA-1). Three of the essential updates flagged in this thread are to do with validating SHA-2 signed software, one for third-party installer software, and (now) two to deal with future Microsoft Updates. (From memory I think the other two essential Updates (and only the updates not the FixIt patch) that are flagged were dependencies for the SHA stuff to work properly. You'd have to read the whole thread as the details are foggy in my memory.) I guess I'm both. Radish my nickname for this forum. The dragon? Well I live in Scotland and not everyone knows of Scotland, but most have heard of the Loch Ness Monster, so I decided that would be a reasonable humorous avatar.
×
×
  • Create New...