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. 


  • Content count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


VistaLover last won the day on March 16

VistaLover had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

68 Excellent

1 Follower

About VistaLover

Profile Information

  • OS
    Vista Home Premium x86
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

1,368 profile views
  1. I downloaded and tried to run the portable version of ShareX 12.1.0 (GitHub repo link); d-clicking on the executable (ShareX.exe) , I am greeted by a pop-up that informs of a failure to start, because .NET Framework 4.6.2 is required, then asks to download and install that version (4.6.2): We all know 4.6.2 won't install on Vista , so I declined the offer... It does appear, then, as though it's Game Over on Vista... However, I just had a struck of genius! : I noticed the "ShareX.exe.config" file standing besides the .exe and decided to open it with a text editor (I use PSPad, but any other would be OK), there I found line 4: <supportedRuntime version="v4.0" sku=".NETFramework,Version=v4.6.2" /> I edited the .NETFw version string to 4.6.1 (since this is my installed version ), <supportedRuntime version="v4.0" sku=".NETFramework,Version=v4.6.1" /> saved the change made, exited the editor and then attempted to run ShareX.exe anew: Lo and behold: As you can see, Update Check (from GitHub, via its new TLS 1.2 API) is working as it should ! It looks like .NET Framework 4.6.1 (properly updated, BTW) doesn't differ much from its successor 4.6.2 (that won't install in NT6.0), at least to the point of functions needed by the ShareX 12.1.x app to run... As I'm not a regular user of the app, I can't confirm it behaves/functions perfectly in every aspect, but be my guest and test it for yourselves ( @WinClient5270 , perhaps you could oblige, if more familiar? ) ... All I can think of for now is this is just a small victory for my favourite OS, Windows Vista!
  2. ... Well, it turns out that page does render OK if I toggle (to true) the following pref: javascript.options.strict (tip found in the Pale Moon forum, for an issue affecting official Pale Moon ) @roytam1 ====== IMPORTANT EDIT ====== It just turns out that the same pref flip (javascript.options.strict from false to true) IS ALSO THE CURE FOR THE MIXCLOUD CRASH : Who would have thought of that ? Browsers are very tricky pieces of software... In any case, no need for you to debug further... That's why I urge more people to commit to testing ... I had been a Firefox Nightly tester myself for many years (since 22.0a1), until Mozilla cut-off Vista support in 53.0a1 (mid-December 2016) . As for Basilisk52/UXP itself, it's quite usable already as an everyday browser, barring some small GUI glitches on Vista (that I suspect don't exist in XP) and broken WV CDM in latest builds; as for mixcloud, it was the only site for me that would crash it . But, as I said already in this thread, this is alpha software, people should often make profile back-ups Best wishes
  3. ... that any time has sadly come I haven't tested newly released v12.1.0, though; pity that in 12.1.0 they chose to upgrade to .NET Framework 4.6.2, when the last installable on Vista is 4.6.1 !
  4. Latest Version of Software Running on XP

    But according to Changelog and GitHub issue #3201 ... so, it's ShareX 12.0.0 (2017-11-27) the very last one usable on XP (& Vista); and it's ShareX 12.1.0 (2018-03-19) and later that require Win7+
  5. ... For people not following this, I am testing both Basilisk browsers by @roytam1 on a Windows Vista SP2 32-bit Toshiba laptop, with an Intel (R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T5250 @ 1.50GHz processor (physical RAM is 3.00 GB) . Reasons are: 1. Official Basilisk (/Moebius) from Moonchild Productions is Win7+, only 2. Basilisk/UXP is also only Win7+ ; while Official Pale Moon still supports Vista SP2, once it'll be ported to the UXP platform it won't ; so I have a vested interest in working Basilisk (52/55) browsers on my Vista OS @roytam1 : I have good news and bad news ; good ones first: I have thus tested Basilisk v55.0.0 (2018-03-17) 32-bit (buildID 20180317010020) and can confirm that 1. DuckDuckGo search engine results (e.g. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=basilisk&ia=web ) display fine 2. Webpage http://oscar.go.com/red-carpet renders fine 3. Mixcloud site now loads OK (without crashing browser) , screenshot below: Bk55 has some lesser issues on Vista, one I'd like to mention here is: a. Windows Media Foundation is broken (i.e. the browser can't access system decoders - pref media.wmf.enabled isn't valid on Vista SP2 (whether true/false); this is because the original Mozilla source Moonchild forked for Moebius was already broken in that respect As I'm sure you know, WMF is absent on WinXP and present in an improved form in Win7+; in fact, I tested Roy's Bk55 builds on a Win7 system and there WMF works as expected... OTOH, Roy has restored html5 playback of MP4 (h264/aac) on both XP+Vista through his ffvpx patch, so that on Vista it's actually media.ffvpx.enabled the pref that controls that (instead of media.wmf.enabled); it appears though that certain functions, like DRM, depend on system decoder pathways to function properly, so this brings me to b. WidevineDRM is broken on Basilisk55 on Vista SP2 ; while Roy's Bk55 builds have --enable-eme=widevine in their configure options, the CDM itself is present (v1.4.8.903) inside about:addons (and in my profile dir), plus all widevine prefs are at their correct values, I can't get it to work on Vista ; not a surprise, but Widevive CDM inside Basilisk55 works fine if the browser is tested on a Win7 SP1 machine! FTR, Widevine works fine on this Vista SP2 laptop if I use current FirefoxESR 52.7.2 32-bit (one site you could test is ITV2 live stream ; you need an ITVHub account and a UK IP address - real one or pretend to be in the UK via proxy/VPN ). WMF/DRM issues aside, Basilisk55/moebius holds the best promise as a FirefoxESR replacement on Vista, when that time comes... ... Now the bad news: So I then tested Basilisk 52.9.0 (2018-03-17) (32-bit) (buildID 20180317021409); my results with regards to reported issues: 1. DuckDuckGo search engine results (e.g. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=basilisk&ia=web ) display fine 2. Webpage http://oscar.go.com/red-carpet does not render OK , it still looks as posted previously here 3. Most unfortunately, mixcloud still provokes a browser crash : What do you make of that? Why reverting matbech/zlib was enough to cure things on Basilisk55 but not on Basilisk52? I am at a loss here... Some additional info on Basilisk52/UXP on Vista: 1. While the Moonchild devs first laid their hands on a perfectly Vista-compatible source of Mozilla FirefoxESR 52.6.0, the massacre that followed created sheer havoc to many aspects of the code relevant to XP+Vista; while @roytam1 did his best to revert as much as possible of the damage done, Basilisk52 has noticeable GUI issues on Vista, especially with the default setting of WinAero enabled ; here come two screenshots of the default (Australis) skin with WinAero on: Normal window Maximised window The solution I've chosen at present to mitigate those GUI glitches is install a third party complete theme (FTDeepDark); since it's only one person involved in these forks, I fear it'd be difficult to fix them... 2. As for WMF on Vista with Bk52, the FirefoxESR 52.6.0 original source had it working OK, Moonchild broke it on purpose but, thankfully, Roy brought it back! . On Vista, either media.wmf.enabled;true or media.ffvpx.enabled;true can control html5 playback of h264/aac media files... 3. WidevineCDM on Bk52 on Vista SP2: It was working fine in Roy's build of Basilisk 52.9.0 (2018-02-24) 32-bit (buildID 20180224095320), but it is broken in all subsequent builds ! My understanding is the Moonchild devs did something and broke it themselves, in an effort to tailor the browser's EME system to their view of things (and their known aversion to DRM modules inside browsers - Pale Moon doesn't support DRM, despite the fact many more media providers turn to DRM for their content); I've tested Bk52 on Windows 7 SP1 and discovered that Widevine is broken there also... FYI, any of the following commits could've broken it: Move --enable-eme out of mozconfigure · MoonchildProductions/UXP@507827c Don't build GMP-clearkey when not building EME. · MoonchildProductions/UXP@011dac2 Don't include MediaKeySystemAccess without EME. · MoonchildProductions/UXP@55d0373 Don't build EME-specific subroutines without EME. · MoonchildProductions/UXP@46ad119 Remove unnecessary front-end features and pres when not building EME. · MoonchildProductions/UXP@c88c161 Fix up leftover merge conflicts. · MoonchildProductions/UXP@1dbd979 Merge branch 'master' into EME-work · MoonchildProductions/UXP@2772787 Merge branch 'EME-work' · MoonchildProductions/UXP@e10dfb6 All these commits were pushed after dc7cecc , which was the code snapshot buildID 20180224095320 was compiled from... Apologies for this lengthy post, I wanted to be as detailed and thorough as possible... Keep up your brilliant efforts
  6. Server 2008 Updates on Windows Vista

    I don't get it ... Why having KB4019478 already installed prevented you from installing KB4019276 ??? (Unless this is a typo, of course... ) In my case, I always let "Installed Updates" completely finish populating the relevant entries, which can take a while on my system, and only then proceed with typing in the search bar the update ID, always including the KB characters (i.e. a search for KB4019276 will succeed, but a search for just 4019276 will fail! ) BTW, @JohnRichardTLH and @mike_shupp, welcome to the Vista Community of the MSFN forums ! The more we are, the merrier...
  7. Basilisk52/UXP, Basilisk55/Moebius and FirefoxESR 52.x.x all use the Australis GUI, while PaleMoon/NewMoon[fork] use a pre-Fx29.0a1 GUI PaleMoon/NewMoon have integrated code borrowed from the Status-4-Evar Firefox XUL extension; in your NewMoon screenshot one can see you have disabled the native Status Bar! Menu Bar -> View -> Toolbars -> tick "Status Bar" then you'll be able to (pre-)view links there... If you don't want the native status bar to be always present but still want the link preview info, then Menu Bar -> Tools -> Status Bar Preferences -> Status -> General -> Links -> Show links in: and change the default ("Status Bar") to "Pop-up" ; then Menu Bar -> View -> Toolbars -> untick "Status Bar" (... but I'm sure all this info could be found easily with a google search, or palemoon forum search... )
  8. taokaizen Browser: "Advanced Chrome" Issue

    @sdfox7 Thanks for your follow up/explanations I, for one, wouldn't do that, regardless of whether it's impacting AdvChrome or not, but everyone here is entitled to one's own free choice... That download comes with the extremely outdated PPAPI v21.0.0.213 (from Apr 6th 2016); does the browser still crash with only that specific version? More to the point, does the crash still occur with only a "pepflashplayer.dll" inside PepperFlash dir (and not a system32 PPAPI install)? You are correct and that detail did escape me ; presumably the developer was lazy and didn't recompile the .exe, although the all-important chrome.dll is of the correct version 54.20.6530.0; you can modify the version of chrome.exe to the correct string (52.15.5320.0 => 54.20.6530.0) using Resource Hacker If you and @heinoganda find this is an ongoing/reproducible XP issue when both the default PPAPI (inside AC's PepperFlash dir) and a system32 PPAPI are present, then, as suggested, better report it to the AdvChrome developer, else this issue will only linger... Best regards
  9. IE 8 in 2018?

    YouTube (read Google) have abandoned Adobe Flash Player on all browsers, period! ; to be able to watch YT, you'd have to use a HTML5 capable browser (MSE also needed for live streams); if the browser/OS doesn't support h264/aac decoding (the case of IE8/XP), then at least your browser should support VP8/VP9 decoding (Firefox e.a.); NB, not all live YT streams have VP8/9 flavours Google Chrome Frame uses the proprietary h264/aac decoders (whose licence costs are paid to patent holders) + free WebM decoders, that normally come bundled with Chrome, to enable html5 YT playback in IE8/XP. ==================================================== Trivia (possibly OT for you XP-ers ): On Vista SP2, IE9 can play on-demand YT (but not live YT streams) with the h264/aac decoders, because the OS (via Windows Media Foundation framework) has native support for these; there's also another project from Google, WebM Video for MSIE, which installs VP8/VP9 (only) decoding support to IE; unfortunately for you on XP, it requires IE9+/Vista+ When YT first disabled Flash on their main site, for a few weeks after it was possible to re-enable Flash and YT MP4 playback via some userscripts on Firefox, exploiting the fact that embedded YT vids could still call Flash; if you've got time to kill, you can read the following google (the irony!) forum thread: https://productforums.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/youtube/CUaTWvKhAuE The now defunct userscript project: https://github.com/juneyourtech/GM_YT_Flash https://github.com/juneyourtech/GM_YT_Flash/issues/6
  10. taokaizen Browser: "Advanced Chrome" Issue

    AppVersion 52.15.5320.0 This is NOT the latest/current version of AdvancedChrome ; that one is v54.20.6530.0, released on Jan 5th 2018: http://browser.taokaizen.com/ ModName: pepflashplayer32_29_0_0_125.dll Is the system32\Macromed\Flash screenshot current? There you have v pepflashplayer32_29_0_0_113.dll which, presumably, it's not the one producing the Error (?); is the latest stable, while is beta; you shouldn't mix both... In your third screenshot, the path to "Pepperflash" directory indicates an "Advanced_Chrome_v54.20.6530.0" directory/installation, so what is your actually installed version? The error signature window points to version 52.15.5320.0 of the browser, that same window refers to PPAPI 29_0_0_125.dll erroring out, but your second screenshot shows an OS install of PPAPI 29_0_0_113.dll; OTOH, your third screenshot purports to version 54.20.6530.0 of the browser and v29_0_0_125.dll of pepflashplayer.dll (obviously manually put there...); I am really confused ; screenshots are supposed to help! In any case, update to just v54.20.6530.0 of AdvChr, removing from your system any previous version remnants; then open chrome://flash/ in a tab and inspect how many flash plugins are picked up by the browser; you'll see paths, too; then open chrome://plugins/ (in a tab) and scroll to the Adobe Flash Player section; the one linked to the browser (inside PepperFlash dir) will report a version string, you should be able to selectively disable the OS PPAPI version, if also present there... I am on Vista myself, so can't test on XP, but here AdvChrome 54.20.6530.0 only sees the locally installed (outdated) PPAPI pepflashplayer.dll v28.0.0.137, not the system-wide install of PPAPI (just installed as a test); I then uninstalled PPAPI 29.0.0125b from the system, keeping a back-up of both pepflashplayer32_29_0_0_125.dll + manifest.json; the .dll was renamed to just pepflashplayer.dll and then placed (+ new manifest.json) inside AdvChrome's Pepperflash dir - older version temporarily removed from there; relaunched browser does see the PPAPI.dll, http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/about/ correctly reports a version and I can browse to chrome://settings/ without any issue whatsoever Maybe your issue stems from a combination of AdvChr+XP+betaPPAPI; I can't be sure whether Adobe really care about (/test on) XP+older Chromium code nowadays, though their plugins presumably still support XP/vista; for further reporting/troubleshooting, AdvChrome has a dedicated support forum here, maintained by the dev himself (though, if you're a newly registered member, it'll be a bit tricky to submit your first post, since the anti-spam filter there is very peculiar )... Regards
  11. ... Yes ; but only those I posted about at the time I posted Ooops! Apologies - my bad ; 5c6320c patches necko.properties file in Bk52, but I now see this patch already exists in snapshot 3da3c97 of your basilisk55 repo (that Bk55 2018-03-06 is built from); in my case, the error was due to my custom language pack (self-made EL locale). ... Good luck with that! Being many time zones behind Hong Kong, I must now go to sleep and hopefully test your new build over the weekend... Best wishes
  12. ... Just came across another page that does not render correctly (at least on my setup ) in Basilisk v55.0.0 (2018-03-06) 32-bit but does so correctly in previous build Basilisk v55.0.0 (2018-02-18) 32-bit In both screenshots, the browser was started in Safe Mode, under the same profile... The URL in question is http://oscar.go.com/red-carpet EDIT: Same issue is present in latest Basilisk52/UXP T2 (= v52.9.0 (2018-03-10) 32-bit)
  13. ... And while the Moonchild devs have said the Moebius fork has been deprecated, new commits found their way in the repo today: https://github.com/MoonchildProductions/moebius/compare/868d263...760f0f3 @roytam1 : You should consider adding this Basilisk52/UXP (T2) fix to Basilisk55/Moebius too, because it's also present there ... And I don't mean to pressure you in any way, but have you made any progress in discovering the cause of identical issues me and @404notfound have reported in both latest Bk52/Bk55? Perhaps, if you suspect new zlib, you could (?) compile new test builds with the older one (zlib) and let us test them ... As ever, your efforts for older WinOS users are priceless
  14. Latest Version of Software Running on XP

    I'm using the WinRAR Vista Ultimate Revamped theme by AmEagle (found in Official WinRar Themes) for more than a year myself (on Vista OS), so I won't be noticing the icons' change with v5.60b1 ... Or you can still update to v5.60b1 and then install WinRAR Classic theme by Francesco Indrio (link); how to install a theme I hear you ask? Enjoy!
  15. About HandBrake on Windows Vista: I have little interest myself in this app ; this old Vista laptop has a weak 2 Core CPU and an integrated graphics card with no hardware support for h264 encoding, hence I avoid transcoding like the plague In the few instances I do need to perform video transcoding (and usually for short video files), I find that FFmpeg (with --enable-libx264) is more than adequate for the task... Some trivia about HandBrake: 1. The last version to not require .NET Framework 4 is 0.9.5 2. The last XP compatible version is 0.9.9 3. The last version to incorporate the superior FDK-AAC encoder (for transcoding audio to HE-AAC/AAC LC) is 0.10.3 ; for legal reasons, this non-free encoder was later removed from HandBrake and the team removed all compiled Windows binaries from their download pages; background here OTOH, their downloads page clearly indicates "For Windows 7 to 10" The latest stable (current) version, again according to the downloads page, is 1.0.7; this is a 32-bit Vista SP2 machine with .NFW 4.6.1 (the last installable - but not officially supported - of the 4.x.x family), hence I downloaded and tested file HandBrake-1.0.7-i686-Win_GUI.exe ; I found I could open the GUI without any kernel errors: but I haven't attempted a video file transcode myself ; someone with a powerful Vista machine should properly test HB 1.0.7 and verify it performs as expected... Are you by any chance using a nightly build? There's a new one uploaded whenever the master branch is updated, right now the available build is HandBrake-20180314-c038876_x86_64-Win_GUI.exe; however, I couldn't test myself, because: So, IIUTC and if @burd 's findings are valid, next stable release of HandBrake will be 64-bit only, Win7+ only