cc333

It's not that hard to create an installer that simply copies the files to the proper place in Program Files and put a shortcut on the Desktop; I created such a setup file within 5 minutes using Inno Setup. I'd post it here, but I need a place to host it (it's too big for the forum). c

I recently installed Win7 on a OptiPlex 320, and then proceeded to do some stuff to it (unsigned themes, etc). Then I started getting this error: It happens *every* time I move a folder or zip file, and clicking "try Again" dismisses the error and the folder/zip file gets moved as expected. Subsequently, I got a new-to-me OptiPlex 390 and put Win7 on it as well. And the error wasn't occurring, until this morning. I had done everything I did to the other install, and it worked fine, until I began installing updates. So, it would seem that an errant update may be causing the problem, but I have no clue as to which one. So, if anyone has had this problem, could you please tell me how you solved it? It doesn't seem to harm functionality much, but it's *super* annoying. Thanks! c

Vista too! (Server 2008 updates!). Also, isn't 8.0 getting unofficial updates via Server 2012? I'm amazed that MS even cared enough about 9x to bother mentioning it! I would think that the impact of this flaw would range from negligible to nonexistent on that OS, given how few people still use it. c

Roytam1's PM28 builds work perfectly on XP! (I've actually used it, so I should know ) I'm on official PM28 now that I'm running 7 on my temporary desktop (it was running XP for awhile because it was too slow otherwise (not enough RAM; I've since upgraded it)). If/when I go back to XP, I'm definitely using roytam1's PM28 builds, though! They also work well in Vista, which is in mostly the same boat as XP where browser support is concerned. c

I would, except TTF is Power Mac only; it's not compiled for Intel. It can run, to some degree, under PPC emulation (Rosetta) on 10.6, but native Firefox 48 performs so much better that it's worth putting up with. It would be lovely if someone came up with a Pale Moon-like browser for Mac OS 10.6, 10.7. Most Macs that can run 10.8 can also run 10.9 or newer, which is still supported, so it wouldn't need to target that OS specifically. The FF 48 codebase would be a good place to start. c

I run mostly Macs and PCs with 7 and up, so I have no problems updating, though on XP/Vista, I have switched to roytam's Pale Moon 28 build. I've seen a message similar to this one in the past, on a Mac (since upgraded) running OS 10.8 Mountain Lion, which, along with 10.7 and 10.6, became unsupported after Firefox 48. c

Well, does the computer on my desk count? This is on a Dell OptiPlex 320 I got from a local computer surplus sale a couple years ago. c

I'm interested! Is it free or paid? c

Haha, I suppose so! OK, I did it! I'm glad the telephone activation is automated!! c

I could, but I just realized that the seemingly nonfunctional online activation may be due to the fact that all forms of TLS less than 1.2 were taken offline June 30, and if that applies to the XP activation servers, we're in trouble unless a) MS decides to release a patch that fixes the problem (not likely for XP Home/Pro, but POSReady 2009 might get one)] that we can use), or b ) some enterprising XP user comes up with a workaround. c

I'm trying to activate XP SP2 (upgraded to SP3), and it won't work. I tried the settings described here to no avail. Whatever I do, I get the "Configure your network settings" screen, and if I click next or skip, it eventually fails to connect to the server. Is it possible MS finally took it offline? EDIT: I have a working internet connection (it's downloading updates presently), so that's not the problem. c

Ha! OK!! I see that I even posted to that thread. Hmm, my memory is, quite literally, burnt out (too many wildfires here in CA!) Compounding the problem is that I haven't really needed to do this for... a year? Thank you for pointing me back in the right direction! c

Forgive me if this has been discussed ad nauseam.. I want to install 2000 on a 250 GB hard drive. Can it be done without undue problems? If it requires a patch, what patch do I need to apply? My disk has SP4, if that helps. Thanks! c EDIT: Found this: https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/456536-windows-2000-sp4-install-cd-doesnt-see-over-127gb/?tab=comments#comment-587641609 Maybe it's useful??

OK, so I briefly tested Vista with every post-EOL Server 2008 update (except the Specre and Meltdown ones), and it ran pretty much fine. It felt a bit clunky, but I attribute that to a hardware failure, as shortly after I installed the updates, my PC's motherboard died :( So I now have to find some sort of Sandy/Ivy Bridge thing to replace it, at a price that isn't obscene (I remember when decent used motherboards could be had for ~$50 or less; what happened?!) so I can reuse my CPU. I do have a backup computer I cobbled together running an i7-900-something (soon to be upgraded to a Xeon X5680) and 18 GB RAM, so it's not like I'm stuck without a working desktop :) It's roughly equivalent architecturally to my 2009 Mac Pro (why not use that, you may ask? Well, it's wildfire season here in No. CA, and I want to keep my best computers packed safely in the car so they're ready to go if anything happens, again (I've already been evacuated twice :( ); It's a 40# hunk of aluminum that I *really* don't feel like lugging out of the house in an emergency (been there, done that)). c

Indeed. Well, I'll try it out, and see what happens. I have a fully up to date and stable-as-a-rock Windows 7 install to fall back on if need be. c

@Jody ThorntonNoted. Thanks! To clarify my earlier post, I don't intend to have a cavalier attitude regarding security, it's just that the reality of the situation is that *every* device that has a CPU in it is affected in some way, and probably 80-90% of it will never be updated to protect against this vulnerability (which is mostly FUD, I've come to realize), so there's really not much we can do about it until new hardware comes out that has the flaws corrected, and that isn't projected to happen for at least a couple more years. In the meantime, we can patch our computers (to a point; older ones that can't run a patched OS will never be patched unless something extraordinary happens), but what about our cars? And our network routers? Some of the more sophisticated cars and routers use CPUs not unlike what we'd see in a smartphone, so they're all just as vulnerable, and none will likely receive any kind of patch for it. Does that mean they'll be hacked? Not likely, because the success rate of a Spectre/Meltdown attack is somewhat variable (particularly on older hardware), and one needs to have physical access to the system in question (to my knowledge; I could be mistaken). So does this mean we should forget about security? NO! We absolutely should continue patching things as usual, because there are innumerable other exploits that are potentially much, much more virulent, and must therefore be mitigated ASAP to prevent any data breaches or other such things from occurring. I just think that it may be a waste of time to worry about this particular exploit too much, because it is mostly academic and of limited value to most hackers (in my opinion). c

Clicking this link brings me back to this thread? Copying and pasting it into the address bar gets around this. c

I'm never abandoning XP! At least not for secondary uses... c

OK, so I downloaded the most recent PM28 build and installed it on my new Vista x64 installation, and the interface is horridly unresponsive. I set it to XP compatibility mode, but it made no difference. I installed PM26 and copied the PM28 files over it. Could that have caused the problem? c

Hahaha! Thank you! I am honored to be a member of this club!! :lol: :) So I guess I'll try skipping those updates... if I knew which ones they were, it'd be easier... My system has a modest i5-2500k, so it's not the fastest to begin with, and a 30% performance cut might be too much. People lived for 25 years with this vulnerability, to no effect. Now that we know it exists, it probably won't change anything because it's a fairly hard thing to exploit (there are many other ways a hacker could steal info that are *much* easier), plus, with older OSes, we have some obscurity to protect us. c

Hi All, I've dabbled with Vista off and on over the years since it's release, and I never really found it to be too bad, although I preferred XP and stuck with it until 2014, when I began using 7 more regularly. That being said, I have a Sandy Bridge PC I built here, and I got a copy of Vista Ultimate specifically for it that I'm planning to install. However, I'm concerned to read that the Spectre/Meltdown patches wreck its performance? Is it possible to avoid installing those updates while still getting all the others? Thanks, c

Exactly. By the way, I just tried something called Q4OS today, and it has a lot of potential, and when the "wine classic" theme is selected, it looks quite similar to Windows XP with the classic theme. Right down to the font (apparently, the makers of Q4OS have managed to incorporate a functional clone of the Tahoma font into the UI, probably by way of WINE, which is also preinstalled). Anyway, if the walled garden apocalypse comes and there are no viable current-version OSes that aren't dumbed down to useless garbage, I think I'll give this a try as my main OS (even Ubuntu isn't quite what it used to be; the last version I really cared much for was 11.04, or whatever the last release was that didn't have the Unity desktop set as default with no Classic option). c

You're welcome! Having been using Macs in one way or another since 1998, I should know When that happens, the only viable OS will be Linux. Of course, I remember back in 2011 when OS X 10.7 Lion came out, that it would be the end of the Mac as we knew it. Well, in retrospect, not so much. While it was quite a bit buggier than it's predecessor, it gave way to a series of very solid versions (10.8 Mountain Lion and 10.9 Mavericks). 10.10 came along, and I found that it wasn't *too* bad, aside from the dreadful looking icons (I stayed on 10.9 until I figured out how to change them). So, back on topic. Kinda. Windows 8.1, for all its flaws, is a much better OS than 10 will ever be for one simple reason: they're not constantly wiping away any customizations or other genuine enhancements. But frankly, if a decent, modern web browser existed and a simple way to boot it on a modern-ish computer was devised (no VMs, that's cheating ), I'd be content with Windows 95 (or maybe 98 SE, because it has better USB drivers and rudimentary Firewire support; the "webbiness" of it never really bothered me much (in fact, IE5 (and later, 6) was my favorite browser until I discovered Firefox)). If I could somehow replicate IE5's look and feel and stick a modern, Firefox-derived rendering engine in it (with tabbed browsing), I'd be very happy. Windows 2000 is very close, so I might settle on that. Or XP, for that matter... Even Vista is better than 10!! Sorry for rambling; it's been a long day, and I'm tired. c

Absolutely not! While it's true that Apple has built quite an empire of services that makes it difficult to switch away from Mac (the so-called "walled garden"), but there's all sorts of non-Apple services and software that work just fine on a Mac. No need to subscribe to Apple (that's more of a problem with their smartphone and tablet offerings; the Mac has traditionally been more open (in the sense that you can run any software you please on it*, so long as it's compatible with the OS and underlying architecture), and mostly continues to be to the present day). One thing that may bother you, however, is the lack of customization. It's not too bad though, and one can get used to it. Of course, there's nothing stopping you from running whatever OS you please on a Mac! If you get an older Mac from 2013-2015, you can run Windows 7 and 8.x, as well as whatever Linux distro you prefer. c *Since Mac OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion, Apple incorporated Gatekeeper to lock down this ability, making it more iPhone-esque. However, since it's fairly straightforward to bypass and disable, it hasn't been a problem (they may very well make the feature undisable-able someday, but they haven't *so far*).

The local community college upgraded their lab computers to Windows 10 this semester. I'm disappointed, because I'm starting to think that a forced upgrade to it might be inevitable in most cases (there are some important software programs dropping support for Windows 7 and 8 now, and things will only get worse once those versions reach EOL). c