Jump to content
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. ×

Vistapocalypse

Member
  • Content Count

    589
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7
  • Donations

    $0.00 

Vistapocalypse last won the day on April 22

Vistapocalypse had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

336 Excellent

About Vistapocalypse

  • Rank
    still afloat!?

Profile Information

  • OS
    Vista Home Premium x86
  • Country Flag US

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I am not posting to ask a question: Only to repeat information that has been well known to some of us for years. There was recently much discussion (often bordering on hysteria) about Microsoft abandoning SHA-1 in favor of SHA-2, particularly in the Windows XP forum. There was also some discussion of old Windows updates related to SHA-2. I only want to clarify the situation with respect to Windows Vista here. Microsoft released KB2763674 for Windows Vista SP2 in January 2013. For those who are curious, there is still a Microsoft article about the update at this time. Those running Vista S
  2. There are a couple of old sticky threads by spacesurfer in the Windows Vista forum that may contain useful information (or else why are they still there?)
  3. Thank you, that appears to be current, so Panda support for Vista is still ONG.
  4. WMP issue was discussed January 25. Same member reported March 6 WMP “now working out-of-the-box,” so the solution might be to use the latest version of extended kernel.
  5. Perhaps it is unreasonable of me to hold a grudge against Panda over a debacle that occurred in March 2015. It would be interesting to know if the Panda version number installed on your Vista is truly the same as the version that would be installed on Win10 or even Win7 in 2021? (Online installers might deliver different Panda versions to different Windows versions.)
  6. I tried Panda Free six years ago and had to reinstall Vista due to the damage it caused. True, it still supports XP/Vista and is listed as ONG in this thread’s original post. (Bullguard is also ONG, has anyone tried that?) Your opinion “it works better than Avast” is not persuasive in the least to me. Edit: Of course I don’t have your famous slow Vista laptop to worry about.
  7. VLC 3.0.13 has been released. (It’s been available since late April, but has just now replaced 3.0.12 as the main download.) There is a security bulletin. Platform Update is required. This may be the final update before VLC 4.0, which will not support Windows XP or vanilla Vista.
  8. You seem to think that Windows Update stopped working for Vista and earlier last year only because users did not install certain updates. What gave you that idea? Windows Update no longer works for Vista and earlier because Microsoft does not want it to work for them anymore. Dave-H and others in this thread have fully-updated XP systems, but Windows Update only gives them an error. If anyone reading this wants to update Vista, greenhillmaniac has a complete repository. As for Windows 7, the only update that has thus far been needed to get Windows Update working is SP1. Perhaps that will chang
  9. Most of the updates probably are interchangeable, but the reason there is no thread is that they both went EOL/ESU in January 2020. Another thing: there are no x86 versions of Server 2008 R2 updates.
  10. After further thought, it seems likely that @greenhillmaniac never noticed that KB4020507 for .NET 4.5.2 was replaced by KB4345682, apparently in August 2018. (There is no mention of it in greenhillmaniac’s detailed August 23, 2018 post, nor is the update in the repository.) You may want to try installing it from this Catalog link to see if you have better luck. It was apparently never replaced. (The same update evidently replaced a Vista-era .NET 2.0 update, KB3142023.) Edit: There was actually a discussion between VistaLover and greenhillmaniac on Page 2 as to whether KB4020503 (which,
  11. KB4020507 was a March 2017 update for .NET Framework 4.5.2. That was indeed the 4.x version that Windows Update used to offer for Vista, but it does not follow that someone actually has it installed in 2021 (maybe check programs and features > uninstall a program). If you manually installed a 4.6.x version, then the equivalent update was KB4020503. (VistaLover mentioned that one in his May 15, 2017 post because he had .NET 4.6.1.) Furthermore, Package Details at the Catalog say KB4020507 was replaced by KB4345682, so there should be no need for it if more recent .NET updates have been (or c
  12. Or maybe this is external pressure from the US Department of Homeland Security.
  13. A diehard naysayer? Suit yourself then. I hesitate to ask (because it’s more likely a VMWare issue), but has anyone running Vista 6.0.6003 x64 updated to February 2021 or later noticed audio issues with VLC 3.x?
  14. I’m not a leading authority, but if your understanding was accurate, then scannow could obliterate any and all Windows updates - not just Server 2008 updates installed on Vista - unless your installation media was slipstreamed with all possible updates to begin with. When an update is installed, I believe backup copies of files are cached. There is no reason to be fearful of these updates. It’s not like Microsoft simply forgot to block installation on Vista: the updates contain extractable text documents that plainly list Vista under applicability info. Vista and Server 2008 SP2 are both
  15. @Dave-H A little OT, but does XP’s security center regard Malwarebytes Premium as an antivirus? (I know that Malwarebytes Free does not register in Vista’s security center.)
×
×
  • Create New...