Vistapocalypse

I wonder why 52.9.0 does not simply update to 52.9.1 in the usual way? Perhaps because the 52.9.1 tinderbox build contained no significant changes. I will continue to use 52.9.0 on Vista x86. Are you saying that the 64-bit build works on Vista x64? That would be remarkable.

That image looks more like one posted by someone using Advanced Chrome in the thread Chromium V 54 not displaying Youtube properly on February 25 (which was before the classic layout was discontinued by YouTube). My guess is that both browsers are being served Polymer v2, but are incapable of actually displaying it. Citrio has a bad reputation, e.g. Beware of Citrio, an iffy Chrome-based browser.

My settings were mostly the same. When you see the "Health Check" system tray notification, I suggest that you click "No, thanks" and perhaps it will never pop up again.

Does that mean you know how to disable system tray notifications for 5.64.7577? If so, could you please explain how?

Pretending to be Opera would presumably work also.

Not very surprising to me, because it seems to confirm what VistaLover said in his February 6 post on page 1 of this thread, i.e. that Chromium 49 is capable of displaying the polymer layout, but YouTube served the now-discontinued classic layout to Chrome 49 by default. (When it comes to browsers, VistaLover is seldom mistaken!)

If anyone still has Opera 36 installed, it would be interesting to know if it suffers from the same inability to display thumbnails as Chrome 49. The only Chromium-based browser that I use is Yandex 17.4.1 (based on Chromium 57), which is unaffected by this issue - and btw I'm using UBO 1.24.4 from the Chrome Store with Yandex.

If I use that link with FF 52 now, then it suffers the same issue as PM 27 and IE 9. Have you perhaps altered your user agent for Chrome 49?

The classic YouTube layout seems to be either going or gone now. Pale Moon 27 (forked from Firefox 38) now displays only a fraction of thumbnails at YouTube's home page, but is nevertheless still able to play videos. (In my February 6 post on page 1, PM 27's only issue was the warning message.) The situation is the same with IE 9, which was no longer a good browser for YouTube anyway. It would be interesting to hear from Chrome 49 users like @Dave-H. Firefox ESR 52 and Yandex 17 are not affected.

I'm beginning to see your point. No wonder I used the same old version for 3 years, but I'd rather not send everyone to FileHippo. How to disable system tray notifications?

Piriform Ccleaner support for Vista is no longer ONGoing. Last version 5.64.7577 was released today, https://download.ccleaner.com/sunset/ccsetup564_xp-vista.exe. However, there might still be "critical security updates" according to Why do you no longer support Windows XP or Vista?

Yes, the main download page should now serve it to you (unless you are spoofing a newer OS). Working on Vista, but I prefer much older versions.

Your conclusion might be a little hasty, since 5.64 hasn't even been released at this time. According to a Wilders Security post, Edit: New FAQ posted just minutes ago: Why do you no longer support Windows XP or Vista?

One solution for XP diehards might be to use Yandex 17.4.1, which is based on Chromium 57. I just installed uBlock Origin 1.24.4 from chrome web store and it seems to be working, even though I flagrantly disregarded Yandex instructions to get extensions from the Opera addons site (where installation of UBO on Yandex is prohibited).

My apologies if this is well known to the 2 or 3 people who already use Yandex 17, but the answer is yes: uBlock Origin 1.24.4 can be installed from the chrome store: I may not be the best UBO tester because I have not been using the unsigned legacy versions with Firefox, but this recent stable version certainly seems to be working. Call me paranoid if you must, but I get the feeling that Yandex and the Opera addons site are in cahoots to promote the installation of Adguard. (I still do not trust those Russians very much.)

In retrospect, it was only this unexpected property of the installer that displeased me. Until your reply, the thought never occurred to me that a standard user might be able to install Yandex without being prompted for administrator confirmation. I uninstalled my most recent administrator's installation via Control Panel, which was successful this time (uncertain how I botched an earlier uninstall, but I may have been logged in as the wrong user), and now have Yandex 17.4.1 installed only on the standard user account that I use for web surfing, which is actually cool. Actually, if the current user is an administrator, one application named service_update is installed in Program Files; but even that file goes in AppData if a standard user installs. Since you have considerable experience with Yandex 17, it would be interesting to know what extensions you prefer to use with it, starting with an ad blocker. As you know, Yandex has an arrangement with Adguard, which has a permanent place on the Extensions tab, just waiting to be turned On. I have tried it, but the question naturally arises whether it is possible to use uBlock Origin with Yandex? According to this link, "Yandex Browser only supports extensions from the Opera add-ons catalog." If you browse the Opera addons site using almost any browser, you can readily find UBO - but not if you browse the site using Yandex: One would naturally conclude that UBO is incompatible with Yandex. Adblock Plus also cannot be found at the site using Yandex, and yet this link shows that ABP supported Yandex five years ago, and leads one not to Opera addons but to chrome web store: I wonder if UBO could also be installed for Yandex 17 from the chrome store, but I'm too tired to try tonight.

Update: Microsoft's scrambled EPG data expired this evening, so I checked for latest guide listings and got good data until the evening of March 8. I can't help thinking that Microsoft doesn't really want to retire the EPG service, but does want those of us running old versions of Windows to give up on it. But why would Microsoft want to continue the EPG service? Just for Xbox? Or is there perhaps a new DVR app for Windows 10 in the works? Edit: I now have Microsoft/Rovi EPG data extending until the evening of March 12. Edit: Guide data until the evening of March 17. Edit: Make that March 19.

Thanks for clarifying that. Microsoft nevertheless rates the vulnerability's severity as Critical for IE 11 on Windows 7, but only Moderate for IE 9 on Server 2008 SP2. I'm not familiar with OSArmor, but you've got me wondering if it could offer a better solution for Vista, i.e. block any process from jscript but not jscript9 (sorry if OT).

Yes, "I have tried the Microsoft workaround" actually meant that I "tried the alternative solution provided by Microsoft," and there is nothing "elegant" about it. If anyone else wants to try that, I would suggest that you first read about "negative side effects" at 0patch Blog and create a restore point. By quoting that, are you implying that Windows XP has no jscript9.dll, or that IE8 does not use it by default? I'm not sure what you mean.

Welcome to MSFN Delrvich. Your Advanced Chrome browser is probably being served YouTube's newest Polymer v2 layout because it presents itself as Chrome 54.20.6530.0, but cannot properly display Polymer v2 because Advanced Chrome is really not Chrome 54 (see VistaLover's October 16, 2018 post). If you are determined to use that particular browser for YouTube, then spoofing a browser that is served Polymer v1 will probably be necessary. (It's a little late to target the classic pre-Polymer layout, which will be discontinued soon.) In the long run, it might be better to use a browser such as Yandex 17.4.1 (based on Chromium 57) that can actually display Polymer v2 (no spoofing required), as VistaLover pointed out in a February 6 post in a related thread. (VistaLover actually prefers a portable Yandex 17.6.0 based on Chromium 58, but I'm not sure if anyone has tried that version on XP, whereas 17.4.1 officially supports XP. My screenshot features 17.4.1 - no warning about the browser being unsupported soon.)

IE 11 on Windows 7 is also affected by CVE-2020-0674. as is IE 9 on Vista. I have tried the Microsoft workaround, and 0patch Blog did not exaggerate its negative side effects. I used System Restore to undo all the changes to jscript.dll.

Update: Microsoft/Rovi EPG data still hasn't ceased, but now appears to be chronologically scrambled, rendering it useless - a puzzling way to retire the EPG service. What were the exact titles of the other dvr-ms sample files? (Of course we have already mentioned Jewels of the Caribbean.)

Support for XP and Vista was a "bug" that the Chromium Project resolved to fix 4 years ago: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=579196. (By the way, did the Vista ISO contain either of the media sample files you sought?)

I doubt it. AFAIK the highest Chromium fork that is known to work on Vista is Extreme Explorer 360, which I am in no hurry to try. (I didn't even try Yandex until last week.)

Welcome to MSFN RetroFan, and thanks for the missing link. Our link for Vivaldi 1.1.453.59 Stable seems to be broken. Can you find that also? Just below Vivaldi in the list, our link for Yandex Browser v17.4.1.1026 always times out on me, but https://browser.yandex.com/ seems to correctly detect Vista and offer that version these days. I have paid attention to my friend @VistaLover's posts about Yandex and had been meaning to try it for some time. Last week I found that I could no longer sign in at Apple Support Community with Firefox ESR 52, so I decided it was time to install Yandex. It did enable me to sign in at Apple Support on Vista; and even though this version is based on Chromium 57 rather than 58 like the portable version that VistaLover now advocates, it does display YouTube's Polymer v2 layout by default (hence will retain YouTube functionality longer than other browsers that are commonly used on Vista and XP, as VistaLover pointed out in a February 6 post). While impressed by the browser's functionality, I was not very happy with the installer. The first thing I noticed was that it did not create shortcuts in the standard user account that I always use for web browsing, which is no major issue (just create them yourself) - but I quickly found that the executable was not in Program Files, but rather in the administrator's AppData folder!? I decided to try an offline installer from a third party (after manually removing Yandex, which needless to say will not uninstall in the usual way), but that was no better. Perhaps this is why VistaLover sought a portable version in the first place?