Vistapocalypse

A visit to https://github.com/mumble-voip/mumble causes me to wonder if icanttellyou was referring to the server rather than the client, in which case Qt may not support Vista:

I do not have Server 2008, but there is a functional download link at https://www.windowsworkstation.com/win2008/windows-server-2008-workstation-converter/. The extracted contents (bottom) appear to match @WinClient5270's YouTube video at 5:41 (top) with the exception of Date modified. It bothers me a little that "WinSever2008Converter" is spelled incorrectly, but nothing was detected at VirusTotal.

Yes, that has been observed since April 2019. This change broke Avast/AVG, but Avast later issued a micro-update that resolved the issue (not bad for a company that no longer supports Windows 6.0). One member reported an issue with VMware services in April (not sure which version). I wonder if any other legacy software was broken. Windows Update apparently does not recognize "Vista build 6003" at all. "Microsoft strongly recommends you install the latest servicing stack update (SSU) for your operating system [KB4493730] before installing the latest Rollup" beginning with April's KB4493471. Even those who do not regularly install Server 2008 updates will end up running build 6003 if they install the recommended BlueKeep patch KB4499180 (May 2019 security-only update).

@Lambo since you are the only interested party running Vista x64 at the moment, could you please confirm that there are OSVersion values in both the TLS1.1 and TLS1.2 keys at this location in your registry: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\AdvancedOptions\CRYPTO\

I do not know what e-mail client @Lambo is using: Only that Lambo is running Vista Ultimate x64 and may be interested in a Reg file that @greenhillmaniac has recently added to his repository (see above). At the moment I'm noticing that the Reg files in the x64 and x86 folders appear to be identical, which concerns me because I believe x64 would require a somewhat more complex Reg file due to the presence of OSVersion values in Wow6432Node (see @WinClient5270's post here). Unfortunately I am no expert on Vista x64 or Reg files.

That is officially correct. IMO average users should not be encouraged to install .NET 4.7.2 on Vista just because a way has been found. The number of Windows 7 programs that have thereby been proven to work on Vista is not great, Personally, I'm only using one program on Vista that even requires .NET 4.6.0. KB4019276 was superseded by KB4056564. I wonder if greenhillmaniac is aware that x64 requires twice as many registry changes as x86? My IE9 on Vista x86 does have TLS 1.2 support thanks to @VistaLover's instructions; but considering IE9's other limitations, this is another thing that average users could easily do without.

It was never my intention to advocate paying for anything. (The products I am inclined to recommend were in boldface.) When I brought home my new Vista system more than 11 years ago, the first thing I did was remove a free trial of Norton and install AVG Free, and I have never paid a penny for antivirus protection since then. But surprisingly, many people here in the United States still pay for antivirus protection because they assume that this gives them more effective protection than any free download possibly could, whereas testing by independent labs shows that only a few such exceptionally effective products actually exist. Of course even fewer of those products could still be used on XP or Vista now (one of which is Norton - no rotten tomatoes please). Did I mention that I'm using Avast?

I regret not being an active participant in this thread before now. I regard my friend VistaLover as the leading browser authority among what remains of the Vista community, but he and I may have to fight over who is the biggest security geek running Vista these days. Of course when it comes to support from security software vendors, Vista and XP are on the same sinking ship. But if you think about it, what else would you expect? Avast itself is free; they have to make money somehow... This comes as no surprise to me. Well before the company was acquired by Avast, AVG's privacy policy aroused controversy - but at least AVG was honest about the matter. In a similar vein, Mozilla and Moonchild seem convinced that there is something fishy about the legacy versions of NoScript and uBlock Origin that graciously continued to support us for so long. Am I the only one who has been blocked from installing one of those and directed to learn more at Add-on signing in Firefox? (Alternative extensions do exist, but are probably not as good.) Despite the above, I am currently using Avast 18.8 on Vista. Avast is the largest third-party antivirus vendor, meaning their telemetry regarding current threats is second only to Microsoft's. Perhaps more importantly for those like me who would prefer not to pay for protection, Avast is the only vendor that has regularly submitted their free version for testing by the independent labs, and its protection scores are always only slightly below the world's best paid antivirus products. One might be tempted to assume e.g. that Kaspersky Free is almost as effective as Kaspersky's superb paid products, but I don't recall seeing any independent tests that would actually confirm that. (If anyone has, a link would be appreciated.) Oh, and Avast's nagging to upgrade seems to be confined to its UI these days. In years gone by, system tray "nagifications" were one thing that led me to embrace Microsoft Security Essentials. Speaking of "the world's best": Windows 10 is obviously OT here, but security geeks might be interested to know that Microsoft's Windows Defender Is Now One of the Best Antivirus Apps in the World. Nevertheless, perhaps the worst idea I've seen in this thread is to keep 6-year-old Security Essentials 4.4 installed even though definition updates are no longer compatible. (I tested MSE 4.4 on Vista in July, but found that its real-time protection could no longer consistently prevent downloading of the EICAR test file from AMTSO. The MSE uninstaller worked perfectly on Vista - but of course I uninstalled MSE before installing Avast.) Comodo deserves consideration because they still support XP and Vista. (I did test an early 12.x version of CIS on Vista earlier this year.) I am still bitter toward Panda Free because of an incident that occurred more than 4 years ago - but then again, reinstalling Vista was probably a good idea by that time anyway. Malwarebytes rose to prominence by virtue of being the world's best PUP removal tool. I keep Malwarebytes Free 2.2.1 (the final 2.x version) installed for on-demand scanning, but I never upgraded to 3.x because of mediocre reviews and features I did not want, e.g. ransomware protection that does not support Vista or XP. (Granted, Avast Free doesn't have ransomware protection either.) As pointed out earlier in this thread, Malwarebytes Premium 3.5.1 could serve as your only real-time protection. Unfortunately, the above-referenced independent test showing that Windows Defender is great and Avast Free is quite good also shows that Malwarebytes Premium is not particularly good - and it isn't even free. (I also won't be purchasing Webroot for Vista - but they no longer support XP so you guys are safe.) Those who are willing to pay for a good antivirus should consider Norton (if you can still obtain the maintenance mode version) or Kaspersky (if you trust the Russians and are undeterred by the lack of official support for your OS). Not exactly an antivirus, but I wonder if anyone here is using Sandboxie 5.22 (the last version to support XP)? I just recently installed it on Vista (see this post). Somewhat surprisingly, it appears to play nicely with Avast Free. (However I took the following precautions: (1) disabled Avast shields during installation of Sandboxie, (2) created an exclusion for Sandboxie's program files folder, and (3) clicked OK when presented with the Sandboxie pop-up shown in my screenshot.) I am writing this post using a venerable Firefox 52.9.0 browser that is both sandboxed and protected by Avast - a virtually unsinkable battleship?

Funny you should say that in light of Barb's first sentence: For those running Windows Vista without a lot of Server 2008 updates who wish to download Sandboxie directly from https://www.sandboxie.com/AllVersions, I could only recommend Version 5.22. Thanks again Ruan, but I now feel that we have chewed up a great deal of thread discussing Sandboxie without really resolving anything, and I don't wish to delve into Server 2008 updates at this time.

Of course Vista has no "Documents and Settings," but I'm sure @Windows Vista will be able to find RobloxLauncher.exe if he cares to.

I attempted another clean install of Sandboxie 5.30 on Vista x86 with the same results as before: Service won't start, driver won't start. Sandboxie/Sophos has taken down all older versions with the exception of 5.22, which was of course the last version to support Windows XP (signed Oct. 30, 2017). I was reluctant to install a version that old, so I tried downloading a 5.26 installer from FileHippo (signed July 9, 2018). If I understand your Sep. 26, 2018 post correctly, that versioned worked with or without installing Meltdown/Spectre patches? Unfortunately, I got the same results as I did before with 5.30: Service won't start, driver won't start. So I turned in despair to XP-compatible version 5.22, which proved to be a piece of cake: As you can see, I did not uninstall Avast, which makes my earlier hypothesis of an undocumented conflict between Avast and Sandboxie appear rather doubtful. (I did however update my 7-Zip to version 19 this month. Could that perhaps have been the cause of my issues with newer Sandboxie versions?) Before I attempt to install version 5.24 or higher, I have a few more questions for you Ruan. Would you please look at this question at the new Sandboxie forum and tell me whether you think Barb@Sophos answered it correctly? Do you have Microsoft Visual C++ 2015 Redistributable installed? What .NET Framework 4.x version do you have installed? (I have 4.6.0 and only one program that actually needs a version even that high.) Version Changes do not mention such things. Thanks again Ruan.

The current version is 3.0.8, and it looks like there will be a 3.0.9: https://www.videolan.org/developers/vlc-branch/NEWS. But as you posted February 10, the upcoming VLC 4.x will not support Vista.

I just updated to VLC 3.0.8 on Vista, and it looks like there will be a 3.0.9: https://www.videolan.org/developers/vlc-branch/NEWS.

I don't use any security software besides Sandboxie, so can't really recommend any particular AV. When Invincia owned SB, their recommendation was always "Windows Defender / Essentials". Now, of course, with the new owners - Sophos AV. I was happily using Security Essentials on Vista prior to April 2017, but Microsoft put an EOL kill switch in it. Last month I tested 6-year-old MSE 4.4.304.0 (the last version with no kill switch), but found that its real-time protection functioned only some of the time with recent definition and engine updates manually installed (see here). Sophos Home is a relatively recent product, and its system requirements did not include Vista or XP from the time it first appeared. I won't be trying to prove them wrong. I'm uncertain about my next move. Were it not for your posts, I would not consider Sandboxie at all, having read their FAQs. I may try an older Sbie version to rule out some possibilities, but I don't think I'm prepared to abandon traditional antivirus protection at this time, and options for Vista are limited. Aside from Avast/AVG 18.8 (which is a legacy version: they ended support for Vista and XP late last year), Comodo is the only other brand that interests me at the moment. Comodo still supports Vista, and some of their products reportedly include a pretty good sandbox. Thanks for all your assistance Ruan.

Do you have Windows Defender turned on, or do you have MS Office 2010? I'm not sure what other Windows updates one might reasonably expect.

Welcome back Ruan! It might be more beneficial to the community if I begin by asking you a question or two: Do you have an antivirus recommendation for use in conjunction with Sandboxie on Vista, or do you think that Sandboxie is all the protection you really need? Also, do you have any insight into what the company's problems were around the end of April? Unfortunately, the snapshot of the old Sandboxie forum at Wayback Machine is from Feb. 6. You answered my question about the browsers you were successfully sandboxing in your April 18 post. My intention had been to begin with Firefox, in light of both your reply and Sandboxie's built-in support. I do not wish to use this as a Sandboxie support thread. I tried repair install and clean install, SbieDrv was present in program files, and of course I uninstalled Shade first. I can't answer your question about Notepad because I didn't try and don't currently have Sbie installed, but presumably not since the driver wouldn't start. Like you, I have an HP x86 system - but unlike you, I have not "upgraded" to Windows 6.0.6003. As you know, Sbie never claimed to support any server OS, so it seems unlikely to me that Sbie would work better on build 6003 than 6002. I quite agree that it is rarely if ever a good idea to install more than one antivirus at the same time, especially since conflicts between security brands aren't necessarily accidental. Years ago, AVG Free harassed users of ZoneAlarm free firewall by launching a command line scan every time ZoneAlarm generated a temp file. Companies are formed to make money after all, and AVG needed more users to upgrade to paid products that included their own dreadful firewall. My best hypothesis at the moment is that Avast nowadays has similar ambitions with respect to sandboxing:

My mind seems to be in a sandbox. Installation of Sandboxie 5.30 seemed successful, but I soon encountered SBIE2331 Service start failed: [22 / 5] Access is denied. Even more ominously, Sandboxie driver (SbieDrv) is not available: Efforts to manually start the service failed, presumably because the driver won't start. A conflict with Avast is conceivable, but I did disable Avast shields during installation and tried creating an exclusion for Sandboxie's program files folder. If there is a conflict between two such well-known programs, an internet search should have found something. (Note to VistaLover: There reportedly is a conflict with Kaspersky.) A complete novice to Sandboxie such as myself should not proclaim the end of compatibility with Vista, but it looks bad and I would really like to hear from @Ruan.

I've long thought that sandboxing would be the best way to secure the obsolescent browsers that can be used on Vista. Sandboxie has long been the leading brand; but aside from their lack of official support for Vista, there are indications that a debacle occurred in April. It concerns me that their old forum was taken down and the "temporary" forum now appears to be permanent. (Years ago, AVG took down their forum and set up a new "support community" at a time when serious issues with their products were driving away users, including myself. AVG was later bought out by Avast.) It also concerns me that @Ruan has not posted at MSFN since April 28, since AFAIK no one else was using Sandboxie on Vista. I nevertheless may try Sandboxie on Vista before long (certainly someone should); but recently became interested in a lesser-known sandbox program called Shade because the website claims that Vista is supported. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be true of the current download (version number not known but signed March 30, 2019): Somewhat uncharacteristically, I turned to third-party websites in an effort to find the last version of Shade that really did support Vista. Both Neowin and Softpedia have May 2018 pages advertising Shade 1.7, but both actually deliver the same March 30, 2019 version as the Shade website. Perhaps Shade 1.7 was the last version to support Vista; but MajorGeeks actually does have a Shade Sandbox 1.6 download signed April 05, 2017. Nothing was detected at VirusTotal, so I installed it and found that it does work on Vista, but may have a few bugs. Here's a screenshot of its minimalistic UI: That and the tray icon's menu are the only options available to the user. You drag and drop shortcuts into the sandbox. Registration is required for activation. My testing shows that it does indeed put CCleaner out of business with respect to browser history, and there is no conflict with Avast. I am concerned about the scarcity of information about Shade. The best discussion I have found is an ongoing thread at Wilders Security. There was some enthusiasm when Shade appeared in 2015, but Sandboxie users were generally unimpressed, while others recommended the sandbox that is included with some Comodo products (which btw still support Vista). The last page or two of the thread include speculation about Sandboxie's recent troubles. I don't mean to recommend Shade 1.6, but it is an option for Vista.

That video was posted by MSFN member WinClient5270, OP of Last versions of software for Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 and perhaps the greatest Vista guru of our time! This is no doubt a much more practical idea than your earlier wish to essentially transform Vista into Windows 7. Edit: Of course I wrote that before win32 developed Windows Vista Extended Kernel.

Right you are! Unfortunately, it's beginning to look like you are the only MSFN member running Vista or XP who is really concerned about Roblox support - or perhaps there is simply no solution.

Disk Defragmenter default schedule is Weekly. If you open Windows Update and click "Check for updates," does that trigger the issue? (If yes, I will have further questions about your update history.) Are you still using VMware against your own recommendation?

Excuse me, I was under the impression that you were running XP 5 days ago. I'll get right on it, just as soon as I have time to kill.

If they worked on XP, then they should also work on Vista. I don't have time either.

Why don't you test your "gold mine of web browsers" on Windows XP? AFAIK there are only 3 or 4 browsers that work on Vista but not XP, and one of those is IE9. OT, but set Windows Update to "Never check for updates," click OK, then restart. If you can now install your preferred .NET 4.x version, then you need to read why has vista stopped automatic updates?.