Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 
  • Country

    United States

InterLinked last won the day on January 20 2022

InterLinked had the most liked content!


About InterLinked

Profile Information

  • OS
    Windows 7 x64

Recent Profile Visitors

3,983 profile views

InterLinked's Achievements



  1. Hi @ThorPan It is definitely doable, I am still using Windows 7 and Microsoft Office 2010 and have no plans to change that, ever. I have no interest in the newer garbage, I get free 365 licenses through work and such, but 365 sucks so bad I have no desire or interest in using those. I did have to install Outlook 2016 about a year or so ago since Microsoft now blocks Exchange access to Outlook 2010, so they did prevent me from using Outlook 2010 but at least I have the rest of Office 2010 still It's been so long my memory may be faulty, I don't think I ever published a file with the updates, I only published instructions and data on update supersedence. Anything I did publish on this would likely be here: https://w2k.phreaknet.org/ Locally on my network, I have all the extracted files on my deployment server, so whenever I PXE boot and reimage a machine using MDT, it gets the latest slipstreamed Windows 7 with any software I elect, including Office 2010 as best patched as I can. I haven't updated the update list in some time though I think updates for 2010 have been discontinued for some time now anyways. I guess the one silver lining is I no longer have to worry about regular software updates or maintenance
  2. Any version from the past couple years, no special configuration.
  3. Finally managed to build a working cross-compiled version. Since the previous one was built on a different system, perhaps Windows 7 was implicitly supported then, but I had to be explicit about maintaining Windows 7 support this time around. This version also has updates disabled, so for those who don't want to see nags about updates, this may also be of interest, in addition to the speed improvements - source and binary available here: https://github.com/InterLinked1/fastfilezilla
  4. Yeah, seems to be the case now actually after more testing. What's not working is when I cross compile on Linux for Windows, which I need to do to incorporate custom FileZilla patches (TL;DR, see this project: https://github.com/InterLinked1/fastfilezilla) I did this once before but didn't compile with the update nags turned off, so I need to do it again with that option passed in, and every build I've produced so far results in that missing API error: The procedure entry point GetSystemTimePreciseAsFileTime could not be located in the dynamic link library KERNEL32.dll.
  5. FileZilla no longer supports Windows 7 it seems (and the author definitely has no qualms about that, given his, er, very made up views about certain things). 3.65.0 is definitely not compatible, but 3.62.2, the last version I used, was. Does anyone know off hand what the last compatible version was? It's not documented on the website (probably intentionally), and I have to cross-compile FileZilla myself, which is extremely arduous, so trial and error is not really an option.
  6. Bit of an odd question, but has anyone gotten the Group Policy Preferences to work with Windows 2000 extended kernel, by chance? The "official" requirements are Windows XP SP3, with the GPP pack for XP, but I'm not sure how much SP3 functionality is available through extended kernel.
  7. MailNews supports OAuth, that's what I use on every version of Windows NT, from 2000, to 7, to 10.
  8. Okay, knew it was something I had to tweak, this was the fix: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/outlook-stops-connecting-on-windows-7-and-legacy-windows-versions-55263b47-921b-4ed8-98fd-c90fb326379c Applied this via Group Policy to all machines so I never have to worry about this again!
  9. I've been really struggling with this issue lately, so I'm wondering if anyone else has been having a similar issue. I use Windows 7 as my primary OS, with Office 2010 as my primary office suite, and for a long time, until mid last year, I used Outlook 2010 to access my calendar and contact. I use Roytam1's MailNews as my primary email client, as Outlook sucks at actual email, but I love it for Exchange access to my calendar/contacts, for a personal Microsoft account. At some point last year, 2010 stopped working due to the basic authentication shutoffs that Microsoft was doing So after cursing them to the moon, I installed Outlook 2016 on my PC, keeping the rest of Office 2010, so I could continue to access my calendar. At the time, it was a necessary evil to function. I hadn't used that machine in a little while due to traveling and such, and when I came back, I reimaged the machine as part of joining it to a domain and getting a fresh setup. I found that Outlook 2016 would no longer connect to Exchange accounts. With suitable updates, it can connect using IMAP just fine, but I don't want IMAP; I use a better client to do IMAP. It must be Exchange. I've now spent probably 10 hours troubleshooting what could be the issue - software updates, network issue, DNS, TLS negotiation, etc. I've looked into everything. Finally found a working version of Outlook 2016 at another site and installed verbatim on a Windows 10 VM here, and it worked. But when I did the same on a Windows 7 VM, it did not. Microsoft obviously says that Win7 is not supported, blah, blah, blah, but it was working just in the past couple months, so I think it's unlikely that something has changed in that time. Would anyone happen to know what the missing puzzle pieces might be to making this work? Since the only difference here is the OS, are there certain files that differ between the two versions of Windows, that could make a difference? Because Outlook 2016 is the newest version supported on Windows 7, this is an issue that is bigger than just Outlook 2016, it is literally about being able to access my calendar using ANY version of Outlook, on Windows 7. It is unbelievable that Microsoft is deliberately screwing with people as much as they can. I wish I could send them an invoice for all the time of mine they've wasted here! At some point I'll probably be forced to set up an on premises Exchange server, just so I can have calendaring access (it must be accessible from multiple machines), but I wasn't planning to do that this year. I'd like to keep using Outlook 2016 as long as it's supposed on any OS (which it should be until 2025). Any help here would be a lifesaver, thanks!
  10. I'm not sure if this is by design, but seems like a potential bug since this is completely ambiguous: I have about 20 email accounts set up in MailNews, but just recently I have been experimenting with multiple IMAP namespaces (Other Users, Shared Folders). I granted myself access to another account, and in the normal view, everything looks fine. However, in Unified view, any of the same types of folder are named exactly the same. For example, if I have access to both John's inbox and my inbox, they both just show up as inboxes for the main account: Perhaps the Unified View is not properly namespace aware? These have different IMAP paths, and yet they show up as exactly the same. Sure, with just 2, maybe I can guess the 2nd one is John's INBOX and the first one is my personal one. But say I have access to six people's INBOXes, how are people supposed to tell which is whose? EDIT: Sorry, not sure why I said INBOX, I mean the non-Inbox folders, e.g. Sent, Junk, Trash, etc. that are all named the same.
  11. ... and to make it worse, it doesn't seem the profile can be moved. I *copied* (I suspected moving might be a bad idea) the old profile folder to the new location. Initially I got all the standard welcome new user stuff when opening MailNews. Now I get: Ugh.... I'm an id*** now for upgrading these programs "just cause"... I really just wanted the updated New Moon for the nullish coalescsing/optional chaining support, not this whole can of worms. If there's no way to fix this, I literally have to spend 4 hours setting up my email and another 8-12 hours syncing it. Biggest headache ever. - Okay, looks like moving the *contents* of the profile folder as opposed to the profile folder, and overwriting all the default files, does work. The folder statistics had to rebuild, but at least no lasting damage appears to have been done - my email is back in business. Now I just need to figure out the New Moon stuff. I didn't have many customization to it, I can rebuild it if necessary and don't mind much, but it would be nice to be able to migrate the profile folder if that can be done.
  12. Okay, don't mean to go off on a rant here, but seriously, WHO CHANGES THE PROFILE LOCATION in MailNews? I've upgraded MailNews before, usually a couple times before, along with New Moon, and it's all gone well before using my auto install scripts, since it upgrades the application. However, it now appears to be looking in %userprofile%\AppData\Roaming\OpenSource\MailNews instead of %userprofile%\AppData\Roaming\Binary Outcast\Interlink\Profiles This is a *HUGE* break in compatibility and a divergence from the previously offered backwards compatibility. Sorry if I missed some announcement about this or something, but this is a huge change that is bound to mess up the entire userbase. I have 11 email accounts and 8 GB of email, it literally takes 3 hours to get the email accounts setup properly in MailNews. (Modern TB, to give it credit where credit is due, is way way faster, maybe less than half an hour. Interlink still uses the obsolete conception of separate IMAP and SMTP servers for who the heck knows why, which makes configuration of Interlink/MailNews a total PITA) And it seems the same thing has happened with New Moon as well - EVERYTHING is gone, and I can't even locate where the new profile folder is yet to move stuff from the old one to the new. Okay, sorry, </rant>, but this definitely made for a grumpy morning and in the future - please, please - such ABI changes should really be avoided unless absolutely necessary, this seems like it wasn't to me, changing Binary Outcast\Interlink to OpenSource\MailNews. At least now that it's happened, hopefully it won't change again. On a different note, much thanks as always for your continued development on these awesome forks, hope they will continue to be around for a long time! But also serious question - WHERE did the New Moon profile folder move to??? I can't find it.
  13. That's true, I would never use it myself. New Moon on Windows 2000 can do TLS 1.3, I'd have no reason to use Chromium on an older system. Supported by the Google store is irrelevant, since the entire Google store is irrelevant to old Chrome as it is. chromefill is manifest v2 which is no longer accepting new ones anyways. It's a fact of Google that you are on your own at this point and if you want to make an extension targeting old browsers, it will NEVER be in the store and you'll have to upload it manually from source using developer mode. Does make me think: we should probably save all the important Manifest v2 Chrome extensions locally before they're removed from the Chrome Web store. Or at least, be able to get them locally from source, e.g. uBlock Origin And for me, only NC and OC are red Right, and maybe 49 is a bit too low but I think the 60s are quite doable.
  14. Ideally, I would like for the extension to support those versions that might not work now, such as between 48 and 68. I use 70 since that's the last usable version, but obviously folks on Vista are older will be on 49, and other folks may be on other versions inbetween. The reality is though that I don't have the ability to test all these different versions for breakage, so it's up to the community to report any issues on the issue tracker, otherwise I simply don't know about them. I have tried to keep up with reported issues that way to add polyfills where needed. So officially it should support all of these versions and if it doesn't, that's a bug that would be great if folks could report.
  15. What errors show up in the developer console when you do this? I only test on version 70, so it's entirely possible that there are things supported by my browser that aren't by yours (introduced between 54 and 69).
  • Create New...