InterLinked
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by InterLinked
-
-
2 hours ago, glnz said:
OK - still here and frustrated that everything I wanted on Christmas sales sold out two months ago. Especially the LL Bean Hurricane flannel-lined shirt, which I wear when I'm using my XP computer,
So - my latest (third) used Dell Optiplex 755 that I bought on eBay two weeks ago is working, with my transplanted hard drive (XP of course), 4GB RAM, 10-year old video card and fax modem from my dead (second) used Optiplex 755. (On the latest (third) Opti 755, msoobe /a says the XP is "already activated", which is good news.)
However, the good (third) Opti 755 has an Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 CPU, which is a bit slower than the E6850 that is still in the (second, now-dead) Optiplex 755.
Questions - is it possible and not terribly difficult to take the E6850 out of the dead (second) Opti 755 and insert it into the good (third) Opti 755? Not the entire motherboard from the dead (second) Opti 755, which may have died, just its slightly faster CPU? And will the E6850 work if transplanted into the motherboard that now has the E6550?
The manuals for the Optiplex 755 are < HERE > and < HERE > <-- these are immediate pdf downloads on my Firefox. I have the "Desktop" or "DT" form factor. Please also point me to any step-by-step videos you might know.
Don't forget - I'm good with duct tape!
Thanks,
Curious, why the 755 and not the 760 or the 780?
I like the 780 the best, but the 755 was the last I think with the built in floppy drive. And none of them have PS/2 ports... gak... can't have everything!
0 -
Just now, siria said:
In KM-Forum someone posted 3 direct links to current version for ActiveX, NPAPI, PPAPI.
Not sure if useful, just in case:
wayback-version of those 3 links from date between v371 and next (v387)
(each ca 21MB)
ActiveX: https://web.archive.org/web/20200516155502/https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/latest/help/install_flash_player_ax.exe
NPAPI: https://web.archive.org/web/2020052117103/https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/latest/help/install_flash_player.exe
PPAPI: https://web.archive.org/web/20200516003347/https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/latest/help/install_flash_player_ppapi.exeThanks, I ended up extracting the whole ~400 MB file and finding these and a bunch of other stuff in them.
I kept all the Windows files and deleted the Mac and Linux junk.
If people block the Windows Update removing Flash support then I think we're home free from here.
I probably won't necessarily install it right or use it actively but it will be handy to keep handy. I don't trust the web to all of a sudden remove Flash everywhere. That takes years, maybe decades, not months.
0 -
Please change username to "InterLinked". Thank you!
0 -
On 12/13/2020 at 12:33 AM, Win10-Hater said:
Wanted to addon even more:
I can't believe that Microsoft, William Henry Gates the Third's large software company created the crap that is Windows 10 when I know that they have created wonderful stuff in the past such as Windows Vista, 7, XP, 2000, Office 2003-2010 etc..
I'm sure all of you retro Windows diehards share my opinions about Windows 10 and the MS of today.
I want to conclude this post here by saying that Windows 10 is just crap with nothing very useful added to it (Task View is a new feature but I never used it and have never found it to be user friendly) and that Windows 95, 2000 and Vista are the gods of Windows OSes.
Yeah, it's very sad. As I said, Microsoft has forgotten about its longtime loyalist corporate and power user base and moved on to another market - the fickles who can't tell a computer from a hard drive from a tablet. Very sad.
2 -
OK, here is is everyone!
Actual download (425MB): https://web.archive.org/web/20200618035158/https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/installers/archive/fp_32.0.0.371_archive.zip
Sourced from: https://web.archive.org/web/20200609220527/https://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/archived-flash-player-versions.html
Live links don't work anymore. Adobe really wants this stuff gone from the face of the earth.
0 -
On 12/10/2020 at 10:08 AM, dencorso said:On 7/28/2020 at 6:26 AM, Dr. Drill said:
All versions Adobe Flash Player newer than 32.0.0.371 contain a time-bomb.
After 12-Jan-2021 local SWF-files does not playback. The latest working version is 32.0.0.371.
Use a virtual machine to check. Install the Adobe Flash Player and set the clock to January 2021.
Wow, thanks! How did you figure that out?
Are you saying if I install 32.0.0.371, I should be good to go? Wonder how old that is.
Looks like Adobe doesn't have the older versions on their site, do you know where the old versions can be found?
Thanks!
0 -
On 12/13/2020 at 11:22 PM, Programmer Nerd said:
Hello MSFN users. I decided to create an account here because when I'm searching for error messages and information about Windows I'm constantly running into this website.
I do software development and and I test my programs on a variety of versions of Windows to ensure it works good on Windows.
Please make sure your programs are supported on *ALL* versions of Windows NT!
Nothing irks me more than apathetic developers that make their software incompatible with any version of Windows not currently in stores.
0 -
5 hours ago, Gansangriff said:
Pale Moon might fit your needs. Try out their current one or maybe "Roytams forked Moon". It's just important, that you ask questions at the right place, because Moonchild Productions, the Pale Moon developer, doesn't support the forked version of his browsers.
Of course it's a niche browser, meaning not everything will run. With Google ruling more and more parts of the internet and their browser engine becoming like the standard, things are tough for these guys, but they still stand strong. Palemoon has the good old Firefox addons. I use it with the old NoScript V5 to block JavaScript, when it's needed.
Is it all about the RAM the browser uses? If you're short on RAM, then yes. For comparison, let's put the old Pentium 3 on the table. A nineteen years old computer with a single core at 1 GHz and 512 MB of RAM. If your computer looks more modern than this machine, then it should be absolutely capable of a good amount of fun on the web. On screen we have Roytams browser (New Moon) in the No-SSE2 version for old processors. It's lightweight and capable of accessing most websites, including my banking website, Invidous Youtube videos, the web flea market ebay-kleinanzeigen (script-heavy web site) and of course the MSFN forum (also with scripts turned on).
Some values of various browsers when idling on a blank page.
Edge Win10 -> 150-200 MB
Palemoon on Linux Mint 64-Bit -> 163 MB
Palemoon (from last year) on Salix-Linux 32-Bit -> 155 MB
Palemoon on Win10 -> 120 MB
Roytams Moon on 32-Bit XP -> 95 MB
Retrozilla (old Firefox) on XP-VM -> 23 MB
Netscape from 2008 (old Firefox) -> 15 MB
Dillo on Salix-Linux 32-Bit -> 9 MBBut that doesn't indicate a lot. Because old Firefoxes and Dillo aren't capable of the terrible modern stuff.
Hi, there,
I've actually use both Pale Moon and New Moon, and I have New Moon. It's not at all what I would consider a lightweight browser. It uses more memory than Iron does! Something like a few hundred MB just to open and load a single page. Interesting it's only 95 MB on XP, but there must be more overhead on Windows 7.
That's why I'm struggling here. I've tried all the browsers that most people consider "lightweight" that are somewhat modern, e.g. New Moon, and my finding is that they are not lightweight at all, CPU and RAM just go through the roof, just like any browser.
QTWeb is the only one I have used that comes close, but if I load bing.com, the entire browser crashes, so it's obviously not going to work out.
0 -
Has anyone found any real lightweight browsers that actually work well on the modern web? By this, I mean tabbed browsing, HTML5, CSS3, etc. - basically drop-in compatibility with the duopoly of browsers that dominate today.
I'm talking about something like QtWeb, which I found mentioned on here, and is actually lightweight but incompatible with many things I need to view. Any way to have my cake and eat it, too?
Even K-Meleon is not all it's cracked up to be. Uses 120 MB of RAM viewing the same page that only brings QtWeb up to 68K RAM.
Looking up "lightweight web browser Windows" online is useless. They bring up all sorts of trash solutions, like Opera, Vivaldi, Microsoft Edge, Firefox, and Chrome. Gak!
When I say lightweight, I mean lightweight, not "lightweight if you your PC is a tricked out server", which is what all these other sites claim.
Running Windows 7 on actually decent hardware, but I'm tired of browsers taking over the computer, and want something that does its job and nothing more.
Customization, easy toggles to disable JS, images, pop-ups, ads, etc. a bonus.
I don't care if sites tell me "this browser is not supported", as long as it actually works. I use Iron 70 mostly (fork of Chrome 70), and it's more than 2 years out of date so I get these messages all the time, but there's not actually anything that doesn't work. It's just FUD.
0 -
On 12/6/2020 at 2:52 AM, jaclaz said:
I think you really need the additional RAM, XP runs just fine with 1 GB, but nowadays browsers (please read a stupidly bloated websites) think it is one of those "all you can eat" places, and 2 GB is probably the bare minimum to have a "normal" experience with a few tabs/sites open in the browser at the same time.
As a side note, the more you can access with QTweb (and with javascript disabled), the better.
jaclaz
Hey, I've been scouring around this place for suggestions for lightweight browsers, and glad I found this. Taking a look now.
Anything else you recommend that actually works with most sites and is lightweight? I know, oxymoron, but I'm hoping there's something...
0 -
22 hours ago, D.Draker said:
A simple addon ? It's not simple for modern day users , blocking scripts ? Well good luck with that , all those modern bloated websites simply won't work , even if user knows what he's doing. Try to use NoScript here , for example . You won't even be able to leave a comment . And the majority of users won't bother themselves with figuring out what went wrong , they will simply uninstall this extension . I think the devs of NoScript really should make it more simple-user friendly , add some templates for example , like light / mid / heavy privacy.
Even though I like your comment in general , I don't think Linux is a "user-friendly" system. And it's bloated with spying as well . Just install a fresh Linux and see the connections it's making right away .
Well, Linux, quite frankly, sucks as a workstation OS in general. It's often impractical to use anything other than Windows for a variety of reasons. I love Windows in general, I just hate the most recent releases of it.
1 -
Bad news for Flash users:
QuoteSkipping this last Flash update won't remove this "time bomb," however.
Adobe told ZDNet that the killswitch code was added months before in previous releases and that this last Flash update only modifies the language used in the prompt that will ask users to uninstall the app.
Anyone know what the last Flash update is *WITHOUT* the kill switch?
Trust Adobe to screw things up even more than Microsoft.
0 -
On 10/1/2020 at 5:27 AM, Gansangriff said:
I'd rather recommend than listening to the FBI but to upgrade your very unique Brain.exe instead. It's the best anti-virus out there.
I agree with the person who said this was one of the best posts on the forum in a long time.
I have used Windows for a long time and have NEVER gotten a virus except for the one time I actually tried, too, in a dev environment. If anyone else "accidentally" just rolls through a bunch of UAC prompts for unverified software from sketchy publishers, I guess they don't have brain.exe
On 10/1/2020 at 5:27 AM, Gansangriff said:The only downside is, that Brain.exe can't be bought for money and downloading it is impossible, too. It must be fed proper knowledge to grow. And then one day, you will be capable of using the old operating systems online without running into a wall.
Would I recommend to average users who use their brain on other things than computers to use Windows XP and Windows 7 for example? No, because that would put them easily in danger.
Eh, not really. Just FUD. I recommend people stay on Windows 7, the technically inclined and very-much-not-so alike.
On 10/1/2020 at 5:27 AM, Gansangriff said:But if you know, what you are doing, then you'll be able to avoid the problems. Use a hardware firewall, that you can configure. Block unwanted Javascripts.
This actually speeds up web browsing a fair bit!
On 10/1/2020 at 5:27 AM, Gansangriff said:Block everything, you didn't ask for. Don't click on everything that sounds like a promising help to your problems. Learn to read links before clicking on them. These things.
Pro tip: if you see a sketchy email, and you don't already, switch to plain text mode for reading it.
Sometimes it's obvious mail is phishing mail, but sometimes I like reading it in PT mode just to see what's up. And since it's PT mode, they can't exploit any security vulnerabilities, execute anything, load anything, or track anything.
On 10/1/2020 at 5:27 AM, Gansangriff said:Also consider that something like Windows XP got more secure over time, as less and less people were using it. Windows 7 is still a very attractive target for mean hackers with circa 15% market share (2020).
I wouldn't say XP is more secure... just less likely and less worthy of being exploited.
Windows 7 gets security updates for 3 or 4 more years, anyways.
2 -
On 12/8/2020 at 1:20 PM, Dave-H said:
Five more updates today!
KB4486698 - Office
KB4486742 - Outlook
KB4484372 - PowerPoint
KB4493140 - Office
KB4493148 - ExcelThe updates still keep coming!
WOW! Now I'm beginning to think the Office team forgot they were supposed to end support...
SHHH!!! Let's not tell them...
In actuality, these are once again RCE bugs, so crossing my fingers there are more in January so we get more updates!
1 -
6 hours ago, j7n said:
Where specifically do you observe a greater speed in Windows 2000 compared to XP with superfluous services, system file protection, and the visual theme switched off? The boot time in XP is shorter,
I'm willing to take a slow boot for faster overall operation. Fast boot is meaningless if it's laggy afterwards.
6 hours ago, j7n said:with a similar size of startup programs and drivers(!). For a weird reason, there is a significant delay when deleting files in Total Commander under Windows 2000. I don't have much experience with Win2k and am probably missing more important differences.
I also use W2K with KernelEx, not vanilla SP4, but should be only better in that case.
I've tried with XP and it's just never been as good. W2K is great out of the box with near-XP compatibility with KernelEx.
6 hours ago, j7n said:I get this WOW experience using any old OS, especially freshly installed, on a modern hard drive.
Yeah, agreed!
I use Windows 7, which isn't as fast as something older like W2K, but there are other benefits obviously.
0 -
On 6/29/2020 at 3:30 PM, NT 6.0 said:
Wow! What a long and thoughtful post. I'd like to voice my opinion, or to be exact, share my knowledge with you. Flat Design is not something for everyone - neither is it for me - but here it is Microsoft itself that started this trend. It started with Windows 8..and it changed the standard design language for quite a few years. As we all know, the reasoning behind that is mostly scaling. Scaling marble and wood or glass textures across multiple devices does not work. And for Microsoft, that was a huge deal. Their idea was (and is) to make Windows an all-rounder. A platform that works with touch inputs as well as with classic mice and keyboards. That means that there are many different sizes of displays and that there must also be a focus on touch functionality.
I don't consider myself someone who likes Apple. But here I have to give them credit for once: Apple understands that there cannot be the same OS for devices that mainly rely on touchscreens and devices that are meant to be used with classical input types. So they have MacOS and IOS, and it works. No bulky buttons, no unnatural movements (like swiping with a mouse), etc.
There is nothing wrong with the old. But I fear it is simply in our nature that we continue to evolve, try out new things and therefore change. I am not someone who necessarily likes that idea, but it is a fact. I would much rather use Vista than 10, but the evolution must go on. You could argue that Windows 3.1 was good enough already, why did they have to introduce a start menu? What is it with that taskbar? If Microsoft would have stopped innovating, we would still be stuck there - assuming that no one else would have done that, which is highly unlikely. It lies like the process that some changes are good..some are not. But to find that out, you have to try it and see what happens. Without this general approach to anything, our society would be nowhere close to where it is today. Another thing that I have noticed is that with time passing, you are simply required to get accustomed to tech. You need to do certain things online, you NEED to learn how to use a computer properly, etc. I am not supportive of that idea, but that is simply how our modern society works. If you want to hop onto the train, you will have to accept these principles. Society is merciless to those who do not want to change - in certain cases, I included. As it is generally assumed that you know how e.g. Windows works, Microsoft has decided to streamline Windows to make it simpler and faster to use. Windows exist for quite a while now, so it is assumed that we know how to do certain things, like navigating Windows without everything having a separate text that explains what this and that does. That is why skeuomorphism initially existed; to make the computing experience more natural. But now, after the internet and computers existing for a while now, it is generally believed that we know enough about these things. So that e.g. skeuomorphism is not necessary any longer, as it was meant to be a feature mainly, a helper so to say. But as you can see, we humans tend to get bored with staring at the same thing over and over again...welcome neumorphism. If you are not a part of the group that constantly evolves together with society and tech hand in hand, you are out of luck. It is sad how our world works. Do you want this job? Can't use a computer? 100 others can. Bye-bye. Changing this is virtually impossible, it is always about progress and progressing and there is not much if any room for anything else. I wish it was different, but it's not. So I have come to accept that. All while trying to do the things I like the way I LIKE them to do. E.g. by having a notebook with W10 for work and trying to install Vista on my machine at home - with which I have not been successful so far.
And regarding all the other numerous issues, that Windows 10 has; as long as we consumers accept it and deal with it, nothing will change. We would have to boycott W10, avoid it. The issue is that we start to depend on things. We can't boycott W10, e.g. I have to go to work and use it there. Or buy a PC with it preinstalled, or update it, because my boss requires it. Maybe because certain software or functionality is needed. It's a vicious circle. For most, it is not worth to make such compromises. And if you do, you know that you will not be missed. Because others will do it instead of you. I fear it's just how it is..I wish it was different, but it isn't.
I think this time it is different. There is really a lot of backlash against Windows 10, and really Windows 8, that has just never been the case with previous version of Windows. Yeah, there was Vista backlash, but people got over it, and Vista itself wasn't bad at all. Same thing with XP when it came out, though I think 2000 is better.
My point is, people really are boycotting Windows 10, and I hope it will never see the adoption rates that previous versions of Windows have.
Microsoft has made my job easy. They have lost me as a customer. I have all the software from them already that I'll ever need. My wallet thanks them!
1 -
On 6/29/2020 at 1:33 PM, Tommy said:
I personally always preferred the classic theme UI. It's fast, snappy, and to me looks cool. The fact that Windows 10 removed it all together just makes me a bit disgusted. I don't really like the entirely flat look in the UI. But so many things have followed that trend as far as logos go, Google even being one of them.
I think that was removed in Windows 8 actually, if we are talkin natively.
On 6/29/2020 at 1:33 PM, Tommy said:A bit of why I don't care for Windows 10's UI also stems from the fact that we use it at work and for the older people who don't get on the computer much but needs to in order to request time off or look at the pay stubs...I always have to tell them how to navigate. One question I have is...what was wrong with the Windows 98 styled start menu? Or really, the 9x/NT4/2000 styled one? With Windows 10, I discovered that you can log off by right clicking the start menu flag and choosing shut down or sign off. Most of the others that help people when I can't tell them to click on the start menu and then click on the little person looking icon and then signing off. Why does something simple like that have to be tucked away? I liked when you'd click on Start (can you truly even call it a "start" menu anymore?) I guess it does say "Start" when you hover over the flag. But you'd click on it and you had actual text of what each option did. Shut down...log off...help....search...etc. I can't completely knock Windows alone because most software developers are moving towards picture only icons. Remember the older IE versions? Back, Forward, Stop, all of those were listed under the respective icon buttons. Now you don't get any of that. Now you have to tell someone to click on the little house icon if you want them to visit their homepage. It's so frustrating because not everyone understands these types of terms.
I also don't care for the "other user" option on Windows 10. I can't speak for Windows 8 but especially on Windows 2000/XP, I preferred always being able to type in your username and password instead of bringing up the last user like Windows 10 seems to do. That throws people for a loop too, more than you know. I liked the CTRL+ALT+DEL to log in which it is obviously capable of doing if enabled...but then you just had a popup window asking for your credentials. Easy peasy! Then again, these are people who complain about having to change their password every year as they finally got this one down pat.
What you described is possible in literally EVERY version of Windows NT. On every version I have ever used, Windows 2000 through Windows 10, I always require CTRL + ALT + DEL and typing and the username and password.
The "other user" thing in Windows 10 IS stupid but it's not like it doesn't let you do that.
I have noticed it's almost impossible to distinguish a locked computer from one that is logged on. Maybe impossible, actually. Often on Windows 10, I'll start typing my password in the username box, thinking I just locked the computer, nope, I just booted it up. I *NEVER* made that mistake <= Windows 7. It was always very clear what the current state of the computer was.
Windows 10 is just a disaster on so many levels.
On 6/29/2020 at 1:33 PM, Tommy said:Now...for a company like Meijer which I work for...for those who don't know, it's basically a supermarket like Walmart but is privately owned and only in 6 states right now. But they're in a bit of a pickle and have things set up so archaically because many of their training modules use Flash which is obviously going away.
It's a complete joke, so many sites still use flash. I will be downloading the latest version on 12/31 and blocking the Windows update that removes Flash from IE.
On 6/29/2020 at 1:33 PM, Tommy said:Many things we use also rely on Internet Explorer. So for most things, we have to use IE but then for training, we have to switch to Google Chrome. Some want to use Chrome for everything but that's not possible as some things are broken in Chrome and don't function properly in it. We did use Windows 7 before it was retired and that was set up a bit differently as they had Flash for IE installed but then they had removed it about a year before we moved to new computers with Windows 10 on them. I did prefer Windows 7 only because it was a bit more configurable and they had a generic user account rather than utilizing our own accounts like we do on Windows 10.
I don't think has anything to do with Windows 7 vs. Windows 10 at all.
On 6/29/2020 at 1:33 PM, Tommy said:We're still using Windows Server 2008 R2 for Citrix and I'm sure other things so I'm assuming that they're receiving custom support for it. But I am a bit concerned with how some of these things are going to measure up, especially when Flash goes away. I really don't think there was a lot of planning ahead for these things. I know I'm sort of straying away from the actual OS discussion but so much of this ties into the poor planning of deployment and maintaining which I'm certain also isn't being done. When we got these new computers, they weren't too bad. They use Ryzen 5 processors and have 8GBs of RAM installed...but they're slowing down so much already that people are complaining quite a bit. What also gets me is they're still using Windows 10 version 1803 which has this problem we've dubbed as the black screen of death, where the screen goes black randomly for no seemingly good reason and even though the computer hasn't crashed, you can't see a thing and the only thing you can do is hold the power button down and restart the computer. Horrible when you're in the middle of working on something! When you head over to the 1XBET Casino, there is a promo code that has to be used to get the welcome offer of up to €1500 with 150 free spins also being given. 1xbet promo code free spins and 1xBet members can activate the bonus code in their account. 1XBET Exclusive Casino Bonus: Up to €1950 and 150 free spins. Establishing sports betting and online casino games since 2007, 1xBet is a great option to play for real money.
But to really cut to the chase, I'd be all for a new version of Windows that was designed for real simplicity. For those like me who preferred Windows 98 and didn't care how "modern" it looks. Straight-forward and functional are good enough for me. While Windows 7 was probably the best OS Microsoft cranked out for a while and is probably the best of the NT 6.0 line...even it wasn't 100% straight-forward as previous versions. Windows 95 was probably a hallmark staple in the Windows series because of how much more straight-forward it was to use. No guessing what buttons did, it just told you in the UI. The OS/UI didn't assume that every person on the planet who uses that software knew what the picture icons meant. While I've figured most of them out, I'm a guru who works with this stuff day in and day out so I get it. But for those who don't use computers very much or have a hard time with them, MS needs to either have an option or a separate version of Windows that could be inter-compatible with updates but go back to some of the original Windows 95 roots that also maintains security and integrity of Windows NT. And of course, not completely forcing updates and restarts whenever the OS feels like it.
And honestly, as I mentioned up above...why does the OS have to be so large in filesize now? Many have been able to whittle down the OS to much smaller sizes which means lower overhead and most likely speeding up the OS itself. Even powerful PCs can start stumbling the more the OS is patched and the size continues to increase.
Yeah, it's amazing how Windows 2000 is so speedy compared to every other version of Windows NT out there, including XP. Seriously, every time I use it, I just say WOW. Everything is just instantaneous.
With the Windows 2000 extended kernel and some custom DLL patches thanks to @win32, I think that's as close as you'll get. It can run most modern programs that can run on XP, so you're pretty good there.
1 -
8 hours ago, crashnburn4u said: I hate those as well, but never thought of Vomit as an expression but I get the "degeneration" of UI
Who that?
Look for the Roytam browser builds part 2 thread in the XP forum on this site.
1 -
11 minutes ago, Jody Thornton said:
How do you find it better DanR20? I'm moving to Interlink Mail and News in January.
I would run Roytam1's version but there is no interest (last that I check) in making an x64 build yet, is there?
Curious, why are you moving from MN to Interlink?
They seem to be virtually identical, except MN has wider software compatibility, so it seems objectively superior.
I had to use IL MN for a few days while I had a script error downloading MN, but all the idiosyncrasies of the programs seem to be identical.
1 -
2 hours ago, Koishi Komeiji said:
Providing you're actually able to execute the download without having to go through a bunch of hurdles to get there (trying multiple different browsers/configurations and whatnot), which was essentially my point when it came to MEGA - you can't simply wget your way to victory like you can most other places even if you had another device and hand-copied the URL, for instance. (Which is something I've had to do quite a few times lol.)
I was more getting at the fact that interacting with MEGA basically requires you to interact with its horrendous web UI or use megatools on the command line. Posting a torrent link would be a lot easier to share a pirated file as a matter of fact, at least I can use whatever client I damn well want lol and it won't throttle me... The latter of which wasn't obvious to me initially and that basically annoyed me enough to warrant creating this thread.
That's a fair point, but I'd be surprised if any of these cloud provider pages supported no-JS or the ability to scrape/ use wget.
Due to my current situation, I have quite a few such accounts but the long term plan will be getting everything onto on-premises file servers, and then I won't need to worry about this. If I need to provide others with file access, I can throw it up onto an actual web server.
2 hours ago, Koishi Komeiji said:In regards to the whole piracy thing? Yeah lots of providers host pirated content, but for some reason (and going by people I've spoke to in warez circles, one in particular) MEGA is the most popular followed by either Google Drive or those weird RapidShare/MegaUpload-esque ones that throttle your download speed unless you have a premium account yourself. There's clearly a reason why this is the case tbh, probably where it's hosted and the fact the connection is 'further encrypted' than most of the others, but what does it matter when the government (and several big mostly US-based companies and govt funded organisations) log all your requests in the first place no matter what - unless you happen to be the likes of Dominic Cummings and want to get your eyes tested at Barnard Castle?
Right... but if they can't tell what you are doing...
If I wanted to be really anonymous, I'd dial in to a BBS or use dial-up. Those can't really be traced back to me by the feds.
(by the way, nice BBS up at bbs.interlinked.us)
Even that supports TLS 1.3
2 hours ago, Koishi Komeiji said:"Compatibility with older clients is not an issue, so I don't really see what the fuss is about anyways." I guess this depends on what you're supposed to be serving to audience-wise. An interesting take for a 'general audience' (say, for a small business) could be to redirect requests that aren't taken <=TLS1.2 to a security reminder page or something instead, I don't know - just to essentially help less technically inclined users.
But then, you *do* support TLS 1.2, and it shows on your security scores. In order to pass those tests, you have to completely not support it, which means that wouldn't be possible.
The only such users I can think of are those using unpatched Internet Explorer versions on <=XP, or something like that...
2 hours ago, Koishi Komeiji said:This could also be interesting of a way to stop some spam requests from being successful since they'd attempt connecting from older clients (without country blocking too so it would be friendlier in this case). Just a thought I guess.
"I don't have any opinion on this, but a little side note. I own a little intel compute stick with intel Atom and 2gb of ram. I once was downloading 12gb file from mega with chrome and it was just fine. I don't think that it is really that resource heavy, but I could be wrong."
@Jaguarek62 I did something like this in 2016 or so with Firefox and couldn't actually touch the PC for about twenty minutes, I thought it was gonna bloody explode or something - it just literally froze and the fan was spinning so much I... dijsgbsnsdjkkn
"Personally like yandex disk"
@TheSaga Yeah, Yandex overall seems to generally have decent to good 'legacy browser' support
Maybe... but half their pages are in Russian, which is really annoying.
Yandex is my mail provider since they let you have unlimited accounts/storage, if you have your own domain. Score!
Of course, I use a mail client (MailNews), since I have 11 email accounts, so I rarely use the website.
2 hours ago, Koishi Komeiji said:- they're the only email account provider I can actually think of who have a lite version that actually fully works on Opera Mini (J2ME) and given I use that myself as well as XP x64... Offtopic but Is it weird I feel like your username would just sound great as a British post-punk / glam-metal rock band name? Thanks for the support on the thread either way
0 -
14 hours ago, cc333 said:
I dunno. I'm kind of neutral on this particular topic of file hosting sites.
However, I will agree that there's lots wrong with the modern internet, particularly the (in my opinion) overemphasis on security. I can understand the need for good security for important things like online shopping, banking, and other such things. But why does every single website need to be forced to use protocols and cipher suites that only a few of the newest browsers (namely Chrome and its derivatives) support?! It's not like they're ALL dealing in sensitive info! For example, I don't see the point in Wikipedia using strict TLS1.2 and 1.3 (at least for the public side); for users logging in to create/edit pages, I suppose it's fine.
c
Just my opinion, and I use to be irritated by this, too.
However, TLS 1.3 is supported w/o zero hassle on every version of Windows NT. I don't use Windows 9x so I can't comment there but the word on the street is it has been done as well.
Even Lynx does SSL.
Here's a good article which raises some points: https://scotthelme.co.uk/we-dont-do-https-for-backwards-compatibility/
Sure, HTTPS might not be necessary for everything.
Disclaimer: I am a webmaster who mandates HTTPS on all of my websites and as of this summer, I require minimum TLS 1.2. Anything older is obsolete, seldom used, and a drag on security scores.
Compatibility with older clients is not an issue, so I don't really see what the fuss is about anyways.
0 -
I don't mean any offense to anyone, but I think this seems rather shortsighted to me.
Mega.nz is the only provider that offers up to 50 GB free storage (or at least it did, I don't think that is the case for new accounts anymore).
Anyone can use any platform to share pirated files, it is merely a tool which I don't think ought to be held against it. It's way more accessible than, say, posting torrent links or something like that.
HTTP? Really? Come on, even Windows 2000 can do HTTPS with TLS 1.3. Even Windows 98 can too, I've heard. There are likely very few members on here that are not able to use HTTPS. Maybe a poll might clarify this, but there are no incompatabilities between older platforms and secure web browsing. Just sounds like the OP doesn't know how to do SSL.
0 -
On 12/1/2020 at 10:11 PM, Dixel said:
Hi , first off , I'm sorry to remind : this top is : Share your Windows >Vista< experience! and not about "the look of 7".
There's too much to write about the differencies . Some of the ugliest things about Win 7 are : fonts (yes that "true" type ones) - washed out and blurry , oversaturated UI colours , like for ravers at the acid party. I always had the best monitors available , so I can tell. Also , sound , oh boy. It's nowhere near Vista's punchy and sharp audio quality . I have Asus D2 , so I can also tell the difference . Win 7 has fat , thick , flat , ugly taskbar . etc , etc , etc .
No comment about your other comments, but this doesn't really qualify as a discounter.
Yeah, I hate that too, but it's easy to change. Taskbar Properties -> Never combine / use small icons.
I don't see how people on W7/8/10 can live w/o that. That was the worst thing ever that they did, makes PCs as hard to use as Macs almost!!
So, the default action is bad, but with a registry tweak or GPO you can mitigate this mess.
On 12/1/2020 at 10:11 PM, Dixel said:P.S. Compare Vista's wonderful orb and Win 7 (I don't even know how to name that "acid something").
I've always noticed that, but not really preferred one over the other...
If the best of Vista and the best of 7 could be combined, and maybe the best of W2K, we'd have the ultimate Windows...
0 -
On 12/1/2020 at 9:38 PM, TECHGEEK said:
IMHO, Windows 7 looked a bit less beautiful than Vista with its fat minimize, maximize and close buttons whereas Vista looked proper with smaller, thinner ones. Also, Win7 performed slower than Vista (or even 8.x) on exact same hardware and I'm sure many other Vista users on this forum have felt that way. But no denying that Win7 was one of the best versions of Windows.
I agree that W7 is overrated compared to Vista. Vista was just ahead of its time, not inherently bad. I never had any issues when I used it daily. Personally, I use W7 as it's the last good version of Windows and modern enough to run anything I need to. I don't see the extended kernel changing that really but it is a neat effort.
DreamScene is one of the few things I think that can't be natively done on Vista, and it doesn't work in a VM so one day I will get it on real hardware and experience that. Worth running just for that.
I like the W7 Explorer much better than the Vista one. I don't like how it expands to everything and the navigation on the left is terrible. But I've heard the search is better.
W7 is better, though of course I have Libraries and Homegroup and all that junk disabled in the Registry so all I see is Desktop, Computer, and Network. I have a lot of mapped drives so that makes it easy.
And the dual lock and power action on the Vista start menu is nice, but not a deal breaker I guess.
0
Cortana Location Wrong
in Windows 10
Posted
Why not dial your local time and temperature number?