NotHereToPlayGames

Technically, I only echoed other reports (MSFN, reddit, GitHub, XP Forums, Twitter, Vogons (this one is not as "recent" of a report)). Several users have reported stability issues. But all remind everyone that it is still "beta". I myself do not use Mypal because I hate the raccoon icon. I know that's not a "real" reason to not use it, but it is MY reason for not using it and we all have our own "likes" and "dislikes". Although, I am "in the market" for a browser update. My XP x64 remains my DOMINANT DEFAULT "everyday" computer. This very thread's v13.5.2036 is this computer's default web browser. Technically it's not a "default", I do NOT set up operating systems to have a "default" web browser - you can NOT open HTML links from email clients, you can NOT open HTML links from desktop shortcuts, apps can NOT launch a web site, et cetera). My SECONDARY browser used to be BNAV 20210820. I like its interface. But Google Voice instant messaging no longer works for BNAV 20210820 (and instant messaging is the ONLY reason I use a secondary so that I can clear primary browser sessions throughout the day but keep secondary instant messaging running all day). Google Voice for PHONE CALLS do not work in ANY of the Roytam offereings (haven't for a few years), but the instant messaging side does and it's nice to have a SECONDARY running "on the side" for this function and this function ONLY. I have ZERO use for ANYTHING other than 360Chrome outside of ONE function - instant messaging "on the side" while enabling me to close browser sessions on my PRIMARY. Instant messaging does work in newer BNAV versions, but I hate the newer interface and will not use it (sure, it's probably able to be reverted, I have not dived that deep and likely will not). No diferent from users not using my 360Chrome because they don't like the XP skin. We all have "likes" and "dislikes". My current SECONDARY was recently changed to NM28 2022-04-29. (first version with telemetry removals in the changelog and recent enough that Google Voice instant messaging works). It is "single-process" but I only use it for ONE tab (Google Voice instant messaging). If there is a way to REPLACE the Mypal raccoon logo, I might give it a run as my secondary. But nope, will not run with the raccoon.

Appears to me to be a DIFFERENT error message and NOT associated with randomUUID(). Please provide a screencap where you are seeing randomUUID() in the error console. Note that this is a "two-stage" error, you will not get the randomUUID() error until AFTER to fix/polyfill the Object.hasOwn error (which I also did NOT see at wallapop). For our LG example, you get this error with no polyfills fixed - Only AFTER you fix that error, will you then get this error - Only after fixing the first error that brings the second error then fixing the second error will the LG site work correctly -

Quite possible. But I do NOT use nor "support" single-process browsers in 2023!

You have to provide the website's URL in order for the script to be improved. Otherwise, it's a bit akin to just being a Negative Nancy or we have to assume it's a website you shouldn't be on in the first place because you "can't" share the URL. That's a new one, never heard of it. What pros/cons to it versus Violentmonkey or Tampermonkey? I actually "heavily" modify my Tampermonkey but instructions on how or why very likely cannot be discussed herein.

I use Tampermonkey 4.13 and have not had any issues with it. I prefer it over Violentmonkey. The "matched scripts" of Violentmonkey seems nice though.

You would also have to export .reg's from the VM and import to the host. You are really REALLY REALLY just better off archiving whatever you need saved and REINSTALLING your XP. If you have the ability to install to a VM, then you have the ability to install to your real hardware. I would suggest a program called DriverGrabber so you don't have to hunt for any drivers not part of OEM XP.

TheLeftOldComputer - you can either spend 6 weeks trying to restore IE6 because you uninstalled IE7 incorrectly or spend 30 to 50 minutes depening on hardware to just reinstall XP.

Seems quite low-risk and unneeded. Speaking for myself, I block/disable the modal overlays that this seems to specifically target. Have you seen any web site actually "require" it?

In other news, you're right, reading through that Malwarebytes forum has a lot of XP Hate. Only makes me stick to my guns and use XP all the more. Some form of "reverse psychology", if one truly wants to rid the world of XP, caps, or BOLD, tell everyone how much you LOVE it and then they won't dig in their heals. Clique this. Click that.

It's micromanaging. Plain and simple. Like correcting people's English, grammar, or spelling. "Nobody cares". But yeah, "OT". And I'm not referring to the buzzer beater to extend the clock. waka waka waka

Use of bold every other word seems a bit unorthodox, while we are micromanaging everybody's typing. Clique this. Click that. Regarding Malwarebytes, has anyone demonstrated if v1.75 definitions come from a different IP/Server than v3?

That last post cites this -- "I have quoted exile360’s August 13, 2020 post above because I tend to agree with his opinion that current definitions cannot be expected to work effectively with a 10-year-old version of Malwarebytes, however I am not an expert on that myself." I have to agree. "Having" a definition created SEVERAL YEARS after the "engine" does not indicate that the engine KNOWS WHAT TO DO with that "definition". Caveat emptor!

I understood it perfectly fine. HOWEVER, it took DECADES of practice as I work for a very diverse global company and "see" and "hear" that type of sentence structure every minute of the day. English is a very VERY difficult language to learn. Or so I'm told, I've been speaking it since the days of sleeping with a Teddy Bear so I cannot speak from firsthand experience.

I'm going to have to copy that one and use often, lol.

I did read it, yes. But I have also read dozens of articles informing the user how to remove the usage of unique identifiers. It is public knowledge and to hide that while shouting about "bans" is a bit BIASED in my view. I myself take that route. I remove/disable telemetry before using Win10. I remove/disable telemetry before using 360Chrome. Even an HONEST Firefox user will tell you that Firefox collects telemetry if the end user does not remove/disable it. An antivirus's sole role is to prevent viruses. The effectiveness of that and that alone (and ability to run on XP) should dictate whether it is discussed in this thread. PLUS how to disable telemetry. Software collecting telemetry is "much ado about nothing" (many do this in the guise of "improving their product"). But an informed user that is NOT showed how to disable telemetry (or even hides that it can be disabled) is also pushing an agenda. There are two sides to this coin. And both sides are equally legit, or so it seems to me. I've said all I need to say, I trust the MSFN Reader is intelligent and above average of a conumser or they would not be here in the first place. I trust them to make the informed decision.

I don't think any US Government Department/Agency has publicly "banned" XP. But I can find several articles stating that they have abandoned XP in favor of 10 -- https://www.minitool.com/news/defense-finally-abandon-xp-for-windows-10.html Does that mean that all XP-related threads here at MSFN should "move on"? Again, a resounding NO. I only site this "correlation" (if it can be seen as such) in the sense that if we can PROVE that Kaspersky of 2023 is NOT THE SAME as the Kaspersky of 2017, then let the reader make the informed decision on whether to use it or not. In the world of IT and computers, almost ALL articles in 2017 no longer apply in 2023 - unsure if this is the case for Kaspersky.

I have not been following the thread but did see a very tiny portion of all of the Kaspersky talks. I only hereby submit that the thread remain informative and unbiased and non-political. My "two cents" in regards to making 2023 decisions based on 2017 "bans" would be this - how many government agencies have banned XP and should we be using that as a metric to ban XP on our personal computers? My answer would be a resounding NO.

Although my Win7 on real hardware may not be of use, I completely disable DEP on all of my machines.

I run Win7 on real hardware. One of my machines is used for nothing but an email client to read emails on the bedroom TV (currently doesn't even have any web browser). But I haven't been following this thread - what needs tried on Win7 on real hardware? My Win7 (Enterprise x64) is a 12yr old Asus X54C laptop with an i3-2310M @ 2.1 GHz w/ 4 GB RAM.

Here is my version, should be same as @rereser though I may have slightly changed the name on my version - // ==UserScript== // @name Inject Object.hasOwn() Polyfill [93] // @version 0.0.1 // @match *://*/* // @run-at document-start // @grant none // ==/UserScript== if (!Object.hasOwn) { Object.defineProperty(Object, "hasOwn", { value: function (object, property) { if (object == null) { throw new TypeError("Cannot convert undefined or null to object") } return Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(Object(object), property) }, configurable: true, enumerable: false, writable: true }) }

I text family members at least a dozen times a day. But always from a DESKTOP COMPUTER. NOTHING is so important that I need to text from a stop light! NOTHING is so important that I need to be ADDICTED to a mobile device with my eyes GLUED TO IT xxx minutes of every day. Try going without your phone for 24 hours then tell me you are NOT addicted to it! I have no need for the ADDICTION and my life is AWESOME without the ADDICTION. "To each their own."

I find them to be the RUDEST and most OBNOXIOUS invention EVER. NOT because people walk around in public while on them, NOT because people stand in line at the grocery store while on them, NOT because people are so ADDICTED to the screen that they will WALK IN FRONT OF A VEHICLE. No, they are the RUDEST and most OBNOXIOUS invention EVER because if you don't answer your phone by the third ring, you are accused by the person calling you for screening your calls. RUDEST and most OBNOXIOUS invention EVER because if you don't reply to a text within two minutes, the person texting you accuses you of being mad at them. RUDEST and most OBNOXIOUS invention EVER not because of the RECIPIENT of the phone call or text message, but by the person SENDING the phone call or text message thinking THEY are so important that the recipient MUST drop anything and everything! RUDEST and most OBNOXIOUS invention EVER !!!

I had one once. Way back in 2001 when I relocated half way across the State. Had it for TWO YEARS. Never used it! When I called to CANCEL, they tried to talk me into a cheaper plan. I merely replied with, "Do you have a way to look up how many minutes I've been on the phone, including texts, including data?" They said, "Sure, of course, absolutely", then I heard the clickety clacking of their computer keyboard. After 90 seconds or so, they return to the line, "Roughly 6 minutes, sir." "Exactly, THAT is why I am cancelling, 6 minutes in 2 years, I have no use for a phone, period, please cancel my service." (I don't remember the "exact" minutes, but I know for a fact it was less than an hour, perhaps even less than HALF an hour, spanning TWO YEARS)