Last versions of software for Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008

[Blados]

Not sure if I can post this here, but...

Here's the list of updates I've installed for .NET Framework 4.7.2:

Not sure if that's all of them. It's based on my list of previously installed .NET 4.6.1, also have tried installing the older ones I had before, but all of them gave me the "not applicable to your system" error so I don't think there are any more updates to install, aside from the possible May 2019 ones, which I have yet to install. Also, it seems you can't install Language Packs since doing it the normal way yields yet another "not applicable to your os" error, and unpacking the installer with 7-zip and running the other installer (forgot its name) tells you to use setup.exe instead...

Note: These are security and quality rollups, I don't know the update numbers for security only updates. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by Blados

[artomberus]

@Blados, I also tried to look for what is possible to install - it turned out 22 updates. Here is a list. But probably, it's also did not complete.

It now remains to find applications that require these fresh versions of the .NET Framework

[Blados]

I've checked most of the updates from your list and well... I think you have a bit too many of them installed in fact. You don't really need security only updates and update previews if you have installed "stable" security and quality updates. Outside of that my list is only missing the May 2019 rollup (KB4495588) I think.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Blados

[greenhillmaniac]

Has anyone tried the final .NET Framework 4.8 release? I don't have a Vista VM at hand right now.

https://dotnet.microsoft.com/download/dotnet-framework/net48

[artomberus]

@Blados, perhaps you are right. I just installed all the files in order that I downloaded. Some of them installed, some is not. It is a pity that they do not come in an official way (Then only the necessary would be applied). But it is logical.

[VistaLover]

19 hours ago, WinClient5270 said:

Now, I could not find an application that specifically required this version of .NET Framework

Neither could I , but here is some more test material:

ShadowSocks is an application very popular in China, because it can be used to connect to specialised servers outside of the GFW and thus circumvent regime implemented censorship ; the windows binary is built on .NET Framework 4.x.x; the last executable that could be launched under Vista SP2 with 4.6.1 (Final) installed is v3.3.4 all the way back from Oct 2016 ; any more recent version will throw an error: 

Unlike ShareX, Shadowsocks.exe does not come with a *.config file we can patch, you do have to have 4.6.2+ installed to make it launch! In their Wiki it's noted (in Chinese) that .NET FW 4.6.2 is the minimum version required, along with latest Visual C++ 2015 Redistributable; also in their wiki they suggest

Quote

Upgrade your .NET Framework to latest release and install all patches against it.

So I think shadowsocks should be a perfect "test-bed" application for correctly functioning .NET FW 4.6.2/4.7.2[4.8.0?] under Vista SP2... People here with Vista SP2 VMs, the challenge is open!

Edited May 17, 2019 by VistaLover

[greenhillmaniac]

5 minutes ago, VistaLover said:

So I think shadowsocks should be a perfect "test-bed" application for correctly functioning .NET FW 4.6.2/4.7.2[4.8.0?] under Vista SP2... People here with Vista SP2 VMs, the challenge is open!

There's also Paint.NET that requires .NET Framework 4.7.2. Anyone can test that program

[Blados]

I don't know about Paint .NET, but I think Shadowsocks will work fine, at least it launches:

Edited May 17, 2019 by Blados

[artomberus]

Paint.NET requires Windows 7. Developers throw old Windows very quickly. Only v. 3.5.11 works on Vista. Is it possible to run Paint.NET as a portable application?

[greenhillmaniac]

7 minutes ago, artomberus said:

Paint.NET requires Windows 7. Developers throw old Windows very quickly. Only v. 3.5.11 works on Vista. Is it possible to run Paint.NET as a portable application?

I think it requires Windows 7 because of the .NET 4.7.2.

Either way, I believe one can simply extract the program files from the installer by simply opening it with 7-Zip (or similar).

[Blados]

I could test it, but it seems there's only 64 bit edition available?

Edited May 17, 2019 by Blados

[VistaLover]

2 minutes ago, greenhillmaniac said:

I think it requires Windows 7 because of the .NET 4.7.2.

On their site (you linked to) they state:

Quote

System Requirements

Minimum System
(snipped)
or Windows 7 SP1 with Platform Update

Do you reckon 7's SP1 + PU are just for .NET FW 4.7.2 compatibility reasons?

[artomberus]

@Blados, no, both architectures are supported. But the developers, when they throw support for Vista, complained that the code was very different and difficult to maintain. Due to hardware acceleration. I tried to run the MSI file - it sends to setup.exe . Setup.exe requires Windows 7.

I modified the MSI file and installed it. With .NET 4.7.2 is installed.

... is not Win32 application. Alas.

Edited May 17, 2019 by artomberus

[Vistapocalypse]

This thread has become rather bewildering these last 2 days. I wonder if .NET Core 2.2 (used by some cross-platform apps) could be installed on Vista?

[UCyborg]

19 hours ago, VistaLover said:

an inspection with Resource Hacker reveals it does indeed support Vista in its manifest:   

  <compatibility xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:compatibility.v1"> 
    <application>
      <!-- Windows 10 -->
      <supportedOS Id="{8e0f7a12-bfb3-4fe8-b9a5-48fd50a15a9a}" />
      <!-- Windows 8.1 -->
      <supportedOS Id="{1f676c76-80e1-4239-95bb-83d0f6d0da78}" />
      <!-- Windows 8 -->
      <supportedOS Id="{4a2f28e3-53b9-4441-ba9c-d69d4a4a6e38}" />
      <!-- Windows 7 -->
      <supportedOS Id="{35138b9a-5d96-4fbd-8e2d-a2440225f93a}" />
      <!-- Windows Vista -->
      <supportedOS Id="{e2011457-1546-43c5-a5fe-008deee3d3f0}" />
    </application> 
  </compatibility>

Compatibility section is irrelevant when it comes to Windows Vista because it's only recognized on Windows 7+ and even there, the Vista supportedOS entry alone is meaningless and equivalent in behavior as if compatibility section is absent. The OS looks for the entry of the highest Windows version it recognizes (so either itself or that of the older version) and modifies the behavior of certain APIs accordingly.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/win7appqual/compatibility---application-manifest