Jump to content

Antimalware, firewall, and other security programs for Windows XP working in 2023 and hopefully beyond


AstroSkipper

Recommended Posts

Has anyone tried Panda recently ? I tried it on a Windows 7 computer and it wanted me to install netframework version 4. It said that setup would download and install automatically but it always fails. I installed netframework 4 manually with the offline redist and the framework installed fine but Panda setup still wouldn't work. I don't know if this problem happens with XP as well. I know that netframework 4 is the last version that XP supports but it's not even in the requirements in the Panda website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I was able to install on XP three weeks ago or so.

I recall aborting the install when it started to download/install .net.

I dislike automated installs so literally forced a power-off to prevent it, then installed .net manually with an offline installer.

Panda installed fine after I manually installed .net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tekkaman said:

Has anyone tried Panda recently ? I tried it on a Windows 7 computer and it wanted me to install netframework version 4. It said that setup would download and install automatically but it always fails. I installed netframework 4 manually with the offline redist and the framework installed fine but Panda setup still wouldn't work. I don't know if this problem happens with XP as well. I know that netframework 4 is the last version that XP supports but it's not even in the requirements in the Panda website.

@tekkaman This thread is exclusively about security programmes for Windows XP . Therefore, your observation or problem is unfortunately off-topic. You should post it in the Windows 7 forum. BTW, I had no problem to install Panda Antivirus Free in the version 22.00.01 under Windows XP. And the installer didn't want me to install .NET Framework 4 either, presumably because my Windows XP was and is fully updated.

Cheers, AstroSkipper matrix.gif

Edited by AstroSkipper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AstroSkipper said:

@tekkaman This thread is exclusively about security programmes for Windows XP . Therefore, your observation or problem is unfortunately off-topic. You should post it in the Windows 7 forum. BTW, I had no problem to install Panda Antivirus Free in the version 22.00.01 under Windows XP. And the installer didn't want me to install .NET Framework 4 either, presumably because my Windows XP was and is fully updated.

Cheers, AstroSkipper matrix.gif

I know that. I just wanted to know if the problem was present in XP as well. Which is what I clearly asked and NotHereToPlayGames confirmed it works.

Edited by tekkaman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me and @WSC4 couldn't install Panda on XP x64 either, nothing happens when .NET Framework install is supposed to proceed.

Edit: Just installing .NET Framework 4 from dotNetFx40_Full_x86_x64.exe is not sufficient on Windows 7. But Windows 7 users can just install .NET Framework 4.8 and be done with it, there won't be any complaint about .NET Framework then.

But on Windows 7 lacking everything .NET Framework 4.0 and greater, Panda installer tries executing .NET Framework 4.6 online installer first, if you cancel it, it goes to online .NET Framework 4.0 installer. I did not let 4.6 installer do its thing, cancelled it instead so it went to 4.0, this one definitely doesn't work anymore, seems to depend on availability ancient .NET Framework related KB958488 update to Windows 7 on MS servers, which was pulled off.

So if .NET Framework 4.0 is supposed to be sufficient, it must require specific update. I can try to run .NET Framework 4.0 online installer on Windows XP x64 that was left behind by Panda installer on Windows 7 when the time permits, just in case it happens to still work and if it does something more than full installer. I suspect it's likely to fail on XP x64 as well.

.NET Framework is an old thing (or history, if you prefer) as it is, even 4.8/4.8.1 on Windows 10/11, the future is in .NET (formerly .NET Core).

Edited by UCyborg
Additional obvservations, consistent naming
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do I need all versions of .NET Framework?

With XP 64-bit, I have these versions installed both x64 and x86:

.NET Framework 2.0

.NET Framework 3.0

.NET Framework 3.5

.NET Framework 4.0

Can I just keep .NET Framework 4.0 and uninstall the rest?  Do I need the 32-bit version on a 64-bit OS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, WSC4 said:

Do I need all versions of .NET Framework?

With XP 64-bit, I have these versions installed both x64 and x86:

.NET Framework 2.0

.NET Framework 3.0

.NET Framework 3.5

.NET Framework 4.0

Can I just keep .NET Framework 4.0 and uninstall the rest?  Do I need the 32-bit version on a 64-bit OS?

On my Windows XP Professional SP3 32-bit partitions, I have installed all .NET Framework versions from 1.1 to 4.0 with all hotfixes and updates.

Edited by AstroSkipper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, WSC4 said:

Do I need all versions of .NET Framework?

With XP 64-bit, I have these versions installed both x64 and x86:

.NET Framework 2.0

.NET Framework 3.0

.NET Framework 3.5

.NET Framework 4.0

Can I just keep .NET Framework 4.0 and uninstall the rest?  Do I need the 32-bit version on a 64-bit OS?

You have to leave all of the versions for better compatibility with all software.  Let's say you have a program that runs on .net 2.0. Even if you have 4.0 it will keep asking to get 2.0. Same thing with Visual C Redistributables. It's best to have all versions. If you have XP64 like I do you need both 32 bit and 64 bit versions of them as well if they're available. Of both .net and visual C.

Edited by tekkaman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, WSC4 said:

Do I need the 32-bit version on a 64-bit OS?

Although that was a question of a more general nature (at least that was how I perceived it), read below:

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/64-bit-apps#running-32-bit-vs-64-bit-applications-on-windows

Quote

All applications that are built on the .NET Framework 1.0 or 1.1 are treated as 32-bit applications on a 64-bit operating system and are always executed under WOW64 and the 32-bit common language runtime (CLR). 32-bit applications that are built on the .NET Framework 4 or later versions also run under WOW64 on 64-bit systems.

If the question was specific to .NFW4, then yes, you do need both architectures of it:

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/64-bit-apps#compiler-support-for-creating-64-bit-applications

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/64-bit-apps#determining-the-status-of-an-exe-file-or-dll-file

Adding to what others have said, it really depends on the actual .NET framework version+architecture a said application was built against (OT: On Win Vista SP2+, 4.x versions are mutually exclusive and backwards compatible - upgrading, e.g., 4.5 to 4.6 will overwrite the 4.5 previous installation)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I knew testing Panda on Windows 7 x64 would be insightful. It installs with plain .NET Framework 4.0 installed with zero updates applied if you fake .NET Framework version by registry edit. Then you can revert the edit and the anti-virus itself still functions. .NET Framework version 4.6 at least must be faked in the 32-bit part of the registry, see Determine which .NET Framework versions are installed.

That doesn't work on XP x64, something else must be bugged about the installer. I was testing on XP x64 the first time around and noticed string with the registry path SOFTWARE\Microsoft\NET Framework Setup\NDP\v4\Full\ in installer's Stub.exe with OllyDbg and several instructions later comparison is made with value 0x6004F, which you would find in Release DWORD value in registry on systems with .NET Framewok 4.6 installed. There was also reference to Install DWORD in the same key in neighbouring part of the code, which is normally present with just plain .NET Framework 4.0 installed. Should've realized then .NET Framework error message by installer is misleading.

Edited by UCyborg
Added forgotten observations
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, UCyborg said:

Me and @WSC4 couldn't install Panda on XP x64 either, nothing happens when .NET Framework install is supposed to proceed.

I hope I didn't mislead you.  My daily XP is x64.  My three-partition XP laptop for when I was comparing Panda to Kaspersky on XP is x86.  Reading your replies regarding Win7 x64 and .NET reminded me that my laptop is x86.

Apologies if I sent any rabbits down the wrong hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@NotHereToPlayGames
Well you likely couldn't have installed Panda on XP x64 unless you figured how to make the installer work on XP x64 or got more adventurous and tried to transplant it from another working 64-bit OS, assuming same files/registry entries that install on e.g Windows 7 x64 work on XP x64.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Admittedly, I totally forgot that x64 versus x86 was our task at the time.

My goal was to compare Kaspersky to Panda.

I did not witness anything "negative" with Kaspersky (once you comb through the settings and don't just leave them at "default"), but I did find Panda to be the better of the two.  (edit:  I only spent a few days on it, more testing would need done.)

I meant to compare Panda to AVG but I haven't gotten around to that yet.

Edited by NotHereToPlayGames
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should add that this wouldn't be the first program I've ran across that doesn't detect .NET "accurately".

I've always had better "detection success" with my offline installer (SourceForge?  gHacks?  I don't recall where I got it) than the official installer from Microsoft.

Do we know / can we track down what registry entries or file versions that the Panda installer is hunting for?  I don't recall if "Dependency Walker" reveals that.  I know that Hex Rays IDA Free will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I should add that this wouldn't be the first program I've ran across that doesn't detect .NET "accurately".

I never had any problems with installers, and especially installers of antimalware programmes, in terms of detecting the .NET Framework versions installed under Windows XP Professional SP3 32-bit (and even including all POSReady updates). :no: So, I can't confirm this statement. :no: But under Windows XP 64-bit, this seems to be more the case. I personally am really glad not to have to use Windows XP 64-bitsmilie_denk_24.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...