I've seen a hundred similar articles. Old news. I don't exactly love turning all that shit off either, but see it as necessary maintenance. I don't care what OS you use. But I learn what I need to know about the OS I'm using.
Including the partition required for GPT booting. For MBR it's just two. And last I checked you CAN disable swap.
The "three partitions" is only for the system drive.
Do you understand that NT isn't windows 9x? 16bit code is emulated under NT.
There's no native 16bit code in NT. The fact you can run 16bit code on 32bit versions of NT does NOT mean NT actually has 16bit code present. It's EMULATED. Do you understand what emulated means?
All Androids come with Google software which takes speech input and sends if off to Google for it to search, answer the question you asked. iPhones offer the same. It's very similar to what MSFT is doing with Cortana on Win 10. And the smartphones had it long before Win 10. Both smartphones, browsers and search engines on PC's that people use send off what you're searching for, what pages you've visited. What Win 10 is doing isn't anything new. It would be, if they were in fact going through your word files, your excel spreadsheets, your CAD files, etc, which is what you're claiming they do. However, you've provided nothing to show that MSFT is doing that and there is no reason to believe they are. Collecting info on what websites you visited, what searches you did, etc, that makes sense and they do that, nothing new there.
That's the context of the thread, where you started arguing that Firefox is supported on XP, based on the fact that there currently is only security updates left for Firefox and even that is scheduled to end in Sept. I said one big problem with XP is that IDK of any browser that is still supported under XP. That is true. Mozillar ended all support except for security updates and even those are guaranteed only through Sept 2017.
But no, according to you, Firefox is still supported under XP. Who should we believe? You or Mozilla?
Infact, I advised the OP not to
Oh, I see. But when I said IDK of any browsers that are still supported on XP, you chimed in with "Firefox is still supported", when the only support left is security updates and that for
5 months? WTF is wrong with you?If he wants to run modern
Was the OP running a CNC machine? Try to stick to the context at least.
IT's not supported when all support except for security updates has ended. And quite remarkable that anyone would argue this, given that even security updates are only guaranteed for 5 months. I told the OP that IDK of any browsers supported on XP, meaning if he sticks with XP, IDK what browser he can use for the future. YOU objected, claiming I'm wrong to say that, because he can still get security updates only for another 5 months? What is wrong with you?
Ohh.. That explains it. :) I'm not really much of a gamer myself, though. Never really have been. Except the older console stuff when I was growing up. Since I no longer have operational consoles nor the cartridges, I tend to play with emulators these days. Nintendo, Atari
2600 (yes, that one. heh). I'm a happy camper with a good game of Asteroids or space invaders. The new games graphics are impressive as all hell to me though, downright life like.
True enough. I don't use those features myself though. I don't kid myself, either. I'm sure it's treated no differently than my search queries typed into the keyboard on my computers. Except that google has no way of linking what I typed to me. Options exist, vpn, etc. Using other peoples network connection, forging browser Identity information, etc etc etc.
It's clearly written (as clear as terms of use go anyway) that they can. For reasons they don't fully disclose. One of those blanket types of licensing agreements. Now, if you're okay with your OS being able to pull files from anywhere locally stored on your machine OR, your network (since it's just a matter of drive mapping) thats on you. As for me, my files are my files and nobody has the right to be lifting copies without my permission for any reason.
See above.
Both of us in this case. Mozilla doesn't claim Firefox is no longer supported on XP, just yet. They are still issuing new versions of it along with security/non security updates. ESR channel.
Nothing is wrong with me. I simply corrected your misleading statement. Firefox IS still presently supported on Windows XP. You contradicted your own comment, anyhow. Your personal opinion concerning what security updates are/aren't doesn't have any bearing on the initial comment you made. For the time being, Firefox is still being updated on Windows XP. That will be changing, soon, but, it hasn't happened yet. My comment concerning the pointless in upgrading to Windows 7 has far less to do with firefox than it does wasting the OPS time in the sense that OS is nearing EOL, too for end users. So if he wants to prepare for the future, his choices are a bit limited. Go with winshit 10, or, switch to linux.
You asked me a question. The OP isn't a client of mine. You didn't ask me specifically about the OP, you asked what I'd tell a client or customer and I answered you.
I find it remarkable that you (I really don't run across many people who think as you do) that security updates are not updates. Firefox ESR release is still getting security/non security updates for the time being, AND, it still supports XP/Vista. ESR versions.
Your statement wasn't correct on the face of it. You didn't specify any qualifying aspects. You stated that you knew of no browsers still being supported that run on XP, and, that's not the case. Firefox is, for the time being.
They aren't all security updates as you can see.
Look at 45.3 and down:
45.3 was released in 2016, years past Windows XP eol.
Say what? You don't think Google has a way of linking what you typed or what you spoke into a voice search on an Android phone back to you? Of course they do.
Re-read what I wrote. The section you conveniently, snipped:
Options exist, vpn, etc. Using other peoples network connection, forging browser Identity information, etc etc etc. I was writing about google, the search engine. I don't use voice commands on my phones, I'm not too lazy to type...
As far as the android phones go...I use burner phones. They aren't associated with my name. So, google has no way of tracking me, personally, no.
Once again, complete BS. Mozilla has said that there will be no new versions of Firefox for XP, only SECURITY UPDATES and only those are guaranteed for another 5 months. Why do you lie? In addition, Mozillar points out that MSFT is no longer issuing security updates for XP and Mozilla is telling it's Firefox users to move to a supported OS and supported browser.
My statement was not misleading, but your BS advice sure is. The context, again was a person planning for the future. And you had to chime in, claiming that Firefox is still supported on XP, when the only support left is security updates and even that is only guaranteed for 5 months. Some future, some great advice!
You
Was the poster concerned about the time being? Idiot.
That will be changing, soon, but,
No shit Sherlock, which is why I said IDK of any browser that is currently supported on XP. And for me and I think most reasonable people, 5 months of security updates only, from folks that have already discontinued ALL OTHER SUPPORT and are telling their users of Firefox on XP to move, doesn't qualify as "supported". But heh, feel free to climb on board a browser for 5 months.
Context matters. The OP isn't running a CNC. Does CNC need an internet browser? WTF?
Lying again. I didn't say that security updates are not updates. I said when all you're left with is 5 months of security updates, ie, no more bug fixes, no more no improvements to make sure it stays compatible, that is not a *supported* browser. You seem to think that security updates are all there is to supporting a product. Probably because you've got a tin foil hat on when it comes to "security".
Firefox
BS. Mozilla has clearly said there are no more updates other than security updates. And even that is for just 5 months. Wow, some "time being", for a poster upgrading a system for the future!
No it;s not when Mozilla has already issued the final release for XP, has stated that there will only be security updates going forward and only guaranteed that for 5 months and told it's users to move to a newer OS that is supported. Besides the fact that Firefox is only issuing security updates for 5 months, you also have the fact that MSFT is no longer doing security updates for XP PERIOD! Quite remarkable for a tin foil hat guy to be advocating that using Firefox on XP is cool and supported, when even the OS itself is no longer receiving security updates from MSFT!
Again, context is everything. The context was what goes on with SMARTPHONES today. What percent of smartphone users are doing the above, ie tin foil hat stuff because they are afraid that google will know that they searched for "pizza near me"? And if you don't do something extraordinary, then of course Google knows what you've been looking for, where you've been located with the phone, etc. Which of course why the comparison to Win 10 is logical.
What percent of smartphone users are using burner phones? That's the issue. You seem to think that 99.9% of us users have the same extreme penchant for privacy that you do. The reality is that if you're using a typical smartphone like 99% of the users out there, then what get's tracked and seen on Win 10 isn't much different than what's been going on for years with phones.
Silly you!
nb
Nice try, but!, that's not what you wrote orig Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
Which isn't true.
The future does NOT include Windows XP or Windows 7. I already told the OP, that, too. The OP has limited options if they are upgrading for 'the future' And the OP made a poor decision, so this is a pointless discussion, anyhow.
Really? So you wrote the following because?
Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
You were wrong, flat out, wrong. Regardless of your pathetic attempt to move the goal posts, your statement is wrong.
By suggesting the OP not even bother with 64bit XP or Windows 7? That's not steering the OP in the wrong direction, that's telling the OP, straight up, they are WASTING their time and money.
I chimed in, when you wrote the following: Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
The OP shouldn't have to pay for your ignorance of the subject matter. Not that it matters either way, the OP has foolishly chosen to purchase Windows 7. Waste of money... but, hey, it's the OPs money and the OPs equipment. What's that saying? a fool and his money are soon parted.. right? Well...
Despite your efforts to move the goal posts when called out on your ignorance displayed here:
Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
Firefox is still being 'updated' for Windows XP. Security updates, are, still updates.
[snip]Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
Sorry, but, I knew atleast one browser company was still doing updates for a browser for XP. The fact you didn't, doesn't make me the idiot. Attempts to move the goal posts, doesn't make me the idiot either...
Wow. I simply asked you a question, Trader. No reason to become more defensive and make more assumptions as to why I asked...
Once again, you're putting words in my mouth. I won't claim to speak for everyone. If you wish to do so, that's on you. Suffice to say, if what you said was accurate, why isn't everyone?!? jumping all over me in this discussion? Something seems to be amiss here...
You specifically wrote:
Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
Which isn't true. And, I responded to that statement. If you were clear in what you personally consider an update to be, this discussion wouldn't have gone this far.
Nope. And, I already commented on that, too. I advised them NOT to waste their time or money on 64bit XP or Windows 7. My opinion hasn't got a thing to do with his/her choice of browser. It's the fact XP is already EOL and Windows 7 soon will be. So there's no 'future' to be had with either of them. Not for the OPs purposes, anyhow. That is, if they think updates mean what you do: new features, etc.
OTH, If (which is why I brought up CNC machines and plasma cutters) the machine was being used for a dedicated purpose, it wouldn't matter which 'version' of Windows they decided to run with, so long as the dedicated hardware/software supported it. And, I brought up the dedicated aspect because YOU asked me what I'd tell a client or customer. See, the thing is, I listen to the client/customer and determine what they intend to use the machine for, BEFORE I advise them on what to do. You might want to try that sometime, instead of writing ignorant statements as you did when you wrote this:
Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
Nope. However, that has nothing to do with what you wrote - which I responded to, initially:
Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
If the OP listened to me, they wouldn't have gone with Windows 7...I did not claim Firefox would be a good choice on XP for the 'future'. I simply corrected your ignorant statement:
Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
Actually, I responded to your comment:
Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any browsers for XP.
Which is certainly an ignorant one to make. And, you've attacked me as well as tried to put words in my mouth AND move goal posts since then...
Er, no. I didn't...
I didn't claim Mozilla was still! do Message-ID:
You must not know much about the subject, then. Firefox will still support XP until 2017. And firefox isn't exactly a 'niche' browser.
They were providing NON security related 'updates' to Firefox upto
2016, but, that doesn't matter as I never suggested the OP should stick with ANY version of XP or Windows 7.
Please feel free to cite MID where I said Firefox for XP (or Windows
7) was a good choice for the future. I can't seem to find one that supports what you're claiming I wrote.
In the context of the OP, who is upgrading a system FOR THE FUTURE, it is true , because Mozilla has ended all support other than security updates. Security updates are the last part of support to go, and even that is only committed for JUST 5 MORE MONTHS. And even XP has no support period, not even security updates, from MSFT. Is that a supported environment? And over this, you want to pick stupid nits? The OP needs a browser for the future, at best FF is there for just
5 months!"Important - Firefox is ending support for Windows XP and Vista Firefox version 52 will be the last complete update for Windows XP and Wind ows Vista. Security updates will be released, but no new features. Why is Firefox support ending for Windows XP and Vista users? Firefox is one of the only browsers to offer any support for Windows XP and Vista. Microsoft itself ended support for Windows XP in 2014 and will end support for Windows Vista in 2017. Unsupported operating systems receive no security updates, have known exploits, and can be dangerous to use, which makes it difficult to maintain Firefox on those versions."
Now, if you were a computer consultant and had a client who was upgrading a desktop system and asked if Firefox was a supported browser that they should use, what would you tell them?
"Well, let's see if you are running a CNC machine......, blah, blah, blah.... Firefox is still supported, blah blah, blah.
I gave him the simple, correct, short answer. FF isn't supported for what he's doing. Mozilla has ended all support except for security updates, and even that is only guaranteed for just 5 months. To you, that's "supported" and worth a whole big detour into the wilderness. Good grief!
If they guy had asked, are there still security updates for Firefox for a few more months, I would have given a different answer. Again CONTEXT is everything.
Nor obviously Firefox for XP, yet here you are, disagreeing, arguing and misleading the OP. If he listens to me, he realizes FF isn't supported on XP. If he listened to you, he thinks it is supported and apparently peachy keen for his upgrade scenario, because *again*, that was the context of the question!
My "cost"? ROFL. If he listened to me, he's be on a modern browser that is supported. Listening to you, he'd put Firefox for XP on the system he plans to upgrade, because according to you, it's "supported". ROFL
Not that it matters either way, the OP has foolishly chosen
Wow, and a minute ago you accused me of wasting his money? Now money doesn't matter? ROFL
Security updates are not the only part of product support, which is a concept you clearly don't understand. Security updates are the very last part of support to go and even that is going in just 5 months!
There you go lying yet again. You did not just ask a question. You claimed that people who use google groups are somehow inferior as an attack on me and wanted to start another whole pointless debate. WTF is it your business as to how others access newsgroups, which are a dying vehicle anyway?
There you go again with the CNC BS. Does the OP have a CNC? You sure have a problem with understanding context.
If the OP needs a 'browser' for the future, they might want to seriously consider an OS that's still going to be getting updates, for the future. XP/Vista is not. Windows 7 will soon be in the same boat. You're the one with the comprehension issue. Although Windows 7 haven't officially reached EOL yet, various companies are already no longer supporting it. As long as you don't need those companies offerings though, you can still continue to run Windows 7.
OTH, If you do, it's time to consider a different version of Windows, different software package, OR an outright OS change.
Ahh, you've rephrased your question. Cute, but, it makes no difference.
The first thing I'm going to ask them is what are you planning to do with the upgrade. Is this going to be for normal every day use, OR, a dedicated purpose? That distinction determines my response.
See above. Btw, part of the work I do is consulations...So, I'm writing from first hand experience here. I have been the entire time. We're in different lines of 'work', so I can see how you may have missed that. Despite the obvious hints I dropped about it.
Umm, actually, you told him you didn't know of any browser still supported on XP, and, at the time, the OP didn't tell any of us what he planned to use the 'upgraded' machine for. While I agree your answer was a simple and short one, at the time of the OPs post, I don't know if i'd go so far as to claim it was the correct one. More details were needed in order to do that. Details you didn't ask for or wait for the OP to provide, before you made your ignorant comment...
For some reason, based on our interactions, I *seriously* doubt it. You may try to backtrack all you like, but, when you wrote what you did, I think you actually believed it. In other words, you didn't know FF was still being updated for XP/vista users. You do now, though. Thanks to me. You're welcome, btw.
Oh, he didn't listen to much of anything I advised. He spent funds on a near EOL OS, multiple times. He might have even gone so far as to purchase 64bit XP had I not posted. Maybe, he did. The OP doesn't seem to be interested in taking sound advice when it's freely offered, imo.
round and round you go. I'm starting to get dizzy watching you.
You previously accused me of having reading comprehension issues and trouble with context...Interesting how you go and demonstrate both weaknesses yourself. :)
A concept I don't understand? :) Really?
That's just one of mine, btw. I mentioned I worked for malwarebytes for a number of years, previously didn't I? If not, I just did. I wasn't in customer service, if that helps, Trader. I was in one of the technical departments.
Wow...
The death of usenet has been predicted now for a decade or more. It hasn't happened, just yet. Using a real client instead of the terrible google groups interface does give you more options. I wasn't trying to 'attack' you with my question. It's been my experience, typically, that google group 'groupies' (it's not a phrase I coined, either) don't know about usenet clients/usenet servers, or the features google isn't able to provide them as a result. THAT is why I asked you. But, hey, if you're okay with posts not inline with thread replies, having to allow google scripts to run, and forced to use a web browser that google likes, fine with me. I wouldn't dream of trying to convert you.
I don't know if they do or not. If you were an IT tech, you'd understand why my reply wasn't BS as you put it. In order to provide the best advice, one must know (or have a damn good idea) what it is the customer/client wants out of the machine.
Btw, you snipped the rest of my reply...Which is important, for proper context...And, I'm not even trying to paint you as a liar for doing it, unlike what you tried (and failed) doing with me.
This is what I wrote. I did remove the last line exposing your ignorance on browsers being updated for XP, though. I'm not out to get you, and, I don't take what you write, personally. Unlike yourself.
OTH, If (which is why I brought up CNC machines and plasma cutters) the machine was being used for a dedicated purpose, it wouldn't matter which 'version' of Windows they decided to run with, so long as the dedicated hardware/software supported it. And, I brought up the dedicated aspect because YOU asked me what I'd tell a client or customer. See, the thing is, I listen to the client/customer and determine what they intend to use the machine for,
Well, one of use seems to, that's for sure.
I don't think that they're operating at the personal level that much (at least for now). Google is more interested in behaviors, preferences, dislikes, and other things that can be applied to a broad segment of the population.
In other words, they'll treat you as a member of one or more groups that you share characteristics with. They want to sell advertising that's well-targeted at you and people like you, and they want to design their apps and services so that you and people like you will have a good experience using them so you'll spend more time on Google properties (and they'll have more chances to show you ads and collect even more data).
Your use of phones not associated with your name doesn't really change any of this, because it's what you do with your phone that they care about and not your name so much.
Nor do I...
Ayep. The thing is though, I don't really use the phone for much other than making calls.. maybe sending an occasional text message. If I want to surf the net, etc, I have a real computer, with a real screen, mouse, keyboard, etc for that. Well, uhh, multiple computers, but, you get the idea.
They aren't getting much useful information from my activities. I treat it like an electronic dog collar and act accordingly.
OK we have a lot of computer expertise in this thread, I have a question th at's been bugging me.
Windows machine with Adobe XI reader.
When I open a .pdf, any .pdf, after a few minutes, my Sunbelt firewall te lls me that Adobe is trying to contact IP address 65.202.58.25. When I dis allow it, it tries 65.202.184.89. I checked the Adobe updater setting and it is turned OFF, no updates, do NOT check for updates.
the IP address show up as Verizon in Brooklyn NY.
WTF is Adobe doing and how do I stop it.
It appears they do not respect my request to not check for updates.
thanks
Mark
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.