Leaderboard

BUT quite a few people deserve it (and they as well deserve windows 8/8.1/10)... jaclaz

That's basically what I mean. I actually liked IE 7 on XP (at the time) but not for today's browsing.

Not to be argumentative here, but... I used IE exclusively back when I actively ran XP - from 2001 to 2006. I never got infected. Are you saying there are new threats that have been specifically crafted against IE8 since XP was in common use? I've just booted up my XP VM to take a look around and make sure I was remembering correctly...... IE8 has the same ability the modern IE releases have to do things like disable ActiveX in the Internet Zone. I'm afraid I have to stick to my statement: If you leave IE set to defaults, you're taking risks. If you set it rationally, not so much. Thing is - security issues aside - I suspect many modern web sites use glitzy new features IE8 can't handle, such as HTML5, so the advice to run a modern version of one of the browsers that still support XP is probably a good one for that reason. I admit, it is kind of gratifying to see the XP Pro desktop sitting idly with 19 processes using a little over 100 MB of RAM total. That miserly treatment of RAM certainly was welcome back when RAM was scarce and expensive, and address spaces were limited to 4 GB. We've gotten used to the newer systems needing 1000 MB or more when idle, but honestly, 1 GB of RAM is now no more of an impact on a well-endowed system than 100 MB was back then, and there are undeniable advantages to 64 bit computing. And yes, I do remember XP x64 (I ran it for a few years). -Noel P.S., a side note on security... I've recently delved into the OpenSSL library because of some issues it caused with my products and I needed to find a bug in the startup code. That's the security library many, many products rely on for encryption. I hate to criticize others' code, but it's no panacea of grace and goodness. The world's security essentially has been running on what I would call junkware code. And the design decisions the current developers are making are questionable (for example, it's no longer possible to statically link OpenSSL 1.1 into a DLL and have it unload; they've created a setup where the process has to exit before things are uninitialized - ridiculous!). It could easily be said that proprietary code (such as is found in the underpinnings of Microsoft's browsers) might be better than what's in OpenSSL.

Just to confirm that it does work fine in the current Firefox version 50.1.

Of course, using Internet Explorer on Windows XP might be a no-no, since it's version 8 ...lol. But yes, IE 11 gets the shaft for no good reason. A good browser.

bro...Simply spread it every where then let them realize their fault . They promised vulkan implementation on XP but never did it.

MS may have a new star in Donald?

Is there is any progress with UxTSB.dll injecting by DWMGlass.dll and logon problem?