2008WindowsVista

Member
  • Content count

    165
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

2008WindowsVista last won the day on May 10

2008WindowsVista had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

70 Excellent

3 Followers

About 2008WindowsVista

  • Birthday 02/16/1992

Profile Information

  • OS
    Windows 8 x64
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

1,845 profile views
  1. Thanks for the additions, all. Sorry it took so long to add them, I've been quite busy with other things lately so I just got around to adding them.
  2. You're welcome, and thank you for taking the time to create and maintain both update repositories, @greenhillmaniac. It's very appreciated
  3. Added SuperAntiSpyware... The other two are already on the list, and since Pale Moon continues to support Vista, I won't specify a version number, since it's constantly changing. Once the final version of Pale Moon is released for Vista (whenever that may be), I will add it to the list.
  4. Yes. I have successfully installed the following (post-Vista EOL) Server 2008 updates in Windows Vista (SP2, x64): KB4020535 KB4019206 KB4019204 KB4019149 KB4018927 KB4018556 KB4018885 KB4018821 KB4018466 KB4018271 Screenshot: http://prntscr.com/f602cl From my testing, the following updates did NOT work on Windows Vista: KB4018196 (Displays "Not applicable to your system" message) Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool for May 2017 (Not compatible with your OS error message) So it looks like Vista will be good to go until 2020, with the exception of a few updates here and there. I also must note that I didn't try any updates related to .NET Framework, as I couldn't figure out how to obtain them. Alright @greenhillmaniac, it's time to make that Server 2008-Vista repository
  5. Thanks for the information and addition. Perhaps MSRT will support Vista for a while longer, as Windows 8.0 is still supported. Just have to wait and see.
  6. Thank you both for the additions! I will wait for you to test 3dsmax 2013 and Unity 5 before adding them to the list, just to be certain whether or not they do work on Vista. As for Windows Defender, I must mention that the Vista/7 version of the software hasn't been very reputable for providing quality protection, so I'd recommend using a free, third party alternative, such as Avast! Free Edition or pretty much any of the (free) listings in the ONG section. However, Windows Defender is still a valid option, so it has been added to the list. Hopefully, I can find out more information about MSE, and whether or not the solution pointed out (in the post you linked) that XP users are currently using, will also work in Vista. As I figure things out, I'll update the list accordingly. Thanks again!
  7. I didn't say to try all updates, but to try at least more than one or even two, to give us a better idea of whether at least most Server 2008 security updates will work in Vista. Sorry for the confusion. Trying only one (security) update, in my opinion, isn't enough to go all out and say that all Server 2008 security updates will work on Vista... Maybe you weren't meaning to imply that, and maybe I just misunderstood. But the way you put it in a couple of your prior posts: ...made it look to me like you were implying that since you tried only one security update, that all of them would work in Vista. Even if the filenames are similar or the same, there's a chance that the updates still won't work in Vista, because Microsoft does indeed have the ability to make updates Server-only or Client-only if they see fit, as I'm sure you know. Take the platform update for example, the filenames and even the file sizes are the same, but there are separate versions for Vista and 2008, and neither of them will work on the opposing OS. Microsoft has different version numbers inside the CAB files contained in the .MSU files to identify each update as either Client or Server compatible. If the version number inside the update mismatches the "host" OS, the update will NOT install. This is the main reason why Powershell 3.0 doesn't work. I'm guessing for the Server 2008 security updates that do work under Vista, there is no specific number specified, for whatever reason, other than just NT 6.0.6002, which is why the updates work in Vista. I actually agree with you about Powershell, as I never use the program myself. I was just tinkering around with the update to see if the version number contained within it could be changed to make it install under Vista. But as greenhillmaniac points out, it can't be done, so I have stopped bothering with it. I'm not trying to be rude or argue about it, but like I said before, I just want to make sure we have strong evidence to make an educated guess, and judging by the information that has been presented to me, I can confidently "guess" that most Server 2008 security updates will work in Vista But we have to wait until May 9th to know for sure, so I'm not going to worry about it until then. Thank you for the information. That's very interesting to know about .NET Framework 4.6.1. I wonder if future (major) versions of .NET Framework, whether it be 4.7 or 5.0, will work. That's stretching it a bit, though.
  8. Are you referring to what @sanszajnrege said? I'm not trying to be rude, but I wouldn't take someone saying that one update works (and without even elaborating on what specific update they tried) as confirmation that Server 2008 security-only updates work in Vista. Otherwise, the only update I tried (at first) was Powershell 3.0 for Server 2008, but from my understanding (according to a knowledgeable source that greenhill consulted), Powershell 3.0 is completely incompatible with Windows Vista, for some reason. However, I did some more searching on the Microsoft Update Catalog site, and tried several different Server 2008 security updates on Vista, and they all installed just fine, oddly enough. Here's a link to the updates I tried (excluding the Server 2008 R2 updates, the Sharepoint services update, and some outdated security updates for IE8. Also, I only tried those on page 1 of the search results): https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=security update server 2008 x64 This is a good sign that May 2017 (and beyond) Server 2008 security-only updates will work in Vista. However, it should be noted that most if not all of the updates I tried have Vista-only versions too, so Microsoft could decide to change something regarding the compilation of future Server 2008 security-only updates (when Vista is no longer supported) that prevents them from installing under Vista. Retracting my last statement about April 11th, it will be the next patch Tuesday that excludes Windows Vista that will give us answers, so make that... May 9th, IIRC? After this finding, my outlook on the situation has changed. I believe that Vista users will be set until 2020, as far as security-only updates go, as long as Microsoft doesn't get any ideas (and at this point, that seems unlikely, given that Server 2008 is no longer in mainstream support). I also doubt that we'll have to worry about incompatible updates, since Microsoft didn't include Server 2008 support in newer .NET framework updates (4.6.1 requires 2008 R2 or later). The only updates I'd imagine wouldn't work would be anything to do with Powershell 3.0. But does that component even get updated at all? I hope I didn't sound rude (that was certainly not my intention), I just don't want people to get their hopes up and then just get hit with disappointment come Vista's EOL. However, like I said, I believe we'll be fine, but I like to take everything into consideration before I jump to conclusions, because Microsoft can be pretty unpredictable sometimes. Best regards.
  9. AFAIK, nobody has done so (yet). I have a feeling it isn't going to work either, at least not without modification to the updates themselves (view this to find out more): However, Tuesday (April 11) will tell...
  10. At the time I made the package and listing, I was very tired so I made some mistakes... Sorry about that. You can safely copy the wrappers to the System32 location, and nothing should be affected, as I've done so several times myself. However, as you pointed out, it would be simpler to copy all the files at once to a single location, so thanks for the information. Unfortunately, according to Adobe's terms of use here, you're not allowed to redistribute or host the software, so I've removed the package from the list. Instead, I'll create a video tutorial on my YouTube channel on how to manually download and install Reader DC under Windows Vista, and will link that video on the list when it's complete. This will cause the process to become much more lengthy compared to using my installation package, but I certainly would rather avoid any legal issues and play it safe. Instead of hosting their software on my MEGA account, I'll just link their FTP server in the video's description, and I'll demonstrate how to manually edit the MSI files, as well as manually hex editing the DLLs to use the wrappers instead of Vista's system DLLs. The only thing I'll host is Smeezekitty's wrappers, which should be fine since they're not part of Reader DC in any way, and I'll be certain to give him credit.
  11. Sure, all additions are welcome as long as the software works with Windows Vista/2008 (and isn't malware obviously, lol).
  12. Thank you for the information, VistaLover! I finally got around to updating the Last versions of software for Windows Vista list to reflect this information, and I added an installation package for Reader DC for Vista containing all of the needed files.
  13. Goodness, the list is getting quite long now! Added those to the list, and as usual, thanks for the information.
  14. Speaking of that, I took a look at the update .MSU files for Powershell 3.0 for Windows Server 2008 and Powershell 2.0 for Windows Vista by extracting them with 7zip. I got two .CAB files for each update, along with an .XML file in each. Here's a screenshot of the .XML files from each update opened in Slimjet side-by-side for comparison: http://prntscr.com/er0kug If you look closely, the build number specified for each OS is different. My guess is that Microsoft used this to differentiate between Client (WinVista) and Server (Win2k8) when releasing updates for each OS to prevent installation of Server-only updates on Client and vice versa. If this is also the case with security-only updates released for Server 2008 post April 2017, Server 2008 updates more than likely won't work under Vista and will require modification of the .MSU/.CAB files (assuming someone here knows how/is willing to do that...) and even then, I'd imagine it would be a huge pain in the neck to have to perform that for each individual update... Taking this information into account, the future of Windows Vista doesn't seem too bright. We can only hope...
  15. Thank you once again Werewolf for the very detailed and informative additions! Added 'em to the list as per usual