[tomasz86]

@blackwingcat
Same thing here with GIMP.

[pointertovoid]

ppgrainbow, on 12 May 2012 - 02:44 PM, said:

... It seems that ClamWin and MalwareBytes Antivirus software are the only viable option now...

The latest Avast 7 antivirus runs on W2k. The editor tells it officially. Users had even success on W2k Server.

An outdated firewall isn't a big worry to me, as it works without updated malware definitions.

[billtodd]

ppgrainbow, on 12 May 2012 - 02:44 PM, said:

It seems that ClamWin and MalwareBytes Antivirus software are the only viable option now.

Sorry I didn't notice this earlier.

I'm still running Avira AntiVir (free version) and getting updates for Win2K (can't say how long that will last, but my impression is that they're not going to stop until they need to for some reason). Version 10.0.0.648 was I think the last one I installed but after subsequent update activity it now says it's 10.2.0.704 (despite the fact that it was shortly after 648, in July of last year, that Avira warned that it could no longer be installed on Win2K - so you could try installing SLIGHTLY later versions if you'd like to try AntiVir but can't find 648). In its Help 'about' screen most program files are dated 11/July/2011 but both the virus signatures and search engine are dated this month and the product date is 28/Sep/2011, well after support for Win2K nominally ceased; in its Program Files folder quite a few .dlls have dates within the past few months. It will occasionally ask to install an 83 MB product update and actually download it but then the install itself does nothing (presumably because the update itself does not support Win2K); still, clearly SOME updating beyond just signatures is still occurring (thank you, Avira).

As long as the virus signatures are still being updated I feel pretty safe, though might feel less so if I weren't behind a hardware firewall. Some people report problems installing Avast 7 on Win2K, but others say that you just need to reboot an extra time to get it running. I may try it, but I think pretty highly of AntiVir so would like to stay on it as long as is reasonably possible.

[pointertovoid]

billtodd, on 09 June 2012 - 05:49 AM, said:

...feel pretty safe... hardware firewall...

Some people report problems installing Avast 7 on Win2K, but others say that you just need to reboot an extra time to get it running.

A hardware firewall brings nearly no security, since it doesn't check what application accesses the Net.

I had to reboot only when installing Avast 7 while Avast 4.8 was still operating, just for fun - nothing meaningful. The other times Avast 7 installed without a whisper on W2k.

[pointertovoid]

What Windows binary version of ImageMagick runs on plain vanilla W2k, I mean without Api extensions?

v6.3.7 Q16 did; it was brought by LyX 1.5.4.
v6.7.7-7, the latest now in June 2012, does not as it was compiled with Visual Studio 2010 (without the proper options).
The editor's site tells nothing. Several users asked, and I did insist again there
https://www.imagemag...php?f=2&t=20703

A more precise version limit?

[ppgrainbow]

pointertovoid, on 11 June 2012 - 09:34 AM, said:

What Windows binary version of ImageMagick runs on plain vanilla W2k, I mean without Api extensions?

v6.3.7 Q16 did; it was brought by LyX 1.5.4.
v6.7.7-7, the latest now in June 2012, does not as it was compiled with Visual Studio 2010 (without the proper options).
The editor's site tells nothing. Several users asked, and I did insist again there
https://www.imagemag...php?f=2&t=20703

A more precise version limit?

Okay, can anyone check to see which dependencies the latest version of ImageMagick uses? Thanks.

I can't tell which dependencies absolutely require either Windows XP SP2 or Windows XP SP3, because although the site set the official requirements, we don't know what entry point dependencies that it uses yet. There are not too many dependencies that do require Windows XP SP3 as far as I know.

Some of the entry points available in Visual Studio 2010 do not even support Windows XP at all. Either Windows Server 2003 SP1/SP2, Windows Vista or even Windows 7.

Visual Studio 2012 will cause a shift in lowest supported OS version from Windows XP SP2 to Windows Vista SP2 for sure.

I'm guessing the ImageMagick 5.x series do run okay on Windows 2000, I'm not sure.

This post has been edited by ppgrainbow: 11 June 2012 - 10:15 AM

[blackwingcat]

WireShark 1.8.0 has same problem.
I think there are any compatibility problems in GLIB 2.3x.
o GLIB 2.28 (Wireshark 1.6.8)
x GLIB 2.30 (gimp2.8)
x GLIB 2.32 (Wireshark 1.8.0)

tomasz86, on 14 May 2012 - 02:52 AM, said:

@blackwingcat
Same thing here with GIMP.

This post has been edited by blackwingcat: 28 June 2012 - 03:41 AM

[blackwingcat]

I succeeded to run WireShark 1.8.0 and GIMP 2.8
Copy libgdk-win32-2.0-0.dll and intl.dll from Wireshark 1.6.8.
Are there anyone who knows the deference?
They have same dll version.

blackwingcat, on 28 June 2012 - 03:40 AM, said:

WireShark 1.8.0 has same problem.
I think there are any compatibility problems in GLIB 2.3x.
o GLIB 2.28 (Wireshark 1.6.8)
x GLIB 2.30 (gimp2.8)
x GLIB 2.32 (Wireshark 1.8.0)

tomasz86, on 14 May 2012 - 02:52 AM, said:

@blackwingcat
Same thing here with GIMP.

This post has been edited by blackwingcat: 04 July 2012 - 07:32 AM

[tomasz86]

Thanks for useful information, BlackWingCat

Edit: GIMP still doesn't launch even after replacing the files. It's present in Task Manager but uses 0% CPU and 60+ MB RAM but there's no visible window on the screen.

This post has been edited by tomasz86: 04 July 2012 - 10:22 AM

[erpdude8]

Colonel O, on 25 February 2011 - 03:12 PM, said:

"The Adobe Flash Player 10.2 no longer supports Microsoft Windows 2000"

Both the IE and non-IE version install fine, but throw an exception at the end. Both IE6 and Firefox Nightly use 10.2 properly.
No modifications required.

Flash Player 10.3 (ActiveX and plugin versions) both work perfectly fine on 2000.

the latter builds of Flash Player 10.3 (10.3.183.15 and greater) won't install nor run under Win2000 w/out KernelEx for Win2000 or KDW / FCWIN2k.
Flash Player versions 10.3.183.11 and earlier can install and run on Win2k without the need for unofficial kernel32 for Win2000.

Opera has ended support for Win2000 starting with Opera 12.50 snapshot build 1513.
so last version of Opera to support Win2000 is Opera 12.00 (or 12.01 if ever that one comes out).

This post has been edited by erpdude8: 20 July 2012 - 11:14 PM

[ppgrainbow]

erpdude8, on 20 July 2012 - 11:10 PM, said:

Colonel O, on 25 February 2011 - 03:12 PM, said:

"The Adobe Flash Player 10.2 no longer supports Microsoft Windows 2000"

Both the IE and non-IE version install fine, but throw an exception at the end. Both IE6 and Firefox Nightly use 10.2 properly.
No modifications required.

Flash Player 10.3 (ActiveX and plugin versions) both work perfectly fine on 2000.

the latter builds of Flash Player 10.3 (10.3.183.15 and greater) won't install nor run under Win2000 w/out KernelEx for Win2000 or KDW / FCWIN2k.
Flash Player versions 10.3.183.11 and earlier can install and run on Win2k without the need for unofficial kernel32 for Win2000.

Opera has ended support for Win2000 starting with Opera 12.50 snapshot build 1513.
so last version of Opera to support Win2000 is Opera 12.00 (or 12.01 if ever that one comes out).

I have a couple of questions here:
1. Has Opera stated that Windows 2000 (and older versions of Windows XP) will no longer be officially supported in Opera 12.50?
2. What dependencies will Opera use that do not exist either in Opera 12.50?

Starting in Opera 13, it's obvious that the support code for Windows 2000 will get removed for sure. There will eventually be a Opera 12.1x and it's obvious that Opera will continue to support Win2k until the end of this year.

With Opera dropping Win2k support and Firefox 10 ESR coming to a end after 2012, there will be no supported browser that will work on Win2k anymore.

[tomasz86]

ppgrainbow, on 20 July 2012 - 11:28 PM, said:

With Opera dropping Win2k support and Firefox 10 ESR coming to a end after 2012, there will be no supported major browser that will work on Win2k anymore.

Corrected There exist browsers other than Chrome / Firefox / IE / Opera that do support Win2k.

As for Opera 11.50 12.50: http://www.msfn.org/...ost__p__1004470
It requires uxtheme.dll and one dependency related to kernel32.dll in opera.dll to be fixed. It's still compiled in VS2008 (?) so no unofficial kernel is required to run.

This post has been edited by tomasz86: 20 July 2012 - 11:47 PM

[ppgrainbow]

tomasz86, on 20 July 2012 - 11:35 PM, said:

ppgrainbow, on 20 July 2012 - 11:28 PM, said:

With Opera dropping Win2k support and Firefox 10 ESR coming to a end after 2012, there will be no supported major browser that will work on Win2k anymore.

Corrected There exist browsers other than Chrome / Firefox / IE / Opera that do support Win2k.

As for Opera 11.50: http://www.msfn.org/...ost__p__1004470
It requires uxtheme.dll and one dependency related to kernel32.dll in opera.dll to be fixed. It's still compiled in VS2008 (?) so no unofficial kernel is required to run.

Thanks for telling me. By the way, do you mean Opera 12.50 or Opera 11.50. Opera is indeed still compiled with Visual Studio 2008, but when Opera 12.50 is released after this year, I bet that it will start including dependencies that do not exist on Win2k. What dependency in kernel32.dll in opera.dll are you talking about, btw?

[tomasz86]

It was a typo. I meant Opera 12.50

The dependency was "GetUserGeoID" if my memory is right (I can't check at the moment). It's present in both unofficial kernels.

[ppgrainbow]

tomasz86, on 20 July 2012 - 11:50 PM, said:

It was a typo. I meant Opera 12.50

The dependency was "GetUserGeoID" if my memory is right (I can't check at the moment). It's present in both unofficial kernels.

Thanks for telling me. GetUserGeoID is present starting with Windows XP SP2. We don't know if Opera 12.50 will also discontinue support for older hardware such as the Pentium III or the AMD Athlon XP too.

In that case, Opera 12.50 will not support Win2k, Windows XP without SP2 or Windows Server 2003 RTM anymore.

This post has been edited by ppgrainbow: 21 July 2012 - 02:52 AM

[blackwingcat]

I posted Opera forum.

http://my.opera.com/....dml?id=1463272

The current version Opera blocks by OS version Hardware Acceleration.

[tomasz86]

ppgrainbow, on 21 July 2012 - 02:50 AM, said:

Thanks for telling me. GetUserGeoID is present starting with Windows XP SP2. We don't know if Opera 12.50 will also discontinue support for older hardware such as the Pentium III or the AMD Athlon XP too.

In that case, Opera 12.50 will not support Win2k, Windows XP without SP2 or Windows Server 2003 RTM anymore.

Well, frankly speaking, this is only my opinion but Opera for desktop seems to be almost dead anyway The only (really, not so called) stable version of Opera is 11.64 while the whole 12.xx series is extremely buggy. Opera has never been known for its stability (it used to crash on javascript / Flash a lot) but the current situation is just terrible. I always used Opera but recently have almost switched to Firefox as it's just much more stable, offers a lot of more functions and customisation, there are many more useful extensions available, etc. Opera's only advantage over Firefox is that it's faster (especially the fact that the UI is responsive even when many pages are being loaded which is a problem in Fx) but there are just too many other flaws.

[ppgrainbow]

tomasz86, on 21 July 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

ppgrainbow, on 21 July 2012 - 02:50 AM, said:

Thanks for telling me. GetUserGeoID is present starting with Windows XP SP2. We don't know if Opera 12.50 will also discontinue support for older hardware such as the Pentium III or the AMD Athlon XP too.

In that case, Opera 12.50 will not support Win2k, Windows XP without SP2 or Windows Server 2003 RTM anymore.

Well, frankly speaking, this is only my opinion but Opera for desktop seems to be almost dead anyway The only (really, not so called) stable version of Opera is 11.64 while the whole 12.xx series is extremely buggy. Opera has never been known for its stability (it used to crash on javascript / Flash a lot) but the current situation is just terrible. I always used Opera but recently have almost switched to Firefox as it's just much more stable, offers a lot of more functions and customisation, there are many more useful extensions available, etc. Opera's only advantage over Firefox is that it's faster (especially the fact that the UI is responsive even when many pages are being loaded which is a problem in Fx) but there are just too many other flaws.

That's what i've been thinking. Only 2.2% of users still use Opera and the developers biggest reasons why Win2k support is being dropped is not only that OS hasn't been supported for almost two years, but now less than .1% of users still use that OS and sadly vendor support is fading; infact, almost all vendors have dropped support for that OS and it has became increasingly difficult, if not impossible for the team to continue to maintain Opera support for Opera. I kinda feel sad that dropping Opera support on Win2k was a tough decision for them.

How did you know that Opera 12 on Win2k is extremely buggy, btw?

[tomasz86]

Opera 12 is extremely buggy in general, not only on Win2k. I think that it shouldn't have been released at all in the current form. In reality it seems to be still a beta, definitely not a stable version.

And I knew it was buggy because I tried to use it as soon as the so called "stable" version was released... but it was impossible. At the moment the only version of Opera which can be used to browse the Web without experiencing (too many) problems is 11.64.

[ppgrainbow]

tomasz86, on 21 July 2012 - 05:36 PM, said:

Opera 12 is extremely buggy in general, not only on Win2k. I think that it shouldn't have been released at all in the current form. In reality it seems to be still a beta, definitely not a stable version.

And I knew it was buggy because I tried to use it as soon as the so called "stable" version was released... but it was impossible. At the moment the only version of Opera which can be used to browse the Web without experiencing (too many) problems is 11.64.

I kinda imaging that Opera 12 is extremely buggy on all platforms. I was wondering of Opera 12.01 and Opera 12.1x fixed these problems.