A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows XP » General XP issues or comments
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old January 6th 21, 03:34 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Ant[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 873
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 11:55:54 +0700, JJ wrote:


On Mon, 04 Jan 2021 17:01:55 -0500,
wrote:

The stuff that runs from the command line is pretty limited
after you got to XP or 7.


That'll be more like all 64-bit Windows, where they can't natively run
16-bit programs. Windows version doesn't really matter.

Some but not all batch commands are supported. Same with DOSBOX.


In terms of internal commands, the missing ones are only a few and they're
not quite important, IMO (e.g. TRUENAME). However, the trick that can make
the FOR command to iterate each character in the given string, is no longer
possible.

DosBox's command line features on the other hand, is more limited even if
compares with MS-DOS (v6.x).

Any ANSI.SYS tricks are not going to work at all.


ANSI escape codes is natively supported by DosBox's built in command
shell/prompt. Though, I don't know how well it covers the whole ANSI escape
code specifications.

Also, there's no way to disable the ANSI unless DosBox is used to boot a DOS
image which doesn't load ANSI.SYS. Running other command shell such as
FreeDOS' COMMAND.COM (i.e. FreeCOM) from within DosBox's built in command
shell won't disable ANSI either.


DOSBOX doesn't seem to support all of the PROMPT tricks I used in DOS
6.3. (redefining keyboard keys etc)
It does seem to support the direct access in dBase that Windows has
choked on since XP. I can also run pretty much all of my 16 bit stuff.
If I really want to walk down memory lane I do have a 1g FAT16
partition on one of my drives that will boot into real DOS. That looks
like the machine on my desk when I retired in 1996 with W/3.1
available if I want to look at my old Prodigy notes ;-)


What about FreeDOS in VMs?
--
NY! Let's hope 2021 will be better.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @
http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )
Ads
  #32  
Old January 6th 21, 12:49 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
JJ[_14_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

On Tue, 05 Jan 2021 09:59:29 -0500, wrote:

DOSBOX doesn't seem to support all of the PROMPT tricks I used in DOS
6.3. (redefining keyboard keys etc)


Yes, it doesn't support all of MS-DOS features. DosBox is just an emulator
for the DOS environment. If you want full MS-DOS features, you'll have to
use DosBox to boot an MS-DOS image. IOTW, actual MS-DOS software is
required.

It does seem to support the direct access in dBase that Windows has
choked on since XP.


In NT3/NT4/XP, you'll have to properly configure the CONFIG.NT specifically
for dBase.

If I really want to walk down memory lane I do have a 1g FAT16
partition on one of my drives that will boot into real DOS. That looks
like the machine on my desk when I retired in 1996 with W/3.1
available if I want to look at my old Prodigy notes ;-)


You can make an image of that drive, then boot it from DosBox.

Keep in mind tough, DosBox is designed for games only. It won't work for
some utility softwares which involves hardware components (e.g. motherboard
chipset, storage/network controller, etc.), because DosBox is not a 100%
accurate emulator. DosBox is a pretty good emulator, but it's not 100%
accurate.

For a 100% accurate old PCs emulator, use PCem. It's similar to VirtualBox,
but for old hardwares. It's like a combination of VirtualBox and DosBox. It
can emulate from the first PC 4.77MHz to late 2000 PCs. Intel, AMD, Cyrix,
or IDT (WinChip) CPUs. It'll be like using an old PC. Even the BIOS.
  #33  
Old January 6th 21, 12:51 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
JJ[_14_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

On Tue, 05 Jan 2021 20:34:28 -0600, Ant wrote:
What about FreeDOS in VMs?


Good luck playing Dig Dug in a VM.
  #34  
Old January 6th 21, 11:47 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
No_Name
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 627
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

On Wed, 6 Jan 2021 18:49:38 +0700, JJ wrote:

On Tue, 05 Jan 2021 09:59:29 -0500, wrote:

DOSBOX doesn't seem to support all of the PROMPT tricks I used in DOS
6.3. (redefining keyboard keys etc)


Yes, it doesn't support all of MS-DOS features. DosBox is just an emulator
for the DOS environment. If you want full MS-DOS features, you'll have to
use DosBox to boot an MS-DOS image. IOTW, actual MS-DOS software is
required.

It does seem to support the direct access in dBase that Windows has
choked on since XP.


In NT3/NT4/XP, you'll have to properly configure the CONFIG.NT specifically
for dBase.

If I really want to walk down memory lane I do have a 1g FAT16
partition on one of my drives that will boot into real DOS. That looks
like the machine on my desk when I retired in 1996 with W/3.1
available if I want to look at my old Prodigy notes ;-)


You can make an image of that drive, then boot it from DosBox.

Keep in mind tough, DosBox is designed for games only. It won't work for
some utility softwares which involves hardware components (e.g. motherboard
chipset, storage/network controller, etc.), because DosBox is not a 100%
accurate emulator. DosBox is a pretty good emulator, but it's not 100%
accurate.

For a 100% accurate old PCs emulator, use PCem. It's similar to VirtualBox,
but for old hardwares. It's like a combination of VirtualBox and DosBox. It
can emulate from the first PC 4.77MHz to late 2000 PCs. Intel, AMD, Cyrix,
or IDT (WinChip) CPUs. It'll be like using an old PC. Even the BIOS.


It is just as easy to point the BIOS boot target to a real DOS drive.
Then everything works.
  #35  
Old February 1st 21, 12:49 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Dee[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

(DK) wrote in news:rv7nf0$nrt$1@dont-
email.me:

https://www.smartftp.com/en-us/support/kb/2754

What does this do, and what are the benefits and risks of installing
it?

Thanks.
  #36  
Old February 1st 21, 01:46 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

Dee wrote:
(DK) wrote in news:rv7nf0$nrt$1@dont-
email.me:

https://www.smartftp.com/en-us/support/kb/2754

What does this do, and what are the benefits and risks of installing
it?

Thanks.


kb4019276 (POSReady WinXP)

_sfx_mainfest_

[Options]

Run = "update\update.exe"
PatchDLL = "_sfx_.dll"

[Deltas]

"update\update.exe" = "_sfx_0000._p", "_sfx_.dll"
"spuninst.exe" = "_sfx_0001._p", "update\update.exe"
"update\updspapi.dll" = "_sfx_0002._p", "update\update.exe"
"SP3QFE\lsasrv.dll" = "_sfx_0003._p", "update\update.exe"
"SP3QFE\rsaenh.dll" = "_sfx_0004._p", "SP3QFE\lsasrv.dll"
"SP3QFE\dssenh.dll" = "_sfx_0005._p", "SP3QFE\rsaenh.dll"
"SP3QFE\ksecdd.sys" = "_sfx_0006._p", "SP3QFE\rsaenh.dll"
"SP3QFE\schannel.dll" = "_sfx_0007._p", "SP3QFE\lsasrv.dll"
"update\update.ver" = "_sfx_0008._p", "SP3QFE\schannel.dll"
"SP3QFE\secur32.dll" = "_sfx_0009._p", "SP3QFE\ksecdd.sys"
"spmsg.dll" = "_sfx_0010._p", "update\updspapi.dll"
"update\spcustom.dll" = "_sfx_0011._p", "update\updspapi.dll"
"update\KB4019276.CAT" = "_sfx_0012._p", "SP3QFE\dssenh.dll"
"update\eula.txt" = "_sfx_0013._p", "update\update.exe"
"update\updatebr.inf" = "_sfx_0014._p", "update\update.exe"
"update\update_SP3QFE.inf" = "_sfx_0015._p", "update\update.exe"
"update\branches.inf" = "_sfx_0016._p", "update\update_SP3QFE.inf"

[Delete]

"_sfx_*._p"
"_sfx_.dll"

What that does, is you can see it's patching the SChannel.
The SChannel is part of streaming encryption support.
The SChannel helps hide your username and password in flight,
so snoopers cannot read it. When doing online banking, the
SChannel protects your bank account number in flight.

So when the web page tells you it's a means of "adding TLS 1.2 support",
you can see how kb4019276 attempts to do that.

Since kb4019276 is for POSReady WinXP and not vanilla WinXP,
the other materials change your WinXP so that it declares
itself as POSReady. POS stands for Point Of Sale terminal,
where small business owners use a cheap PC and a thermal printer,
to do a cash register in a store. The WinXP POSReady OS, has
a different set of "years of support", which is why we ride
on the coattails of it and use it to selectively patch
vanilla WinXP.

I recommend setting Windows Update to Manual mode, so that
after you add POSReady, the machine is not assaulted with
an endless stream of POS updates. Do that, before the first step
of the installation procedure.

Set a restore point (or take a C: backup) before testing that.

*******

To see what capability you got, you can try this.

1) Select a browser worthy of testing...

2) Open IE8. Run this test. Takes two minutes or so.

https://dev.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html

Print off the results for safe keeping. That's a "browser tester".

3) Do the procedure for installing TLS 1.2

4) Open IE8

https://dev.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html

Print off the results for safe keeping.
Compare to (2).

If a browser appears to have not automatically included
TLS 1.2 in its suite, that means some Preference is not
set. In Firefox, for example, about:config might have
such a setting in there somewhere.

TLS 1.3 is the latest and a couple web nitwits have
enabled only 1.3 on their server. Those sites will still
be out of reach for many users. The POSReady method, will
not be adding TLS 1.3. Not evar.

*******

SSLLabs has two test URLs.

https://dev.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html # browser tester
# " is my browser ready? "

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/anal...d=www.hrca.net # web site tester
# " what protocols does this
# website support ? "

These are not tests you run "all the time".

But like tools in a toolbox, they are damn handy when you need them.

For the second one, edit the thing on the end, to test the
website you're interested in.

The results of the two SSLLABS tests, help a person to determine
"what is the common denominator these techie things support".
If both only supported TLS 1.2, then when the browser visits
the web site, the two negotiate and agree to use TLS 1.2.

Many people reach into their browser (Firefox about:config)
and disable the SSL ones, if any are still enabled. TLS 1.1
or TLS 1.2 for https today, are common choices. TLS 1.3
is a choice, but only a few sites have gone TLS 1.3 only.
Maybe by the year 2030, there will be no TLS 1.1 or TLS 1.2 left.

I haven't tried this yet, so no test results to offer.

Paul
  #37  
Old February 2nd 21, 01:03 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Dee[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

Paul wrote in
:

Dee wrote:
(DK) wrote in
news:rv7nf0$nrt$1@dont- email.me:

https://www.smartftp.com/en-us/support/kb/2754

What does this do, and what are the benefits and risks of
installing it?

Thanks.


kb4019276 (POSReady WinXP)

_sfx_mainfest_

[Options]

Run = "update\update.exe"
PatchDLL = "_sfx_.dll"

[Deltas]

"update\update.exe" = "_sfx_0000._p", "_sfx_.dll"
"spuninst.exe" = "_sfx_0001._p", "update\update.exe"
"update\updspapi.dll" = "_sfx_0002._p", "update\update.exe"
"SP3QFE\lsasrv.dll" = "_sfx_0003._p", "update\update.exe"
"SP3QFE\rsaenh.dll" = "_sfx_0004._p", "SP3QFE\lsasrv.dll"
"SP3QFE\dssenh.dll" = "_sfx_0005._p", "SP3QFE\rsaenh.dll"
"SP3QFE\ksecdd.sys" = "_sfx_0006._p", "SP3QFE\rsaenh.dll"
"SP3QFE\schannel.dll" = "_sfx_0007._p", "SP3QFE\lsasrv.dll"
"update\update.ver" = "_sfx_0008._p", "SP3QFE\schannel.dll"
"SP3QFE\secur32.dll" = "_sfx_0009._p", "SP3QFE\ksecdd.sys"
"spmsg.dll" = "_sfx_0010._p", "update\updspapi.dll"
"update\spcustom.dll" = "_sfx_0011._p", "update\updspapi.dll"
"update\KB4019276.CAT" = "_sfx_0012._p", "SP3QFE\dssenh.dll"
"update\eula.txt" = "_sfx_0013._p", "update\update.exe"
"update\updatebr.inf" = "_sfx_0014._p", "update\update.exe"
"update\update_SP3QFE.inf" = "_sfx_0015._p",
"update\update.exe" "update\branches.inf" = "_sfx_0016._p",
"update\update_SP3QFE.inf"

[Delete]

"_sfx_*._p"
"_sfx_.dll"

What that does, is you can see it's patching the SChannel.
The SChannel is part of streaming encryption support.
The SChannel helps hide your username and password in flight,
so snoopers cannot read it. When doing online banking, the
SChannel protects your bank account number in flight.

So when the web page tells you it's a means of "adding TLS 1.2
support", you can see how kb4019276 attempts to do that.

Since kb4019276 is for POSReady WinXP and not vanilla WinXP,
the other materials change your WinXP so that it declares
itself as POSReady. POS stands for Point Of Sale terminal,
where small business owners use a cheap PC and a thermal printer,
to do a cash register in a store. The WinXP POSReady OS, has
a different set of "years of support", which is why we ride
on the coattails of it and use it to selectively patch
vanilla WinXP.

I recommend setting Windows Update to Manual mode, so that
after you add POSReady, the machine is not assaulted with
an endless stream of POS updates. Do that, before the first step
of the installation procedure.

Set a restore point (or take a C: backup) before testing that.

*******

To see what capability you got, you can try this.

1) Select a browser worthy of testing...

2) Open IE8. Run this test. Takes two minutes or so.

https://dev.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html

Print off the results for safe keeping. That's a "browser
tester".

3) Do the procedure for installing TLS 1.2

4) Open IE8

https://dev.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html

Print off the results for safe keeping.
Compare to (2).

If a browser appears to have not automatically included
TLS 1.2 in its suite, that means some Preference is not
set. In Firefox, for example, about:config might have
such a setting in there somewhere.

TLS 1.3 is the latest and a couple web nitwits have
enabled only 1.3 on their server. Those sites will still
be out of reach for many users. The POSReady method, will
not be adding TLS 1.3. Not evar.

*******

SSLLabs has two test URLs.

https://dev.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html # browser
tester
# " is my
browser ready? "

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/anal...d=www.hrca.net
# web site tester

# " what protocols does this

# website support ? "

These are not tests you run "all the time".

But like tools in a toolbox, they are damn handy when you need
them.

For the second one, edit the thing on the end, to test the
website you're interested in.

The results of the two SSLLABS tests, help a person to determine
"what is the common denominator these techie things support".
If both only supported TLS 1.2, then when the browser visits
the web site, the two negotiate and agree to use TLS 1.2.

Many people reach into their browser (Firefox about:config)
and disable the SSL ones, if any are still enabled. TLS 1.1
or TLS 1.2 for https today, are common choices. TLS 1.3
is a choice, but only a few sites have gone TLS 1.3 only.
Maybe by the year 2030, there will be no TLS 1.1 or TLS 1.2 left.

I haven't tried this yet, so no test results to offer.

Paul


Thank you so much, Paul, for the clear explanation and steps. I
remember reading about this years ago but did not explore it further
at that time. I have saved your post for reference. I have Win XP SP3
Home 32-bit, so I guess that's vanilla XP.

Dee
  #38  
Old February 2nd 21, 03:37 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

"Dee" wrote


| Thank you so much, Paul, for the clear explanation and steps. I
| remember reading about this years ago but did not explore it further
| at that time. I have saved your post for reference. I have Win XP SP3
| Home 32-bit, so I guess that's vanilla XP.
|

I had to figure this out for my own software because
I wanted to use Microsoft's winhttp library to download
maps. It's actually very simple:

1) put this in notepad and save it as a reg file, then
run it. (Watch for wordwrap.):

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\SecurityProviders\SCHANNEL\Protocols\TLS
1.1\Client]
"DisabledByDefault"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\SecurityProviders\SCHANNEL\Protocols\TLS
1.1\Server]
"DisabledByDefault"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\SecurityProviders\SCHANNEL\Protocols\TLS
1.2\Client]
"DisabledByDefault"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\SecurityProviders\SCHANNEL\Protocols\TLS
1.2\Server]
"DisabledByDefault"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\WPA\PosReady]
"Installed"=dword:00000001


The last setting allows the patch to install. The others
are to configure TLS 1.2 to be recognized.

2) Download this and install it, straight from the horse's mouth:

http://download.windowsupdate.com/c/...5e1240ce3d.exe


No risks I'm aware of. It just enables TLS 1.2. However,
that's not your problem with XP. I'm still trying to figure
out what the problem is. WebGL? Something else? Some
pages just won't work. For me it's complicated because I
also use NoScript, an extensive HOSTS file, and Secret Agent
extension, in addition to it being XP. Oddly, the more recent
vintage New Moon seems worse than FF 52. Why? I don't
know.

Websites are such a mess these days, with many pages
completely broken unless script is allowed from a dozen
sources. Even then sometimes they're broken. I use a
CSS-toggle button to fix many of them.

On top of the other issues, many sites are deliberately
breaking unless you allow script and let them show ads.
The page will load broken, with links set to not function
in CSS, or an opaque DIV covering the whole page. Then
those problems are only fixed by script. It's a non-confrontational
way of giving you a choice between broken websites or
allowing the website to completely take over your browser
with moving, flashing, pop-upping, spying, and so on.

One thing that will definitely help in many cases is to
change your userAgent to Win7 with Firefox 84 or something
similar. Many sites now are rigged to just reject any browser
that isn't new. The web designers can't be bothered to
uderstand what they're doing. They load jquery and other
"libraries" from 3rd parties, copy snippets of script from online
to add pizzazz to their pages, and they simply don't have the
idea that their page should work for you. It's your job to
make the page work for them.


  #39  
Old February 3rd 21, 12:23 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mike Garcia
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

G.F. wrote:
Hi all.
Using XP many websites are no longer available because of new protocols or
new certificates not compatible.
Many programs are no longer available as they run in newer versions of
Windows only.
I still love XP but I begin to weary of it.
Perhaps the break of my main hard disk will push me to carry out the "great
step" to Windows 10.
What about you?

GF




I'm not worried,
I use XP as a dev env for a few things.
Mostly VM's but also on a laptop and desktop.
It's a good thing that (anti)social servers don't work on XP, more
productive!

As someone said here, linux!
I moved to linux when Vista come out and haven't looked back!
But even linux now is getting bloated :'(
I have a win7 VM if I need it or laptop.

WinXP and win32 is still a great platform and very portable
----------
http://mgarcia.org/
  #40  
Old February 3rd 21, 12:53 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Dee[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

"Mayayana" wrote in
:

"Dee" wrote


| Thank you so much, Paul, for the clear explanation and steps. I
| remember reading about this years ago but did not explore it
| further at that time. I have saved your post for reference. I
| have Win XP SP3 Home 32-bit, so I guess that's vanilla XP.
|

I had to figure this out for my own software because
I wanted to use Microsoft's winhttp library to download
maps. It's actually very simple:

1) put this in notepad and save it as a reg file, then
run it. (Watch for wordwrap.):

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\SecurityProvid
ers\SCHANNEL\Protocols\TLS 1.1\Client]
"DisabledByDefault"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\SecurityProvid
ers\SCHANNEL\Protocols\TLS 1.1\Server]
"DisabledByDefault"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\SecurityProvid
ers\SCHANNEL\Protocols\TLS 1.2\Client]
"DisabledByDefault"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\SecurityProvid
ers\SCHANNEL\Protocols\TLS 1.2\Server]
"DisabledByDefault"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\WPA\PosReady]
"Installed"=dword:00000001


The last setting allows the patch to install. The others
are to configure TLS 1.2 to be recognized.

2) Download this and install it, straight from the horse's mouth:

http://download.windowsupdate.com/c/.../software/updt
/2017/10/windowsxp-kb4019276-x86-embedded-enu_3822fc1692076429a7dc0
51b00213d5e1240ce3d.exe


No risks I'm aware of. It just enables TLS 1.2. However,
that's not your problem with XP. I'm still trying to figure
out what the problem is. WebGL? Something else? Some
pages just won't work. For me it's complicated because I
also use NoScript, an extensive HOSTS file, and Secret Agent
extension, in addition to it being XP. Oddly, the more recent
vintage New Moon seems worse than FF 52. Why? I don't
know.

Websites are such a mess these days, with many pages
completely broken unless script is allowed from a dozen
sources. Even then sometimes they're broken. I use a
CSS-toggle button to fix many of them.

On top of the other issues, many sites are deliberately
breaking unless you allow script and let them show ads.
The page will load broken, with links set to not function
in CSS, or an opaque DIV covering the whole page. Then
those problems are only fixed by script. It's a
non-confrontational way of giving you a choice between broken
websites or allowing the website to completely take over your
browser with moving, flashing, pop-upping, spying, and so on.

One thing that will definitely help in many cases is to
change your userAgent to Win7 with Firefox 84 or something
similar. Many sites now are rigged to just reject any browser
that isn't new. The web designers can't be bothered to
uderstand what they're doing. They load jquery and other
"libraries" from 3rd parties, copy snippets of script from online
to add pizzazz to their pages, and they simply don't have the
idea that their page should work for you. It's your job to
make the page work for them.


Thank you, Mayayana, for this info as well. I agree with your
assessment here. I changed my UserAgent to Win7 which did help with
some sites. And I used New Moon after you recommended it and found it
too doesn't work for some websites, but I do find it useful as an
alternative. I now have 4 browsers to try when I come across a
website that doesn't want to work properly. If a site won't render
after 4 browsers, I generally just give up. If they can't be bothered
to make their site compatible, I can't be bothered to try to make it
work.

Dee


  #41  
Old February 3rd 21, 02:29 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

"Dee" wrote

| If they can't be bothered
| to make their site compatible, I can't be bothered to try to make it
| work.
|
Me too. But then I'm faced with confirming my
doctor's appt or logging into social security. Then
I have to swallow my pride and use the Win7
computer.

I recently had a physical and got an email telling me
I could create an online account to get my results.
Athena.com. They recently paid a fine for illegal
marketing. They tie into Google script. The site was
a monstrosity. I'm supposed to talk to my doctor that
way because email isn't private?! I'm guessing 5 data
miners had my test results before I did. My doctor is
subject to HIPAA. These 3rd-party operations are not.

I finally got through all the rigmarole and got to the
test results page: "Results were in normal range."
So if I want to actually know my blood pressure,
cholesetrol levels, and so on, I'll still have to go to my
doctor's office and hint that I might file a lawsuit if they
don't give me a copy of the lab results.

This might help a bit:
https://github.com/gcrico/disable-style-button

It seems to be the same CSS toggle button I use.
You can do the same through the View menu, but so many
sites are broken these days, especially without script,
that I find it handy to be able to quickly toogle from the
toolbar. It works on FF52 and New Moon 28. I think I
recall that it didn't work on the NM 27 line, which seems
to be some kind of parallel development.


  #42  
Old February 3rd 21, 04:00 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 603
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 08:29:42, Mayayana wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
[]
I finally got through all the rigmarole and got to the
test results page: "Results were in normal range."
So if I want to actually know my blood pressure,
cholesetrol levels, and so on, I'll still have to go to my
doctor's office and hint that I might file a lawsuit if they
don't give me a copy of the lab results.


(-:

This might help a bit:
https://github.com/gcrico/disable-style-button

It seems to be the same CSS toggle button I use.
You can do the same through the View menu, but so many
sites are broken these days, especially without script,
that I find it handy to be able to quickly toogle from the
toolbar. It works on FF52 and New Moon 28. I think I
recall that it didn't work on the NM 27 line, which seems
to be some kind of parallel development.


Pity the github site itself is so code-sodden. (I see a lot of grey
circles and rectangles which I assume are supposed to be text.) Never
mind, I eventually found the .xpi file; when I ran it, it said it had
installed OK - and if I look in Tools | Add-ons, it's shown as there
(and another add-on I have, that shows next to each one which versions
of Firefox it is supposed to work with, show mine as within that range),
but I see no extra button. Ah well - I'll just have to keep using View.
(Pity, as it sounded as if it was tab-specific - I think View | Page
Style toggles for all.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Illinc fui et illud feci, habe tunicam?
  #43  
Old February 3rd 21, 05:12 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Pity the github site itself is so code-sodden.

Indeed. It's a ****ing mess. I don't know why a
site for coders can't have decent coding. Though I
usually do manage to find the download link.

Turns out the link I found is .1 and says it's for up to
v. 30 when I opened up the XPI and loooked at install.rdf.
It's the same extension but older. My version
is .1.1. I've just sent you a copy via email, as I can't seem
to find a download link. But for anyone who wants to try,
you want v. .1.1.

It works great, though sometimes needs 2 clicks. I don't
know why. But I never use tabs, so I don't know how
that plays into it. I would assume you get one button that
affects the active tab.


  #44  
Old February 4th 21, 12:55 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Dee[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

"Mayayana" wrote in
:

"Dee" wrote

| If they can't be bothered
| to make their site compatible, I can't be bothered to try to make
| it work.
|
Me too. But then I'm faced with confirming my
doctor's appt or logging into social security. Then
I have to swallow my pride and use the Win7
computer.

I recently had a physical and got an email telling me
I could create an online account to get my results.
Athena.com. They recently paid a fine for illegal
marketing. They tie into Google script. The site was
a monstrosity. I'm supposed to talk to my doctor that
way because email isn't private?! I'm guessing 5 data
miners had my test results before I did. My doctor is
subject to HIPAA. These 3rd-party operations are not.


Wow. I did not know that. My doctor also uses Athena, and I hate
having to login to it.


I finally got through all the rigmarole and got to the
test results page: "Results were in normal range."
So if I want to actually know my blood pressure,
cholesetrol levels, and so on, I'll still have to go to my
doctor's office and hint that I might file a lawsuit if they
don't give me a copy of the lab results.

This might help a bit:
https://github.com/gcrico/disable-style-button

It seems to be the same CSS toggle button I use.
You can do the same through the View menu, but so many
sites are broken these days, especially without script,
that I find it handy to be able to quickly toogle from the
toolbar. It works on FF52 and New Moon 28. I think I
recall that it didn't work on the NM 27 line, which seems
to be some kind of parallel development.


Thanks, will take a look.
  #45  
Old February 4th 21, 02:40 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Aren't you wearied of Windows XP?

"Dee" wrote

| I recently had a physical and got an email telling me
| I could create an online account to get my results.
| Athena.com. They recently paid a fine for illegal
| marketing. They tie into Google script. The site was
| a monstrosity. I'm supposed to talk to my doctor that
| way because email isn't private?! I'm guessing 5 data
| miners had my test results before I did. My doctor is
| subject to HIPAA. These 3rd-party operations are not.
|
| Wow. I did not know that. My doctor also uses Athena, and I hate
| having to login to it.
|

https://www.healthcareitnews.com/new...act-violations

I wasn't aware of it until recently. Apparently it's a big
business. The doctors don't know tech and don't want to.
They only want a legal, easy way to not have to look up
from their laptops. The webmasters are kids who don't know
how to code. So like so many sites these days, it's a circus
of javascript libraries.

If you use NoScript you can see what outside domains
are being called to code webpages. It seems no one knows
how to code sscript anymore. They're all using "javascript
libraries", which are basically giant wrappers that hide the
hard work and take care of accommodating different browsers,
so that the coders won't have to understand that stuff.


The result is that "everyone and his brother" is piggybacking
on most websites. Google have their finger in virtually every
commercial website, with fonts, APIs, jquery, captchas, ads,
analytics, and so on. Very few webmasters know how to
do any of that without Google's free trojan horse services.
But a medical data portal? That's nuts. I regret that I even
filled in the membership... especially since my doctor doesn't
tell me anything, anyway.

|
| Thanks, will take a look.

John said it wasn't showing up on his system. In that case
see if it's in View - Toolbars - Customize.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.