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

MSFN down?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 14th 20, 05:54 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Lu Wei
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default MSFN down?

For a long time MSFN's Windows XP forum
(https://msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-xp/ ) is my source of
information about XP. But recently I hardly could open it. Is it only
me? Is there anything wrong with the site?

--
Regards,
Lu Wei
IM:
PGP: 0xA12FEF7592CCE1EA
Ads
  #2  
Old August 14th 20, 08:02 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default MSFN down?

Lu Wei wrote:
For a long time MSFN's Windows XP forum
(https://msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-xp/ ) is my source of
information about XP. But recently I hardly could open it. Is it only
me? Is there anything wrong with the site?


Your link opened here, just fine. Tested with Seamonkey.

Paul
  #3  
Old August 14th 20, 02:32 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Lu Wei
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default MSFN down?

On 2020-8-14 15:02, Paul wrote:
Lu Wei wrote:
For a long time MSFN's Windows XP forum
(https://msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-xp/ ) is my source of
information about XP. But recently I hardly could open it. Is it only
me? Is there anything wrong with the site?


Your link opened here, just fine. Tested with Seamonkey.


Thanks. Then that's my network problem.

--
Regards,
Lu Wei
IM:
PGP: 0xA12FEF7592CCE1EA
  #4  
Old August 14th 20, 04:51 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default MSFN down?

Lu Wei wrote:

For a long time MSFN's Windows XP forum
(https://msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-xp/ ) is my source of
information about XP. But recently I hardly could open it. Is it only
me? Is there anything wrong with the site?


I can load it in Firefox 79.0, latest release, while on Windows 10. The
last version of Firefox that is usable on Windows XP in version 52ESR.

You obviously don't get to use Edge (old EdgeHTML or new Chromium
versions) on Windows XP.

I can load it in Google Chrome 84.0.4147.125, latest release, again
while on Windows 10.

Don't know what "hardly can open it" means. Many sites require a
minimum version of the web client used to connect to their site. There
are features or functions available only in later versions. Many sites
will not accept connects from Internet Explorer whose last release was
almost 7 years ago. You never mentioned which web browser you were
using and its version.

You also did not mention if you installed any extensions in the
unidentified web browser. Those can affect rendering or even connecting
to a web site or the resources it uses from elsewhere.

What web browser?
What extensions installed into it?
What anti-virus or other security software?
What does "hardly open it" mean?
  #5  
Old August 15th 20, 04:54 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Lu Wei
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default MSFN down?

On 2020-8-14 23:51, VanguardLH wrote:
Lu Wei wrote:

For a long time MSFN's Windows XP forum
(https://msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-xp/ ) is my source of
information about XP. But recently I hardly could open it. Is it only
me? Is there anything wrong with the site?


I can load it in Firefox 79.0, latest release, while on Windows 10. The
last version of Firefox that is usable on Windows XP in version 52ESR.

You obviously don't get to use Edge (old EdgeHTML or new Chromium
versions) on Windows XP.

I can load it in Google Chrome 84.0.4147.125, latest release, again
while on Windows 10.

Don't know what "hardly can open it" means. Many sites require a
minimum version of the web client used to connect to their site. There
are features or functions available only in later versions. Many sites
will not accept connects from Internet Explorer whose last release was
almost 7 years ago. You never mentioned which web browser you were
using and its version.

You also did not mention if you installed any extensions in the
unidentified web browser. Those can affect rendering or even connecting
to a web site or the resources it uses from elsewhere.

What web browser?
What extensions installed into it?
What anti-virus or other security software?
What does "hardly open it" mean?

I am not a native English speaker, so my expression is strange
sometimes. Maybe I should say "I could hardly open it", or "I couldn't
open it, even when it opened, it only displays the title".

I am using Serpent 52, descendant of Firefox 52, tried both "safe mode"
and with extensions. Tried user-agent switching but not work. No
anti-virus or other security software installed.

Well, when I was about to install Chrome49, it opened normally. So it
surely was network problem. Maybe dns or proxy related.

--
Regards,
Lu Wei
IM:
PGP: 0xA12FEF7592CCE1EA
  #6  
Old September 18th 20, 01:45 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default MSFN down?

"Lu Wei" wrote

| I am using Serpent 52, descendant of Firefox 52, tried both "safe mode"
| and with extensions. Tried user-agent switching but not work. No
| anti-virus or other security software installed.
|
| Well, when I was about to install Chrome49, it opened normally. So it
| surely was network problem. Maybe dns or proxy related.
|

It just opened fine for me and I don't allow script,
cookies, 3rd-party images, etc. So maybe it was temporary.
I think worrying about extensions and browser version is usually
what, in the US, we call a "wild goose chase". (A lot of work
for nothing.) It's the first advice many people give, but they're
not the ones who have to waste time with safe mode and
trying other browsers.

There are some sites these days that act up if you don't have
a new browser. I find that setting the userAgent to Windows 7
with a recent version of Firefox seems to work fine with those.
Note that with recent Mozilla products they tried to break that.
It only works if you also add the setting:

general.useragent.enable_overrides true

Then add something like:

general.useragent.override

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:79.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/79.0

Firefox changes so fast it might be easier to just set the version
to 200. If they test for something like " 66" then 200 would work
fine. But I haven't tried that. I just update it every once in awhile.

Note about XP: New Moon is a variant of Pale Moon, which
is a less bloated version of Firefox. You can get a recent
release he

https://o.rths.ml/palemoon/?sort=date&order=desc

I currently have 28.10.2a1, about 1 month old. It also has
some nice extras. For example, it incorporated the staus-4-eva
status bar extension as part of the progran and now provides
preferences for the status bar. All my older extensions also
seem to work with it.


  #7  
Old September 18th 20, 05:01 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default MSFN down?

Mayayana wrote:

"Lu Wei" wrote

| I am using Serpent 52, descendant of Firefox 52, tried both "safe mode"
| and with extensions. Tried user-agent switching but not work. No
| anti-virus or other security software installed.
|
| Well, when I was about to install Chrome49, it opened normally. So it
| surely was network problem. Maybe dns or proxy related.
|

It just opened fine for me and I don't allow script,
cookies, 3rd-party images, etc. So maybe it was temporary.
I think worrying about extensions and browser version is usually
what, in the US, we call a "wild goose chase". (A lot of work
for nothing.) It's the first advice many people give, but they're
not the ones who have to waste time with safe mode and
trying other browsers.


So, what would be your 1st time advice for troubleshooting the problem?
Sorry, hindsight is not allowed because it is not available until after
troubleshooting. Your advice would be to wait 24 hours to see if the
problems went away, if not then wait another 24 hours to retest, and
repeat ad nauseum without actually you getting involved in doing any
troubleshooting?

There are some sites these days that act up if you don't have
a new browser. I find that setting the userAgent to Windows 7
with a recent version of Firefox seems to work fine with those.


The OP already reported that lying with the UA header did not work. The
UA is deprecated in determining which web client is connecting to a
site. If the site tests the browser then it doesn't matter what the
client claims it is via UA.

Changing the UA header, per your own definition, is a wild goose chase.
  #8  
Old September 18th 20, 05:04 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 603
Default MSFN down?

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 08:45:36, Mayayana
wrote:
"Lu Wei" wrote

| I am using Serpent 52, descendant of Firefox 52, tried both "safe mode"
| and with extensions. Tried user-agent switching but not work. No
| anti-virus or other security software installed.
|
| Well, when I was about to install Chrome49, it opened normally. So it
| surely was network problem. Maybe dns or proxy related.
|

It just opened fine for me and I don't allow script,
cookies, 3rd-party images, etc. So maybe it was temporary.
I think worrying about extensions and browser version is usually
what, in the US, we call a "wild goose chase". (A lot of work
for nothing.) It's the first advice many people give, but they're
not the ones who have to waste time with safe mode and
trying other browsers.

[]
(We have the expression in the UK too.)

It's like the helpdesk "reboot your computer"; it _may_ fix the problem,
but doesn't help either the helpdesk or the customer learn what the
problem was in the first place. (In addition, for the more unscrupulous
helpdesk, it gets rid of the customer for a while, unless they do a
Dilbert 2001-9-24. They like the "turn off your router for half an hour"
even more!)

[If you _do_ end up working through your extensions, do a binary search,
not one by one - it's a lot quicker. (But note which are enabled, as
Firefox at least rearranges the order.)]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

After all is said and done, usually more is said.
  #9  
Old September 18th 20, 07:19 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default MSFN down?

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 08:45:36, Mayayana
wrote:
"Lu Wei" wrote

| I am using Serpent 52, descendant of Firefox 52, tried both "safe mode"
| and with extensions. Tried user-agent switching but not work. No
| anti-virus or other security software installed.
|
| Well, when I was about to install Chrome49, it opened normally. So it
| surely was network problem. Maybe dns or proxy related.
|

It just opened fine for me and I don't allow script,
cookies, 3rd-party images, etc. So maybe it was temporary.
I think worrying about extensions and browser version is usually
what, in the US, we call a "wild goose chase". (A lot of work
for nothing.) It's the first advice many people give, but they're
not the ones who have to waste time with safe mode and
trying other browsers.

[]
(We have the expression in the UK too.)

It's like the helpdesk "reboot your computer"; it _may_ fix the problem,
but doesn't help either the helpdesk or the customer learn what the
problem was in the first place. (In addition, for the more unscrupulous
helpdesk, it gets rid of the customer for a while, unless they do a
Dilbert 2001-9-24. They like the "turn off your router for half an hour"
even more!)

[If you _do_ end up working through your extensions, do a binary search,
not one by one - it's a lot quicker. (But note which are enabled, as
Firefox at least rearranges the order.)]


So, as I asked of Mayayana, what is YOUR first advice on troubleshooting
the OP's problem? And, no, you don't get to work in hindsight. Work on
troubleshooting the problem as though it's the first encounter with this
OP. Both of you make it sound like you are experts in knowing exactly
what is the perfect option for the first and only troubleshooting
process, but you don't prove it.

If your first troubleshooting step is to disable the extensions, then
you're belatedly making the same suggestion as I did, which means you
are also proclaimed "wild goose chasing" by Mayayana.
  #10  
Old September 19th 20, 01:39 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default MSFN down?

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| (We have the expression in the UK too.)
|

I suppose it probably originated with you. It sounds like
an 18th century kind of thing.

| It's like the helpdesk "reboot your computer"; it _may_ fix the problem,
| but doesn't help either the helpdesk or the customer learn what the
| problem was in the first place.

Or worse, the people who tell you to install all updates,
boot into safe mode, restore to the last stable restore
point, and, oh yeah, if you have extensions then disable
all of them. They're trying to sound like knowledgeable
IT people but really they don't know the answer and they're
just making the person waste a lot of time.

MS people are even worse in their groups. Profuse thank yous,
followed by a request to restate the question, followed by
more nonsense, then eventually an answer that the question
must be asked in a different group.... But have a super day
and thank you so much for your question!!


  #11  
Old September 19th 20, 02:27 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default MSFN down?

Mayayana wrote:

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| (We have the expression in the UK too.)
|

I suppose it probably originated with you. It sounds like
an 18th century kind of thing.

| It's like the helpdesk "reboot your computer"; it _may_ fix the problem,
| but doesn't help either the helpdesk or the customer learn what the
| problem was in the first place.

Or worse, the people who tell you to install all updates,
boot into safe mode, restore to the last stable restore
point, and, oh yeah, if you have extensions then disable
all of them. They're trying to sound like knowledgeable
IT people but really they don't know the answer and they're
just making the person waste a lot of time.

MS people are even worse in their groups. Profuse thank yous,
followed by a request to restate the question, followed by
more nonsense, then eventually an answer that the question
must be asked in a different group.... But have a super day
and thank you so much for your question!!


Sounds more like you ranting about your personal gripes of not getting
solutions for YOUR problems.

Again, and before the OP discovered the solution, just what was YOUR
troubleshooting help to resolve the problem? Oh, that's right, you
didn't have a solution (since you think everyone just must get a
bullseye on the first try) nor did you even have any suggestions for the
OP. In fact, you showed up in this thread a month late!
  #12  
Old September 19th 20, 03:11 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default MSFN down?

"VanguardLH" wrote

| In fact, you showed up in this thread a month late!

Odd. I saw it as a new posting when I posted. I didn't
notice the date, but the thread showed as bold in my
reader, meaning there was a new post since since last
time I viewed the group.


  #13  
Old September 19th 20, 08:58 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 603
Default MSFN down?

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 13:19:47, VanguardLH wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 08:45:36, Mayayana
wrote:
"Lu Wei" wrote

| I am using Serpent 52, descendant of Firefox 52, tried both "safe mode"
| and with extensions. Tried user-agent switching but not work. No
| anti-virus or other security software installed.
|
| Well, when I was about to install Chrome49, it opened normally. So it
| surely was network problem. Maybe dns or proxy related.

[Mayayana's bit was here]
[If you _do_ end up working through your extensions, do a binary search,
not one by one - it's a lot quicker. (But note which are enabled, as
Firefox at least rearranges the order.)]


So, as I asked of Mayayana, what is YOUR first advice on troubleshooting
the OP's problem? And, no, you don't get to work in hindsight. Work on
troubleshooting the problem as though it's the first encounter with this
OP. Both of you make it sound like you are experts in knowing exactly
what is the perfect option for the first and only troubleshooting
process, but you don't prove it.


By the time I saw this thread, the description of the problem - assuming
Lu Wei was even the OP - had been snipped to what is shown above, so I
have no idea what the problem actually was. (I'm _guessing_ that it was
that one particular website wasn't working.)

If your first troubleshooting step is to disable the extensions, then
you're belatedly making the same suggestion as I did, which means you
are also proclaimed "wild goose chasing" by Mayayana.


I wasn't suggesting that as the first step; I'd want to know more about
what the problem is. I was just saying that if you _do_ get to the stage
where disabling extensions is the next thing you're going to try (and I
agree on the whole with Mayayana that that tends to be a
shot-in-the-dark exercise, like reboot-your-machine or
reboot-your-router), I _wouldn't_ disable them all, then turn them back
on one at a time: I'd disable _half_ of them, and proceed with a binary
search. _If_ the problem _is_ an extension, a binary search (for which
one it is) needs fewer tries than doing them one at a time. (And I added
that you should note which ones you've disabled, as Firefox at least
changes the order they're listed in if some are disabled.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

She looked like the kind of girl who was poured into her clothes and forgot to
say when - Wodehouse
  #14  
Old September 19th 20, 01:30 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default MSFN down?

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

|
| By the time I saw this thread, the description of the problem - assuming
| Lu Wei was even the OP - had been snipped to what is shown above, so I
| have no idea what the problem actually was.

Lu Wei couldn't open https://msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-xp/

Surprisingly, my New Moon with just about everything disabled
shows a fully functional website that doesn't even seem to
need script to follow the discussions. Lu Wei later found
he could access it. In the meantime, I suggested he could
get New Moon if he keeps having trouble. In my experience,
userAgent sniffing for no good reason has become an increasing
problem, so it's a good idea to spoof that. But perhaps in
second place is the problem of people writing webpages to
depend on the very latest functionality. And many people
don't realize that they can get a recent version of Mozilla
browser for XP by using New Moon.

So it's a bad combination: Webmasters who often
don't even realize what they've done, produce webpages
that fail with no information when using a browser that's
not fairly new. Meanwhile, XP users use old browsers
because they don't know they can get a new one. More
often than not, the pages will work just fine once the site
is tricked into thinking you have the latest browser on
7, 8, or 10.

A follow-up note on that: New Moon seems to be made
in several versions that are updated concurrently. I don't
know why or what the differences are. But I found that one
of them (v. 27, if I remember correctly) broke my CSS toggle
button extension. Yet the current version I have, 28.10.2a1,
breaks nothing.... Life's little pleasures.



  #15  
Old September 19th 20, 04:35 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default MSFN down?

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 13:19:47, VanguardLH wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 08:45:36, Mayayana
wrote:
"Lu Wei" wrote

| I am using Serpent 52, descendant of Firefox 52, tried both "safe mode"
| and with extensions. Tried user-agent switching but not work. No
| anti-virus or other security software installed.
|
| Well, when I was about to install Chrome49, it opened normally. So it
| surely was network problem. Maybe dns or proxy related.

[Mayayana's bit was here]
[If you _do_ end up working through your extensions, do a binary search,
not one by one - it's a lot quicker. (But note which are enabled, as
Firefox at least rearranges the order.)]


So, as I asked of Mayayana, what is YOUR first advice on troubleshooting
the OP's problem? And, no, you don't get to work in hindsight. Work on
troubleshooting the problem as though it's the first encounter with this
OP. Both of you make it sound like you are experts in knowing exactly
what is the perfect option for the first and only troubleshooting
process, but you don't prove it.


By the time I saw this thread, the description of the problem - assuming
Lu Wei was even the OP - had been snipped to what is shown above, so I
have no idea what the problem actually was. (I'm _guessing_ that it was
that one particular website wasn't working.)

If your first troubleshooting step is to disable the extensions, then
you're belatedly making the same suggestion as I did, which means you
are also proclaimed "wild goose chasing" by Mayayana.


I wasn't suggesting that as the first step; I'd want to know more about
what the problem is. I was just saying that if you _do_ get to the stage
where disabling extensions is the next thing you're going to try (and I
agree on the whole with Mayayana that that tends to be a
shot-in-the-dark exercise, like reboot-your-machine or
reboot-your-router), I _wouldn't_ disable them all, then turn them back
on one at a time: I'd disable _half_ of them, and proceed with a binary
search. _If_ the problem _is_ an extension, a binary search (for which
one it is) needs fewer tries than doing them one at a time. (And I added
that you should note which ones you've disabled, as Firefox at least
changes the order they're listed in if some are disabled.)


The problem could be conflicting extensions. With a binary approach,
you may not end up testing the two conflicting extensions together until
late, and then you have to start a binary test with different sets
starting with most of them until you found the two that conflict.
Binary sounds great if you have dozens of extensions. I only have 5:
Enhancer for YouTube, OneNote Clipper (the least used and I'll probably
remove it), Print Edit WE, Selection Context Search (let's me
right-click on selected text instead of copying it to the address bar to
use with a bookmark's keyword), and uBlock Origin. How many do you
have?

One of the reasons I went with Firefox is it has options that are not
available in Google Chrome unless you add extensions to cover the
deficiencies. For example, in Firefox, you can configure new tabs get
immediate focus, not loaded in the background. With Google Chrome, you
need an extension (e.g., Tabs to Front) for that.

If testing is to check if one, *or more* (might not just be one),
extensions are causing a problem, seems obvious the first step in that
process is to disable them all instead of hunt them down halved at a
time. If nothing changes after disabling all the extensions, you don't
have to waste any further time on binary or linear testing of
extensions. If the problem disappeared after disabling all extensions,
then how you test further each extension depends on how many you have.
I can't see a binary search (that you'll have to track which sets you
tested) is going to be much faster testing one at a time unless you're a
whore for extensions (wink wink).
 




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 09:14 AM.


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