Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - v_v

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
1
Corrine wrote,

Quote
I hope you're not still using Windows 95, v_v.

No, but I do have an IBM Thinkpad salvage project related to Windows 2000 that I will bring to the board for help soon!  (Smile)

v_v

2
LandzDown Lounge / Re: Visual History of Your Favorite Technology
« on: January 22, 2022, 05:25:35 PM »
My, my, I guess that I am old!  (Smile)  The Commodore 8032 computer, monitor, and keyboard (combined in one unit) and the Commodore CBM 8050 disk drive (dual drive 1 MB floppies in one unit) were not listed.  I suppose that the computer was driven by Commodore BASIC and the disk drives by Commodore DOS (2.5/2.721?).  (I knew nothing about operating systems back then.)  This was all circa 1982 and these machines were before the very poplular Commodore 64 and the later Commodore Amiga.  I probably had a copy of the Commodore WordPro 2 Plus word processing program to go along with the machines (but I never used it and did not really understand it).

Back in those days basically the only personal computer choices were the various Commodore machines, the Apple II, and the Radio Shack TRS-80 --- the so-called "Trinity" as they are referred to these days.  (See "personal computer history" at Wikipedia.)

I hung on to the above machines until switching to the AT&T 6300 in 1985, which by then was following the IBM pc-compatible model---but still DOS based.  As for as word processors were concerned at that point I switched to WordPerfect 4.2---and trained myself very well on it and its popular successors 5.0 and 5.1, well enough to produce a high quality 32 page black and white journal/magazine/newsletter on the early HP Laserjets.  (I would print one master copy on the Laserjet and then take the copies to a copy shop to be mass copied, folded and stapled.)  To this day I still prefer WordPerfect over the currently more dominant word processor standard.

Finally in 1999 friends helped me to purchase one of the ubiquitous generic clone computers which is when I finally arrived at Windows, starting with version 95.

Time does move on they say. . . .  (Smile)

v_v

3
Linux Help, News and Information / Re: Major Geeks Linux Perspective
« on: December 11, 2021, 01:53:05 PM »
Thank you, plodr!!!

(That teaching experience comes in handy, doesn't it?!!  {Smile})

v_v

4
Jokes / Re: Funny, But SOOOO TRUE!
« on: November 30, 2021, 01:32:06 PM »
A very good thing!!  (Smile)

5
My goodness!!!

😵

6
What a sad situation.  I have been successfully using MyPal as part of my browser rotation and so far it has worked well on my Windows XP, 7, and 10 machines.  Since SeaMonkey has finally had to abandon XP in order to continue development MyPal was the only ongoing browser for XP.

I tried to work my way through most of the linked exchanges and discussions from the link posted by ky331, and this is my summary, with no offence to any of the parties involved.  MyPal developer Feodor2 has tried to do a decent thing by developing and maintaining a forked version of PaleMoon that would work in Windows XP.  But there appears to be a language and understanding problem on his part about what his obligations were and are with reference to doing that.  He appears to be making interpretations that do not conform to the "legalese" of the public licensing agreements.  This is understandable from my point of view because few of us are trained lawyers who can figure out every little nuance in legal terminology.

Sadly Feodor2 has been relying on his own interpretations and those of others who are also apparently not legally trained or well-versed.  In addition in the discussion forums the MyPal supporters want to interpret "Public License" in their own ways and then to raise the "temperature" by posting emotional reactions based upon those interpretations.

While I have noticed in the past that some of the Pale Moon crew appear to have 'not so good' attitude reputations on the internet, in this case they appear to be supplying the actual Public License agreement code that is prompting their responses.  Unfortunately Feodor2 does not seem to understand what the code is asking for and neither do his supporters, and in reply to these postings of the Public License code the MyPal side is responding with emotional invective based upon their own untrained interpretations.

From my point of view the situation could possibly be resolvable if the MyPal side were to get good sound legally based interpretations of what they need to do to get in compliance.  They cannot expect the PaleMoon side to take the time to explain and lead them step by step towards compliance.  Sadly it may be beyond the means of the MyPal side to get "sound legally based interpretations" and guidance.  Relying on random and anonymous internet postings as to "what should be" (regarding "Public License" versus "Public Domain") has definitely proven insufficient.

Sigh. . . .

v_v

7
At the present moment this update seems to download and install as 29.4.0.1 --- as per the release notes at " http://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes.shtml ".

8
Security Software Programs / Re: Windows Defender scheduled scan
« on: July 14, 2021, 09:41:39 PM »
Panos,

In my last post I wrote

Quote
However my overall view and conclusion on the situation was simply that Windows Defender is doing its job, I occasionally get notifications from Windows Defender indicating that 'the scan were completed successfully and no problems were found', and thus I had nothing to be concerned about regardless of the "code 0x2" error.  To me it just seems to be one of the ways that Windows Defender goes about doing its tasks and recording the results, especially since it is constantly doing these tasks in the background.

If as you wrote,

Quote
I don't doubt that everything is OK, but I want to know how my antivirus behaves. Not just say that it works. How it works? When the scan is taking place? Why those errors are present and when?

perhaps you might want to write to Microsoft for more details!  (Smile)

Digerati/Bill indicated that "The default scan is weekly" and despite what you experienced that may still be the case.  My understanding is that Windows Defender (WD) is constantly 'watching' things but 'watching' is not the same thing as 'scanning'.  It is quite possible that any behavior or experience that any of us may have could trigger off a 'scan' because WD was watching and decided that the circumstances presented a situation where a scan would be advisable.  There are probably a bunch of rules that would say something like "if this, then do that."  So again the best source for that would be the Microsoft programmers---and good luck with that!


[I see that Digerati/Bill has beat me to the punch again.  So I will repeat the two words and short sentence from his earlier post:  ". . . then chill. Odds of getting infected are very very slim."  To repeat from his most recent post this time, "In any case, I still would not worry about it - especially when no threats are found."]

So to me the point would be that the pursuit of knowledge about how WD works is laudable, but perhaps it is not worth the effort because only the programmers at Microsoft will know all the rules that they have set up.  Such a pursuit would then be more of a distraction from other more significant matters in life!

v_v

9
Security Software Programs / Re: Windows Defender scheduled scan
« on: July 12, 2021, 02:22:22 PM »
Panos,

Here is another wild guess:  personally I would not get too concerned about a momentary instance of finding a "code 0x2" error in the task scheduler.  When I say momentary I mean that I can imagine that you might find a different value there at different times of the day.  When I saw that error in my own image that I posted previously I tried to do some research on it and found confusing and unclear results just like you did.  However my overall view and conclusion on the situation was simply that Windows Defender is doing its job, I occasionally get notifications from Windows Defender indicating that 'the scan were completed successfully and no problems were found', and thus I had nothing to be concerned about regardless of the "code 0x2" error.  To me it just seems to be one of the ways that Windows Defender goes about doing its tasks and recording the results, especially since it is constantly doing these tasks in the background.  Because Windows Defender will delay or postpone its tasks due to the lack of resources or intense user activity at any given moment it is possible that it will post such error codes or other messages.  Yet I do not think that these are indicative of problems.  They just seem to be indicative of temporary situations that occurred due to complications at that particular moment.

For example my task scheduler screen right this moment has the messages "The process terminated unexpectedly. (0x8007042B)" and also the code "(0x2)" error.  I will attribute these to the fact that I started using the computer in an intensive fashion around about that time and therefore interfered with Windows Defender's background operation.  To me this does not mean that there is a problem; it simply means that the background task is being delayed or postponed and that Windows Defender will come back to it later, when resources are available.

I am not a programmer and do not know how Windows Defender is designed to work in every instance, but in these cases I am willing to just "let go" and allow Windows Defender to do its work.  I guess as long as I see the "Status" as "Ready" and as long as I occasionally get the task completed successfully notifications with no problems found, then for me all is well.


[I just noted that Digerati/Bill posted an extensive comment while I was preparing mine.  What I have written above he reduced down to two words and a short sentence:  ". . . then chill. Odds of getting infected are very very slim."  Essentially that is the point of my post!]


v_v

10
Security Software Programs / Re: Windows Defender scheduled scan
« on: July 12, 2021, 01:01:25 AM »
Panos,

I am going to throw a wild guess out there about the "1549950 files scanned!" and the long time that it took to do those scans and why "after 3 hours the computer was working so hard" that you ended up turning the computer off.

I noticed that in the graphic that you posted on "July 10, 2021, 11:24:52 AM", the date in that graphic said "30/11/1999" for the "Last Run Time".  I thought that it looked weird at that time but since nobody else said anything about it I thought that it may not be relevant.  But now after all of the subsequent events it seems that it probably was really relevant.

Because neither Windows Defender nor Windows 10 were in existence in 1999 I am guessing that that date caused Windows Defender to do some sort of extraordinary scanning that it would not have otherwise done.  By that I mean that it probably searched every little item in the computer (or perhaps everything dated since 30/11/1999!).  That is probably how it came up with that huge number of "1549950 files scanned" in your post of "July 10, 2021, 12:33:46 PM".

Once Windows Defender had done this major scan my guess is that it did not need to scan every little thing anymore because it brought itself up to date so to speak.  Now, as your last post indicated, it can do the normal usual scan that all of us have usually experienced --- as your post said, "14670 files scanned" taking only "1 minute 58 seconds".  Based on most of the feedback in this thread this number of files and the time it took seem far more normal, and hopefully it will turn out to be that way for you going forward.

As to how that "Last Run Time" got to be "30/11/1999" I have no idea, although it might have had something to do with you deleting your previously scheduled scan.  Possibly the deletion did some sort of date re-setting back to that old date.  (Maybe some of the data in your Task Scheduler "History" tab might offer a clue.)

At any rate my conclusion is that Windows Defender should work much more normally for you now and everything should happen relatively automatically without your intervention, just like it does for the rest of us.

v_v

11
Meet & Greet! / Re: Happy 4th of July
« on: July 06, 2021, 12:14:29 AM »
Addendum, and there were more from early this morning:

" https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/fireworks-blamed-for-three-house-fires-in-east-austin/ ".

That's five houses so far!

12
Meet & Greet! / Re: Happy 4th of July
« on: July 05, 2021, 03:19:01 PM »
Here in Austin Texas two houses were lost to fireworks, but thankfully the inhabitants were able to escape.

See " https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/this-is-why-fireworks-are-illegal-in-the-city-of-austin-2-family-homes-go-up-in-flames-july-3/ ".

13
Security Software Programs / Re: Windows Defender scheduled scan
« on: July 05, 2021, 03:10:28 PM »
Panos,

Okay, after I had another night to sleep over it, if I try to integrate what Bill/Digerati said with my own comment the result might be the following:

 1.  Windows Defender is working all the time anywyay.  So it will run its scans when it needs to;

 2.  Therefore setting a scheduled scan is somewhat redundant as Bill/Digerati said;

 3.  It seems that a possible reason why you might be getting the yellow triangles is because you have set a scheduled scan with various "triggers", "conditions", and "settings" (see the tabs in your Task Scheduler);

 4.  The combination of your triggers, conditions, and settings may be blocking your "Scheduled Scan" when you are working at your computer and also when you turn it off;

 5.  If you wish to continue with your scheduled scans you can probably review and revise your triggers, conditions, and settings so that the scan happens in the background at various idle moments, while the computer is still in use;

 6.  If you get rid of your scheduled scan "trigger" altogether, then Windows will just go ahead and do what it automatically does anyway, which is to constantly work at 'defending' your computer.

So it would seem to me that either # 5 or # 6 should eliminate your problem with the yellow triangles, and if the Scheduled Scan trigger is redundant then why not just get rid of it altogether and let Windows Defender do its ongoing work?

v_v

14
Security Software Programs / Re: Windows Defender scheduled scan
« on: July 05, 2021, 04:41:02 AM »
Panos,

Well I guess that I learned a little something today.  I could not figure out where you got the data in that little clip that you posted at "July 04, 2021, 12:27:11 PM".  Finally after a lot of internet searching I was able to find my version of that data.

As I mentioned in my earlier post I never get those little yellow triangles, and I do the same thing as you---meaning that I turn my computer off every night (or whenever I will not be using it for a long while) and unplug the power cords.

Having said that, when I compared my Task Scheduler data to yours it seems that the difference is that you seem to have set a schedule manually, whereas in my case I have not set a schedule (or a "trigger").  I have simply allowed Windows to do whatever it needs to do with Windows Defender.  (See my clip below)

So maybe if you delete the "trigger" for your "schedule" that you have set up for "13:00 every Sunday. . ." and just let the "trigger" stay blank perhaps Windows will just go about doing its business automatically and not bother you with the yellow triangles.  It is worth a try anyway.

v_v

15
Security Software Programs / Re: Windows Defender scheduled scan
« on: July 03, 2021, 11:28:54 AM »
Panos,

Are you using Windows 10?  If so when you right click on the Windows Security icon on your taskbar and choose "View Security Dashboard", are all of the settings that you can find through the links on the dashboard set to "On"?  There are several categories of links there and all of mine are set to "On" and all of the scans happen automatically for me.  I never get that yellow triangle anymore nor do I have to do anything manually.

You can also get to the same pages by clicking the "Start" button, "Settings", "Windows Security", "Open Windows Security".

v_v

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13