trader_4
Thu, 13
Apr 2017 15:05:40 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:
On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 5:39:33 AM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
trader_4
Tue,
11 Apr 2017 16:05:13 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:
Just having security updates is not a supported product.
Nice try, but!, that's not what you wrote originally.
You wrote:
Message-ID:
IDK of any browser company that is still doing updates of any
browsers for XP.
Which isn't true.
In the context of the OP, who is upgrading a system FOR THE
FUTURE, it is true , because Mozilla has ended all support other
than security updates. Security updates are the last part of
support to go, and even that is only committed for JUST 5 MORE
MONTHS. And even XP has no support period, not even security
updates, from MSFT. Is that a supported environment? And over
this, you want to pick stupid nits? The OP needs a browser for the
future, at best FF is there for just 5 months!
If the OP needs a 'browser' for the future, they might want to
seriously consider an OS that's still going to be getting updates,
for the future. XP/Vista is not. Windows 7 will soon be in the same
boat. You're the one with the comprehension issue. Although Windows 7
haven't officially reached EOL yet, various companies are already no
longer supporting it. As long as you don't need those companies
offerings though, you can still continue to run Windows 7.
OTH, If you do, it's time to consider a different version of Windows,
different software package, OR an outright OS change.
Now, if you were a computer consultant and had a client who was
upgrading a desktop system and asked if Firefox was a supported
browser that they should use, what would you tell them?
Ahh, you've rephrased your question. Cute, but, it makes no
difference.
The first thing I'm going to ask them is what are you planning to do
with the upgrade. Is this going to be for normal every day use, OR, a
dedicated purpose? That distinction determines my response.
"Well, let's see if you are running a CNC machine......, blah,
blah, blah.... Firefox is still supported, blah blah, blah.
See above. Btw, part of the work I do is consulations...So, I'm
writing from first hand experience here. I have been the entire time.
We're in different lines of 'work', so I can see how you may have
missed that. Despite the obvious hints I dropped about it.
I gave him the simple, correct, short answer.
Umm, actually, you told him you didn't know of any browser still
supported on XP, and, at the time, the OP didn't tell any of us what
he planned to use the 'upgraded' machine for. While I agree your
answer was a simple and short one, at the time of the OPs post, I
don't know if i'd go so far as to claim it was the correct one. More
details were needed in order to do that. Details you didn't ask for
or wait for the OP to provide, before you made your ignorant
comment...
If they guy had asked, are there still security updates for
Firefox for a few more months, I would have given a different
answer. Again CONTEXT is everything.
For some reason, based on our interactions, I *seriously* doubt it.
You may try to backtrack all you like, but, when you wrote what you
did, I think you actually believed it. In other words, you didn't
know FF was still being updated for XP/vista users. You do now,
though. Thanks to me. You're welcome, btw.
If he listened to you, he thinks it is
supported and apparently peachy keen for his upgrade scenario,
because *again*, that was the context of the question!
Oh, he didn't listen to much of anything I advised. He spent funds on
a near EOL OS, multiple times. He might have even gone so far as to
purchase 64bit XP had I not posted. Maybe, he did. The OP doesn't
seem to be interested in taking sound advice when it's freely
offered, imo.
My "cost"? ROFL. If he listened to me, he's be on a modern
browser that is supported. Listening to you, he'd put Firefox for
XP on the system he plans to upgrade, because according to you,
it's "supported". ROFL
round and round you go. I'm starting to get dizzy watching you.
Not that it matters either way, the OP has foolishly chosen
to purchase Windows 7. Waste of money... but, hey, it's the OPs
money and the OPs equipment. What's that saying? a fool and his
money are soon parted.. right? Well...
Wow, and a minute ago you accused me of wasting his money? Now
money doesn't matter? ROFL
You previously accused me of having reading comprehension issues and
trouble with context...Interesting how you go and demonstrate both
weaknesses yourself.
Security updates are not the only part of product support, which
is a concept you clearly don't understand. Security updates are
the very last part of support to go and even that is going in just
5 months!
A concept I don't understand?
Really?
http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/changes.txt
That's just one of mine, btw. I mentioned I worked for malwarebytes
for a number of years, previously didn't I? If not, I just did. I
wasn't in customer service, if that helps, Trader. I was in one of
the technical departments.
Wow. I simply asked you a question, Trader. No reason to become
more defensive and make more assumptions as to why I asked...
There you go lying yet again. You did not just ask a question.
You claimed that people who use google groups are somehow inferior
as an attack on me and wanted to start another whole pointless
debate. WTF is it your business as to how others access
newsgroups, which are a dying vehicle anyway?
Wow...
The death of usenet has been predicted now for a decade or more. It
hasn't happened, just yet. Using a real client instead of the
terrible google groups interface does give you more options. I wasn't
trying to 'attack' you with my question. It's been my experience,
typically, that google group 'groupies' (it's not a phrase I coined,
either) don't know about usenet clients/usenet servers, or the
features google isn't able to provide them as a result. THAT is why I
asked you. But, hey, if you're okay with posts not inline with thread
replies, having to allow google scripts to run, and forced to use a
web browser that google likes, fine with me. I wouldn't dream of
trying to convert you.
Nope. And, I already commented on that, too. I advised them NOT
to waste their time or money on 64bit XP or Windows 7. My opinion
hasn't got a thing to do with his/her choice of browser. It's the
fact XP is already EOL and Windows 7 soon will be. So there's no
'future' to be had with either of them. Not for the OPs purposes,
anyhow. That is, if they think updates mean what you do: new
features, etc.
OTH, If (which is why I brought up CNC machines and plasma
cutters) the machine was being used for a dedicated purpose, it
wouldn't matter which 'version' of Windows they decided to run
with,
There you go again with the CNC BS. Does the OP have a CNC?
I don't know if they do or not. If you were an IT tech, you'd
understand why my reply wasn't BS as you put it. In order to provide
the best advice, one must know (or have a damn good idea) what it is
the customer/client wants out of the machine.
Btw, you snipped the rest of my reply...Which is important, for
proper context...And, I'm not even trying to paint you as a liar for
doing it, unlike what you tried (and failed) doing with me.
This is what I wrote. I did remove the last line exposing your
ignorance on browsers being updated for XP, though. I'm not out to
get you, and, I don't take what you write, personally. Unlike
yourself.
OTH, If (which is why I brought up CNC machines and plasma cutters)
the machine was being used for a dedicated purpose, it wouldn't
matter which 'version' of Windows they decided to run with, so long
as the dedicated hardware/software supported it. And, I brought up
the dedicated aspect because YOU asked me what I'd tell a client or
customer. See, the thing is, I listen to the client/customer and
determine what they intend to use the machine for,
You sure have a problem with understanding context.
Well, one of use seems to, that's for sure.
--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.