Browser for reading Hotmail?

[98 Guy]

MicroSith just "upgraded" their hotmail service, and instead of giving
me a one-time warning that my Firefox 2.0.20 is outdated that I can
say "ok" and not have to view again as long as I don't clear cookies,
it's now taking me to a screen and telling me I need to upgrade my
browser.
Can somebody please provide a working link to a newer browser than
Firefox 2.020 I can follow in Firefox 2.0.20, Mozilla 1.7final, or
some ancient version of IE5 that is normally disabled?
Good news is that within two hours of the new system, they allowed
a link for older browsers. Bad news is that the new system is
even more script-heavy and bloated than the previous one. It's
as bad as Comcast's SmartMail, if not worse.

I'm replying to this and cross-posting it to these additional groups:

- microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
- alt.windows98

You are advised to check the traffic on any group before you post to
it. You'll find that the group you originally posted this to
(microsoft.public.win98.internet.browser) is seldom used.

To address your particular problem, the solution is to modify Firefox's
User Agent string. Web browsers send out these strings when
communicating with web servers. The string includes (among other
things) the brand and version of the browser. You need to have Firefox
send out an incorrect version number as part of it's User Agent string.

To do this, enter "about:config" in the Firefox address bar. On the
"Filter" bar, enter "agent".

You should see something called "general.useragent.extra.firefox", and
it's value should say "Firefox/2.0.0.20". If you don't see that item,
you can create it. Right-click on it, and select "modify", and change
it to read "Firefox/3.0.0.20". In other words, change it's major
version number from 2 to 3. This will trick some websites to not
complain that you are running an older / unsupported browser. They will
think you are running Firefox version 3.

If you read some of the recent posts in
microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion, you will find posts relating to
Adobe Flash and how to install various flash versions on win-98. You
might find that information useful as well.

[Ed]

MicroSith just "upgraded" their hotmail service, and instead of giving
me a one-time warning that my Firefox 2.0.20 is outdated that I can
say "ok" and not have to view again as long as I don't clear cookies,
it's now taking me to a screen and telling me I need to upgrade my
browser.
Can somebody please provide a working link to a newer browser than
Firefox 2.020 I can follow in Firefox 2.0.20, Mozilla 1.7final, or
some ancient version of IE5 that is normally disabled?
Good news is that within two hours of the new system, they allowed
a link for older browsers. Bad news is that the new system is
even more script-heavy and bloated than the previous one. It's
as bad as Comcast's SmartMail, if not worse.

I too am running Firefox 2.0.0.20 ( without any tweaks or script/ad
blockers) but I never get any warnings to upgrade my browser when I
login to Hotmail.

Mind you, I am not complaining about the lack of warning to upgrade the
browser but I wonder why it behaves so with my setup?

Ed

[98 Guy]

Post by Ed

MicroSith just "upgraded" their hotmail service, and instead of
giving me a one-time warning that my Firefox 2.0.20 is outdated
that I can say "ok" and not have to view again as long as I
don't clear cookies, it's now taking me to a screen and telling
me I need to upgrade my browser.

I too am running Firefox 2.0.0.20 ( without any tweaks or script/ad
blockers) but I never get any warnings to upgrade my browser when I
login to Hotmail.

Interesting.

With my user-agent set to Firefox/3.0.0.20, I also got the message about
having an unsupported browser when logging into "Windows Live" a few
minutes ago.

I changed my user-agent to say "Firefox/3.6.8" (the most current
version) and tried again, and this time it worked - no message about
having an old browser.

So I changed it back to "Firefox/3.0.0.20" - and it still worked. So
I'm not sure what's going on.

Anyone that can't log into Windows Live (I don't think you can actually
log into "Hotmail" any more) because of an "Outdated Browser" error, and
if you're using Firefox 2.x, then try changing your user-agent string to
"Firefox/3.6.8" and try again.

[Ed]

Post by 98 Guy

Post by Ed

MicroSith just "upgraded" their hotmail service, and instead of
giving me a one-time warning that my Firefox 2.0.20 is outdated
that I can say "ok" and not have to view again as long as I
don't clear cookies, it's now taking me to a screen and telling
me I need to upgrade my browser.

I too am running Firefox 2.0.0.20 ( without any tweaks or script/ad
blockers) but I never get any warnings to upgrade my browser when I
login to Hotmail.

Interesting.
With my user-agent set to Firefox/3.0.0.20, I also got the message about
having an unsupported browser when logging into "Windows Live" a few
minutes ago.
I changed my user-agent to say "Firefox/3.6.8" (the most current
version) and tried again, and this time it worked - no message about
having an old browser.
So I changed it back to "Firefox/3.0.0.20" - and it still worked. So
I'm not sure what's going on.
Anyone that can't log into Windows Live (I don't think you can actually
log into "Hotmail" any more) because of an "Outdated Browser" error, and
if you're using Firefox 2.x, then try changing your user-agent string to
"Firefox/3.6.8" and try again.

Me, I just login at www.hotmail.com and get no messages to update my
bog standard Firefox 2.0.0.20 browser.

No problems at all.

Strange eh?

[98 Guy]

Post by Ed
Me, I just login at www.hotmail.com and get no messages to update
my bog standard Firefox 2.0.0.20 browser.

Are you sure that you're logging into "hotmail" ?

When I go to www.hotmail.com, I always get redirected to:

http://login.live.com/login.srf?(...)

Are you sure that you're not also being redirected to
something.live.com?

[Ed]

Post by 98 Guy

Post by Ed
Me, I just login at www.hotmail.com and get no messages to update
my bog standard Firefox 2.0.0.20 browser.

Are you sure that you're logging into "hotmail" ?
http://login.live.com/login.srf?(...)
Are you sure that you're not also being redirected to
something.live.com?

Yes, I am redirected as you say. But still no problems with prompt to
upgrade my browser.

[Eddie]

Post by 98 Guy

Post by Ed
I too am running Firefox 2.0.0.20 ( without any tweaks or script/ad
blockers) but I never get any warnings to upgrade my browser when I
login to Hotmail.

Interesting.
With my user-agent set to Firefox/3.0.0.20, I also got the message about
having an unsupported browser when logging into "Windows Live" a few
minutes ago.
I changed my user-agent to say "Firefox/3.6.8" (the most current
version) and tried again, and this time it worked - no message about
having an old browser.
So I changed it back to "Firefox/3.0.0.20" - and it still worked. So
I'm not sure what's going on.
Anyone that can't log into Windows Live (I don't think you can actually
log into "Hotmail" any more) because of an "Outdated Browser" error, and
if you're using Firefox 2.x, then try changing your user-agent string to
"Firefox/3.6.8" and try again.

----------------------------------

I am using FF 1.5.0.12, according to about:config. (I thought I was up
around 1.8.)
Reason I use outdated FF is because my download manager doesnt support 2 or
higher.(star)

Thing is too, I've never had a problem surfing using this version; if
anything, I am lucky in that I dont have to see a lot of crappy
advertising.. yippee.!

Ed

[98 Guy]

Post by Eddie
I am using FF 1.5.0.12, according to about:config. (I thought I was
up around 1.8.)
Reason I use outdated FF is because my download manager doesnt
support 2 or higher.(star)

Why do you need a separate download manager?

Firefox 2.0.0.20 has it's own download manager.

Post by Eddie
Thing is too, I've never had a problem surfing using this version;
if anything, I am lucky in that I dont have to see a lot of crappy
advertising..

If you download this hosts file, then you would see little to no
advertizing:

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.zip

Download the hosts.zip file into your C:\WINDOWS directory and unzip
it. Answer yes to over-write your existing hosts file (this is assuming
you've made no custom entries in your existing file).

I notice that the MVP's have removed the line on the hosts.htm page
describing where the hosts file is normally located on win-9x/ME
systems. They must be running short on space on their server.

[glee]

Post by 98 Guy
snip
I notice that the MVP's have removed the line on the hosts.htm page
describing where the hosts file is normally located on win-9x/ME
systems. They must be running short on space on their server.

"the MVP's"? That site is the product of one person, who is solely
responsible for the content. It's not connected to any other MVPs...it
is hosted on the mvps.org server, which was set up by someone else to
make space available to any who needed it. Being on the mvps.org server
doesn't mean it is a MVP group website any more than being hosted by
GoDaddy makes a web site there a product of GoDaddy.

[98 Guy]

Post by glee

Post by 98 Guy
I notice that the MVP's have removed the line on the hosts.htm
page describing where the hosts file is normally located on
win-9x/ME systems.

"the MVP's"? That site is the product of one person, who is solely
responsible for the content. It's not connected to any other MVPs..

Is that all you can say?

You have no comment on the fact that some ass-wipe MVP took the time and
the energy to remove the win-9x line on that hosts info page? An
action that was completely unnecessary - if not ignorant.

[glee]

Post by 98 Guy

Post by glee

Post by 98 Guy
I notice that the MVP's have removed the line on the hosts.htm
page describing where the hosts file is normally located on
win-9x/ME systems.

"the MVP's"? That site is the product of one person, who is solely
responsible for the content. It's not connected to any other MVPs..

Is that all you can say?
You have no comment on the fact that some ass-wipe MVP took the time and
the energy to remove the win-9x line on that hosts info page? An
action that was completely unnecessary - if not ignorant.

Why don't you ask the person who removed the info to restore it? It's
the same person who puts together the hosts file you are recommending
from that site. If he's such an "ass-wipe," why are you recommending
his hosts file?

It could very well be an oversight from when he updated the page for the
newer operating systems.... he may have replaced the old lines instead
of adding to them, doing a copy and paste. Doesn't it occur to you that
it could be inadvertent? I see no reason for me to second-guess with no
information about his motives, if any.

Your name-calling just reflects back to you.

[98 Guy]

Post by glee
Why don't you ask the person who removed the info to restore it?
It's the same person who puts together the hosts file you are
recommending from that site.

Please be my guest - and ask him. You seem to know him.

Post by glee
If he's such an "ass-wipe," why are you recommending his hosts file?

I wouldn't necessarily know that (a) the hosts file is the work of 1
person, and (b) that the person or persons responsible for editing the
info page is the same person(s) crafting the hosts file.

And (c) it wouldn't matter if the author of the hosts file is an asswipe
because he intentionally removed the reference to win-98. That doesn't
take away from the usefulness or capability of that file. (if the hosts
file is good, then it's good. It can be good but the author can be a
douche at the same time).

Post by glee
Doesn't it occur to you that it could be inadvertent?

A spelling mistake is inadvertent.

Sure, if it's a pure slip-up, a copy-and-paste mistake, then ok, fine,
I'll eat my hat.

But in this day an age, you have got to be kidding that a rational
person wouldn't assume that the omission or removal of references to
win-9x is anything but intentional.

[glee]

Post by 98 Guy

Post by glee
Why don't you ask the person who removed the info to restore it?
It's the same person who puts together the hosts file you are
recommending from that site.

Please be my guest - and ask him. You seem to know him.

Post by glee
If he's such an "ass-wipe," why are you recommending his hosts file?

I wouldn't necessarily know that (a) the hosts file is the work of 1
person, and (b) that the person or persons responsible for editing the
info page is the same person(s) crafting the hosts file.
And (c) it wouldn't matter if the author of the hosts file is an asswipe
because he intentionally removed the reference to win-98. That doesn't
take away from the usefulness or capability of that file. (if the hosts
file is good, then it's good. It can be good but the author can be a
douche at the same time).

Post by glee
Doesn't it occur to you that it could be inadvertent?

A spelling mistake is inadvertent.
Sure, if it's a pure slip-up, a copy-and-paste mistake, then ok, fine,
I'll eat my hat.
But in this day an age, you have got to be kidding that a rational
person wouldn't assume that the omission or removal of references to
win-9x is anything but intentional.

The hosts file download is in a zip file. The zip file contains the
hosts file, a readme.txt file and a batch file for renaming the existing
hosts file and installing the downloaded file. The readme.txt file
contains instructions for both using the batch file and for manually
installing the hosts file. Those instructions all include the proper
methods for Win98 as well as later operating systems, and the batch file
includes lines for installing on Win98.

So the only thing missing is a line on the web page describing the
location of the file in Win9x...everything else includes the info.

There are references to Win98 on other pages on that site, including a
batch file for resetting the hosts file. Looks to me like an oversight
on that web page only.

Surely any rational person would read the readme text file in the zip
for instructions.

[thanatoid]

Post by glee
Surely any rational person would read the readme text file
in the zip for instructions.

*rational*

[98 Guy]

Post by glee
Surely any rational person would read the readme text file in the
zip for instructions.

Not before reading the web-page (which now might leave the rational
person with the impression that the hosts file is not for win-98
systems).

[glee]

Post by 98 Guy

Post by glee
Surely any rational person would read the readme text file in the
zip for instructions.

Not before reading the web-page (which now might leave the rational
person with the impression that the hosts file is not for win-98
systems).

That's your opinion...I disagree. Most people will not bother reading
the entire web page. They are referred to the site for the download,
and that's what they go there to get.
You can believe whatever you like, but it's a quantum leap to take what
could be a simple oversight and make it out to be deliberate with
absolutely no evidence to suggest such is the case, and plenty to
suggest that it's an oversight.

[thanatoid]

Post by 98 Guy

Post by glee

Post by 98 Guy
I notice that the MVP's have removed the line on the
hosts.htm page describing where the hosts file is
normally located on win-9x/ME systems.

"the MVP's"? That site is the product of one person, who
is solely responsible for the content. It's not connected
to any other MVPs..

Is that all you can say?
You have no comment on the fact that some ass-wipe MVP took
the time and the energy to remove the win-9x line on that
hosts info page? An action that was completely
unnecessary - if not ignorant.

ig•no•rant (ig‚nƒr ƒnt) adj.1. lacking in knowledge or
training; unlearned. 2. lacking special knowledge or
information: ignorant of physics . 3. uninformed; unaware. 4.
showing lack of knowledge or training.

malicious adj.She was the victim of a malicious rumor:
vicious, spiteful, malevolent, malignant, ill-disposed, baleful,
harmful, vindictive, revengeful, resentful, rancorous, hateful,
invidious, acrimonious.

HTH.

[Ed]

Post by Eddie

Post by 98 Guy

Post by Ed
I too am running Firefox 2.0.0.20 ( without any tweaks or script/ad
blockers) but I never get any warnings to upgrade my browser when I
login to Hotmail.

Interesting.
With my user-agent set to Firefox/3.0.0.20, I also got the message about
having an unsupported browser when logging into "Windows Live" a few
minutes ago.
I changed my user-agent to say "Firefox/3.6.8" (the most current
version) and tried again, and this time it worked - no message about
having an old browser.
So I changed it back to "Firefox/3.0.0.20" - and it still worked. So
I'm not sure what's going on.
Anyone that can't log into Windows Live (I don't think you can actually
log into "Hotmail" any more) because of an "Outdated Browser" error, and
if you're using Firefox 2.x, then try changing your user-agent string to
"Firefox/3.6.8" and try again.

----------------------------------
I am using FF 1.5.0.12, according to about:config. (I thought I was up
around 1.8.)
Reason I use outdated FF is because my download manager doesnt support 2 or
higher.(star)
Thing is too, I've never had a problem surfing using this version; if
anything, I am lucky in that I dont have to see a lot of crappy
advertising.. yippee.!
Ed

Why not try updating to Firefox 2.0.0.20 ?

you shouldn't have any problems with that.

Ed 2 Ed