Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by Absorbation
I thought 6.2 still works? Anyway you can just change the version number by hex/ resource hacking it. Change it to the lastest version and voilia it should sign in fine.

If you want more information on doing this, tell me and I will explain

---

Thanks, it worked like a charm! For others who are interested, people with version 6.2.0205 should do the following. Open msnmsgr.exe in a hex editor and look for the hexadecimal "string" 30 96 46 45 E4 51, after it is the version number..just change the 6 to a 7 or something.

If I violated some sort of agreement, MS can give me a call.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mattike
People are strange...

---

And I think you people who consume program versions are strange. Updating everything like there's no tomorrow.. You all think that bigger is better and that's not always true.
All and well if programmers IMPROVE their programs by putting out new versions, but some (read MS) just make it worse and bloated.

Nevertheless CookieRevised, I have no doubt you are right about several things. But I hereby declare using this outdated MSN version at my own risk. If the time comes to upgrade, we'll see.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hitokiri
Thanks, it worked like a charm! For others who are interested, people with version 6.2.0205 should do the following.

---

I'm sorry... but PLEASE follow the advise given or at least read what the latest versions are. I posted them before inclusief download links...

6.2.0205 contains severe bugs and security holes!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At the least update to 6.2.0208 as I stated before and don't publicize half-arsed tricks to get around the update notification. This isn't safe for you nor for those who attempt to get around it. Again: 6.2.0205 contains severe bugs...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hitokiri
If I violated some sort of agreement, MS can give me a call.

---

This isn't about violating an agreement (that much). This is more about putting yourself and possibily your contacts into (virus and malicious) danger.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hitokiri
And I think you people who consume program versions are strange. Updating everything like there's no tomorrow.. You all think that bigger is better and that's not always true.

---

You are right about that but you are entirly missing the point we are making here. We do not say that you need to use the biggest, brand new, resource hogging Windows Live Messenger. We are saying that you at the least should update when there are bugfixes.

------


If I can be quite frankly, being stuburn and keep on using 6.2.0205 is nothing more than absolutely plain stupid. You might as well download and execute a virus strait away, so to speak.

And this has got absolutely nothing todo with "people who consume program versions are strange". It has nothing todo with constantly wanted/needing the absolute latest stuff with all the newest features. It has everything todo with being a bit smart and at the least updating when there is a bugfix for a certain branch of a program (aka: I am not speaking about 7.0, 7.5, nor 8.0, but about 6.2). Even if you don't like main version updates, at least update when there are major security bugfixes for a certain build!

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised

At the least update to 6.2.0208 as I stated before and don't publicize half-arsed tricks to get around the update notification. This isn't safe for you nor for those who attempt to get around it. Again: 6.2.0205 contains severe bugs...

---

There's nothing wrong with spreading objective information. You already pointed out the dangers, so smart people will think twice before applying the change. I don't care about the dumb ones.

It's about the principle of forcing people, and I don't respond well to that. And it's not a notification, access is denied.
Since you speak of major security holes in 205, I'll look into the latest build of MSN 6.2.

But then I'd still have to apply this trick when that version is blocked as well, if they still allow its protocol by then.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hitokiri
There's nothing wrong with spreading objective information. You already pointed out the dangers, so smart people will think twice before applying the change.

---

That you don't want to update to .0208, because you're just stuburn (as there is absolutely no other reason), has got nothing todo with objective information.

You want objective and a decent strait answer? Then update to .208... you would be surprised with the result.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hitokiri
I don't care about the dumb ones.

---

But we do care about the information given on this forum; It should be decent and correct.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hitokiri
It's about the principle of forcing people, and I don't respond well to that.

---

It is not about the principle of forcing people! Again, reread everything I've said (especially the firsqt post!).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hitokiri
And it's not a notification, access is denied.

---

of course access is denied with .0205!

Please read what I've said before instead of being dead stuburn and seemingly dismissing everything without even reading what has been said...

I clearly talked about .0208, as .0205 contains major flaws (again as I clearly said before). Update to .0208; on the outside you wont even see any difference. Again, this is not about being allergic to change or about forcing updates as nothing is even changed on the outside!

It is about you requesting a decent answer to your question but even dismissing the answer before you even asked it and not accepting an objective answer from people because your mind is already set up to something... so why bothering to even ask.....

I have to agree with Cookie Revised, cannot understand why people do not keep their machines and softwares up to date. I always update everything, as I do not want buggie software or anything with security risks, and generally there are improvements.

The latest version is great.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Schockwave
I have to agree with Cookie Revised, cannot understand why people do not keep their machines and softwares up to date.

---

indeed...

...and keeping it up to date does not automatically mean you must have the latest and newest version. It means you need to apply possible bugfixes for the version you already have...

If that means an update to a major new version then so be it, but this isn't the case here.


eg: It is not because MS Office XP (or whatever) is the latest version that you need to install that to have all the bugfixes. You can still use Office 2000 or even 98 if you whish, but at least install the bugfixes for those (older) versions.

And that is what they don't seem to understand. Nobody is forcing them to use Office XP. We are mainly talking about applying bugfixes for the versions they already got (thus bugfixes for MS Office 2000 or 98).... But of course MS will force you to use a bugfixed version of MS Office 2000 if there is a major security flaw in it and that is nothing more than normal.


This is exactly the same for MSN Messenger 6.2....

There is a reason why build numbers exist, they indicate bugfix updates, they do not indicate major differences like brand new features or whole interface changes, that's what the major and minor number of the version is for.

---------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Schockwave
The latest version is great.

---

well I'm not so convinced about that, but that is not the issue here

I actually have Office 2003.

When I installed the previous beta version of WLM, did not like it, but this version is a lot better. There are always improvements that can be made, of course, but I like the fact that you can choose the colour of the main window and send messages to people, who are offline, just waiting and hoping that I can add my Yahoo contacts on there, as I seem to remember that we should be able to at some point.

All I need next is messenger plus and IMTiger for WLM!

Hmmm, I sure didn't want to update to MSN 7.0 and 7.5 when they came out. I found all the new stuff annoying and not needed and would rather have stuck to the older versions as well. I don't like change a lot either. But in the end, the new version also can be used for just chatting and camming, and you can turn most of the other stuff off. You actually get used to things fairly quickly as well. I rather have my pc protected and use software that's as safe as can be, then knowing I leave holes in my security open knowingly. You shouldn't want that either.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
That you don't want to update to .0208, because you're just stuburn (as there is absolutely no other reason), has got nothing todo with objective information.

---

You're mixing things up there. First of all, I never said I don't want to update to 208, just not to 7.x. Second, I never implied a relation between objective information and stubborness, you did.

quote:

---

You want objective and a decent strait answer? Then update to .208... you would be surprised with the result.

---

Sounds like an opinion to me, not objective information. Anyway, I already updated to 208, as I said I would in my previous post (you should read more carefully). But you're missing the point, this version will probably be blocked as well and then I'd still need my (slightly adjusted) half-arsed trick.

quote:

---

It is not about the principle of forcing people! Again, reread everything I've said (especially the firsqt post!).

---

It IS about forcing people to ME, that's enough. I've read all your posts carefully before replying.

quote:

---

It is about you requesting a decent answer to your question but even dismissing the answer before you even asked it and not accepting an objective answer from people because your mind is already set up to something... so why bothering to even ask.....

---

Please point out where I dismissed any such answer. You compared MSN 6.2 against MSN 7.5.0324, so my criticism was pointed towards MSN 7, not 6.2.0208.

edit: Anyway, in light of a couple of the previous replies maybe this article might be of interest to people. When I first read it, I wanted to dump Windows for Linux right away, and I'm still planning to as soon as I find the time. Of course, who's to say it's all true..but that's with everything and I have little doubt about this one.

Greetings.

I know 7.x and higher have a different user interface (though 7.x isn't that different at all), but I constantly talked about updating to at least 6.2.0208 because of the fixes, in contrast to you wanting to stay with 0205.

You rant about the issue that people are forced to update just because of features so new features which they wont use are pushed unwillingly in their throat. The fact is that most updates are in the first place done because of bugfixes; not because of new features.

If forced updates are done it means it is because of bugfixes, not because MS wants you to use the new features. If an update is almost only about features then the upate will NEVER be forced! An extremely good example of this is exactly MSN Messenger. Updates will NEVER be forced if they almost only contain new features; you would still be able to use older versions. And if an update is about new features they change the major or minor version number. If an update is done mainly because of bugfixes only the build number is changed.

But it is very convenient to forget and/or ignore all that and not make that distinction when ranting about how MS and updating is bad.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hitokiri
edit: Anyway, in light of a couple of the previous replies maybe this article might be of interest to people. When I first read it, I wanted to dump Windows for Linux right away, and I'm still planning to as soon as I find the time. Of course, who's to say it's all true..but that's with everything and I have little doubt about this one.

---

I'm sorry but if you base your judgement on such an article where the biased opinion leaks of it like oil from an old car, you will encounter a lot of problems in your computer usage (being it based upon MS, Linux or whatever).

I'm not saying MS is everything and always does the right thing and all, but that article clearly is written to put MS in a bad daylight and put together by someone who simply hate MS. It was not written to tell people the truth about MS at all or to give people decent information as that article is even so biased and full of wrong or twisted stuff and stuff convenient left out that it gets rediculus.

If you have little doubt that such an article is a piece of representative information, i surely can understand why you don't want to update programs. But it is exactly people not wanting to update stuff which feeds such stupid and biased opinions and articles.

Base you judgement on knowledge, not on some stuff you read on random pages (and knowledge isn't gathered by reading/believing everything you read on the net).