That’s how it works on your PC.
I’m in charge of 3 PCs, and in my experience on those PCs, most Windows updates require a reboot.
Of course, everyone else’s mileage may vary. 
Weird
Maybe we have different settings for Windows Update.
I only get two updates in an average month, and at least one of those two will require a reboot. 
115 was originally released ~1000 days ago today. One metric claims that ~7% of Fx users are still using it, the largest share outside of the recent versions. I guess that may be one reason why my bank hasn’t actively blocked it yet. But based on other indications, that may be giving their IT staff too much credit.
Reddit is another site that suffers glitches, but a cynic would say that’s SNAFU for them.
But the glitches are becoming increasingly prevalent, and Discourse, despite its aggressive nature with legacy software, at least offers the courtesy of warning notices.
So even with more time to delay, I’ve finally stopped procrastinating, and have shifted my primary workflow to a boot drive with a more recent OS.
Another updates restart today, just restarted 2 days ago (that one was not update related but annoying to have to rebuild everything yet again)
Not great idea is artifically to limit access from older browsers.
The situation is forcing to use specially for this and only site on this time moment an additional browser.
Not at now still, but in later years such limitations may become critical.
Yandex browser v24 supports Win7
Agreed, but it’s an upstream problem in the Discourse forum software. Our admin here probably can’t do much about it.
With enough people complaining upstream though… maybe they might reconsider their decision to aggressively block older browsers?
What would be the alternative? People complaining about a non functional site because their browser is too old and does not support the technology used by the system? A single broken function can ruin the user experience. So it’s a fairly simple decision to block such situations.
Maybe Discourse can be extended with a minimal UI that does not use interactive web technologies, but it would be limited to read-only probably.
1 Thank
The core functions of Discourse worked fine on older browsers. It’s possible that they changed the workings of core functions to somehow require newer browsers, but I don’t think it’s likely. Generally it’s newer or secondary / tertiary functions which require something newer, and people can happily use the site without ever touching those functions.
Like, Discourse has an entire realtime chat system that isn’t even enabled here. If a browser requirement is only for a chat function, we wouldn’t even see a difference here. Or they recently added some new bling to the default stylesheets, and I think those aesthetic touches may require a new browser… but people without that CSS feature typically wouldn’t even notice.
It really depends on the details. There’s a pretty good chance that like 95% or more of the site would work fine in older browsers, if they weren’t blocked. And I’d rather have 95% than 0%. Especially if the remaining 5% is something I wouldn’t be using anyway, like chat or an animated “like” button.
1 Thank
But nobody runs tests for old browsers that are EOL. If they have decided to develop against a specific language/feature version, that’s what is used in tests. Now you can either accept that features break on old versions and users (repeatedly) report bugs that won’t be fixed, or you explicitly stop supporting older versions. Developers won’t consider compatibility with versions that aren’t in the specifications of the project.
It would be nice to have a switch that disables the version check and says: “I accept that bypassing this restriction may lead to unintended behavior, including data loss or potential harm to animals.”
Yeah, it would be nice to have a “do it anyway” option.
Like the -f or --force option on most command line tools. “I don’t care what the consequences might be … do it anyway.” The user knows more about their needs and situation than the developer does.
Can youse still change the “user-agent” string to make the browser self-identify as a different version, or different browser entirely? Or is that like ancient tek?
The detection is not based on the user agent string but on JS/CSS/HTML features that the forum software uses not being present.
There’s a different way to defeat the browser detection: adblock /assets/browser-detect-*. Discourse actually uses the features it checks for, so something will break, but like TK said, it may not be something that matters.
1 Thank