Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, TAZMINATOR said:

Some people are finding a way to get in your PC without your knowledge.

That been happening for years, Taz....

30 minutes ago, TAZMINATOR said:

What do you think?   What would he want to hash those files that aren't belong to him for?   If he hash them, most likely he would host them or upload to file sharing website such as softpedia  something like that so the visitors download the infected files... you NEVER know what he would be doing with those. Malware, virus, ad wrap, etc.

 

Some people are finding a way to get in your PC without your knowledge.

 

 

The paranoia is strong with this one. The OP has shown in past posts that he just doesn't understand computers and software. 

  • Like 1
8 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

The paranoia is strong with this one. The OP has shown in past posts that he just doesn't understand computers and software. 

in ALL his posts, it seems... I can not teach him...

6 hours ago, kifirefox said:

I'm trying to test the hash, but nobody here does not understand, is there anyone to help do the test?

Post the program, the hash and the link and I'll check it out here too.

Get a program known as firefox, sumatra pdf, utorrent, cdburnerxp, recorders, pdf readers, codecs, etc.

 

And by the link to test in the same place, because in different sites it seems that the hash are different. Has to be the same link, same version, even everything.

 

 
 

Budman did exactly that on page one in his 2nd post, using Firefox from the Legit sight.

1 hour ago, Mindovermaster said:

That been happening for years, Taz....

You are telling me like i didn't know that....

 

I know that.   I fix the computers from home for years.   People come to me and saying that they get virus, malware, etc.   I cleaned them off for them.

If Neowin Forums are searchable by Google and if there is a community of "Neowinians" and a community of the Internet  and if members feel they are helping a community by posting here, then it would always make sense to treat all OP as "Abstract Generic Entities" who submit questions as "FAQ Canditates" and see what sort of interesting ideas we could present by using the original question as a brainstorming starter.

 

Because bashing on the OP is really boring...

 

I see 3 possible interesting issues that the OP raises:

 

1. File repository sites of commonly useful software are popular because they do in fact present a theoretical convenience that is obviously overridden if the site feels they need to package adware to cover the costs. Maybe there is a way to reverse that trend? 

 

2. If you download a file and the hash matches some hash where you downloaded the file from you have achieved logically nothing from a security perspective. You would need something more like a Blockchain that can follow a provenance trail perhaps? And some standard W3C/Browser support to automatically check hash/blockchain becuase very few individuals will even check a hash.

 

3. Also, the common hash algorithms are no longer as secure and there needs to be an agreed upon new standard with enough bit depth to last for maybe the next decade in the face of Quantum Computing?

 

 

23 minutes ago, DevTech said:

...

 

3. Also, the common hash algorithms are no longer as secure and there needs to be an agreed upon new standard with enough bit depth to last for maybe the next decade in the face of Quantum Computing?

 

 

Hashes, in the current form(s), are completely useless in the face of Q computing.  The very nature of Q encryption means simply "looking" at an item changes the item.  It is this fundamental aspect of quantum physics (Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) that is @ the very heart of Q computing/encryption.

1 hour ago, adrynalyne said:

The paranoia is strong with this one. The OP has shown in past posts that he just doesn't understand computers and software. 

This makes me want to read his past posts :)

Edited by T3X4S
  • Like 1
6 minutes ago, T3X4S said:

Hashes, in the current form(s), are completely useless in the face of Q computing.  The very nature of Q encryption means simply "looking" at an item changes the item.  It is this fundamental aspect of quantum physics (Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) that is @ the very heart of Q computing.

This makes me want to read his past posts :)

Trust me, you don't. 

  • Like 2
27 minutes ago, T3X4S said:

Hashes, in the current form(s), are completely useless in the face of Q computing.  The very nature of Q encryption means simply "looking" at an item changes the item.  It is this fundamental aspect of quantum physics (Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) that is @ the very heart of Q computing/encryption.

 

I think maybe that you are confusing two different things.

 

1. The use of Quantum Entanglement means that you could have a communication via fibre optics that collapses if it is as you put it "looked at"

 

2. Long before that sort of communications is worked out and then somehow gets enough bandwidth and cost reduction decades later to be a download channel for the average consumer, there will be insanely powerful and expensive Quantum Computers that can calculate stuff like hashes. They are already being delivered to customers (in prototype form and not yet good for much) and will certainly be affordable by the same commercial (criminal) organizations that brought us botnets.

 

Side note: IPV6 already gives me severe privacy violation "Big Brother" "Heebie Jeebies" with potential 100% loss of anonymity so the secure Quantum Communications of point #1 would appear to put the last nail in the coffin of freedom if it ever came into being without strict oversight by an international organization but I guess in that time frame we have the "grey goo" problem and well whatever Google is planning with its purchase of that Killer Robot company...

1 hour ago, TAZMINATOR said:

You are telling me like i didn't know that....

 

I know that.   I fix the computers from home for years.   People come to me and saying that they get virus, malware, etc.   I cleaned them off for them.

Guess you didn't catch it as a joke. My bad... I'm sure you did this stuff, too. :)

37 minutes ago, DevTech said:

I think maybe that you are confusing two different things.

 

1. The use of Quantum Entanglement means that you could have a communication via fibre optics that collapses if it is as you put it "looked at"

 

2. Long before that sort of communications is worked out and then somehow gets enough bandwidth and cost reduction decades later to be a download channel for the average consumer, there will be insanely powerful and expensive Quantum Computers that can calculate stuff like hashes. They are already being delivered to customers (in prototype form and not yet good for much) and will certainly be affordable by the same commercial (criminal) organizations that brought us botnets.

 

Side note: IPV6 already gives me severe privacy violation "Big Brother" "Heebie Jeebies" with potential 100% loss of anonymity so the secure Quantum Communications of point #1 would appear to put the last nail in the coffin of freedom if it ever came into being without strict oversight by an international organization but I guess in that time frame we have the "grey goo" problem and well whatever Google is planning with its purchase of that Killer Robot company...

I cant comment on all the conspiracy stuff - I dont want to get into that.  
But my comments had nothing to do with fiber connections, nothing to do with bandwidth.  My comment was simply about quantum encryption, and HUP making eavesdropping (man in the middle)  pointless.
Hashes, would change the second any observation was done due to HUP.

As far as everything else you were talking about - the only thing that made sense was the stuff about Q:wave being a worthless refrigerator, and nothing close to a Q computer.

If you think I had something confused, it is only because you mistook what I was saying - because I happen to know a little bit about this stuff.  So I apologize if I wasnt clear in what I was saying, but I am not mistaken. ;)


BTW - your 1st bullet point made no sense.
quantum entanglement does appear to pass any data - therefore any mention of bandwidth, or data transfer is fundamentally incorrect.

All tests have shown that if data is passed in QE - its done faster than the speed of light - therefore - modern thought is data is not being transferred - it is the same electron in 2 places - not 1 sending data to another.
 

8 minutes ago, T3X4S said:

I cant comment on all the conspiracy stuff - I dont want to get into that.  
But my comments had nothing to do with fiber connections, nothing to do with bandwidth.  My comment was simply about quantum encryption, and HUP making eavesdropping (man in the middle)  pointless.
Hashes, would change the second any observation was done due to HUP.

As far as everything else you were talking about - the only thing that made sense was the stuff about Q:wave being a worthless refrigerator, and nothing close to a Q computer.

If you think I had something confused, it is only because you mistook what I was saying - because I happen to know a little bit about this stuff.  So I apologize if I wasnt clear in what I was saying, but I am not mistaken. ;)


BTW - your 1st bullet point made no sense.
quantum entanglement does appear to pass any data - therefore any mention of bandwidth, or data transfer is fundamentally incorrect.

All tests have shown that if data is passed in QE - its done faster than the speed of light - therefore - modern thought is data is not being transferred - it is the same electron in 2 places - not 1 sending data to another.
 

1.  I let my personal conviction that there is more going on with entanglement than is covered in "classical" Quantum Mechanics turn that point into total garbage and thanks for clarifying the dog poop nature of that one. 

 

2.  I was never originally talking about Quantum Encryption although I did manage to throw it into the dog poop anyways. I was simply saying that the CPU power Quantum or otherwise to blow through current hashes is in the immediate near term category. It is a current problem to make forecasts on what sort of hash you could apply today that will hold for a reasonable time frame. That was pretty much my entire concern with that one.

 

3. I have given zero thought to Quantum Encryption other than it seems to imply an alarming level of identity authentication to work out in practice. I'd love to be totally completely wrong about that.

 

4. I'm not wrong about "the risk" of IPV6 however. If you carry devices with a globally unique address and live in a home full of devices with globally unique addresses then it's much more of an inference than a conspiracy to predict that data will be gathered and portrayed to you as "improving" your security which is currently exactly what all the large tech companies are saying about connecting all your logins to your (GPS capable) cell phone number. I actually believe that Microsoft and others have good intentions with this and it will start out well. But they haven't thought through the IPv6 cloud of devices that will be connected to you eventually and how all that data goes to the Cloud and never dies. People find "stalkers" creepy but with the coming Big Data stream available to datamine and ML for every single individual one of us and not an anonymized aggregate, it seems to me that "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely" comes into play. Maybe as we go along lots of government oversight will gradually spring up but for some reason geeks just see the "infinite" addresses of IPV6 as a "good thing" and there is no conversation going on about what that means in human terms. I originally was excited about the giant RAM-like addressable space of IPV6 and might never have given this any thought except by accident it collided with a childhood memory of a friend's father rolling up his sleeve and showing me the serial number that had been tattooed on his arm in a German concentration camp. He was fortunate to survive and build a life but it's one of those memories that seem somehow life changing, It wasn't abstract from a book, I was looking intently at actual ink in his skin and how that number attempted to take away his right to be human. So maybe i'm worried about nothing. After all, correlation is not causation.

 

So is the OP trying to know how to create hashes - and wondering why his doesn't match some websites?

 

I am still confused as to what this thread is actually about - just like most every other thread the OP has ever created ;)

 

Now if we want to start talking about Quantum computing or entanglement that could be fun - but prob should be in a different section..

 

As to everyone having a global IP (ipv6) that can directly be tied back to them - I will agree that the security/privacy implications that this will bring forward would also be a great topic for discussion.. And yes this will change many aspects of security and privacy!!  That may have not been thought all the way through..

 

Keep in mind pretty much everyone currently carries around a phone that is tied to them and can quite easy track your very accurate location 24/7.. And then you also pay for goods with this device which just ads to the information available to where you are and what your doing..   This can be life saving for sure - but "privacy" could be a concern here is it not?  But people do not think of this - nor do they think about it when they use their CC or discount cards or that there are cameras everywhere that can do facial recognition very easy, etc. etc..

 

BTW its quite possible that the OP is very knowledgeable on what he is trying to discuss - but it is being lost in the translation... I would think that if I ran everything through google translate to mandarin or something and tried to discuss a technical topic with a native speaker that it could come off very confusing ;)  I really do think this person is just running through some sort of translation software and their native language (whatever that might be, since clearly its not english) grammar/syntax does not translate over well.

 

While translation services can get basic topics and concepts across.  We are not quite to the universal translators of star trek as of yet ;)  Or maybe wherever he is picking up english is just horrible (Maybe old Chinese kungfu movies with subtitles?) While sure he could order a beer or find the bathroom using it..  As to discussion of technical topics clearly there is a huge disconnection...  Or maybe he is just stoned??  Or I am? hehehe

 

Maybe there is someone here that speaks his native language, while also actually being fluent in english and could translate for us!!  I know for sure my understanding of any other language than english is limited to ordering a beer and saying good morning, night, day.  While beer is really the most important phrase you need to know when traveling.. heheh And can quite often be accomplished with pointing and grunting and or miming.. So I have a great admiration for anyone that can even somewhat converse in more than one language..  So I want to give the OP a lot of latitude - but it is becoming funny/frustrating all at the same time..

  • Like 3

really the subject seems to be very wide, but get in quantum physics I think anybody here overreacting and super stimulating conversation on the topic.

 

Let's see, let's see this hash here and shows here the result.

https://www.sumatrapdfreader.org/download-free-pdf-viewer.html

https://www.sumatrapdfreader.org/dl/SumatraPDF-3.1.2-install.exe (x86)

What are you asking kifirefox?  

 

I feel there is a language barrier somewhere ... but you've been given sound advice (download from the original source).  Not sure what you're asking regarding hash checking (I understand it...just not sure what you're asking).

 

As others have pointed out ... get the software from the developer's website (i.e. Firefox from mozilla.org).

why???  Seems utterly freaking pointless..

 

Especially since the author doesn't seem to actually give what the hashes should be..

 

Only thing I can tell from that website is the author is I guess color blind, with zero creative web design background.. Looking for the dancing baby gif.. Should be on there somewhere ;)

 

Is that you don't understand what the hashes are used for???  An author of a something.. Gives out the hashes, this is a way for someone to validate they have what the author intended the users to have.. It has not be altered and the download was good if your hash matches what the author says it should be.  If it does not match then either your download went wrong or someone altered the file..

 

The only point of someone posting the hash they get from that site would be to validate that say the one I get works, and here is it hash.. If you do not match that then your downloads are being corrupted and could explain why its failing to run/install/etc.

  • Like 1
On 25/03/2017 at 7:13 AM, BudMan said:

So I see my hash in this file..

https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/52.0.1/SHA256SUMS

2856ffff9fefb0bbbad79f0b9fcfa471ff473c61610e3a5a0566b43de3cd4bb1  win64/en-US/Firefox Setup 52.0.1.exe

And in the 512

https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/52.0.1/SHA512SUMS

12401b9d67f78c0428891d6f00c21ec7d704b3edb0e38f79641b0e0b421f44f284841d0d025605c247691c219db80ac26d421e0669c3adf5d4e3e42175e17e08  win64/en-US/Firefox Setup 52.0.1.exe

 

 

https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/52.0.1/win64/en-US/

54c09b8d242ce24e90e2db2d2f1d3901

e83a50f5230571492e643e49333670f3ef3e40a3

2856ffff9fefb0bbbad79f0b9fcfa471ff473c61610e3a5a0566b43de3cd4bb1

 

https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/52.0.1/win64-EME-free/en-US/

34768d234d6eacaeae296762c53498a5

bd8d9cd90d61bd85d1775a04b38637b1f7dda0a6

393ea18ae57c5ea451da113617ea092fb94b76ad0a3f7b42c3e6053c0949fcaa

 

1 minute ago, kifirefox said:

 

 

https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/52.0.1/win64/en-US/

54c09b8d242ce24e90e2db2d2f1d3901

e83a50f5230571492e643e49333670f3ef3e40a3

2856ffff9fefb0bbbad79f0b9fcfa471ff473c61610e3a5a0566b43de3cd4bb1

 

https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/52.0.1/win64-EME-free/en-US/

34768d234d6eacaeae296762c53498a5

bd8d9cd90d61bd85d1775a04b38637b1f7dda0a6

393ea18ae57c5ea451da113617ea092fb94b76ad0a3f7b42c3e6053c0949fcaa

 

Yes and your point? Two totally different files have two totally different hashes.

1 hour ago, xendrome said:

Yes and your point? Two totally different files have two totally different hashes.

Uhh, yeah. I was wondering myself wth he was talking about... They're two entirely different files, of course they have different hashes...

Ok kifirefox, lets go about this a slightly different way...

 

Lets say you go to the Sumatra homepage like you linked to above and downloaded the 64Bit install exe. The Sumatra website has an entry stating what the hashes should be so after download the file is hash checked and you get this:

 

File: C:\xyz\SumatraPDF-3.1.2-64-install.exe
Size: 5208720 bytes
File Version: 3.1.2
Modified: 26 March 2017, 20:45:53
MD5: 904A7DC26E6326191374082BD9F2F753
SHA1: 593E9B0D96F07783DF13F1B311548069961465FB
CRC32: 6781FE2C

 

This is exactly the same as the Sumatra website said it should be so you can be pretty confident it hasn`t been tampered with in any way!

Now you go to some download site, say Softpedia or Filehippo and download SumatraPDF-3.1.2-64-install.exe then run it through your hash checker. If the result is exactly the same as it says on the Sumatra website then the file is exactly the same, if the hashes don`t match then you don`t know what the file is, it could be anything, ad wrapped, modified, etc...

On 3/25/2017 at 2:53 PM, kifirefox said:

I really do not understand why someone would download something on each separate site, having a website that provides all the programs on one site.

I just down my programs and utilities in download sites because it is easier to find than to search for google.

Has a lot of good download site to do your downloads, and the softpedia is one of the best.

Because of digital infections. Just get your software directly from the source. Softpedia is absoultely not "one of the best."

3 hours ago, Riggers said:

Ok kifirefox, lets go about this a slightly different way...

 

Lets say you go to the Sumatra homepage like you linked to above and downloaded the 64Bit install exe. The Sumatra website has an entry stating what the hashes should be so after download the file is hash checked and you get this:

 

File: C:\xyz\SumatraPDF-3.1.2-64-install.exe
Size: 5208720 bytes
File Version: 3.1.2
Modified: 26 March 2017, 20:45:53
MD5: 904A7DC26E6326191374082BD9F2F753
SHA1: 593E9B0D96F07783DF13F1B311548069961465FB
CRC32: 6781FE2C

 

This is exactly the same as the Sumatra website said it should be so you can be pretty confident it hasn`t been tampered with in any way!

Now you go to some download site, say Softpedia or Filehippo and download SumatraPDF-3.1.2-64-install.exe then run it through your hash checker. If the result is exactly the same as it says on the Sumatra website then the file is exactly the same, if the hashes don`t match then you don`t know what the file is, it could be anything, ad wrapped, modified, etc...

https://www.sumatrapdfreader.org/dl/SumatraPDF-3.1.2-64-install.exe

904a7dc26e6326191374082bd9f2f753

593e9b0d96f07783df13f1b311548069961465fb

6081686cacf010bccc0617a848f2963be7ec44f98dd1daf62dc8eae448195b93
 

 

 

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!