Yes, but as I wrote yesterday, there was a problem (see my first post.) Not knowing what to undetake I just tried with an older version, which now works. So I will keep it running w/o pretending to have a most recent one
Dont worry, you are not considered to be "that guy"!! With many other XP related problems I was told the same by other "that guys" and am aware of it. First, my XP software packages have grown "historically" over the years, some of them more than 12 years old but working. The original distributions would for sure not run on anything above Win 7, let alone I no more have many of them. Next, I am really not keen of installing many old drivers (which probably would cause troubles) and particularly not keen to getting acquainted with the handling of those modern "tiles - OS's. This sounds old fashioned and it is indeed, but is actually quite pragmatic - at least for my purposes.I hate to be "that guy" but if you're still running Windows XP on an Internet-connected PC/device, I'd really consider either upgrading Windows (or getting a newer PC) or jumping to a Linux distribution if I were you.
I use Waterfox on a few hundred customer systems, and a few dozen have the Adguard add-on installed. A customer of mine that purchased a new laptop, and for some unknown reason, Adguard add-on crashes during installation when it should display the options page. I have yet to get into options to change settings because the options tab crashes every time. This issue has not presented itself on any other machine - only this new HP 360 laptop. I have had no issues with installing new antivirus software (same brand used on all customer systems with no issues), MS Office, or any of the other installed applications. The behavior I see resembles an infected machine that actively blocks your attempts at installing applications such as antivirus. Home page set to fake IT scam - user gave scammer remote access to this system, so who knows what they did to it.
I used Firefox with NoScript for many years until they started packing it with fake news and click bait "someone else" decided for me see (who gets to decide what news you see or don't see? Who is watching over the watchers?), while Waterfox has not gone that route - at least not so far. Not to mention Firefox developers changed the menu layout and placement of toolbar buttons, which creates a problem when trying to determine how to instruct a customer through a problem. I have found no downside to using Waterfox, and considering Firefox seems to be going against the very thing they brag about in terms of privacy. Any change is not necessarily good when it comes to Firefox. I would argue Firefox sucks for these reasons.Does Waterfox even support WebExtensions? As far as I know it's purposely keeping XUL/XPCOM extension support and sticking with an older Firefox (pre-57) codebase. Waterfox might be in the same boat Pale Moon is in - this is why I always recommend sticking with Firefox instead of one of the forks.
You might have to try the Firefox legacy extension.