All Activity

Thanks for the new version! Unfortunately, I have to report a new issue on Codeberg.org. When opening a website there (here Mypal 68.14.1b in single-process mode), the following message is shown on the top of the site: JavaScript error: e.contentBoxSize[0] is undefined (https://codeberg.org/assets/js/webcomponents.js?v=7.0.0-140-34a85c1536~gitea-1.22.0 @ 10:32190). Open browser console to see more details. Here is a screenshot of the browser console: And when closing the site by clicking the close button, the complete browser closes immediately.

Interesting. I may have to go this route on Win 7. As much as I love @roytam1's Serpent, it looks increasingly like the end is near. My hunch (that's all it is) would be no. The author wouldn't expect anyone to run r3dfox on Win 10 since they could just run vanilla Mo. Besides, why? The question reminds me a bit of @Jody Thornton's request for a 64-bit build of MailNews. Sure, it could be done - the program could check the Windows version and then make different OS calls based on the result - but what advantage would it bring?

You're right, but it's not a matter of DoH someday becoming the "only option" because the last holdout, MCP, finally caved and supported it! DoH's mere existence threatens ad blocking at the router. Let's say you have a Roku app, which of course is completely unrelated to your computer or Web browser. The author of that app doesn't want you to block ads, so he/she/it already has a huge financial incentive to build DoH into the app so you can't. And DoH already exists, so there's nothing (besides a little development cost) to stop the author from doing so. Thanks for the suggestions, but what does it buy me? You of all people should know how much work it takes to remove all the telemetry from 360Chrome. BTW, the soon-to-be-minimum versions at chase.com are Chrome 116 and FF 115. The former won't run on W7, so it's either Supermium, Thorium, one of the 360Chrome versions above, or Mo (my new abbreviation for modern Firefox) 115 ESR. I think I trust Supermium v118 most, but in any case, there's very little true choice left among "modern" browsers. Which proves the point @VistaLover was making - that's only five versions above your current "primary" and only five versions older than the "latest and [supposedly] greatest." Google has us all on their "upgrade" treadmill now, even if you skip a handful of versions each time.

I am experiencing a weird issue that can't be reliably reproduced. Occasionally scrollbars in listviews and some "rich" textboxes (such as the application JPEGsnoop) behave erratically. When I click on the blank space to move the view one page further or behind, the scrollbar registers multiple clicks and keeps scrolling until the end. A large area of the GUI window around the scrollbar becomes inverted (dark grey/blue) and stays that way until refreshed. Normally only the scrollbar itself changes color. The listview may scroll very sluggishly, with a smoothscroll animation, taking several seconds to advance. It happens only sometimes. Basic system stability is not impacted. My current uptime is 108 days. I suspect it might be an interaction between multiple software programs. Another reason might be the use of Windows Classic theme without DWM (as is default on Server), and NT 6.1 might have not been tested without the Aero. I've read that it lacks basic GDI acceleration that was present in earlier versions of Windows. The Nvidia display driver might also not be tested in Windows Classic. I can't say which of these to blame for sure. I have: Server 2008 R2, Core 2 Duo E6600, 8 GB RAM, GTX 750 Ti, E-MU 0404, 5 various HDD, 1 XRayDisc SSD. I feel like I switched from XP only just now, a couple years ago. But today I was told that 2008 R2 is already OLD! It feels very modern to me, and could handle a PC five to ten times faster. And 3rd party software developer won't look into issues with it. Maybe the Windows 7 forum should be moved into the "Older systems" section already.

I did that a bit back, forgot to post back here. Not entirely sure what you mean by that. There is some delay loaded or disabled pre-10 stuff like the share menu or tablet mode for 10. All I did was undo what broke 7. What I did was make Aero work on 7 again, so it should work on r3dfox. It's not something I test, although I don't stray too far from stock. I think the custom settings options would probably break and about menu would be stock, but I guess working well enough. Everything else mentioned should be like stock Firefox. I didn't change too much. https://github.com/Eclipse-Community/r3dfox/tree/release-121

The new version is out, сrash and time bug may be fixed, Is this about this, I try it

Yes! Windows 2000 Professional. Jim

@Damnation May be, that IDE works, but I need for XP the boot Rom. Just now I order from ebay a card Dawicontrol DC-150, which has an own Bios Rom. https://www.ebay.de/itm/404890659301 On next weekend I make also a try with flashing another Bios to the Shuttle Hot 433 board, because my intuition tells me, that it is not normal that ALL PCI cards fail Dietmar EDIT: I found the driver together with the Bios for this card. nr for the NON-Raid version. Because in description they wrote, that driver and Bios from this card have to match. With my EEprom writer TL866 II plus it is easy for this Bios chip. dc150_nr.zip https://ufile.io/v3omq3sk

I didn't download it from the r3dfox repo which doesn't store the 121 version anyway

Using Thorium_SSE4_122.0.6261.168_WINXP_x64.zip for XP x64, Vista & 7 (multiboot, so literally the same copy). Will try Thorium_AVX2_123.0.6312.133.zip in Vista 64 & post results in a few. UPDATE: tried AVX2 (this box is 4770k), AVX & even SSE3 flavors on W7, all from https://github.com/Alex313031/Thorium-Win/releases. Each one gives me the "not a valid win32 app" error. AVX2 flavor performs roughly the same on W10: 144, 156, 145 The weird thing is on W10, the XP/legacy version (Thorium_SSE4_122.0.6261.168_WINXP_x64.zip) benches better (196, 200, 204) than the AVX2 version meant for Win10. In Vista extended kernel (Nov. 2022), i get Supermium on Vista extended kernel (Nov. 2022): 199, 203, 200 Thorium (XP SSE4) on Vista extended kernel: 192, 197, 198

@Dietmar The one I linked does, maybe try that?

Read the first post.

how do I know the source of the FF fork (121) I'm using ? I downloaded it from a github repo some months ago but just can't remember the original link

what version are you using SSE or AVX ?

@Damnation I tested this card only for to boot XP SP3 on this 486 board Shuttle Hot 433, and there also no IDE Dietmar

@roytam1 Now I have the perfect excuse to request you upload a copy of Firefox 1.5.0.12 (Mozilla 1.8.0.12) source code. Personally I prefer Firefox 1.5 over 2.0 because it is more lightweight, and it should ironically be easier to fork than 2.0. I still want Gecko 1.9.x building with Visual C++ 6.0 SP5 (really Visual C++ 5.0 SP3), but this is a great start. I tried using Visual C++ 5.0 SP3 on my RetroZilla fork, but it crashes while trying to display pictures. https://codeberg.org/Nicholas_McAnespy/FxVC5Mods

@Dietmar Does IDE work at least?

Until now, I couldn't observe such crashes here in my Thorium testing installation.

Thanks but I already know that all. I was one of the first to be involved in testing that re-basing when @UCyborg suggested this method for Chrome360 after my observations in terms of its enormous RAM usage on my old Windows XP computer. The good is that Thorium is configured perfectly when it comes to RAM consumption.

I still get out of memory crashes on tabs with Thorium, but it's nowhere near as bad as Supermium was. Supermium may have improved in that respect of course, I haven't yet updated from version 122.0.6261.85. My 360Chome (13.5.2036.0) does use a rebased chrome.dll of course.

Yeah when I tested 24H2 briefly on my main machine control center was overhauled but borked. Leave it to the world class engineers at Microsoft. I wish they'd get back to the way they were in the 90s and 2000s.

@Damnation I have this card. No Rom, no boot message, just nothing on the Shuttle Hot 433 board for 486 cpu Dietmar PS: May be this happens, because no Bios Sata driver is integrated in the Bios from that Shuttle board.

@Dietmar I'm not sure how to tell if it has a boot ROM or not.

it's rebased by default https://msfn.org/board/topic/184515-arcticfoxienotheretoplaygames-360chrome-v1351030-rebuild-8/?do=findComment&comment=1242048