All Activity
- Past hour
-
Unofficial updates for XP x64?
George King replied to bob_smith's topic in Windows XP 64 Bit Edition
Use UpdatePack instead. https://msfn.org/board/topic/183839-5eraph-updatepacks-x64-v2019/ -
Any examples of problem sites? I have to say that I haven't found a site which doesn't display correctly in Thorium (apart from the incorrect font on the Digital Spy forum site which I mentioned earlier).
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
roytam1 replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
For the time being, it should be fine. But once the injunction affecting ISPs, the condition will change. -
As far as I can see after all my performed tests, Thorium is still in beta stage. Many websites are not shown correctly. So, we will see how the development of this browser will go on. Generally, Thorium works even on my old computer even though we live in the age of seemingly limitless computer resources. But one thong is clear. It is much slower than Mypal 68 or New Moon 28, at least on my hardware.
- Today
-
There IS a way to bypass that. I discovered a method myself, though I never shared it anywhere, cause I don't want rockstar to close that loophole. https://prnt.sc/aEyLJ1GypD5b
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
AstroSkipper replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
-
XP/Vista-compatible clients for modern email services?
Jody Thornton replied to Mathwiz's topic in Windows XP
Unfortunately, Tobin abandoned the Interlink project. To be honest, I can't make heads or tails of what he's doing with BinOC. -
For me, the logger works in Mypal 68.14.1b with uBlock Origin 1.57.2 (tested in single-process mode) as it should. I can log every website and am able to select all results or the results of each opened website by clicking onto the corresponding entry in the logger's address bar.I don’t have to click right anywhere in the logger window, Could it be that you are simply using the logger incorrectly? Here is a little tutorial: First, start the logger. Then load pages. Now, select the window inside the address bar of the logger you want to observe. Cheers, AstroSkipper
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
ClassicNick replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
... -
Thorium
NotHereToPlayGames replied to mockingbird's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Agreed! -
It was a needlessly ranty part and didn't take into account process address space fragmentation... although TBH, I still find it strange, Chromium being multi-process, how do you not have consistently free contiguous 256 MB of space in that one process. https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/507 On the other hand, we live in the age of abundant computing resources, so sometimes these issues do struck as "first world problems".
-
enderlais started following any windows 3.11 gurus kickin around?
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
roytam1 replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Off-topic: so, in worst case, my internet connection can be unavailable in any time. A Hong Kong appeals court has sided with the government in its attempt to ban protest song Glory to Hong Kong, overturning an earlier ruling. https://hongkongfp.com/2024/05/08/breaking-govt-bid-to-ban-glory-to-hong-kong-protest-song-approved-by-appeals-court -
Thorium
NotHereToPlayGames replied to mockingbird's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Oh man, you edited out the part I was going to comment on, lol. re: 256 MB spare -- it's because some people eat their cereal with a fork and don't realize that a spoon works better. There would be no MSFN without these types of people, the folks that use the wrong tool for the job then come here to get that FORK (pun intended) to do what the spoon has no issues with. -
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
AstroSkipper replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Use JustOff's tool MozJAR Recompressor: https://github.com/JustOff/mozjarr/tree/master All about recrompressing such files was already discussed here: https://msfn.org/board/topic/184051-my-browser-builds-part-4/?do=findComment&comment=1248092 and here: https://msfn.org/board/topic/184051-my-browser-builds-part-4/?do=findComment&comment=1247872 Cheers, AstroSkipper -
I noticed random tab hanging with Supermium as well. Slightly off-topic, it's just that I used Supermium slightly more often on XP than Thorium so far. But it could be due to small fixed 1 GB page file since XP is installed on a small 20 GB partition...I think warning about possibly failed memory allocation requests may only show the first time. Those that have these types of problems should check if their page file setting is set to auto. No, you're not smarter than Windows if you think you know appropriate size or worse, think you don't need it at all. If you don't have decently (over)sized page file and settings prevent Windows from resizing it, chances for memory allocation requests randomly failing decrease dramatically.
-
coding a new browser for windows 3.1?
enderlais replied to enderlais's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
here is a site of programs to compile and code on wfw 3.11 (although this is only c++ so i don't know how useful that is) i have Symantec C++ Pro 6.1 installed because it supports 256 colors. https://www.streetinfo.lu/computing/programming/windowsold/software/win3x_cpp.html -
coding a new browser for windows 3.1?
enderlais replied to enderlais's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
well the netscape navigator already had java script so wfw 3.11 supports it. there are multiple older ones that have the capability of compiling 16 bit. especially, the ones o that area. the main problem is i don't know what i have to do or how to code because i cant find anything for windows 3.11 yet alone a browser. the idea came from me not managing to bring a dos browser to work under wfw3.11 and there being no newish browsers for it natively. maybe something simple, a few security protocols maybe and https support since that is totally missing in any browsers from that area. -
13600200993 changed their profile photo
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
j7n replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
In 7-Zip directories are added as items separate for any files they may contain. You can see they have dates and attributes. Most archivers do this. The XPI contains only files. Each file header in the Zip central directory has a 36 bytes long extra field. With many files and directories, this adds up. Old archivers like RAR do not add this, but the Deflate compression there is worse. -
13600200993 joined the community
-
Intel Ethernet Connection I219-V on Windows 7 (x64)
ED_Sln replied to castilloxx's topic in Windows 7
Welcome to MSFN. Write the ID of the device. There are two revisions of the I219, one has a driver, the other does not. As a last resort, you can use a PCI-E Network Card, or USB-LAN if there are no ports available. -
Windows 7 has been my favorite and daily OS since 2010. When web browsers (I use Firefox and Opera) or internet functions begin to stop working maybe then I will make the switch to Linux which I haven't been fond of but I hope that day doesn't come anytime soon. I've experienced browsers becoming unusable before with PowerPC Macs and had to give up using the internet on mine.
-
proquipx1 joined the community
-
Thomas Shi joined the community
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
Ascii2 replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Does 7-Zip not have reliability troubles with the relevant ZIP extended formats (XPI, EPUB, APK, (I think also JA) etc.)? Particularly, for Mozilla files that use extended Zip formats, such as .ja (I think) and .xpi, it is my understanding that member file order in the archives matters and is optimized by Mozilla process. Mozilla has provided a disclaimer against using 7-zip in creating a singed XPI-file extension (see https://web.archive.org/web/20200105223104/https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Archive/Add-ons/Signing_an_XPI#Prepare_XPI_file_for_signing ) because, as it alleges, 7-zip may change order of files. Have you found this not to be the issue? As a test of compression ability, I have downloaded and extracted https://o.rthost.win/boc-uxp/session_manager-0.8.1.14-sm.xpi then tried to re-compress the extracted content to Zip format with 7-zip, but the compression type and end archive file size is much greater (556,780 bytes is my lowest-size outcome) than yours (552,422 bytes). What am I missing? -
BobT joined the community
-
coding a new browser for windows 3.1?
jumper replied to enderlais's topic in Windows 9x Member Projects
Windows GDI and User resources for object handles. 64 KB. -
Thank you very much, you are the best!
-
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
roytam1 replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
7-zip can do better zip compression sometimes.