Leaderboard

Thanks to extensive coding work carried out by upstream developer FranklinDM, "Web Components Slots" are now supported in UXP natively ; last Saturday's UXP-builds by Roy come with that support backported ; as such, now the "modern GUI" version of VirusTotal can be successfully rendered and used in NM28/St52 without disabling the native WC implementation and without excessive CPU consumption (YMMV, here it was OK ) : https://www.virustotal.com/gui/home/upload

AFAIK yes. The modifications are not a big deal, just take a look at this --> https://ia802303.us.archive.org/28/items/360EE_Modified_Version/DCB_4.0.7.22_Modified_Notes.txt Your welcome. I use XP on a 2003 laptop (Dell Inspiron 600m iirc) and it is very slow unfortunately. Rebasing did improve memory usage so I just decided to go for it. Hope you can make good use of the browsers!

Sounds to me like another genius move by Micro$oft: make sure even fewer folks use Bing! Hasn't affected me, since I routinely spoof Win 7 or 8.1 in my UAs; but Chase long ago fell for the FUD that old OSes are inherently too insecure. I remember years ago when they blocked their own Android app on Android 6 for the same reason. Of course that just meant I had to use Chrome instead of their app. Maybe Moonbat works for Chase? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering. Sorry, couldn't resist! I checked mine, and mine is user-set to ... which is better, but obviously way out of date! Problem with pointing it to this thread is that it, too, will be locked someday.... Multi-process mode was removed from Basilisk by MCP before @basilisk-dev got ahold of it. @roytam1 omitted those particular commits, so it can be enabled in Serpent, but even Serpent doesn't have it enabled by default! IIRC, multi-process mode was still in its infancy when the two Basilisk versions were forked from Firefox. Even FF 52 disables it by default on XP. That said, I've had generally good results running with it enabled, except for some incompatible add-ons; notably Palefill and Classic Add-ons Archive. (The latter has a "hack" which was written for Waterfox but can be enabled for Serpent, which makes CAA open in a single-process mode window.) If one site hosts multiple domains, the certificate will typically include a Subject Alternative Name for each domain hosted at that site. As long as the domain you're accessing is one of the certificate's SANs, the browser shouldn't give a warning. But if the domain isn't listed as a SAN, a warning should appear.

Yeah, it just works with little interaction(s) FWIW: Even version 1.09.4.1001 just updated a few minutes ago along with MB Anti-Rootkit 1.10.3.1001. Just saying they do work but can't say much for their detection ability.

I don't get MiniBrowser either, but to 'to each their own' I guess, I don't know.

Qihu 360 Total Security Essential 8.8.0.1119 is quite ok as an alternative in Windows XP where the choice of antivirus programs is very limited. Although I can't say much about the quality of its protection, you have the option of installing the Avira Scan Engine. This increases the detection rate of this program considerably, as AV-Test has shown in the follow-up version. Here is an image taken from the test: First a screenshot of the main interface: And now a screenshot of my security configuration especially in terms of the Avira Scan Engine: In this screenshot above, you see I changed the protection mode from the default Balanced to Custom, and I enabled the Avira Scan Engine. Or you set the maximum protection mode Security. This definitely improves the program's detection rate. Cheers, AstroSkipper

XuanWu.

If one site hosts multiple domains, the certificate will typically include a Subject Alternative Name for each domain hosted at that site. As long as the domain you're accessing is one of the certificate's SANs, the browser shouldn't give a warning. But if the domain isn't listed as a SAN, a warning should appear. @luweitest : Mathwiz is right ; below is a capture of the "SAN field" of the server certificate on "forums.internetfreedom.org":

Sounds to me like another genius move by Micro$oft: make sure even fewer folks use Bing! ... It's actually their new "offspring", OpenAI-based, supposed to be "more powerful" than ChatGPT: https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/02/07/reinventing-search-with-a-new-ai-powered-microsoft-bing-and-edge-your-copilot-for-the-web/ ... And Roy's choice is: https://github.com/roytam1/basilisk55/commit/babf7e8e5c79cab7ea504f16fab609253e047ce8 => https://msfn.org/board/forum/201-browsers-working-on-older-nt-family-oses/ Quite right ; at that time, Fx did support both XUL+WE extensions, and while WE are inherently e10s-compatible, not all XUL ones had been rewritten to support it; their authors became less "enthused" (to put it mildly ) when Mozilla announced XUL support would be axed in "Quantum" (Fx57+) ... Being on Vista SP2 x86 myself, e10s is enabled in my Fx-52.9.1 (32-bit) "nostalgia/test" copy, however I don't use nor recommend myself e10s on St52/St55; the platforms (UXP Take 2 / UXP Take 1 = moebius) were significantly modified by upstream compared to their respective Mozilla forkpoints (52.6.0/53.0a1), not taking at all the underlying (but dormant) multiprocess support code into account; as posted already by others, that support was later excised completely from the "official" UXP code; "we" have kept these e10s vestiges inside "our" UXP tree, but no-one upstream (of course) or downstream (Roy) checks how well/bad these vestiges behave now, when enabled, with current UXP platform snapshots; St52 has also kept vestigial support for Fx52-level "Container Tabs" (off by default) and WEs, but, like e10s, those platform features, no longer present in official Basilisk, aren't being maintained at all by Roy... All these extra features are in a "Use at your own risk" status; for e10s specifically, you should definitely back up your profile (to have a single process one to revert to if/when things turn sour ) before enabling it, and making frequent profile backups once on e10s isn't a bad idea either ... To give credit to people requesting e10s in their browsers, it's mostly due to the way website design has grown to become over the last years : the major league of browsers, Chromium-based ones and Firefox, have, since long ago,, native multiprocess support, and it's those browsers that are being targeted by web devs and web frameworks; this has resulted in the current web abomination where every independent browser tab runs a "web app", downloading tens of MiBs of JS code that has to be rendered locally by the browser's engine; this is especially true on "popular" social media portals (facebook, instagram, twitter, etc.) and "chat" apps (e.g. Discord), exacerbated by the concurrent use of a multitude of rich media (HD images/GIFs, HD video, audio, WebRTC video+audio, etc) ... While single process engines were "fine" a decade or more ago, they're more likely to "run out of O2 and choke to death" when asked to deal with the modern web, especially on our older H/W and OSes - but do also note that e10s works best on more recent H/W, where ample RAM and CPU is being made available to the multiprocess-enabled browser core ...

Dave-H reply not that timely either. But if you have to bump an old topic, it is best to at least add something to it. I have no answer on how to put a BMP as the background since JPG seems to work just fine. The issue nowadays is not the difference between 4:3 and 16:9 or 10, it is that some hardware seems to be able to stretch the background fine to fit, and some do not. And forget about 4K displays. There doesn't seem to be a good way around getting one singular HTA at fullscreen to be able to reliably fit the background image on multiple different aspect ratios, resolutions and video controllers.

That seems like a step backwards when we have v86 and v87 forks available.

Technically, v11 is faster. It launches faster, it scores faster, and it passes more checks at BrowserAudit. BUT it's too old for me to use because my banking sites will not function on v11. What I don't understand is the hype surrounding DcBrowser and MiniBrowser, I've never liked either one but web browsers are always always always "in the eye of the beholder".

I make some serch,so I found the way how to change the useragent in 360EE,now I show you: 1.Click F12 or Click "Option">"Tools">"Devloper Tools" 2.Click "Customize and control DevTools">"More Tools">"Network Conditions" 3.Cancel the selection of the "Select aautomatically" 4.Enter the useragent as you want into the input box Now the problem is which useragent to input is right

I did a second test, but instead of Qihu 360 Total Security 10.8.0.1541, I installed Qihu 360 Total Security Essential 8.8.0.1119 on my second system partition. I can't say anything about the quality of its protection either, but no such bloatware and desktop manager anymore.. The whole installation process is far more pleasant. There is an option to install additionally the browser Opera but you can untick it. Although the program is an older version from 18.12.2019, its virus definitions can still be updated. The installation file is 360TSE_Setup_8.8.0.1119.exe and is unfortunately no longer available on their homepage. But you can find it using a search engine in the internet, for example here: https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/360_total_security_essentials.html I really don't know why this product was abandonded. In the case of Qihu, once again, the newer the worse. Cheers, AstroSkipper

No, this guide is now complete

Yes, I wasn't serious. don't worry. Well, forget that link I sent then. Sorry about that. How about the screencap I sent instead? And I don't have any problems with Panda Dome by the way, this is a clean installation of Panda Dome.

I did a short test of Qihu 360 Total Security 10.8.0.1541 on my second system partition. I can't say anything about the quality of its protection, but quite a bit about the installer and what is installed. There is no way to do an individual installation. Particularly annoying is the so-called desktop manager, which is of course installed without being asked and has moved all my icons on the desktop. I don't like this program and can't recommend it. And I miss the main focus on security, but many unnecessary functions instead. Here is a link to a test performed by PCMag: https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/qihoo-360-total-security-86 The results and evaluation are also quite poor, similar to my first impressions.

Just wanted to say thank you for continuing to maintain these browsers to this day! I will have to try them now and see how they are doing on performance...it's amazing how much speed you can gain by rebasing the DLLs. 360v13.x used to run well, albeit a bit slow with a lot of tabs open...when NHTPG rebased his 360v13.5 build, the speed became competitive with old and fast 9.5/11/12! The same principle applied to those older browsers, and to DCB and MiniBrowser, should mean significant performance gains for web browsing. It's truly fantastic because unlocking the extra speed is beneficial across the board, not just for those on Ivy Bridge and Haswell-era processors but those who are still using very old Pentium 4 or Athlon 64-based machines. For my part, I still use my old HP S5-1020, which I've even run 2000 on years ago (with full driver support) and have gone up to 10 with. 10 actually doesn't run too bad if you strip away the bloat and tweak it sufficiently, but XP is much faster. The performance can give the latest PCs running 11 a run for their money, and that's with an old HDD! If I ever put an SSD in it, forget it...it's game over. While it's possible to run newer OSes, having done a lot of testing recently (and over the years) I can say for sure that older PCs really thrive with XP and have their ups and downs with Vista and later. Being able to use modern web browsers in XP, and have a sense of assurance that they will not only run but run with good speed, is a truly amazing thing. Thanks again for doing what you do, H.O.!

I guess I'm more patient than most folks. Max number of tabs I usually open is 10 - 15. Single-process mode is guaranteed to work with all XUL extensions one may want to use. I'm mostly concerned about speed/performance when it comes to multimedia.

function depends on platform code (i.e. UXP) which MCP removed such function from platform code long time ago, I don't think people can add back this without forking platform code.

Welcome to the human race! That last question from the quote above, it's a bit like asking "Why is the sky blue?" IMO. Here's the quote I found on another discussion website that relays some thoughts that seem fitting in an instance such as this: People love to lash out when their ways are challenged in any way, or they're being screwed by more powerful person/group, then they take the bottled up tension on the weaker person/group. Or if they had bad day. Add sociopathy, psychopathy, greed, egotism, narcissism etc. And the way this whole Matrix is structured...who can keep sanity? Navigating this world feels a bit like this picture to me: Surrounded by enemies, no allies, no weapon to defend oneself with. Backstabbers everywhere.

New build of Serpent/UXP for XP! Test binary: Win32 https://o.rthost.win/basilisk/basilisk52-g4.8.win32-git-20230325-3219d2d-uxp-00534b26f-xpmod.7z Win64 https://o.rthost.win/basilisk/basilisk52-g4.8.win64-git-20230325-3219d2d-uxp-00534b26f-xpmod.7z source code that is comparable to my current working tree is available here: https://github.com/roytam1/UXP/commits/custom IA32 Win32 https://o.rthost.win/basilisk/basilisk52-g4.8.win32-git-20230325-3219d2d-uxp-00534b26f-xpmod-ia32.7z source code that is comparable to my current working tree is available here: https://github.com/roytam1/UXP/commits/ia32 NM28XP build: Win32 https://o.rthost.win/palemoon/palemoon-28.10.6a1.win32-git-20230325-d849524bd-uxp-00534b26f-xpmod.7z Win32 IA32 https://o.rthost.win/palemoon/palemoon-28.10.6a1.win32-git-20230325-d849524bd-uxp-00534b26f-xpmod-ia32.7z Win32 SSE https://o.rthost.win/palemoon/palemoon-28.10.6a1.win32-git-20230325-d849524bd-uxp-00534b26f-xpmod-sse.7z Win64 https://o.rthost.win/palemoon/palemoon-28.10.6a1.win64-git-20230325-d849524bd-uxp-00534b26f-xpmod.7z Official UXP changes picked since my last build: - No Issue - Ensure more OsiSpace (82a2a67f0) - [GFX] Add some sanity checks and clamps to SurfaceData calculations. (fd5015fae) - Issue #2117 - Follow-up: Run precomplete cmd during package staging (05d29a53d) - Issue #2155 - Split TDZCheckCache, IfEmitter/InternalIfEmitter, JumpList from BytecodeEmitter (e8fee2056) - Issue #2155 - Simplify BytecodeEmitter::isRestParameter (da05c050e) - Issue #2155 - Refactor BytecodeEmitter in preparation for *Emitter work (a2fd8846b) - Issue #2155 - Add PropOpEmitter, ElemOpEmitter, NameOpEmitter, CallOrNewEmitter (89e682000) - Issue #2155 - Fix BytecodeEmitter::emitArguments for our ParseNode tree (e88f946c0) - Issue #2155 - Remove now-unused functions (5dc6be1bc) - Issue #2155 - Fix debug build (76c203014) - Issue #2155 - Fix wrong assertion (fbb5f7345) - Issue #1593 - Follow-up: Fix :host matching from inside the shadow tree (7374ca671) - Issue #2171 - Skip over shadow nodes that don't have an owning node. (f09d2bba0) - Issue #1592 - Part 1a: Prevent crashing if a slot element was selected via DOM Inspector (0232bcdfa) - Issue #1592 - Part 1b: Move <slot> UA rule to html.css (460e8db94) - Issue #1592 - Part 1c: Pass SelectorParsingFlags as a reference (ab63b7b94) - Issue #1592 - Part 2: Parse ::slotted() pseudo-element as if it were a pseudo-class (77ad970db) - Issue #1592 - Part 3: Ensure only tree-abiding pseudo-elements will follow ::slotted() (92b31dd25) - Issue #1592 - Part 4: Walk ::slotted()-containing rules for slottables (518c41fd7) - Issue #1592 - Part 5: Use flattened element tree when looking for a parent while matching ::slotted() (8d2533ad7) - Issue #1592 - Part 6: Allow pseudo-classes with a forgiving selector list argument to follow pseudo-elements (91d2b6f4c) - Issue #1592 - Part 7: Slottables cannot be matched from the outer tree. (19226fd56) - Issue #1592 - Part 8: Test the assigned slot for type/class/ID/attribute instead of the slottable when matching ::slotted() (4cd0de04d) - Issue #1592 - Part 9: Post a restyle event after changing the slot of a slottable (9a071f3b7) - Issue #1592 - Part 10: Slot elements should restyle their parent on attribute changes (bc12e05bd) - Issue #1592 - Follow-up: Don't post a restyle event if restyleElement is null (b29522749) - Issue #2161 - Ctrl + Enter should cause keypress event even though the key combination doesn't input any character (078b1b73d) - Issue #2135 - Don't discard event state mask when matching ::slotted() or :host arguments (f16994074) No official Pale-Moon changes picked since my last build. No official Basilisk changes picked since my last build. My changes since my last build: - follow-up rev 24572438, `targetInKnownToBeHandledScope` can be null (af28af9f8) - add comments and formatting in mozilla upstream "bug 1440809, ensure we don't try to treat non-DOM-Node event targets as such, r=masayuki (89c8025537a5)" (64329d41b) - js: add `using js::LifoAlloc` to fix build (e162f075e) Update Notice: - You may delete file named icudt58l.dat inside program folder when updating from old releases. * Notice: From now on, UXP rev will point to `custom` branch of my UXP repo instead of MCP UXP repo, while "official UXP changes" shows only `tracking` branch changes.

Great news! Thanks for the information! To see VirusTotal working again is fantastic.

Hi All! Hope I can help and get help.

I've pretty much made that my 'go-to' right now because I'm finding most new shows too boring and political for my liking. Season 2 was very good I agree.

I have been running last Saturday's St52 (32-bit) build (BuildID=20230324153850) for a whole 3 days now and can confirm that the "xul.dll" crashes I first spoke of here no longer happen ; so it was indeed Bugzilla #1440809 (landing first on Fx60) that had to be applied to "our" UXP tree to get those crashes fixed... Many thanks (FWIW, don't "upstream" also need this fix, or is it specifically tied to WebExtensions ? ). Speaking of "xul.dll" crashes, another type of them (see #2176) was addressed by upstream in PR #2178, that fix has already been transferred to "our' tree and will be included in the next UXP-based releases (Sat, Apr 1st 2023) .

Yes, but at the same time, if he doesn't want to (for his own reasons), it's his choice, and we should respect that. I removed DC Browser from my system 2 months ago (because it's old), and I prefer and use 360Chrome more now.

Yep! A deeper look at the (server) certificates is always a good idea.

I personally prefer the SQUARES. Why install a font that I can not read?

Agreed!

It's difficult to find working user agent extension on web store, I use very good Random User-Agent (Switcher): https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/random-user-agent-switche/einpaelgookohagofgnnkcfjbkkgepnp?hl=en-US

Is this guide still incomplete? The last edit from November 7, 2022 says "totally incomplete"

Are you using the latest Extended Kernel version? At least using the version from March 6 should get it to run.

I know this list. AV-Test is always a good source to get information about antivirus programs. Unfortunately, this list is from 2014 and thus almost 9 years old. We have already discussed here some of the antivirus programs listed there. Including Qihu 360 Total Security which was already mentioned in this thread here: and here: Overloaded security programs are not my taste, but the current Qihu 360 Total Security 10.8.0.1541 still seems to support Windows XP: https://www.360totalsecurity.com/en/features/360-total-security/ The others on this list as for example Avira, Norton, BullGard, Trend Micro, Eset, G Data, and so on have given up any support for Windows XP a long time ago. Therefore, such lists are of little use today. So what are the new good options? I can't see them.

I just downloaded it from there - the same issue! They only had beta version of the one I've been using (10.1.1002.1). Maybe the one I was using was also beta because the website I've gotten it from didn't specify if it was, thus they both have the same issue?

This is what I've been saying ! They showed us no proof. = no screencaps, nothing.

Yes, these are my impressions as well... But I like to play with new extensions to see if they can improve this crazy world... So, to increase your curiosity about the extensions that take care of your "privacy" and "security", here are some things that might interest you; checked by me and secure (sorry if you already know them): No History (this with Size 33.09 KiB): https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/no-history/hdifnhiliocdiomkphonngpedadhinof?hl=en-US Referer Control: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/referer-control/hnkcfpcejkafcihlgbojoidoihckciin?hl=en-US Reject Service Worker (Size12.63KiB): https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/reject-service-worker/falajmifjcihbmlokgomiklbfmgmnopd?hl=en-US CSS Exfil Protection mike gualtieri Clear This Page

if you ever need help with any windows vista related problems we have some of the biggest vista users in the world here (like win32 the creator of the extended kernal) and many others

this function seems to be broken for a quite long time Was actually a total coincidence that I came across this issue. I had to create a new profile to check the other issue with the search engines. In the process, I also wanted to reconfigure the toolbars and suddenly the crash. Can this be fixed?

Not likely. And I say that as an XP user. I think we XP users think far too highly of our influence in this world.

You got the legitimate answer though, the system requirements for their browser is clearly stated on their website. Another person pointed you to the thread here, which you must have been aware of, being a member here, but the official last XP compatible is simply the one that's several years old by now. I've got attacked there once by the guy called gepus for simply asking about the issue that may happen with uBlock Origin + blocking scripts on the site being navigated to from Google search results - you may be redirected back to search results if you have JS enabled on Google. Had to find a workaround on my own, which isn't too bad, don't need Google's tracking in the links, but nobody explained why the issue happens on Pale Moon. Is it really not a browser issue? I sometimes ask about some sites' issues, except the few incidents, the place doesn't seem as bad these days. If they know what's up, you tend to get the answer. When they were beefing up their RegExp code in recent times, I asked about a particular regex example that wasn't working as it used to anymore and it was fixed right away. One thing I'm still curious about, but there were only crickets' sounds on Pale Moon forum, why are Volkswagen's websites so sluggish? Some examples: https://www.volkswagen.si/ https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/en.html https://www.volkswagen.de/de.html The errors look about the same between UXP powered browser and Firefox 110, even polyfills loaded message appear in both cases. Well, almost, this may be encountered on UXP: SyntaxError: missing : after property id Which must result in something being broken (some popup in this case at least, maybe also something else), but I don't remember if we figured out this one yet.

Relaunch DcB on the 2 GB VM and RAM/process drops to around 30 MB.

aka Serpent 55; lethal toxicity on the official Pale Moon and/or Basilisk forums aside, I believe the very reason this: https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?p=237897#p237897 "happened" in the first place is the existence of below about:config pref in St55: app.feedback.baseURL;https://forum.palemoon.org/viewforum.php?f=61 that controls where "Help -> "Submit Feedback..." will take the St55 user who wishes to, well , submit feedback (e.g. a bug) specific to that browser... Obviously now , the value of that pref has to change... FWIW, @pdemal isn't a username directly associated with a MSFN forum member (ofc, one may use different usernames "there" and "here" , ), but by now (and especially ever since the infamous M.A.T. "era" ), 99.9% of MSFN members do know that "forum.palemoon.org" is NOT the place to register in order to seek support for any application that launches under XP (and... Vista ) ...

New build of post-deprecated Serpent/moebius for XP! * Notice: This repo will not be built on regular schedule, and changes are experimental as usual. ** Current moebius patch level should be on par with 52.9, but some security patches can not be applied/ported due to source milestone differences between versions. Test binary: Win32 http://o.rthost.win/basilisk/basilisk55-win32-git-20230325-3d31a53d0-xpmod.7z Win64 http://o.rthost.win/basilisk/basilisk55-win64-git-20230325-3d31a53d0-xpmod.7z repo: https://github.com/roytam1/basilisk55 Repo changes: - import from `custom` branch of UXP: import mozilla upstream "bug 1440809, ensure we don't try to treat non-DOM-Node event targets as such, r=masayuki (89c8025537a5)" (64329d41b) (482f63828) - import from UXP: No Issue - Ensure more OsiSpace (82a2a67f) (5924cbbd2) - import from UXP: [GFX] Add some sanity checks and clamps to SurfaceData calculations. (fd5015fa) (0fe415a94) - ported from UXP: Issue #2155 - Split TDZCheckCache, IfEmitter/InternalIfEmitter, JumpList from BytecodeEmitter (e8fee205) (b3ccbe7bb) - import from UXP: Issue #2155 - Simplify BytecodeEmitter::isRestParameter (da05c050) (c063999c2) - import from UXP: Issue #2155 - Refactor BytecodeEmitter in preparation for *Emitter work (a2fd8846) (ab9ea1208) - ported from UXP: Issue #2155 - Add PropOpEmitter, ElemOpEmitter, NameOpEmitter, CallOrNewEmitter (89e68200) (a2de1d580) - import from UXP: Issue #2155 - Fix BytecodeEmitter::emitArguments for our ParseNode tree (e88f946c) (3daef3c97) - import from UXP: Issue #2155 - Remove now-unused functions (5dc6be1b) (a5602bf09) - import from UXP: Issue #2155 - Fix debug build (76c20301) (c3d752db7) - import from UXP: Issue #2155 - Fix wrong assertion (fbb5f734) (590888c1c) - import from UXP: Issue #1593 - Follow-up: Fix :host matching from inside the shadow tree (7374ca67) (b8320e63d) - import from UXP: Issue #2171 - Skip over shadow nodes that don't have an owning node. (f09d2bba) (e47b2be5c) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 1a: Prevent crashing if a slot element was selected via DOM Inspector (0232bcdf) (54a68ef66) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 1b: Move <slot> UA rule to html.css (460e8db9) (16b338382) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 1c: Pass SelectorParsingFlags as a reference (ab63b7b9) (c71941bf7) - ported from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 2: Parse ::slotted() pseudo-element as if it were a pseudo-class (77ad970d) (8186d06c3) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 3: Ensure only tree-abiding pseudo-elements will follow ::slotted() (92b31dd2) (adae2cbc7) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 4: Walk ::slotted()-containing rules for slottables (518c41fd) (732d49663) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 5: Use flattened element tree when looking for a parent while matching ::slotted() (8d2533ad) (a93992b32) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 6: Allow pseudo-classes with a forgiving selector list argument to follow pseudo-elements (91d2b6f4) (4c31da96f) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 7: Slottables cannot be matched from the outer tree. (19226fd5) (941a8a77c) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 8: Test the assigned slot for type/class/ID/attribute instead of the slottable when matching ::slotted() (4cd0de04) (572a2aa99) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 9: Post a restyle event after changing the slot of a slottable (9a071f3b) (b29f97176) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Part 10: Slot elements should restyle their parent on attribute changes (bc12e05b) (2c64594e8) - import from UXP: Issue #1592 - Follow-up: Don't post a restyle event if restyleElement is null (b2952274) (90b345d97) - import from UXP: Issue #2161 - Ctrl + Enter should cause keypress event even though the key combination doesn't input any character (078b1b73) (12bbdf34f) - import from UXP: Issue #2135 - Don't discard event state mask when matching ::slotted() or :host arguments (f1699407) (3d31a53d0)

I've been using Malwarebytes Premium on XP for several years now. It's not free, but it just works. Strange how people have very different experiences with these programs on their systems. I never had any problem installing MB Premium on either of my XP systems, but my main desktop absolutely refused to work with Avast or AVG! They would install fine, but the main service refused to start, and I never found out why this was. I too spent ages on their forums and with their technical support, and apart for the vague 'some people do have this problem on XP' no answer was ever found.

don't understand. sometimes the error is with 360chrome.exe and sometimes with chrome.dll. hitting the escape key just closes the error and the browser. this is a "non issue" as far as i'm concerned. no need to click that "bookmark menu" star three times when there are no bookmarks ...

I did not know that. However, turns out i already use for a 14 days this March version of New Monn, where WebComponents is included. That's not accurate statement. I usually download new versions from here: https://rtfreesoft.blogspot.com/search/label/browser And i usually read whats new in "Official Pale-Moon changes picked since my last build:" and "Official Basilisk changes picked since my last build:". Because i expected that the most critical changes will be mentioned there. The reason why i miss mention about WebComponents, is because it is written as casual change in the middle of long list named: "Official UXP changes picked since my last build:" Here is examle of issues from there next to important WebComponents announcement: I usually not read this because i don't understand meaning of this. I wAS expectING more BIG announcement about WebComponents enabled, then getting it lost in the list of super-complicated issues that 99.9% of people do not understand. I Like how the Pale Moon guys did it: They openly said - "hey guys, we now enabled WebComponents by default, major change, long awaited, how cool is that!!!" So i notice that. But if you think i will read every - Issue #OVER9000!1111 - you simply wrong and you lying to yourself. I deeply respect work of roytam! and often like and up-vote his posts here,

Well, why would it matter ? The OS existed in the IA-64 form, and someone from Western Europe can still use it. As for the wrong x64 name, I agree !

I'm watching Charmed, '98. I watched it a few times when I was a kid, now it's a different kind of feel to the series.

Welcome to MSFN. My understanding is that there is no better driver for your purposes than 372.70, which did not officially support Vista and has significant issues. Obvious solutions would be a newer version of Windows or an older GPU. There have been recent efforts by @win32 to modify the driver as discussed beginning here, but testing by @burd in subsequent posts has not been very encouraging thus far.