Leaderboard

since @ClassicNick provided a newer NSS port, I'm trying to fix/port it to VC7.1 and VC6 for retrozilla use. EDIT: progress - VC7.1 works, VC6 needs more fixing: in NT 3.51: and in Win95: EDIT2: VC6 port is finished. PR created: https://github.com/rn10950/RetroZilla/pull/68 Bin (suite): http://o.rthost.win/gpc/files1.rt/retrozilla-suite-tls13-20240526.7z browser-only (rzbrowser): http://o.rthost.win/gpc/files1.rt/rzbrowser-tls13-20240526.7z

I got a 2.0 here:

So, long time no update on Browser support for Windows 8(.1) I just tested the latest versions of Firefox (edited with CFF Explorer) and Opera (with DWrite.dll from W10) and that's what I found out: - Firefox 128 Nightly works on Windows 8.1. This version is going to be the next ESR branch, which means that we will be able to browse the web safely for another year (EOL: August 2025) without the need of an Extended Kernel what so ever EOL was Firefox 115 Proof: imgur.com/a/firefox-128-windows-8-1-GSvRMpu - Opera 112 (based on Chromium 125) works on Windows 8.1: Opera isn't as leightweight as it was anymore. I'm not a fan of that browser, however it still works with the same method that was already discussed a year ago (--no-sandbox). I don't think any other Chromium based browser is still working on 8.1. In fact, when it comes to Chromium, Windows 7 users are definitly having an advantage with VxKex. They can install the latest Chrome or any Chromium Embedded Framework Programs (e.g Spotify) without disabling the sandbox. EOL was Opera 95 Proof: imgur.com/a/opera-112-windows-8-1-wOrVyOx

I managed to get Python 2.7 going (installed). Pale Moon (64-bit GTK2 version) took slightly over 58 minutes to compile on a Raspberry Pi 5. I did not use --disable-debug-symbols option, used defaults as suggested in build instructions, the source code was downloaded to external WD 5 TB hard disk, the slower kind using SMR tech. Still can't believe the browser works, that was the first time I ever compiled any web browser from source code.

For starters, I can't even load in St52 https://pixai.art/search?q=asuna&sort=trending with uBlock Origin "legacy" turned OFF (but this is material for another research ) ... With uBO ON, the page eventually loads; Web Console throws below TypeError: Several web searches later, it appears this is a Firefox-specific predicament; @roytam1, please take a look at below Bugzilla bugs: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1533680 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1335594 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1367251 Mozilla "fixed" the bug in Firefox 93.0+ ; it's unclear to me if "their" code can be ported to UXP and St52 ; of course, the "bug" isn't present in Chromium (KMB, Ch87-based, here ) ...

No, I don't. Policies are a moot point, they change in the upstream way faster than flags, they reset when you update the core, they reset with a new profile. They reset each time you move the browser onto another PC (like passwords, cookies, etc).

You're welcome! Did you check the result manually? Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger] "Status"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\Audio] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\Circular Kernel Context Logger] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\DiagLog] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\EventLog-Application] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\EventLog-Microsoft-Windows-Backup] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\EventLog-Security] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\EventLog-System] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\NBSMBLOGGER] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\NtfsLog] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\PEAuthLog] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\RAC_PS] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\RdrLog] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\SQMLogger] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\TCPIPLOGGER] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\WdiContextLog] "Start"=dword:00000000 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WMI\Autologger\WFP-IPsec Trace] "Start"=dword:00000000

crash

grash https://www.definitions.net/definition/grash

Grasp

Scalf

Feature request Multi Lang from - dism /Get-WimInfo /WimFile:install.wim /Index:1 get all the lang available Languages : ar-SA en-US es-ES he-IL (Default) pt-BR ru-RU and have option to choose which lang to install so after the deploying is done and rest it will run dism /image:p:\ /Set-AllIntl:he-il and set the unicode and ui of deployed image before booting Ty for considering

I still see that as Chromium came first, then Chrome. BOTH are owned/maintained by Google. One "department" (Chromium) hands over their "engineering" to another "department" (Chrome). That "department" (Chrome) adds their "content" and then it is released to the public (as Chrome). Chromium may have been a "Google INTERNAL" but it existed FIRST. We would not have Chrome (created by Google) if Chromium (created by Google) did not exist FIRST.

Congratulations on your first browser compilation!

The OLDEST version of Chrome I could find is v7 dated November 2010. Its own About basically states it would not exist without Chromium.

Yes. At least that has been my understanding "from the beginning". https://phoenixts.com/blog/history-chrome-for-those-who-dont-know/ https://www.howtogeek.com/202825/whats-the-difference-between-chromium-and-chrome/

Probably because if you're a Windows programmer, then you're probably running Windows 11, or at least 10, anyhow; so you see no need for one. Folks like @roytam1 who have modern equipment but still care about supporting older OSes are a rare breed. You're right - but it's because the software we're trying to backport was changed to require the latest OS versions, often intentionally. No one is forcing Google or Mozilla to call functions only available in Win 10+. For that matter, no one is forcing MCP to call functions only available in Win 7+. That was a choice they all made. I realize that said choice was often made implicitly, by moving to the latest (C/Rust/whatever) compilers, which by default, target the latest OSes. But it was still a choice to move to the latest compilers, and it was also a choice not to configure them to support older OSes. This is often done in the name of "performance," but (as with some hardware improvements like AVX) the performance gains are minimal - unless the idea is to force users to buy new hardware to run the new OS required to run the latest browsers. Of course your browser will run faster if you make all your users go out and buy new PCs!

3.7.9 does not disable itself on 23H2; reinstall proper version from the website.

As far as I have tested until now, the Chromium Web Store extension works really great in Thorium. It indeed allows adding extensions from Chrome Web Store on ungoogled Chromium versions and also enables the extension updating by dragging and dropping. Now, I always get an extension update notification on the Chromium Web Store badge when extension updates are available and can immediately archive the downloaded update files.

trest

What a service!

It will still be very niche. People want clean and simple OS out-of-the-box, without the need for third party tools.

wrest

crush

It's safe to emulate a processor instruction set, it's just a programme, but emulation is much slower than native execution so you probably won't like the performance.

Processor instructions emulator https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/tool/software-development-emulator.html

Much more simpler solution is to add it in the form of a flag. --enable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Availability No quotes, commas, exclamation marks, mysterious signs or ancient runes needed.

trash

Crass

Flare

clave

One core, only one task at once, I agree. But there is more necessary for a complete comparison. However, I won't go into more detail at this point, as it would unfortunately be off-topic.

Starting point for the Part II is here. From Elira's post: Stale

I tried disabling multiprocess mode on St 55 on Win 7 and had a similar experience. Couldn't even type a post on MSFN at 10-20 seconds per letter, with one CPU core maxed out! So, even with a single core, you might have had better luck with e10s forced on. It's my opinion that the OS version makes little difference in performance, assuming the application (browser or whatever) will run on both OSes. The app might be faster if optimized for a newer version, but in that case it's unlikely to run on the older version at all. It's mostly the hardware, rather than the OS, that provides good performance. I always run Serpent in single-process mode as it is the only mode in New Moon 28. Furthermore, I think a real single-core CPU is not fully comparable with a multi-core CPU where only one core is enabled. Anyway! New Moon 28 works great but I have to agree with your observation on MSFN. Writing comments has become much worse than it was in the past. Many delays when entering letters. The whole forum editor has become more of a chronical disease. And I can't see any progress in the last few months that would represent any improvement.

Scarf

Smarf

Start

What's good about this is that I always find time to smoke a cigarette and drink a cup of strong coffee or East Frisian tea.

Correct, compact characterisation. It looks like the browser world is about to shrink a little. At least for me. Chrome 127 is definitely the end for me. A browser like that has to be avoided. And there seem to be many users who feel the same way. The reason for this is, of course, manifest 3 and the associated restrictions on extensions, which are particularly tragic for content blockers like uBlock Origin. Personally, I'm happy to use New Moon 28, Serpent and Mypal 68 and will continue to do so for as long as possible.

That's not the issue at all. Most of developers and manufactors have stopped supporting Windows XP, and Windows 3.11, of course. That's not the problem at all. But to trash and ridicule special forks for older OSes such as New Moon 28, which is excellently maintained by @roytam1, is a no-go and shows a fundamental lack of respect.

The PM forum can take a leaf out of MSFN's book. We welcome everyone. You can get help here even if you don't use Windows XP or other older operating systems. For example, my thread "Extensions and custom buttons for UXP browsers - Corrections, modifications, adjustments, and special recommendations" is open to anyone who uses legacy extensions, whether in New Moon 28, Pale Moon or whatever compatible browser. I also don't care whether the poster in question uses Windows 7, Windows 10 or even the crappy Windows 11. He will not be verbally punished in any way, even if I personally do not favour these OSes. That's how it has to be. But these Fright Wing and trollbat types from the PM forum won't understand that. Their horizons aren't good enough for that.

Duke

Any explanation what you actually wanted to express? I have no idea. It's always very interesting what is quoted from a post, even though it was more of a minor matter. The actual content tends to be ignored and seems to be of less interest.

Tile

And for those over there who don't want to believe it and to be on-topic again, New Moon 28 is still my daily browser. It's blazingly fast on my old hardware, not on modern, bloated sites, of course. But on MSFN, for example, this browser is 'umpteen times faster than e.g. Thorium. And I am a very experienced Windows XP user. I know all the essentials and much more about this operating system after more than 20 years. I have never had a serious compromise of my system. Everything that is said about the dangers of using Windows XP today and in the past is largely based on ignorance and propaganda. But there are people who believe everything they are told. And if you look around the world, things are getting worse and worse despite a supposedly higher standard of education than before.

Rite

If you are completely new about programming, and if it is for 9x I would advice you look into Delphi (basically what everyone else does NOT use). There are lots of (old, which in this case means good) books and manuals for the language that you can find used/second hand and - once you become familiar with it - you can still use your acquired knowledge using Lazarus (which is open source but only early version of it are Windows 9x/Me compatible) on newer OSes. I am not a programmer (at the most I can manage to half-@§§edly put together some scripts) and C and its variants (which are the alternative) are (to me at least) completely incomprehensible, Delphi is usually at least readable. For simple programs it is probably not worth the effort and I would go for some simpler environments, such as Autoit, up to 3.2.something it was windows 95 compatible. jaclaz

Just want to thank Mr. Geoff Chappell for his whistleblower article on memory limitations in 32-bit Windows, it has been useful to me. Seems that isn't the first time he has exposed weird behaviours in MS software: AARD code .