timofonic
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by timofonic
-
-
What about talking with Pale Moon developers? If you are the maintainer, I would see possibilities they would accept to support older systems.
While I would love to see this happen I highly doubt it would even be given any serious consideration. We just had a battle with the PaleMoon developers over the ins-and-outs of Windows XP support, which they have all but threatened to drop (again) if too many people using a "hack" they disapprove of try to get support. Also I read a post over at their forum once by someone who wanted to run PaleMoon on 2K, and he was given the standard Microsoft-esque response (old, outdated, insecure, bla, bla, bla). I can only imagine the rubbish that would be said about supporting 9x.
I think things maybe changed since then. The Atom build runs under XP too.
Here's a reply:
Why?
Why do you follow the mainstream way? There's rebels out there. Despite some may think, Pale Moon is a "rebel" project too.
The [highlight]rebel force[/highlight] is here dude: Go to grab the Atom flavor that is the official version for Windows XP now. :mrgreen: http://www.palemoon.org/palemoon-atom.shtml
They also replied about it and seem positive about 3rd party builds. But they are going to the C++11 route. Is possible to build C++11 for Win95/98?
0 -
Can't remember now, it's been a long time, but I vaguely recall a bunch of my favorite add-ons having stopped updating at this version back then, which made me stay with that version. I'm not saying it's the best or whatever. Actually someone really knowledgeable with web technology should assess the best browser version to be picked.Just out of curiosity, what did they put in Firefox 14 that made you never want to upgrade?
Indeed, such application as a browser can be critical for a system and it should be able to run without any additions.I agree, we should have an updated browser that don't requires unofficial packs, whether it be SP3, KEX, 982ME etc....
Not everyone use or want these packages installed on their systems.
http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/152624-experimental-firefox-7-build-for-windows-98/
However, it should be thoroughly tested so that it should also run correctly when any (and all) possible (un)official packages were to be installed on a given system. That is, full compatibility with or without (un)official upgrades.
The link you pointed to is about a modified version of Firefox 7 that still requires KernelEx (or has a problem with). I do have Firefox 9 on my 98SE machine and I know some 10 ESR version would work too (I tried such version for a very limited amount of time on another system, with some bad behavior). If someone managed to get Firefox 10 (or even 9) run on 98SE without needing KernelEx or other updated (ME/2000/XP/etc) system files, then that would be perfect.
I agree.
What about talking with Pale Moon developers? If you are the maintainer, I would see possibilities they would accept to support older systems.
I think extremely massive multiplatform and well managed projects have very interesting advantages:
- Robust and cleaner code: The code must compile on even older compilers. While this may reduce the possibilities of using latest syntactic sugar and nice additions, these "universal" features are often more universal and less prone to deal with compiler bugs or differences.
- More optimized code: Because the project has been adapted to run on older operating systems, they can potentially run on older computer systems too. These optimizations could even benefit newer platforms too!
- More debugged code: Because the software is able to run in a diverse range of platforms, there's more probabilities to find bugs. These bugs can be solved and iteratively improve stability of other systems if done properly.
My favorite example is ScummVM.
I even mentioned this forum in Pale Moon forums
I even mentioned this forum in Pale Moon forums
0 -
Thanks a lot, I was unable to find a mirror of the executable. It's very nice there's even a mirror to the source code!
I didn't know this logo stuff is a really big hack, very interesting to know...
0 -
If you like Pascal, I would recommend Free Pascal and Lazarus. You will have Pascal and Object Pascal, a Delphi-like GUI and a very wide portability between different platforms (Windows, Linux, Windows CE, BSD, MacOS X, AmigaOS... even Nintendo DS!) and processors (x86, AMD64 aka x86 64, ARM, PowerPC, 68k, SPARC...).
JDK? Seriously, Java is not a sane language for people that likes Pascal or C/C++ languages, despite being massively used by market(ing) reasons. The development methodology of Java is different and certain developers are not comfortable with it or feel a lot productive not using it.
I'm not against Java as a programming language, just I avoid apps running into bytecodes because generally being highly inefficient and prefer to use native code instead.
About support: What about Chromium? It's Open Source, so maybe it can be even patched for Win 9x support. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a developer and just suggesting it
0 -
Seeing how other people take interest in this specialized topic (@mvsnaniou), I'd like to add a recent find:
They made a driver that apparently works on older versions (but not FreeDos) and reads a logo.sys.
Untested, but looks like a complete emulation including animation and escape-key override!
In any case, the gallery of logos includes nice ones for MS-DOS 6.x/7.x
Flo
Hello.
Sorry for bumping an old post, but that url is currently dead.
Some mirror or a sucessor of it?
Regards.
0
remove IE 8 (default)
in Windows 7
Posted
Necroposting...
What about following the Wine approach? No IE crap!