Jump to content

Mathwiz

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,737

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    United States

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Mathwiz

  1. Mathwiz
    That sounds familiar....
  2. Mathwiz
    Well, a clean profile didn't work on this machine either. But, perhaps a clue.... The first time I accessed the "Check Adobe Flash Version" page after switching to a clean profile, I got a pop-up saying something about "Tracking Protection Enabled." Remember, this was a clean profile - no add-ons! So it appears the latest Serpent build has some kind of "built-in" tracking protection, which, I suspect, is "protecting" me from Flash (a notorious privacy leak). I also noticed the 64-bit version was built (rebuilt?) three days later than the 32-bit one. I need to go back and take a look at what @roytam1 added. Edit: I may have figured it out! I just remembered that a "clean profile" isn't necessarily the same thing as "factory default" settings! You can change preferences outside the profile too, by, for example, installing the UOC Patch - and the only browser with the UOC Patch installed is the one that Flash doesn't work on! Of course, now I have to figure out which line of the UOC Patch is interfering with Flash.... Edit 2: This is turning out to be more complicated than I imagined, but I found part of the problem. The UOC Patch sets privacy.resistFingerprinting to true, which inexplicably interferes with the Flash animation. Removing that line from the UOC Patch lets the Flash animation play normally.
  3. Mathwiz
    Very strange. The new version of Flash does appear to be correctly installed, and shows up on about:addons and about:plugins as installed and set to "Always Activate." Everything looks the same as the screen shots you posted above, except the "Check Adobe Flash Version" page, which shows blanks where the two Flash controls should be. Like you, I have Flash "protected mode" enabled. Closing the latest Serpent 55 build and launching the previous build allowed the "Check Adobe Flash Version" page to run normally. The Flash animation and the version detection both worked as expected. For the clean profile test, I was careful to make my clean profile the default and restart the browser. In the past I've noticed that the "Launch Profile in New Browser" button doesn't always do the job. Unfortunately, results were the same. I also tried the same tests on Windows 7 and got the same results. Maybe it only works under Vista? (jk) However, I am now home and about to try again. Be back soon.... Edit: I'm back. This is all on 64-bit Windows 7, BTW. 2019.08.18 32-bit: works. 2019.08.18 64-bit: works. 2019.10.22 32-bit: doesn't work (same as on my work machine and on the XP VM). But it works on @VistaLover's PC. 2019.10.25 64-bit: works! I haven't tried a clean profile on this machine yet; BRB....
  4. Mathwiz
    The latest Flash (32.00.293) doesn't work with the latest Serpent 55 (2019.10.22). It does work with the previous Serpent 55 version (2019.08.18). I tried a clean profile; same result.
  5. Mathwiz
    Chromium-based M$ Edge (on Win 7) started nagging about eventually not supporting Flash at least a month ago. I never really liked Flash all that much, but always keep it installed in case I run across a Web page that still needs it.
  6. Mathwiz
    When I tried out FF 53, I discovered that some of my add-ons got disabled. The problem was with "unsigned" add-ons. Usually these were legacy add-ons that continued to be maintained after Mozilla banned pre-WebEx add-ons, and thus could no longer get Mozilla to sign them. The biggest example was the legacy version of uBlock Origin, which I use because it offers more privacy protections than the WebEx version does on FF 52 and 53. (A couple were add-ons that were originally signed, but from which I had removed the signature in order to implement some hack.) In FF 52 ESR, unsigned add-ons aren't much of a problem. You simply set the about:config preference xpinstall.signatures.required to false and you're good to go. The unsigned add-ons will produce warnings in the about:addons page, but they work. You can even hide the warnings with an add-on like Classic Theme Restorer. But FF 53 is a "stable" release, and xpinstall.signatures.required doesn't work in stable FF releases. Luckily, there is a workaround, but it's a bit more complex than just setting a preference. The workaround at the link can be combined with @VistaLover's fix for re-enabling SSUAOs in Firefox 52: First, follow the instructions there; then add this JavaScript to the config.js file you just created: try { Components.utils.import("resource://gre/modules/addons/XPIProvider.jsm", {}) .eval("SIGNED_TYPES.clear()"); } catch(ex) {} (I put it after @VistaLover's code, but it will probably work before it too.) One last thing. Since FF 53 doesn't expect to have add-on signing disabled, it doesn't have the yellow "warning" text that FF 52 ESR does for an "unverified" add-on. Instead, you'll see a scarier, red "This has been disabled" message. However, it has not been disabled; you'll still see a "disable" button which wouldn't be there if the add-on were already disabled. Luckily, hiding warnings (with, e.g., the Classic Theme Restorer add-on) will hide these scarier messages just as it hides the yellow warnings in FF 52 ESR.
  7. Mathwiz
    Detailed explanations are always my preference; thanks! Of course I also understand why you might not have wanted to go into such detail the first time around. (It's too bad MSFN doesn't support a "spoiler" tag - that would have been a perfect use for it.) (Note: henceforth I will use "AM" as my abbreviation for "Add-on Manager," so I can reserve "AOM" for "Alliance for Open Media" and its AV codec.) So from the above, one can infer that NM 27, NM 28, as well as "official" PM and Basilisk, none of which support WebEx add-ons, all use the Tycho AM, which displays add-on version numbers without the assistance of an add-on like CTR. OTOH, any browser supporting WebEx add-ons (Serpent 52/55, Firefox 52/53) by necessity must use the WebEx AM, which does not display add-on version numbers unless "coerced" to do so via an add-on such as CTR. However, that little wrinkle aside, nothing seems to stop anyone from running the newer CTR versions on Serpent 52. At present I'm not aware of any "killer" features that would make this worth doing, but at least we can experiment! Waterfox (Win 7 and 64-bit CPU required) would seem to be the oddball here, as it does support WebEx add-ons (as well as classic ones), so one would think it too would use the WebEx AM, and therefore wouldn't display add-on version numbers without CTR's "help." I must therefore conclude that the Waterfox folks developed their own fix for this issue. (Since it appears to be merely a .css issue, I suspect it was a rather simple fix.)
  8. Mathwiz
    Actually I did read that; I merely chose to ignore it!
  9. Mathwiz
    Mozilla's decision to remove support for all pre-WE APIs, of course, broke CTR for FF 57+. Then their decision to remove all pre-WE add-ons from AMO meant that only "legacy" / classic add-on repositories would have a link to CTR. I checked legacycollector and addons.basilisk-browser.org first with no luck, then found it in the CAA database and thought my search was done, unaware that development is continuing for Basilisk / Waterfox at GitHub. So now, I've updated Serpent 55 to v1.7.8, and Serpent 52 (which should be on par with "official" Basilisk) to v1.7.8.2019.10.7! I'll update my old FF 52.9 (and XomPie-patched FF 53) next. CTR has so many options, though, I can't readily tell what was added between 1.7.7.2 and 1.7.8 et seq. One weird thing I did discover, though was that v1.7.8.2019.01.21 removed the option to display the version number in the Add-On Manager screen so by updating Serpent 52 to the "latest" version, I lost that bit of info. The author explained, "Basilisk 2019 and Waterfox don't need this option, because version number is active by default." If so, that would be a question for @roytam1: What is the difference between Serpent 52 and "official" Basilisk that accounts for this slight UI change? Inquiring minds want to know.... Maybe I'll roll it back to 1.7.8 so I can tick that option back on; I like having my add-on version numbers visible at a glance. Serpent 55 still searches AMO for updates. Serpent 52 searches, um - what should we call it? ABBO, I guess. But I haven't found ABBO particularly useful (as mentioned it doesn't even include CTR), so I switched the prefs in about:config back to AMO (you have to change %APP% to firefox). That way, at least my WE add-ons stay updated. Surprisingly, quite a few are still compatible with FF 52/53 and Serpent 52/55.
  10. Mathwiz
    That's good; your last post had me worried! My yellow shield was there this AM with the three Office 2010 updates. Since manual installation still works, here are links to their support pages: https://support.microsoft.com/kb/4484164 https://support.microsoft.com/kb/4484127 https://support.microsoft.com/kb/4484160 You can go to each support page, scroll down to "Option 3: Microsoft Download Center," and find links to the standalone installers for both 32- and 64-bit versions of Office 2010. (I would assume the vast majority of folks have 32-bit systems, but just in case....)
  11. Mathwiz
    That isn't a problem only for users of older OSes; it's a problem for anyone who prefers a platform other than Google's Chromium! Opera switched to Chromium long ago. Micro$oft switched from IE to Edge a little less long ago, but the "new" M$ Edge for Win 7/8.1? It's Chromium-based. It's gotten to where Chromium is the new IE monopoly! (But at least M$ wasn't using IE to spy on me or to dragoon me into helping train their AI.) I sometimes wonder if I should have a SSUAO for Google sites, claiming to be Chrome, just so Google's reCaptchas don't bug me quite so much, but then I remember I'd have to update the SSUAO almost as often as @looking4awayout updates the UOC Patch! No, he means New Moon, as the Pale Moon folks will angrily tell you if you ever make that innocent mistake on one of their forums. "Pale Moon" is only one of the browsers officially released by Moonchild Productions. Pale Moon does not run on OSes considered "obsolete," like XP or Vista, and woe to the poor soul that mentions XP or Vista on a Pale Moon forum. Anyone else's build is "New Moon" unless they develop their own branding (e.g., MyPal, Arctic Fox) for their own fork of Pale Moon. Edit: Doggone it, @VistaLover beat me to it again! Foiled by a page break....
  12. Mathwiz
    That actually sounds like an old problem that's come back! We used to complain about this all the time on the POSReady '09 thread. Then M$ did something and the problem went away - until now. Uh-oh; that sounds more serious. It sounds like M$ is now signing Office updates with SHA2 signatures. XP was never updated to validate that type of code-signing signature. Your only hope is to extract the updated files with something like 7-Zip and replace the original files manually.
  13. Mathwiz
    If I could figure out how to automate downloads from Mediafire I'd just put the code to do it in my batch file. Then every time I installed a new version it'd get the new UOC Patch!
  14. Mathwiz
    Yes, I tested it with the latest PM 28, and it works! E10s remains disabled even with the "standard" FF 52 version of the patch. Thanks! So, the separate NM28 version of the patch is no longer needed.
  15. Mathwiz
    Try the "Classic Theme Restorer" add-on: https://ca-archive.biz.tm/storage/472/472577/classic_theme_restorer_fx29_56-1.7.7.2-fx.xpi?origin=caa&action=install
  16. Mathwiz
    To be specific, I was trying to install the Chromium-based version linked to in @jumper's post directly above mine. (The FF 52-based version is old news.) The Web site claimed XP compatibility, but I was skeptical, and sure enough, it doesn't install.
  17. Mathwiz
    I think there's an about:config preference you can set to false: plugin.load_flash_only Try it and see. Edit: Yep, it works! You have to create the Boolean pref above and set it to false, but it works. BTW, Serpent 55 is essentially an updated version of FF 53, and it does support NPAPI plugins. Also, it's probably worth pointing out that you will lose some security fixes in moving from FF 52.9 ESR to FF 53.
  18. Mathwiz
    The "best" browser for XP depends on your hardware. For pre-SSE2 processors, I agree with @looking4awayout: If your system is even older (pre-SSE) your best bet is probably @roytam1's no-SSE build of New Moon 27. For newer systems you have more options. The Chinese Chromium backports are OK if you like Chromium and can deal with the Chinese language. If you prefer a Firefox-based browser, I've had pretty good luck with @roytam1's Serpent 55. It supports more add-ons than his Serpent 52 and I almost never have problems with Web sites not displaying correctly.
  19. Mathwiz
    Despite claims at the Web site, it doesn't seem to install in Win XP:
  20. Mathwiz
    Images often downloaded separately from the email that contains them because they're so large. Outlook uses IE to download these images. If IE can't download an image you'll get the red X, but there are lots of reasons IE might not be able to download from a particular server besides a certificate problem. For example, there may not be a TLS cipher that both the server and IE support. You may find that installing @heinoganda's version of ProxHTTPSProxyMII will resolve many of those download failures.
  21. Mathwiz
    One thing to watch out for: the file names are different (e.g., UOC_Patch_38.js vs. UOC_Patch_45.js). So besides copying the _38.js files, you also need to delete the *_45.js files you copied earlier; otherwise NM 27 will load both and the result will probably not be what you want!
  22. Mathwiz
    Nothing new in this post; it's just a summary of what's been discovered so far about this issue. To play Instagram videos in your FF (or FF-derived) browser, you need three things: Most obviously, you need to be able to play MP4 videos. This won't be a problem with @roytam1's UXP forks (NM and Serpent) since he includes his MP4 video DLLs in the build. For FF 45 though 52 or SeaMonkey 2.49.5, you can install the Adobe Primetime CDM according to the instructions pinned atop this forum; either method works. (Those instructions were recently modified slightly to work with SeaMonkey.) You need to set your user agent to spoof FF 56 to instagram.com. You can either set the general.useragent.override preference in about:config to Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:56.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/56.0 or use an Instagram-specific user agent. FF versions before 56 work too, down to a point, but basically nothing on Instagram works at all if you spoof any version newer than 56. If you're not using NM, Serpent 52, or SeaMonkey, you need the following code in file userContent.css in the "chrome" subfolder of your profile: Note that this code is changed somewhat from @mixit's original fix; Instagram changed some of their random class names, requiring an update. Instagram will probably change them again someday, and we'll have to get @mixit to update his fix yet again.
  23. Mathwiz
    Not sure if KM 74 has the pref security.ssl3.ecdhe_rsa_aes_256_sha, but setting that pref true is probably your best bet for Startpage.com. (I have it set false on mine because SHA1 suites are considered weak, but I've enabled other cipher suites that Startpage.com can use.)
  24. Mathwiz
    Thanks for trying a new profile and confirming that it doesn't help. I don't think it's a matter of you and @kitaro1 being ignored, so much as the fact that no one here has a solution to the problem. I haven't tested it, but I strongly suspect "official" Pale Moon and Basilisk (on Win 7+) will have the same issue. I seriously doubt this is a bug that both @roytam1 and @feodor2 have both independently managed to introduce into their respective PM forks. So unless @looking4awayout's UOC patch helps, we're at the mercy of MCP to come up with a fix. Unfortunately the browsers (that @kitaro1 mentioned) that don't have this issue with GMail simply don't run on XP (or Vista), and can't be made XP-compatible. If that's the case, you know the drill: confirm the issue with official PM on a supported OS (Win 7 or later) and report it to MCP directly via PM's Help / Submit Feedback link. I agree; this has bitten me too when trying multiple versions of, say, Firefox, on the same PC. @VistaLover has the right answer - install at most one non-portable version of each browser - but it's easy to forget and not always practical. Luckily some combinations do work: Basilisk/Serpent 52, Serpent 55, PM/NM, BNavigator, Seamonkey, and FF all use different profile folders, so one of each of those can coexist peacefully without using "portable" versions. That's a bit much to ask of, say, 7-Zip; how's it supposed to know that what you're unzipping is a browser with this particular potential issue? But I'll look at adding a message of that sort to my "Download Latest Browser" batch file. AFAIK e10s/multiprocess only works on FF and Serpent, not NM; trying to enable it on NM just crashes it. But @roytam1 is customizing NM by locking some e10s-related preferences, so inadvertently installing the "wrong" UOC patch from @looking4awayout won't crash the browser.
  25. Mathwiz
    Due to concerns about potential copyright infringement issues, ReactOS is quite explicitly not based on One-Core API.
×
×
  • Create New...