AstroSkipper

4.39 + 144 +123.93 + 123.95 + 111.2 + 121.83 + 151.26 = 780.56 You're right! The values speak for themselves!

Just for clarification! Unfortunately, there is no "no-tab-open" browser mode. I'm afraid browsers such as 360Chrome 13.5 or bnavigator without tabs are either not yet open or already closed . I think you mean a browser started with one empty tab only. Anyway! The RAM consumption in Windows XP with only one empty tab opened and only one extension (uBlock Origin) installed are: bnavigator (single-process mode): 145 MB 360Chrome 13.5 build 2022: 750 MB Cheers, AstroSkipper

This has been the case for years and is an inevitable development. I can live with that as long as the life-support machines are not completely switched off.

The WebSocket protocol is a TCP-based network protocol designed to establish a bidirectional connection between a web application and a WebSocket server. From a technical point of view, with WebSocket, as with HTTP, the client starts a request, with the difference that after the transmission of the data to establish the connection, the underlying TCP connection remains in place and enables asynchronous transmissions in both directions. Source: Wikipedia Cheers, AstroSkipper

@Mathwiz! I changed my mind a bit. Due to some limitations of OE Classic, I will first try MailNews. Although Binary Outcast had removed the protocol OAuth2, @roytam1 confirmed to support this protocol in MailNews. Anyway! OE Classic Pro seems to be worth its money. Greetings from Germany, AstroSkipper

At the bottom of the order page, you'll find a more detailed comparison between Free and Pro version with the headline "Free and Pro version comparison". Here is the link: https://www.oeclassic.com/order Cheers, AstroSkipper

Hello @RainyShadow! Thanks for your hint! Frankly, I'd know exactly what I would have to do to port my program package ProxHTTPSProxy's PopMenu TLS 1.3 3V3 to Windows 7. For checking or changing the system's proxy status, this OS has also corresponding, native commands which probably could be easily implemented in my program modules. But at the moment, it's not an issue for me.

I don't think it is a good idea to use patch + proxy and nginx method together on the same system. These methods weren't meant to work in coexistence. Some of the listed methods can coexist but unfortunately not all of them. You will probably have to choose one of these two methods.

On my old Windows XP computer, I use all my browsers in single-process mode only. Even Mypal 68. Firefox 1.0 was released 2002 with tab browsing. And old Opera versions did also tab browsing, even in 2001 and earlier.

Your old computer seems to be what I defined with period correct hardware. What kind of RAM is it? My old Windows XP computer is equipped with slow SDRAM only. Would be interesting to see if you can run 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022 on it. In my system, it consumes with only one empty tab round about 800 MB of RAM after starting.

I have deliberately chosen the definition of "period correct" hardware so strictly to make clear that no newer Windows-based operating system than Windows XP can be installed on these underperforming computers. My Windows XP computer is equipped with an old Pentium 4 single core CPU 2.8GHz and only 1.5GB of RAM, produced in 2000. Therefore, this computer fulfils my strict definition of "period correct" hardware. The motherboard is fully compatible with Windows XP. I started using anti-virus and firewall programs in the 90s. And I do not surf the internet or connecting to other servers without them. Some weeks ago, I switched completely from Avast to WiseVector StopX. On my old computer, it works perfectly. It is leightweight and uses only few system resources. But unfortunately, serious problems with all 360Chrome versions, and with 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022, too. I had to add all 360Chrome versions to both exclusion lists of WiseVector StopX. They can be found in the main program window under Exclusions and additionally in the Settings under Advanced Protection Settings. If I don't exclude them completely from scanning, then the starting of these browsers will cause BSODs. For me, a rather bad sign, unfortunately. No other browsers or programs generate BSODs in my system. Some of them have to be excluded from scanning to get them work. But if not, they can still be started without any BSODs. I conclude from my observations that all 360Chrome browsers do things in the background that are very unusual (to put it in a completely non-judgemental way), even crashing an AV program that ends in a BSOD.

Any hardware with such a designation is fully compatible with Windows XP, and there are working drivers available for it. What I mean, however, are computers or hardware from 2001 and earlier. That is what I mean by "period correct hardware". On such computers or similar, one can observe such resource problems I have when starting 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022. And only on such ones, more recent OSs won't work. Computers produced in 2002 and later are already much more powerful, i.e., equipped with newer processors and much more RAM.

Of course, you can disagree. Fortunately, we live in democracies. Period correct hardware can be defined in different ways. But I defined it as hardware which existed or was sold when Windows XP was released. Only this hardware has probably such resource problems. And only their users will observe all that I have found in my system.

Hello @IXOYE! Then you are one of the lucky guys who bought their hardware years after Windows XP was developed and released. But that's not really period correct hardware. Windows XP was released in 2001. Three years of further hardware development is a very long time. So it is quite clear that you have no resource problems with 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022. Of course, I am happy for you, but unfortunately, you were not meant with period correct hardware. And as already described in my previous comments, the BSODs occur with all 360Chrome browsers in combination with WiseVector StopX, which is probably the most up-to-date AV program that supports Windows XP and is still under active development. And that is not a good sign. So if you don't use WiseVector StopX, you can't notice any BSODs. In any case, no other browsers or programs cause such BSODs on my system. But, thanks for your opinion and information! Cheers, AstroSkipper

Hello @NotHereToPlayGames! First of all, I would like to express my sincere respect for all the efforts, work and time you have invested and continue to invest in your projects. And now, in media res! You said: I still use Windows XP as my main operating system. It runs on a very old computer that no longer supports more modern operating systems. So I am a real Windows XP user on a period correct hardware which this OS was developed for. These old computers have low system resources and are naturally very underperforming compared with current hardware. Unfortunately, your version 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022 does not run properly on such systems. And that is just the problem. Only there is it really needed! On computers which can't run more recent OSs and can't be upgraded in terms of their hardware. Therefore, I personally decided to use UXP browsers and Mypal 68 (in single-process mode) only, which can reasonably handle the hardware resources offered and work well in general. All websites which don't work anymore on my old system are called up in a modern browser on my tablet or notebook. Unfortunately, 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022 is basically a rather badly ported version like all the other 360Chrome versions. But probably, these browsers can't be ported any better either, which should also be mentioned here. Anyway! 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022 performs background accesses which are totally strange and unnecessary. The RAM consumption is beyond good and evil. Old processors groan under the load generated by this browser. Furthermore, all 360Chrome browsers are causing BSODs on my system. All other browsers or programs work fine and without any serious problems. In any case, no chance for me to use 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022 for bearable surfing. The unauthorised sending of data is not a problem for me. This can be controlled by the router or firewall settings or tools like Proximotron. All members here who use this browser on Windows XP with multi-core processors and a lot of memory, possibly in a VM, are not true Windows XP users. It's not their main OS. They can always call up much more up-to-date browsers on their computer if certain web pages no longer work properly in the browsers on the Windows XP system by using their host system or one of their multi-boot systems. In general, I personally would never install Windows XP on a modern computer with powerful, much more recent hardware because it wouldn't make any sense, due to many reasons. Anyway! Nearly all of these 360Chrome editions as v12, v13 and v13.5 are simply unusuable on real Windows XP systems with a period correct hardware. So as far as I am concerned and presumably others similarly affected, it actually does not make sense to invest so much time in modifying the code of 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022 if the real Windows XP users with a period correct hardware can't use it and participate from it. Unless you do it mainly for yourself! For whatever reason! I say this because you recently mentioned that you had abandoned Windows XP and upgraded all your computers to Windows 10, as far as I remember correctly, at least. And one thing is clear. The browser 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022 is also long outdated. More and more websites will no longer work properly day by day, as can already be observed in some cases now. We know about our friend Google. Update, update, update ... In the end, your project will not reach the real Windows XP users who are desperately looking for a modern browser on their old, weak systems, because the actual browser code is not modified here. At the moment, you mainly reach users with hardware where other more modern operation systems can be installed additionally without any problems. And we know in these OSs much more recent browsers are able to do their work. Of course, you can also support only those users who are not really dependent on Windows XP or who use it just for fun. In any case, you should ask yourself whether the effort is really worth it then. Ultimately, it's simply your sole decision! Kindest regards, AstroSkipper PS: With "period correct hardware" I mean such hardware which existed or was sold when Windows XP was released, and logically not years after.

You do not have to repeat anything to me. Try WiseVector StopX yourself or leave it! If you want to know which actions and accesses are performed by the 360Chrome browsers, you have to check and analyze it yourself.

Of course, you have none. Because you don't seem to use WiseVector StopX. For example, Avast which I used before didn't detect anything when starting one of these 360Chrome browsers. In contrast, WiseVector StopX detects and analyzes much more and deeper. It is a modern piece of software and is based on artificial intelligence. Without any evaluation, these 360Chrome browsers seem to perform unusual disk accesses or other actions that WiseVector StopX tries to intercept and ends in a BSOD.

I did not say that a virus is inside these browsers. I stated that these 360Chrome browsers perform actions and accesses which WiseVector StopX detects and tries to block, unfortunately leading to a BSOD again and again. Only setting exclusions helps which is not really a good solution.

All 360Chrome browser editions (including 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022) I have tested on my Windows XP system cause BSODs due to my AV program WiseVector StopX which seems to try stopping strange accesses and behaviour of these browsers. I had to add them completely to both exclusions lists (general and advanced) in WiseVector StopX what I usually do not need to do with other browsers, otherwise these 360Chrome browsers would continue generating BSODs and would be unusuable for me. Frankly, I am not happy with that and use them only if necessary. Not to mention the enormous consumption of system resources, especially with regard to the browser edition of this thread, 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022.

Yep! You're absolutely right! Unfortunately, the 360Chrome browsers have never been truely portable and 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022, either. Therefore, the designation 360ChromePortable_13.5.2022_rebuild_3_ungoogled_MSFN.zip is rather a little misleading.

Thanks for the clarification!

Hello @roytam1! Do the latest versions of IceDove and MailNews still support the protocol OAuth2?

Hello @Mathwiz! MailNews is based on Interlink Mail & News from Binary Outcast. I read on their website that they seem to have removed the protocol OAuth2 from their email client. Here is the respective link: https://binaryoutcast.com/projects/interlink/release-notes/ Of course, this does not necessarily mean that MailNews no longer supports this protocol, either. It's just a theory! I don't know what @roytam1 exactly did when he built his latest releases of MailNews. Some weeks ago, I was also looking for an email client and found the program OE Classic which is supposed to support the OAuth2 protocol as well: https://www.oeclassic.com/ This is the one I'll try the next time. Maybe, it is what you are looking for. Kind regards, AstroSkipper

One could also do just fine without many members saying "how wonderful Windows 7 is because it still gets the ESU updates ", and no one obvioulsy has a licence for them, but they advice to use them for "free" with the help of a patch and even tell where to find it, but seems like everyone is fine with this ! But yeah , these free certificates are the problem, sure ! Your comparison is off-topic and makes no sense. And my statement was not about free, legal or illegal. I stated that this thread has no content anymore what was foreseeable for the OP and therefore, it has become pointless. PS: @D.Draker You can post whatever you want, but if you quote parts of my posts, I'd appreciate it if you didn't take them completely out of context. Thanks!

Ok. The OP has made this kind of offer before and received a warning for it. Now I really wonder why he did the same thing again. The topic of this thread implies the provision of a download archive whose link was deleted only minutes after creating this thread. Honestly, none of this makes any sense at all. Sorry to say that, but one can really do without such threads.