Jump to content

AstroSkipper

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,581

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    505

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    Germany

 Content Type 

Everything posted by AstroSkipper

  1. AstroSkipper
    Congratulations on your first browser compilation!
  2. AstroSkipper
    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.
  3. AstroSkipper
    What a service!
  4. AstroSkipper
    Thorium 122.0.6261.171? Where is such a version available?
  5. AstroSkipper
    In Thorium SSE2 122.0.6261.168 WINXP x32 under Windows XP, there is no update button on an extension page when an update is available. Updates of extensions are not shown on extension pages, and a manual update does not work. At least in my installation. That's why I installed the Chromium Web Store. I added one flag, switched an internal flag and now, updating works. PS: On an extension page, I can only see an Add or, if the extension has already been installed via the Chrome Web Store, an Remove button but never an Update button.
  6. AstroSkipper
    No. It is the Chromium Web Store extension in the latest version 1.5.4.2 from here: https://github.com/NeverDecaf/chromium-web-store
  7. AstroSkipper
    I don't know if this has already been mentioned here. Installing and removing extensions works perfectly in Thorium under Windows XP. Unfortunately, updating extensions does not. In my installation of Thorium SSE2 122.0.6261.168 WINXP x32, it does not matter whether the update is done by dragging and dropping the CRX file or by unpacking the extension (in developer mode). Both methods do not work as expected in a standard installation of Thorium, at least for me. Therefore, I changed some settings and installed the Chromium Web Store extension. Now, I can update my extensions simply by dragging and dropping the CRX file. And what I was always missing in Thorium, the Chromium Web Store badge additionally shows a red number indicating that updates are available. A click on the badge and then on the name of the offered extension update leads to the download of the latest version, which of course has still to be installed manually, based on my changed settings in Thorium. BTW, that's a very convenient method to directly archive all extension updates as I always do.
  8. AstroSkipper
    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.
  9. AstroSkipper
    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.
  10. AstroSkipper
    I have been using this trick to execute all more recent versions than 360Chrome v11 in Windows 2000 compatibility mode from the very first. But it doesn't work for the DeepL website in 360Chrome v13.5. Using ProxHTTPSProxy solves indeed this problem. While doing so, I noticed some strange effects. Enabling the System Proxy mode in the Proxy Switcher extension doesn't work in the same way as enabling the Manual Proxy mode which of course has to be configured correctly. Although DeepL was shown properly in 360Chrome v13.5 with the padlock and green coloured https, the ProxHTTPSProxy logging window shows clean, green connection entries only in the Manual Proxy mode. Thus, I changed some proxy settings in the IE8 and, however, got finally clean, green connections entries in the System Proxy mode, too. In any case, that was the actual reason for my last recommendation to use the Manual Proxy mode instead of the System Proxy mode in the Proxy Switcher extension to avoid having to change the proxy settings in IE8.
  11. AstroSkipper
    Good to know. I will also change that in my next release.
  12. AstroSkipper
    In general, absolutely unnecessary. If Avast can't be removed from Windows inside, no matter whether in normal or safe mode, you can do this from outside. I did that in the past to remove locked registry entries which couldn't be deleted from Windows inside, not even by using Avast Clear in safe mode.
  13. AstroSkipper
    Just a little reminder. This thread is about proxies. I believe there is no need to use Thorium together with ProxHTTPSProxy. @Dave-H Can you please move your conversation with @Anbima to the Thorium thread? A bit offtopic is normal and ok but I think this is the wrong place here. The Thorium thread is more suitable. Thanks!
  14. AstroSkipper
    Glad it worked for you!
  15. AstroSkipper
    As I said, deepl is not important because no sensitive data is transmitted. DeepL was only an example. When using 360Chrome together with ProxHTTPSProxy, then either the settings in IE8 have to be changed or the Manual Proxy option has to be used by Proxy Switcher. All this can be clearly seen in ProxHTTPSProxy's logging window. BTW, the web interface of DeepL is broken in 360Chrome. It looks like a CSS issue.
  16. AstroSkipper
    When it comes to Deepl, you should use the Manual Proxy instead of the System Proxy option in Proxy Switcher. 360Chrome v13.5.1030 Redux in combination with Proxy Switcher seems to have problems when using the System Proxy option. Just tested with ProxHTTPSProxy. The Manual Proxy option works fine without any errors.
  17. AstroSkipper
    The only example you gave is a website where the user has to register. You said: "...more and more sites...". So please list here examples of websites which appear unsecure in 360Chrome and do not need any registering! Thanks
  18. AstroSkipper
    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.
  19. AstroSkipper
    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.
  20. AstroSkipper
    There is no need to use ProxHTTPSProxy for all internet connections, even in Windows XP. Mypal 68, 360Chrome, Thorium, Supermium and all @roytam1's browser editions are capable of the TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols. However, the proxy is actually only needed for those programmes which are not capable of these protocols but need them in these days. Same applies to WU/MU, for example. Therefore, I use ProxHTTPSProxy only occasionally when really needed. And such cases happen, of course. Which sites do you need this proxy in 360Chrome for? Which sites appear to be unsafe for you in 360Chrme?
  21. AstroSkipper
    I found a German forum site where the same issue was reported under Windows XP long time ago: https://administrator.de/forum/win-xp-ereignis-id-3012-loadperf-16362.html Use an online translator! Maybe, the solution at the end of this thread works for you, too. Cheers, AstroSkipper
  22. AstroSkipper
    All @heinoganda's, @Thomas S.'s, @cmalex's proxy versions and also my packages of ProxHTTPSProxy's PopMenu are based on whenever's ProxHTTPSProxyMII. All of them can be considered secure, of course. Or do you think I would offer here unsecure proxy packages? And first of all, credits to the original developer whenever.
  23. AstroSkipper
    Which developer do you mean? Please, be a bit more precise! If you mean the extension developer, I assume he warns the user not to misconfigure the Proxy Switcher extension and not to use unsecure web proxies. Which proxy do you mean? If you mean ProxHTTPSProxy, this local proxy is as secure as Windows XP and direct connection is.
  24. AstroSkipper
    I had to create for each domain a separate, new IF query otherwise it wouldn't have worked in my installation.
  25. AstroSkipper
    @Anbima didn't say anything about that. If one doesn't make clear announcements, one can't expect to get exactly the information one needs. We are not clairvoyants. If the PAC script contains a different URL than the one you want to call up, you don't have to be surprised that it doesn't work.
×
×
  • Create New...