UCyborg

Since I'm normally on Win10, I don't use Serpent there, but I've also ditched Basilisk and didn't come back to it even after its development was taken over. Just don't like having to use huge extension to revert that Australis mess of UI to how it was before, and even with CTR addon, I remember there were quirks. Didn't even Tobin say at some point Australis GUI code is a mess of spaghetti code? Still, regardles whether you use Pale Moon/New Moon/Basilisk/Serpent/whatever, it's still plagued by issues everyone complained about back before Mozilla radically the overhauled browser. It's like tweakability has to come with CPU usage spikes, memory leaks, sluggishness with prolonged use. No one suffers with these issues while browsing the web...Chromium has minimal customization as far as browser behavior goes, but basics just work. Though considering existence and performance of Vivaldi, it doesn't have to be either one or another.

Trying out Win11 on real hardware for the first time, fresh initial version 23H2, using the good 'ol known tools for restoring/enhancing various functionality (ExplorerPatcher, OpenShell, 7+ Taskbar Tweaker, QTTabBar), noticed something odd with keyboard shortcut for moving windows between screens (Win + Shift + Left/Right arrow). The left screen has the resolution 1920x1080, the right screen is at 1280x1024. On Win10 (up to 20H2 at least), if I centered the window on any screen and moved it to the other screen with the shortcut, it would be centered on the screen it was moved to, but moving it on Win11, it's off by few centimeters. I didn't find anything written/discussed about it, TBH I don't even know how to word it. Wondering if it's a bug or just another intentional simplification and if there's a trick to make it work like it used to.

Release notes say something about GDI rendering improving remote font rendering over Vista level DirectWrite, so I flipped that flag over in chrome://flags to force GDI. While they render then, it seems to cause some misalignment of fonts in general here, how they're positioned in 2D space.

I noticed when trying out BasicThemer2, which uses functionality built into DWM to activate Aero Basic style window frames, which resources are still in stock Aero theme, that it then actually also follows *.msstyles setting for window title text placement (left, center, right). Did you use the same trick near the end of the video? I guess the text placement for normal theme rendering was always hard-coded, not sure whether it would be "correct" to take that same setting for text placement in "normal mode", though just judging by Explorer windows with ribbon, it should. I haven't checked if this basic mode also allows changing text color, either through the theme or registry settings, but it would be nice if this, along with text placement, was tweakable, in any mode, the basic theme rendering isn't compatible when the app does something with its own frame. If I remember correctly, the trick BasicThemer2 uses is similar to what compatibility shim DisableThemes does. I came across the utility when searching for info regarding Windows 11's frame/border rendering, last time I checked, it completely ignores theme resources for rendering normal window border, it's just always invisible while Windows 10's DWM renders it as usual. BasicThemer2 was suggested as the workaround as the rendering mode it activates still has normal border around windows. While default theme in Win10 lacks those borders, they are in Aero Lite theme and certain custom themes, as also evident in your video. So, another thing to consider if you get into tweaking Windows 11's DWM at some point, Windows 11 is catching on as the time passes.

Errors!

Anyone wants to check if BasicThemer2 works on Vista? It should, but few individuals feel like actually trying. It gives windows' frames/borders Windows Aero Basic appearance without having to actually switch to that theme and consequentially turning off DWM. May not work for processes that protect themselves from tampering.

4th page, first post.

There are ways to add CSS with JavaScript if you really wanted, eg.: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15505225/inject-css-stylesheet-as-string-using-javascript

Where did the idea that unpatched browser will certainly crash come from? Still have two unpatched browsers installed, Edge 94 and Firefox 110, none of them crash on that image.

Why? Do you explicitly want to inject CSS with JavaScript? If not, just use Stylus.

360Chrome on Vista (should be only GDI, which looks about the same on XP here), no extension: While this one comes out nicer, fonts in general look all over the place when running on an old OS, some too thin, some too bold, others are edgy. Fonts below for instance look way different than on browsers running on recent Windows versions (I'll post the other image later - done): Hm, could've sworn differences on this site were more pronounced a while ago. That and it doesn't look quite right when captured on the image.

Does Chromium support custom themes? GUI looks and feels like stock Chromium. Also, yay: ContextResult::kFatalFailure: Failed to create shared context for virtualization. Definitely much laggier because of it and zero ability to run WebGL. Vanilla up-to-date Vista with SP2. Also the below happens when restoring window when using Actual Window Manager, version 8.14.1, had problems with newer versions (it just exited after few minutes), only on Vista though. A workaround is to minimize it and restore it quickly afterwards. GDI font rendering looks weird to me, but at least web fonts render now.

When was the last time you visited optometrist? On the unrelated note, looking at those images I posted on the site as-is, default 100% zoom, they're definitely a bit sharper in Pale Moon. I've read complaints about Chromium blurring images, but didn't pay much attention to it, especially since I don't do general browsing on Chromium (at least most of the time on PC), it's mostly reserved for resource intense web-based apps.

I use Chrome Font Super Enhancer on Chromium variants that aren't Edge to improve font legibility. Still, it doesn't work for some sites/fonts for whatever reason, eg.: Edge: Pale Moon: I can't get that contrast with ClearType settings on XP. I remember messed with ClearType settings in the browser, must have been Serpent 52, but they didn't do anything either. Nothing works on XP these days. That extension does, at least the older version, unsure about the current, would have to check, but last time I checked, it worked in Chromium 86 based browsers - OS shouldn't matter.

You didn't read the code right. It's more complex because it handles domain matching on its own, it doesn't use ViolentMonkey's support for tld wildcard in @match rules. tld wildcard is however supported universally in @include rules...at least it should be. But if @include will really have to go to work in future Chromium, hopefully Tampermonkey author could add support for tld in match rules as well. I changed metadata block in the other Return Pagination to Google like so, just like tld better than asterisk: // ==UserScript== // @name Return Pagination to Google // @description Makes Google searches break down into separate pages, rather than displaying as one continuous page. // @namespace Violentmonkey Scripts // @include https://www.google.tld/search?* // @icon https://www.google.com/favicon.ico // @grant none // @version 1.4.4.1 // @author Jupiter Liar // @license Attribution CC BY // @description 11/16/2023, 12:40 PM // @downloadURL https://update.greasyfork.org/scripts/468360/Return%20Pagination%20to%20Google.user.js // @updateURL https://update.greasyfork.org/scripts/468360/Return%20Pagination%20to%20Google.meta.js // ==/UserScript== Though I don't use Google search as much as I used to, the script seems to work nicely. I doubt there's a reason to fear that @include would stop working in GreaseMonkey for Pale Moon.

https://www.huk24.de/zugang/registrierung/anmeldedaten uses Friendly Captcha. My results on home PC are a bit slower (compared to 32-bit St52 on 64-bit XP) on Pale Moon, both 32-bit build on Windows 10 and 64-bit build on Linux (KUbuntu 21.10 ATM), though the latter is about 2 seconds faster (13 seconds). Recent Chromium, both Ungoogled Chromium 118 and Thorium 117 are through in 8 seconds, both 64-bit builds. I use the SSE3 build of the latter, which is faster in some scenarios than plain builds, but not noticeably in this one. It's interesting that Firefox (110 ATM) fares about the same as Pale Moon. I tried disabling Web Assembly support in Pale Moon on Windows, that slows it down to about 2 minutes and 4 seconds. Maybe I should try 64-bit also without WASM. CPU is AMD Phenom II X4 920 clocked at 3 GHz, which was still quite lagging behind Intel models of the time. Web Assembly may not be as speedy as native C/C++, but it's significantly faster than plain JavaScript, which was one of the ideas behind it. I doubt UXP platform does Web Assembly on such old CPU as Pentium III. WebGL error is not related to Friendly Captcha, some other script calls it, but, again, a 1999 era graphics card probably only knows fixed-function pipeline, no shaders, and if it is an office PC, does it even do hardware accelerated 3D? Office PCs have come a long way since. 1999 was also the time when serious 3D games stopped offering software rendering option, at least it began in that era and when developers were weighting their options, but if you were ambitious, you either required users to get a real graphics card or play Solitaire or the other games of yesteryear. Not much time for testing at work laptop from 2018, but I use nothing less than AVX2 build of Pale Moon there, with (plain) Firefox and Edge on the side. Pale Moon with Web Assembly support disabled went through in about 15 seconds, with Web Assembly in 3 seconds, Edge is through in 2 seconds.

I understand that, but you won't be able to change that service's configuration without becoming TrustedInstaller first. Some interesting reading: https://www.tiraniddo.dev/2017/08/the-art-of-becoming-trustedinstaller.html While you don't need to concern yourself with technicalities in that post, you will need System Informer or another utility that makes it easy to run any program in the context of TrustedInstaller (aka NT SERVICE\TrustedInstaller). It's a special service account that has full permissions over various system objects that administrator accounts or more precisely the Administrators group don't. I simply suggested running System Informer itself as TrustedInstaller as that program allows changing services' configuration, but if you wanted, you could run also run Windows' services.msc as TrustedInstaller, then you should be able to change the configuration of those services with said utilities as well, at least assuming the program that disabled them didn't mess with the permissions. System Informer also allows you to view and change permissions for each service, if you open any service on Services tab and click Permissions. There, you should see in the case of both Security Center service Windows Security Service (at least that's how they're called in US English version of Windows) that Administrators group doesn't have either Modify Configuration or Stop permission. But TrustedInstaller does. And the pictures from System Informer showing default startup type for both services in question: At least that's how it should be in Win10 builds from the last 3 years or so...sometimes they change some services' configuration with newer builds. Including the most recent one? It's updated quite often so oddities can come and go.

I don't see it that way. if anything, it's the waiting time that is absurd. The waiting time does increase to about half-minute when forcing affinity to 1 core, but I'd have to boot into XP to get the exact seconds as it slipped off my mind. That's on some version of St52 from first half of October 2023. It's done in 15 seconds on Pale Moon 32.5.0 on Windows 10. Single-core here increases waiting time to about 85 seconds. It does manage to load all 4 cores as-is, which is a rare sight in UXP browser in my experience, when it's stuck with some websites' scripts, it's always one core that is working. From what I remember from his posts mentioning specs, it reminds me of my previous one, but mine was definitely slower, a Celeron instead of a Pentium, less RAM, worse GPU, it didn't even do DirectX 8. I drove a 2001 model until autumn last year, after I switched to a 2022 model, I was the reason the old car was at the house 5 years longer than it would have been otherwise, I'm the youngest in the family, BTW. And we only got rid of the 37+ years old freezing cabinet last year, no idea how much electric bill was inflated because of it, I don't pay electric bills currently and I never asked. Regarding the car, issues were just cropping up one after another in recent times and engine shutting down mid-motorway shot my anxiety through the roof, which was the last straw. I'm on the road almost every day and the peace of mind is worth a lot to me.

Hard to tell remotely, though crashing in vcruntime140.dll sounds really odd, this library has the most basic C-runtime functions. Maybe look into generating crash dump for someone to analyze? This sounds highly specific case to me...

Good lord...minutes!? It goes through in 7 seconds here, both St52 and Mypal 68. 360Chrome is through in 5 seconds. My Xperia E3 takes almost 40 seconds though, it's on Chromium 118 engine. You guys really do browse the web with computers that are equivalent of putting a Ford Model T on a modern highway...

Installing version 119.0.6045.192 in C:\Program Files, there's an extra step with the new installer, have to unpack it and invoke mini_installer.exe with --system-level command-line argument. I would assume there shouldn't be an extra step (unpacking) required and provided installer file should be able to pass the command-line argument to mini_installer.exe?

The differences are smaller with default Windows theme, but if you use a custom theme, you'll get the titlebar from theme, not stock Windows 10 look-alike. This is with accent color enabled on the titlebars, stock Windows theme: Above pictures are of active/focused window, but the titlebar is fully white with the flag when window is inactive while it's more greyish without the flag. Without the flag, Chromium is overriding and trying to emulate the titlebar the way Windows' compositor draws it on its own. Another picture with official Aero Lite theme, though it can't be set through GUI AFAIK, it's Microsoft signed theme, so doesn't require SecureUxTheme or the like. The one without the flag would be similar to the very first picture above + thicker borders. Well, "thicker" probably, if I remember correctly, they're just invisible with default theme, though in Windows 11 for instance, last time I checked, they're invisible even if theme has them. Bloody Microsoft, man!

I had a feeling that there'll be another reason for not starting, though no guarantee there won't be another obstacle in attempting to re-enable it. Administrators normally don't have permission to change this service's configuration through the APIs that sc and 3rd party utilities use, but its service registry key might be accessible to administrators, so if you don't mind a reboot after changing settings, you may open Registry Editor (regedit.exe) and navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\wscsvc, where you set Start to 2 and DelayedAutostart to 1, at least those are the defaults. The other method that can be used and will get the changes applied right away is through System Informer. There's only nightly build, but unless you're heavily involved with the program, you shouldn't notice anything off. If one's familiar with Process Hacker, which is basically its predecessor, one should have known "stable" build really means old build lacking many features developed over time. When you install it, you have to launch it as TrustedInstaller, so launch it normally as administrator first, then in the menu, choose System->Run..., type in C:\Program Files\SystemInformer\SystemInformer.exe and tick Create this task with TrustedInstaller privileges. Another instance of the program will open, where you can open Services tab, double click wscsvc in the list, change Start type to Auto start and enable Delayed start and save with OK. While some people shun the suggestion to reinstall, they tend to underestimate how borked things can get. The problem in this thread is hopefully on the easier (more obvious side). But say we focus on registry alone, the amount of data that is there (on top, keys also have owner and permissions, the latter could be explicit or inherited), you can't possibly tell with a naked eye if everything is OK.

I don't remember when I've seen their basic HTML interface the last time, must have been many years ago. The few times I do login there, I've never had problems using Pale Moon for it.

"Google Voice is not supported in your country." or something. So it's not an option for everyone. At least for me, there's just too many little things where the actual phone number comes in handy these days, so getting by without one wouldn't be for me, even though I rarely use it. I was overpaying for it until recently, the old provider just kept increasing data plan volume (gigabytes) and subscription price, which I almost don't need and when I do (mostly paying for petrol, few megabytes a month at most), I figured they have Wi-Fi there, so recently switched to another provider, their cheapest subscription model has zero subscription cost, you pay depending on how much you use, 4 cents per minute/SMS/MMS/megabyte. No idea about plain internet based services, maybe Skype still works on 360Chrome? I don't use any in personal life, used Teams couple of times (work-related, bleh, last time I used it, which was very recently, last month, it updated mid-call and threw me out...).