NotHereToPlayGames
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by NotHereToPlayGames
-
-
Agreed. Even enabling HA (I prefer disabled by default) for 360Chrome in Win7 had no effect.
0 -
On my Win7 quad-core at the moment and you can see the CPU drop as soon as I turned off that STUPID animation.
1 -
Just now, Mathwiz said:
I'm guessing the more modern browsers use the computer's GPU vs. its CPU for this effect.
I'm pretty sure that for XP it is done by the CPU no matter what, there is no offloading to GPU.
0 -
On 8/3/2023 at 3:39 PM, UCyborg said:
Multi-process is a hoax IMO, another bad Googleism. Sorry, nobody will convince me I need this multi-process nonsense to display a bunch of images, text, dynamic elements, voice-chat etc. while a competent (single-process!) game engine will proces inputs of dozens of players, render the world in player's sight while animating all natural occurrences (river flowing, trees rustling), dynamic shadow casting, sun flares...while players are shooting each other on foot, in tanks, jeeps, airplanes, explosions going off, buildings being torn apart...
I don't think you are seeing the bigger picture. It's all about FLOPS. Or Giga Flops (GFLOPS).
Remember that most of us here are using computers 10 to 20+ years old, most of us don't see the need to run top-of-the-line brand-new gaming PCs.
Xbox 360 is 18 years old. The Xbox 360 was rated at 240 GFLOPS.
PlayStation 3 is 17 years old. The PlayStation 3 was rated at 230 GFLOPS.
PlayStation 4 is 10 years old and is rated at 1843 GFLOPS.
Xbox One X is 6000 GFLOPS.
PlayStation 5 is 10,280 GFLOPS.
Xbox Series X is 12,000 GFLOPS.On average, a mid-range Intel Core i7 processor can perform around 100-200 GFLOPS (billion floating-point operations per second).
An i3 is only 110-120 GFLOPS.Yes, an 18yr old Xbox 360 can beat the living tar out of any "modern" i3, i5, or i7 !!!
0 -
19 minutes ago, Ben Markson said:
Which I reduced to this:
* { transition-property: none !important; transform: none !important; animation: none !important; }
Agreed! Been blocking them for years.
I also block "box-shadows". Tons of box shadows on a page seems to effect scrolling smoothness so I just disable all of them.
0 -
For those trying to follow the XP antivirus/firewall thread(s), may I ask which program you are using?
I have given Windows 10 Firewall Control Free XP a trial-run and it seems okay and LIGHTWEIGHT.
I have "never" been a fan of antivirus because they have always SLOWED DOWN MY COMPUTER (afterall, we are talking older computers).
I would like a "small list" of antivirus programs that the followers of the antivirus/firewall thread IS ACTUALLY USING and I'd like to perform some actual "performance comparisons" (ie, effect on actual computer "speed").
4 -
wallapop is failing at Intl.NumberFormat. Chrome supports it since version 24 for most sub-features and since version 64 for other sub-features.
There are some sub-features not supported until Chrome version 106 but I am not seeing them being used at wallapop (I do not have my normal debug tools available here at work).
What browser are you using in Win7 and does it show up as "green" here - https://caniuse.com/?search=intl.numberformat
0 -
43 minutes ago, Milkinis said:
Application error: a client-side exception has occurred (see the browser console for more information).
That error isn't actually telling us anything. Error messages have to come from the Console tab in Dev Tools and not the browser content area where web pages are displayed.
The last time that the content area showed that error, TWO polyfills were required to clear it.
I think they were Object.hasOwn() and randomUUID() but I'm not 100% positive.
0 -
So you visit the web site from Win7 and a different browser and AFTER you do that, then you can visit using 360Chrome on XP?
0 -
4 hours ago, Dixel said:
Let me know if you are interested
I'm not. Not to contact somebody I do not know! All of my "older" extensions work just fine in my "older" browser, ZERO need to convert to v3.
Have the curiosity, but can wait until it becomes "mainstream public knowledge" versus a "private contact-me hobbyist-project".
0 -
On 8/8/2023 at 12:13 PM, Jody Thornton said:
I can't believe there hasn't been way louder noise on this. Great Progress!
Will there be an ungoogled version?
I think it was asked in the past but I don't recall seeing a definitive "yes or no".
1 -
Just now, UCyborg said:
There's mobile section.
My brain is so awesome that the voices in my heard were crickets chirping as I read through the post dates of that mobile section.
0 -
10 minutes ago, Vistapocalypse said:
This does not bode well for this forum’s future.
I've often wondered if I should "share" my Win10 mod's. I will not! But I have often wondered what kind of "traction" or "userbase" it would add to MSFN. But alas I also thought that with 360Chrome and the harsh reality is "we are a dying breed".
Win10 works perfectly well on "older" hardware. No! Not 20yr old hardware! But works perfectly well on 10-15 year old hardware!
Unfortunately, MSFN only gets new members trying to turn their "older" hardware or "older" OS into a GAMING PC - MSFN is not a "gaming communitiy" (we have several gamers, I am not amongst them, but "gaming" isn't MSFN's 'bread and butter').
These new members last a week, if that! Then it's back to us "regulars". Unsure what our average AGE is, but something tells me it's way over mid-40s.
Do we even have a section dedicated to SMART PHONES? That is the ONLY thing that "kids these days" even USE!
But why would we have a section dedicated to SMART PHONES, wouldn't we need a "mobile version" of the web site for them to even visit?
I say that with so many Stylus tweaks applied to MSFN that I kind of forget what it is "supposed" to look like - my view would work on a mobile device but it is FAR from the "default" layout.
2 -
-
16 minutes ago, UCyborg said:
One interesting area - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unofficial_patch
Reading through that I am reminded of how even us geeks with a Commodore 64 in the mid-80s knew how to create "cheats" for Pac-Man so that we had infinite lives instead of only three.
0 -
28 minutes ago, UCyborg said:
Disallow kernel extensions
I actually support kernel modification discussions. I am unsure of the HISTORY behind why they are not allowed here at MSFN. But also know the "can of worms" it legally brings upon MSFN.
I have been members of several "modification" forums over the years (I used to publicly share an "Adobe Reader LITE" complete with how-to instructions on how to create it yourself (I provide how-to instructions for 360Chrome also, I might add)).
I don't recall if that was WinCERT, RyanVM, etc. There were, and I'm sure still are, several folks providing a LITE versions of Adobe Reader.
I actually STILL use my "modified" Adobe Reader. I do have to occasionally download a "portable Foxit" or "portable Sumatra" for 'modern' PDFs but this still opens 99% of PDFs that I throw at it.
Microsoft clearly is/was against such programs as vLite, nLite, NTLite, WinReducerEx, et cetera. But isn't/wasn't MSFN the "home" for nLite? So MSFN clearly supports something that Microsoft does not.
Like I say, "a fine line".
0 -
13 minutes ago, UCyborg said:
So what license does the browser come with? Because if it's restrictive, then we have clear double standards on the forum (and you're in violation). Disallow kernel extensions, allow hacked web browsers.
I actually agree. It seems to be a fine line and the moderators have to decide amongst themselves which threads are shut down and which are not.
0 -
23 minutes ago, Dixel said:
As for Manifest V3 to Manifest V2
That doesn't really help. How do you generate the extension ID?
0 -
I've not yet "needed" to convert a Manifest V3 back to a Manifest V2, but something tells me it isn't as easy as changing a "3" to a "2", lol.
0 -
13 minutes ago, UCyborg said:
All latest versions of these are Manifest V3 extensions and this browser doesn't do Manifest V3 extensions.
Crap! I totally missed that and I even had the manifest file open WHILE YOU POSTED, lol.
0 -
Unsure if this will work or not and also unsure if MSFN allows publicly discussing how to modify extensions (I modify all of mine but I don't publicly share those modified versions).
So I will only show via a "picture" and this picture will be deleted with my next profile attachment purge.
0 -
34 minutes ago, Milkinis said:
I am trying to get this one up to date
Why? If an older version works, then use the older version. NONE of my extensions are "up to date".
0 -
Download from here - https://www.crx4chrome.com/crx/1227/
You do not need Developer mode to install it, you drag-and-drop the downloaded .crx onto your Extensions page.
0 -
29 minutes ago, Milkinis said:
F52 with multiprocesses is significantly faster than F52 with multiprocesses
? ? ?
1
My Browser Builds (Part 4)
in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Posted
Definitely bad web design. But it's not like we can blame "modern web" for that design. https://caniuse.com/?search=css animation