NotHereToPlayGames

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.

Crap! I totally missed that and I even had the manifest file open WHILE YOU POSTED, lol.

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.

Why? If an older version works, then use the older version. NONE of my extensions are "up to date".

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.

? ? ?

And if we are being "truly fair", to anybody that is "concerned" with CVE reports - "why are you on Win7 then?" Shouldn't the "sky be falling" with all of the CVEs reported for Win7? Afterall, "Windows 7" has 1,412 CVE reports to "Windows 10" having "fewer" at 1,195 and to "Windows 11" having "only" 81. Heck, "Windows XP" only has 656. NONE of these stop MSFN Members from using Win7 or XP. Or Vista with their 737 CVE reports. I am not "for" or "against" Kaspersky! But come on, let's be a bit more "fair and unbiased" in our discussions. Our "whole universe" should NOT revolve around a CVE report from 2019. There are ways to REMOVE the "unique Product ID" if you guys truly WANTED to, but the reality is that you'd rather "talk it down" as opposed to seeking/discussing SOLUTIONS.

SO IS NORTON, SO IS McAFEE, SO IS COMODO, SO IS AVIRA, SO IS AVAST, SO IS MALWAREBYTES, SO IS AVG... Use that database web site and perform some searches for other antivirus programs -- https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/search I'm showing 75 for Avast - read through all of them before using any Avast product and if they apply to the product you wish to use. I'm showing 90 for Kaspersky - read through all of them before using any Kaspersky product and if they apply to the product you wish to use. I'm showing 25 for Malwarebytes - read through all of them before using any Malwarebytes product and if they apply to the product you wish to use. 114 for Norton... 37 for Avira... 40 for AVG... 44 for Comodo... 482 for McAfee... No, that's not a typo, four hundred and eighty two... 3,019 when I search for Firefox... Again, not a typo - three thousand and nineteen... 38 when I search for Chromium... 3,440 when I search for Chrome... 6,728 when I search for Linux... Six thousand seven hundred and twenty eight... 557 when I search for antivirus... Pointing out these CVE "issues" does have its place, but it is mostly FEARMONGERING - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fearmongering

I personally don't bother. But I don't give them my fingerprint either. If the web site doesn't let me in because they can't fingerprint me, then I move on to another web site. I have options on web sites and don't live in a country where my web browser needs fingerprinted just so that I can buy a sandwich.

Just on the home front, I have 8 computers. 3 of them are used each and every day! My "newest" is the workhorse Dell XPS 8700 from 2013, originally with 8 GB RAM, upgraded to 16 GB RAM. Came with Win7 Home, intentionally "downgraded" to XP x64. My "finances" computer is an emachines T3656 from 2008. Technically it was given to me by a neighbor in January 2009 - they basically gave away a Christmas gift that their own family had given to them! It came with Vista Home Basic and only 1 GB DDR2. The neighbor downright HATED IT and offered me a TRADE for an even OLDER computer that I had lying around with XP on it. AMD Athlon 64 with 2 GB RAM. I've never upgraded any GPU's, I don't do games and never needed anything more than cheap OEM onboard graphics. I intentionally "downgraded" to XP x86 and increased to 4 GB RAM (still only DDR2, 3.24 GB available, more than enough for what I use it for). It came with a Celeron 440 @ 2.0 GHz. I upgraded it to an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 @ 2.66 GHz (best I could get with current motherboard, more than enough for what I use it for). "This thing is so old" that it has three 4:3 17" monitors, doesn't even have widescreen, lol. It's been very good to me (after the upgrades), especially for a FREEBIE.

That one basically hit store shelves in January 2012. Many around here wouldn't label it as "era correct" for XP. I myself don't really look at it as "era correct" or not. Anything without 16 GB RAM in this day and age isn't "capable" of running Win10 or Win11 and I'd put the cutoff at 8 GB RAM for Win7. At least not for the "average consumer". My "nosed, decked, chopped, shaved, and sectioned" (a car term) Win7 doesn't break a sweat with only 2 GB RAM and my Win10 doesn't break a sweat at 3 GB RAM. Of course, it should also be obvious that I don't try to run 30 tabs in a web browser on either - a "habit" I don't condone for anyone with less that 16 GB or even 32 GB RAM. (ie, sometimes our "pain and misery" is brought on by ourselves)

Depends on your perspective. Here's a good read - https://www.webperf.tips/tip/browser-process-model/ As the perfect example cited by someone else here at MSFN (unable to locate at the moment), single-process FF is slower than multi-process FF, but both are "stable".

A little searching and I am finding that retailers were allowed to offer "free downgrades" from 7 to XP. But note that it was not 7 to Vista, it was 7 to XP.

I'm sure that Vista ended up maturing with age. All I know "living through it" is that when Vista first came out, it rendered my laptop useless and so I reverted to XP. It was basically "that experience" which still has me running XP to this day! The multi-continent global company that I work for *never* ran Vista on ANY of our company PCs. We went from XP straight to 7, skipping over Vista. Then went from 7 straight to 10, skipping over 8/8.1. We (the company) is also skipping 11. Can that be correlated to "every other" Windows release or that the skipped one's were "that bad"? I'd say "not really" because we didn't migrate to 10 until two or three versions in. Again, I don't doubt that Vista matured with age. But I also know what my "first impression" was and Best Buy even offered me a "free downgrade" to revert a brand new PC that came with Vista to run XP instead. To the best of my knowledge, Vista is the only Windows OS that ever allowed retailers to offer "free downgrades". But again I will repeat, I don't doubt that Vista matured with age (I personally never looked back once offered that "free downgrade").

I do think that is where most of us here at MSFN over-exaggerate. Every few years? That is an exaggeration. My newest PC is a Dell XPS 8700 from 2013. Ten years old and still very impressive for a WEB BROWSER. Only the "gamer crowd" would find it unappealing. And again, that is my newest PC. The problem, here at MSFN at least, is the unrealistic view that something TWENTY years old should perform "identically" to something TEN or even FIVE years old. Unrealistic. It would be one thing if the MSFNer that puplicly cries (for lack of a better word) about that 20yr old computer being slow was from a Third World Country - but most are not. Most of it, to me at least, just sounds like the cries of somebody needing to be heard but has nothing to say. It's a gray area, I get it. I disprove of the "throw-away society" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throw-away_society (my DAILY DRIVER car is THIRTY TWO YEARS OLD without a single spot of rust!). Perform a search for "average life of computer" and you will find article after article after article citing three to five years. THAT IS RIDICULOUS! All of mine are two to three times that! But we simply are unrealistic to think a four to five times that should perform identically to a two to three times that. We only have ourselves to blame on how we "react". I personally LAUGH MY BUTT OFF when I take off from a red light and have to take the foot off the gas to hit the clutch, manually move transmission from 1st gear to 2nd gear, and the person behind me has to HIT THEIR BRAKES to keep from rear-ending me! We only have ourselves to blame if we CHUCKLE about our old PC or if we cry and whine and act like a "have not" thinking it 'unfair' that the "have's" have a better computer. Because let's face it, we could all have a better computer if we wanted one. None of these shouts are coming from a Third World Country. Or maybe they are, I don't follow that closely - because I don't want to rear-end anybody.

This can NOT be solved in XP.

Agreed. But one of them was a guy we know as "MAT" and the Pale Moon versus New Moon saga. I'm sure that Astro doesn't want involved with one of these drama scenes so better safe than sorry by dotting i's and crossing t's.

There was also "blink" -- https://htmleditor.w3schools.in/?filename=html_blink_tag I guess my main thing is that I remember when marquee and blink were the ways that web sites "directed your attention". Say what you want about "Google-isms" and modern web being "bloated", but would you honestly prefer the days of marquee and blink?

I would vote "throw it out". Mean and Lean should increase performance, theoretically. Heck, I wonder if UXP still "supports" <marquee>? And if so, throw it out also. We could probably come up with a list of (at least) 100 deprecated functions that should no longer be supported and no longer exist "in the wild".

You could also try this -- https://msfn.org/board/topic/175170-root-certificates-and-revoked-certificates-for-windows-xp/ DISCLAIMER: I HAVE NEVER ATTEMPTED AND I HAVE NEVER MANUALLY DID ANYTHING WITH MY XP'S CERTIFICATES, YOU CAN BREAK THINGS JUST BY THINKING YOU ARE FIXING THEM.

Please show us your System Properties so we know what kind of computer you are using.

Ah. Yeah, we would all be in a much better place if people opened their eyes and started going after Cloudflare in the same way that they attack Google. Not saying the Google attacks are not warranted, they are, to a degree, but let's be real, Cloudflare poses just as much, if not more, of a privacy rights issue!

Not possible. Or should I say, "Good luck!" Depending on which countries they operate in, they have to abide by "data retention laws". Most VPNs only substitute one bad actor (your ISP logs) for another (the VPN logs). You also "get what you pay for" and as you say, nothing good comes for free. https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/why-you-should-be-skeptical-about-a-vpns-no-logs-claims/

Not only which browser, but details on "the site" would help us to help you.