NotHereToPlayGames
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by NotHereToPlayGames
-
My course of action thus far has been to run XP x64 as my Host and only run Win10 as a VirtualBox Guest. So far, I've needed that Win10 VM zero times. But yeah, I'm prepared for the day that I will have to resort to it just to reconcile a credit card statement.
-
lol Figures something "kiddy-like" [ie, "child-like"] (kitty-like?) that exists. I still define that as "for the gamer" and I've not played any games since the Mrs. Pac-Man table-top unit was no longer at the local Dairy Queen in the late 80s or early 90s.
-
Looks to me like an "identity crisis" web browser. Intended customer is the "gamer" crowd that want their web browser to look like a "game". Not for me, but "to each their own". All it's missing is a machine gun at the bottom that you aim at your mouse-clicks using a "game controller" instead of a mouse.
-
Very possible. That's why two of my laptops now have Win10 instead of XP. So by the time 2025 rolls around, I should have it tweaked and customized to my liking. I have no plans. Don't let the build number fool you, it has no "real world" benefit over the previous TWENTY (not an actual count) versions of v13.0 and v13.5 combined. All the same exact v86 rendering engine with just Chinese "stuff" thrown in that we strip out anyway.
-
I have my own modified version of DcBrowser. But I am not a fan of DcBrowser, it's a step "backwards" (v75 versus v86), I don't like the GUI, and so I've abandoned it before sharing it publicly.
-
That seems like a step backwards when we have v86 and v87 forks available.
-
I personally prefer the SQUARES. Why install a font that I can not read?
-
Agreed!
-
I don't see anything! If the web site loads and functions, then who cares if it throws up some "banner" saying they don't "support" your browser. Those "banners" citing "support" despite the web site "working" is about as usefull as the web site owner plastering a banner on what sports team s/he "supports".
-
Technically, v11 is faster. It launches faster, it scores faster, and it passes more checks at BrowserAudit. BUT it's too old for me to use because my banking sites will not function on v11. What I don't understand is the hype surrounding DcBrowser and MiniBrowser, I've never liked either one but web browsers are always always always "in the eye of the beholder".
-
My Google Drive works perfectly fine in v13.5. What part of Google Drive is not working for you?
-
My Browser Builds (Part 4)
NotHereToPlayGames replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Not likely. And I say that as an XP user. I think we XP users think far too highly of our influence in this world. -
In tracking something else down (below pic), I may have found the bookmark star clickety-clickety-clickety. But may be a long while before I upload another round.
-
Ah, thanks. I have not been able to replicate here either. Well, I did once but I have not been able to repeat it consistently. But I also cannot understand why somebody would click the star "repeatedly".
-
Rebuild 7 uses #4. Rebuild 8 uses #5.
-
I have no plans to devote any time to the "Show bookmark menu" with zero bookmarks. This only occurs with zero bookmarks so stop clicking the icon, add a bookmark so it's no longer zero, or hide this star so you stop clicking it.
-
Yes, that is normal. There is no such thing as "hardware acceleration" in XP. And as far as that goes, I personally DISABLE "hardware acceleration" in my Win10 installs also. My browser RAM and CPU is BETTER without using HA. Though multi-monitor systems do "benefit" SLIGHTLY in some graphics "lag" by enabling HA. But if your job function requires screencaps from video presentations delivered via browser, then you must disable HA in order to screencap from those video presentations. "Hardware acceleration" SOUNDS like a neat and novel idea, but I've only had ISSUES every time I've tried it in both Win7 and Win10. And every browser support web site you ever seek advice from, one of the first three answers will always be "did you disable hardware acceleration".
-
Go to chrome://settings/advanced There is a setting to change where your CACHE is stored.
-
That's your entire profile directory, I guess I misread the question. My CACHE is not at that directory, it's at C:\Documents and Settings\<account name>\Local Settings\Temp And it ALREADY deletes completely each and every time I exit 360Chrome.
-
Rebuild 8 rebases to a better memory address then Rebuild 7. Rebuild 8 includes two .dll files that technically should have never been removed in the first place (there was incorrect information being spread at MSFN that requested them to be removed, but it was INCORRECT INFORMATION). Several minor cosmetic differences.
-
Restart XP and first launch only of DcB has RAM/process back up around 110 MB.
-
Relaunch DcB on the 2 GB VM and RAM/process drops to around 30 MB.
-
Here's the same three browsers but with VM RAM increased from 1 GB to 2 GB. Note that v11 stays at four processes while DcB and Ungoogled v77 both increased in the number of processes despite being the same four tabs. Also note that a DcB process on a 1 GB VM is roughly 30 MB but a DcB process on a 2 GB VM is roughly 110 MB !!! This seems to suggest that the rebase address has to be somehow based on the system's overall available RAM.
-
Multi-processor web browser RAM usage is not "linear". The browser decides how many processes to run based on number of open tabs and available RAM. Run the same exact browser on a computer with 1 GB RAM, 2 GB RAM, and 4 GB RAM and you will get different RAM consumption. Here is my 360Chrome v11 rebuild 8 on XP with 1 GB RAM, Humming Owl's DcBrowser on XP with 1 GB RAM, and Ungoogled Chromium v77 on Win7 with 1 GB RAM.