NotHereToPlayGames

Nope. At least not the freebie version. I've never looked into what features are added in the "premium" version.

My old-but-not-ancient harware boots Win10 in 59-61 seconds. Default was 72-74 seconds. As measured by a program called BootRacer -- https://greatis.com/bootracer/index.html This is how I gained approx 10.7 seconds -- http://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/69693-startup-delay-enable-disable-windows-10-a.html Since I "hibernate" 99.9% of the time, I never really tried to improve cold boot more than that approx 10.7 second gain. The same exact old-but-not-ancient hardware boots XP in UNDER THIRTEEN SECONDS. I miss that aspect of XP, but everything else works much MUCH better in 10. I do not regret migrating to 10 (heavily tweaked 2016 version, not the 2xHy versions).

Agreed! Kills my eyes also. The fonts are NOT rendered that way for me. That screencrap's fonts are UGLY!

I am aware. However, it also becomes a matter of what web sites I ACTUALLY USE! I have to pay my bills. And if so much as ONE of those bill-pay web sites do NOT work in a browser, THEN I FIND ONE WHERE *ALL* DO WORK. Yep, it really is THAT SIMPLE. The only thing that is "bothering" YOU is that I can only find that in a "death to everything not Firefox" browser that you don't want me to use. That's also why "browser choice" is always always ALWAYS "relative" to the USER. I'm sure you've been around MSFN long enough to have new members ask, "Which web browser is best?" and my reply is always always ALWAYS the same, though wording of the reply may change slightly. My reply is always always ALWAYS that nobody can answer that but the user him/herself! Despite the thorn in your side, I have succeeded in my mission, ONE web browser for ALL of my web sites. And it is CHROME-BASED. But I am just as security/privacy-concious as you are. Just as I would *NEVER* use Official Firefox and all of its telemetry, I would use IceCat if needed. And by the same EXACT "due diligence", I would highly highly HIGHLY prefer to never have to use Official Chrome and all of its telemetry. I would use UNGOOGLED if needed. My mission is clear! I have NO INTEREST in "this browser for this, that browser for that". I shall be moving on now, we keep "talking in circles" and this thread has become (or already was) "just the two of us".

Nor in mine.

Bingo! My own "defenses" *FORCE* a 404 whenever an HTTPS site links to an HTTP site. It's really no different than "how" you yourself were "able" to get to that HTTP, your Firefox DEFENSE MECHANISM threw a dialog to PROTECT YOU, you clicked "proceed anyway". You had to go out of your way to BYPASS a DEFENSE MECHANISM.

Doesn't really take much time and energy. Just knowledge of and experience in all of the browser's "configs". I suspect that you yourself don't even use "default config". ie, you have SEVERAL about:config/chrome:flag changes in your very own whichever-you-use browser.

That's because you FAILED to PROPERLY "harden" your EDGE profile. Why in Hades would anyone that claims to undergo significant security/privacy/privacy "hardening" EVER ALLOW ANY BROWSER TO VISIT AN HTTP LINK ??? LIke I said, the ONLY reason that I could visit that HTTP LINK was by DISABLING some of my own "hardening" (I worded it as "let my guard down"). As I've also said, if you REALLY want to DISCREDIT a Chrome-based and CLAIM that "this site works in FIREFOX but NOT in CHROME", then that claim must be made in INCOGNITO comparisons! This is only a comparison of YOUR "hardening" between YOUR Edge and YOUR Firefox. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Your scenario LOADS THE PAGE FOR ME. If I let my guard down! Because it is an HTTP site and I generally DO NOT LOAD NON-HTTPS web sites! Not sure if that really counts as a "good example". An HTTPS site with an HTTP IP-ADDRESS hosted link is BAD PRACTICE.

Yes, what website? But more importantly, are we comparing Firefox INCOGNITO to Edge INCOGNITO? Why do I ask? Because I could fairly easily create a uBO filter or a Stylus style or a Tampermonkey script that could crash a web site for no other reason than not liking the web site's color scheme, lol.

Perhaps. But I have also sought advice on how to get IceCat to perform FASTER and my requests for before-and-after Proof-of-Concept were denied. I have no doubt that your Firefox performs FASTER then your Edge. All I can tell you is that I CANNOT REPLICATE THIS CLAIM (my tested Chrome-based forks are much MUCH faster than my tested Mozilla-based forks - NO CONTEST FASTER). But that point is MUTE and MEANINGLESS. Because, as I have stated, I want ONE browser to perform ALL of my browsing needs. ALL OF THEM. I really do have ZERO interest in "this browser for this, that browser for that". I was faced with Ungoogled v94 all the way up through v131 not meeting that ONE and ONLY criterion (looks weird, but that is the singular spelling of the plural criteria). I spent five days all but non-stop awake-hours to get my IceCat profile to where I wanted it - only later to discover it does not meet that ONE and ONLY criterion. Heck, it kind of makes me think of creating a new CHALLENGE for any-and-all - find me ONE, just ONE web site!, that WORKS in Firefox but does NOT work in Chrome! Just ONE! I don't think we can find ONE. But I could be wrong, lol. They did exist in the 90s! Seems fair to me.

Agreed. I don't use "loaders" as some sort of attempt to speed up browser start. In fact, I kind of prefer not to. Although the very slow FIRST-LAUNCH-ONLY after a restart or hibernate bugs me and it happens on ALL browsers, literally ALL browsers, something with my hardware, but other members cite the same exact FIRST-LAUNCH-ONLY slow-start phenomenon. Those that do speed up browser start basically load at Windows startup or run "partial load" in the background. I don't want additional startup or additional background tasks. I don't even allow the OS to do any "prefetch" (which could be PART OF first-launch-only). What I liked (but can do without if needed) about the winPenPack loader (and 360Chrome's loader) is that they enable a very robust session-only browsing scheme. With winPenPack/360Chrome loaders, I set a "default state" of extensions, config settings, even allowed history/cookies/logins and I can have the loader do file-copies and file-deletes to revert to the "default state". I can install/test 100 different extensions, but as soon as I exit the browser, NONE of them "stay" but my "default state" extensions DO STAY. I still haven't quite figured out HOW a bank web site and the US Post Office web site can DENY a login only when the winPenPack loader is being used. The best I (we) can figure thus far (and based on Brave browser discussions on the same banking web site) is NEW SSL SCHEMES. Basically how certain SSL certificates are very difficult to "pass" as 'secure' on XP.

I do remain "irrationally exhuberant" that IceCat v128 (whenever it is released) may work for ALL of my web sites. I can only cite that current IceCat (based on v115) does not work for ALL of my web sites. So that alone makes it "not for me".

Listen, I hear ya... No, please, I said listen... I ignored your "reply" all of yesterday, I guess I chose to break that silence this morning... Listen... I've "been there, done that". I was part of the "death to IE" Firefox userbase back in the day. I hear the same tone in your reply. Again, I hear ya, I had to sift through my registry to manually axe sixty-some references to "Google Updater" and that was from running a so-called "portable" version of Chrome! "...even under torture" reply = no help to anyone = pushing an agenda = no service to me = no service to you = no service to any reader hereof = et cetera... My very own "death to IE" narrow-minded mentality served nobody, not even myself. Again, "been there, done that". Whether "you" see it or not, I am no longer that single-focused narrow-minded "Firefox Only, Death to IE" user. I've used Netscape, AOL, IE, Firefox, Sleipnir, Maxthon, GreenBrowser, Pale Moon, New Moon, Serpent, Basilisk, 360Chrome, Ungoogled, Chrome, Iron, Opera, Edge, Flock, LibreWolf, Floorp, IceCat, K-Meleon, Lunascape, SlimBrowser, ane more! I'm not talking trial runs of a few hours, I've used every single one in that list for MONTHS ON END as my then-default ONE-AND-ONLY web browser. [edit: I take that back - Flock, LibreWolf, Floorp, and K-Meleon were DAYS, all others were MONTHS] I'm not sure why you aren't "hearing" this, because I've stated it more than once, I am NOT interested in "this browser for this, that browser for that". As far as MODERN forks, IceCat did come VERY close. But it does not work for ALL of my web sites and I will have ONE browser for ALL of my web sites - it really is THAT simple. So far, that ONE-for-ALL remains Ungoogled v122. Turns out that all versions (at least back as far as v94 and as new as v131) ALL work for ALL of my needed web sites. So long as I conjunct them with the PortableApps "loader" and not the winPenPack "loader". And to prevent the PortableApps "loader" from falling down the same rabbit hole that took the winPenPack "loader", I will likely create my own loader using AutoHotkey or recompile one of my own old Opera loaders. We all have options. One size will never fit all.

Eureka! I finally found out "what scenario" results in my bank AND the US Post Office (neither of which are "affiliated" with each other) being server-side blacklisted. They both blacklist the winPenPack loader if it has a version-mismatch with the browser that the loader loads (doesn't matter if it is 360Chrome, Ungoogled, or Official Chrome). I might still have to use Official Chrome versus Ungoogled, still testing. But I can "intentionally" cause server-side blacklisting! And, shh, don't tell them, but if I "intentionally" server-side blacklist ELEVEN web browsers (call them A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4, E-5, F-6, G-7, H-8, I-9, J-10, and K-11), for my TWELTH web browser, I can reuse the first (A-1) and it no longer be blacklisted!

Does anyone here use PortableApps Portable Chrome? More specifically, I am attempting to gain familiarity with the "loader" / "appinfo" .ini file. Other Chrome/Chromium "loaders" have the ability to DELETE files/directories when the browser is closed (I am not wanting to use a .bat file).

Wow! I can't help but laugh at yet another virus scanner yielding FALSE POSITIVES.

There are no easy answers, that's for d#ng sure. We thought we had a tight reign on our daughter. At times, that only "pushed her" to "push back". Doesn't matter what you do with HER device on YOUR network. She has friends who have different ideas of "parenting". There are girls at her school that has been raised differently. There are boys at her school that will give her a "free phone" for over the weekend. Hades, my daughter would walk around with a DEAD PHONE and EARBUDS claiming that was the only way that others at school didn't "make fun of her". et cetera... Welcome to "parenting" in the digital age.

I don't have a YouTube account. But I can't help but be curious if the solution is to create a YouTube account. Some sort of scenario where NO videos can be watched if NOT LOGGED IN. And once logged in, you know the entire history of what has been watched.

WAY reasonable !!! Trust me !!! "Been there, done that!" Some learn the hard way, my daughter (and parents of my generation) had to learn the hard way. My daughter didn't really see the "why" until she had a daughter of her own.

At work, I already have to use Official Chrome. We can only use Official Edge (corporate default) or Official Chrome at work (unless a lab bench). At home, my list of 8 to 15 or so "problem sites" only only ONLY all work in OFFICIAL CHROME. (I was quite suprised that I could drop all the way down to v94 [didn't try older]). They USED TO all work in Official Ungoogled. They USED TO all work in 360Chrome v13.5. They USED TO all work in Official Pale Moon. They USED TO all work in Mypal/New Moon/Serpent. I really really really REALLY REALLY REALLY will only use ONE web browser. I really really really have NO INTEREST in "this browser for this, that browser for that". Why not use the latest? Because I have an IMMENSE DISLIKE for the "modern GUI". One size never fits all. That's why there are HUNDREDS of different browsers, abides by the whole "to each their own". And let's face it, even history demonstrates how GUI changes can downright kill something like Firefox. Pre-Quantum/Photon market share was around 10%. Post-Quantum/Photon market share is an abysmal 2-3%.

Not just banks. Been having issues with other logins as well (US Postal Service is one, I have a list somewhere). IceCat (based on Firefox v115) is also NOT working for several of my must-have--no-alternatives web sites. So I've just sold my soul! I CAN get ALL of my must-have web sites to work with OFFICIAL CHROME v97 !!! (v94 also works!) They "don't like" me running Ungoogled v122 (v130 also does NOT work for my bank) and they think that's going to get me to "upgrade". Nah! I'll now have to see how long Official Chrome v97 lasts me, lol. I swear, keeping up with browser upgrades has become a FULL TIME JOB.

I'm finding it funny that the keyboard was moved on top of the mousepad before snapping the picture.

Definitely not cookie-related on my end.

Regarding benchmark scores - Speedometer 3.0 has a Developer Mode -- https://browserbench.org/Speedometer3.0/?developerMode