NotHereToPlayGames

I wish there was a 360Chrome v12.5 based on Chromium 80. v12 is based on Chromium 78. v13 (and v13.5) is based on Chromium 86.

Yep. But so far it's mainly been on web sites I kinda don't care about anyway. With only ONE exception - my local water bill payment, which I can't "replace" with another website offering "similar" content so I'm stuck with v13 for it, fingers crossed that it can eventually be polyfilled.

Same here. Nothing happens in 360Chrome v11 even with @InterLinked's polyfill from https://github.com/InterLinked1/chromefill

Wow! I feel "fortunate" that I was traveling and only trial-ran (what I will call) POS PM 30 from a hotel room on an experimental labtop with an experimental VM, both of which have already been deleted. Hint - POS does NOT stand for "point of sale" !

I tried to help you out as far as Chase constantly breaking. I cancelled a Chase account 2 to 2-1/2 years ago and when the person asked me why I am cancelling, "Because this web site, and this web site alone, has forced me to upgrade web browsers twice in six months, my life is far too important to spend so much of my time chasing this rabbit". But only to see several other web sites suffer over the 2 to 2-1/2 years that followed

Holy Crap! What a TOXIC mess! "Good riddance!"

Doesn't mean a dang thing! Or very limited at best. GitHub has a section to show green squares for how "active" the author is. Feodor2's projects have always been sparse and have historically gone several weeks between "contributions".

Do either of these two errors suggest a polyfill fix? Or might these be on the fly transpiling also? {"rootCause":null,"stackTrace":"TypeError: Cannot read property 'onBeforeRenderBtn' of undefined\n at Object.eval (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcore/vulcanuxcore.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:179861)\n at JSON.parse (<anonymous>)\n at Function.Ki.initJSFunctions (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcore/vulcanuxcore.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:179658)\n at nia.getUIControlConfig (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:427736)\n at eval (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:427092)\n at Array.forEach (<anonymous>)\n at nia.initialize (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:426690)\n at WRb.getContainerConfig (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:1170692)\n at WRb.buildComponentConfig (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:1169671)\n at eval (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:1169365)","detailedMessage":"error in layout configuration menuHeaderId"} {"rootCause":null,"stackTrace":"TypeError: Cannot read property 'onBeforeCustomerTestPaegeLoad' of undefined\n at Object.eval (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcore/vulcanuxcore.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:179861)\n at JSON.parse (<anonymous>)\n at Function.Ki.initJSFunctions (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcore/vulcanuxcore.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:179658)\n at Function.ua.handleComponentEvent (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcore/vulcanuxcore.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:233219)\n at _Kb.loadSolutionPage (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:1133118)\n at _Kb.loadDefaultPage (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:1130876)\n at _Kb.handlePageChangeByAction (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcontrols/vulcanuxcontrols.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:1131286)\n at SafeSubscriber.eval [as _next] (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/@apporchid/vulcanuxcore/vulcanuxcore.umd.min.js?v=@2.3.0:1:36068)\n at SafeSubscriber.__tryOrUnsub (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/rxjs/Subscriber.js?v=@2.3.0:242:16)\n at SafeSubscriber.next (https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/node_modules/rxjs/Subscriber.js?v=@2.3.0:189:22)","detailedMessage":"Error in loading solution page from response"} Those are the two errors my water bill pops up in a details-box. It's the ONLY site I visit monthly that "requires" 360Chrome v13 or higher

Piece of cake! Got 'er loaded. I think I tried this before but I neglected to test on known URLs and inadvertently dropped it, oops. Found it ironic that I need the chromefill in order to download the chromefill (in Chrome-based v69) via GitHub

Looks easy enough. Will do as time permits.

I'll say, "No, it doesn't mean anything of significance." Maybe it could "in the future" but I ran official Pale Moon 28, latest New Moon 28, and official Pale Moon 30 in several benchmark tests and all tests basically showed the same. That being official 28 and 30 being basically equivalent in scores and New Moon scoring slightly worse. edit - I did have to disable WebGL in all three because all three would crash on various benchmark tests with WebGL enabled. Win7 with Intel i3.

Ah, I guess I assumed it to be a simple match-and-replace. No logic required for simple match-and-replace.

I use Proxomitron for this purpose.

I'm a bit at a loss. "How" do I use this? What is the "your extension" being referenced and "how" do I use that also? I'm asking specifically towards 360Chrome v11 - I have very limited interest in any browser "newer" than 360Chrome v11.

I'm using a v69 (late 2018) and it works for 90% or so of everything I've thrown at it. Regarding the other 10%, and to be as blunt as possible, "nobody cares". I mean that towards the web masters running those 10% of web sites - "none of them care". As much as we (myself included) "live in the past", we are unrealistic to expect web masters to remain in the past. Web masters know what browsers are visiting their web site. They know that for every 10,000 visits, they have 1 using a four-year old web browser or a twenty-year old operating system. LIFE GOES ON if they "lose" that ONE visitor. Plain and simple.

I'm up to NINE computers and they are all i3 or older except for one i7. Hardware acceleration does NOT work on any of them! I have ZERO performance gain with hardware acceleration and TONS of graphics issues when I enable it. 9 times out of 10, if you have issues you are researching, the FIRST suggestion is ALWAYS to "disable hardware acceleration". I personally would never suggest anybody to enable hardware acceleration - "mileage may vary".

Is there an AWD model?

I cannot find any references to that address in chrome.dll. I suppose it could be some "certificate update" but I block any-and-all "certificate crap" on my computer, it's a broken system and I feel more "secure" WITHOUT IT.

Still doing some digging. Limited resources at the moment, visiting dad out-of-state and not at my own computer.

I have been unable to replicate this in my "regular" as-is v13.5. If it doesn't exist in "regular", there's no way for it to exist in "ungoogled".

None of 360Chrome (not the official Chinese, not the Russian Repack, not my rebuild, not Humming Owl's rebuils) is compatible with Chrome Web Store themes.

The above is a quote from @Dave-H in a different thread. I would like to ask for Ad Revenue to be made public if this web site is now going to have constant "banners" requesting members to "donate". I seek not to overstep my bounds and will cease-and-decist at request. I just think that the constant "banners" is a bit over-the-top and we-the-members herein should have a better "overall picture" of "costs" we are being asked to cover. Again, I am not seeking to overstep my bounds, I have been here since December 2019, making me relatively "new" here. But the question begs to be asked - if we-the-members fully and wholly cover the "costs", then we should also consider REMOVING the "ads" - ALL of them. Just thinking out loud...

I'm unsure how "honest" we are supposed to be. The topic of "donations" have been front-and-center as of late. I sincerely hope we-the-members do not become "at risk" of being banned simply on grounds of discussing said "donations". Against that "backdrop", I have never, in my entire life, "donated" to a web site. That does not imply that I never will. I DO have a small list of political and religious affiliations that I DO "donate" towards. But I generally call them "contributions", not "donations". I cannot, in good faith, "donate" towards a "technical" web site with political rants running amok. That's just me. But perhaps other "silent" members as well. That said, we-the-members should have a full account of "expenses" and of "advertising income" if we are going to have banner after banner requesting we "donate".

Hmm, interesting. I'll see if I can replicate (I've never personally trusted anything higher than v13 build 2206, to be honest). Do you still see this first-tab connection if all extensions are disabled?

Noted, might be a few weeks before I can did into it and see if I can find the culprit.