NotHereToPlayGames

Please learn how to read GitHub "commits".

I certainly hope so! So that we can nail this d#mn coffin, faking a user agent or client hint is WAY different than "claiming" to be several versions newer on an older engine. THE SUPERMIUM ENGINE IS WHAT IT IS CLAIMING TO BE !!! Plain and simple. TO H#LL WITH TWITCH! Twitch by itself proves NOTHING. It only proves bad coding at TWITCH! IT WOULD BE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT STORY IF WE HAD A HUNDRED OR A THOUSAND WEB SITES THAT DO NOT WORK IN SUPERMIUM! Let's face it, PERSONAL BIAS is leading this discussion. Not logic and reasoning.

Bingo!

This is not true! Something in Supermium is indeed breaking Twitch. But "do" the same exact thing (once we find out the "exacts") in OFFICIAL CHROME v132 and Twitch *WILL* break also! If Supermium was "not even v126", a hundred or even a thousand web sites would be broken, NOT ONLY TWITCH.

Disproving CONSPIRACIES is a DEATH TRAP. I'm done with the "conspiracy" of Supermium not being the engine it claims to be. H#LL, we're still trying to prove who killed JFK or whether we really landed on the moon or not. Some CONSPIRACIES will NEVER be proven - this one is NOT WORTH ANY MORE OF MY TIME. You guys are, of course, obligated/entitled to define how your time is allocated.

re: --test-type chrome flag https://github.com/GoogleChrome/chrome-launcher/issues/24 https://github.com/GoogleChrome/chrome-launcher/blob/main/docs/chrome-flags-for-tools.md I do not get the Chromecast UDP in *any* of my browsers! But I can confirm that I just *disabled* the --test-type flag but I still do *NOT* get the Chromecast UDP! Would require additional testing which time alludes me at the moment. Only tested in Official Ungoogled as of this morning. No time to test further.

Highly HIGHLY improbable. We either need to NAIL THIS COFFIN SHUT or we need to PROVE this CONSPIRACY once and for all. Let's all of us take a step back and come up with some sort of D#MN PROOF. Twitch PROVES NOTHING. Let's start thinking outside the box that we have all buried ourself in. I've already "seen enough" to see THIS IS MISINFORMATION !!! But the "west side story gang" is always always always going to stick together and "go down with the ship".

Agree *AND* Disagree. We still don't really know the EXACT reason that Twitch is broken. NO ONE is denying that Twitch is broken. NO ONE is trying to find another example web site! It's just "dogpile on the rabbit". If it is CSS or FONT related, then Supermium's HIGHLY APPLAUDED endeavor at attempting DirectWrite broke a CSS coding at Twitch. I don't have Twitch, I will not be signing up for Twitch. BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE MORE EXAMPLE WEB SITES instead of just more "dogpile on the rabbit". Has anyone tried Twitch in the only other GDI/DirectWrite browser that at least I am aware of - ie, this one = https://github.com/GTANAdam/GDIChromium ? But it's also showing its age big time, it's still at v103 and appears to be an abandoned project.

You're not listening. Twitch this, Twitch that. Is Twitch seriously the *ONLY* web site out of roughly 1.1 BILLION of them that isn't working in Supermium? If so, that's about 438,692,547 times better than Pale Moon, Basilisk, and Serpent. I myself have never heard of Twitch until this "hit the fan". But YES, apparently it is "important enough" of a web site that the developer SHOULD BE finding out what he did to the Chromium Code that broke Twitch.

Yes and no. I give it the benefit of the doubt. Only the next release would indicate if the author accepted the critique or not. I don't think that the author "owes" a reply to every issue/bug being reported. I mean, there's over 500 open and 600 closed. Yes, "gigantic" bugs would be nice to have a reply. But I myself do not see them as "owed" to us.

Was it answered in a previous issue tracker?

That seems perfectly fair and legit. Afterall, all of Roytam's and Feodor's releases spoof useragent overrides for the same exact "better webcompat" reasons.

IDENTICAL results in XP. Personally, all of this "chitter-chatter" hinting/suggesting/accusing Supermium of being an older engine is FALSE, "misinformation", and "slanderous". None of us do MSFN any "justice" when all we do is go around "following" our 'favorite Lemming' over the cliff. My two cents...

Enabling experimental javascript and experimental web platform features results in chromiumchecker to PASS v135 pre-release checks and PASS one of the v133 checks, but still FAILS the v134 check.

I just did that test ( https://chromiumchecker.com/ ) using Supermium 132 and it passes all v132 and older checks, it fails v133 thru v135 pre-release checks. Supermium 132 is "faking" user agent and client hints as pretending to be v133. But *SMART WEB SITES* know better, LIKE THIS TEST SITE, all it takes is ONE javascript test to prove that a claimed user agent and client hints (despite them both "matching" each other) is actually FAKED. I tested in Win10 with all default flags. Will test in XP shortly.

I kind of still think that this is an Unproven Hypothesis and akin to "misinformation". Our one (and ONLY ONE?) variable is TWITCH. All other sites are behaving as they should (even the British Gas site) once the end-user swaps the flag defaults that Supermium swapped behind the scene. Seems we should be finding ways to PROVE this before we keep spreading it as "gospel".

You could try one of the below (their .js files would need modified accordingly, easy to do if we know "what" you need in the Open With list) - https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/open-with-switchbar/klgpknafjlhnpkppfbihchgfebbdcomd https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/open-in-openoffice/ioppgifkecchbmpobbkdkobildodihed https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/open-with-notepad++/hgfbigeomjlaahldcoilagphholnmhlc Or any of their "related" extensions. Note, just because they are "extensions", you don't have to use them as extensions, most are easily converted to userscripts.

Well, we kind of need more details. Are you trying to watch 4K movies on a slow computer? On my slower computers, YouTube is denied webm, vp8, vp9, and av01 video types and framerate is limited to 30. I actually disable the comment section, so I'd have to experiment in that regard.

Yeah, perhaps. I really want to remain optimistic on Supermium + Widevine = Netflix. As of now, Supermium can be made to pass some Widevine tests, but NOT FOR NETFLIX. And NO, it has nothing to do with "old hardware" because I am using Brave v134 + Widevine and Netflix WORKS on even my **OLDEST** hardware.

That's a question to post on GitHub, not in this thread. This is really just a "BS" thread that most of the Supermium userbase probably doesn't even "follow". YOUR fault as much as MINE. I'm MAN ENOUGH to share PARTIAL BLAME. Your EGO probably prevents you from doing the same. You have a God Complex, everybody should praise you. **NOT ME** FIGHT FIRE WITH FIRE. I've had ENOUGH of YOU over the YEARS. Yeah, it's THAT simple!

Members that SOLICIT "followers" as often as you do SHOULD BE BANNED. Solicitation = Spam.

Should we realistically expect them to? I myself really really REALLY hate hate HATE that somehow we-the-consumer has all but come to EXPECT our browsers to be updated WEEKLY if not NIGHTLY. Armageddon would befall MSFN if Roytam1 stopped updating WEEKLY.

He "undid" that change. But only after the userbase basically said, "Hey! Don't do that! I did not sign up for 'experimental' features!"

On second thought, the mere way that GitHub commits "ahead / behind" 'works' kind of disproves this? I think?

Very very interesting! Call me intrigued! This would actually be VERY EASY BUT TIME-CONSUMING to prove. Again, VERY EASY! But who among us is going to spend the TIME to PROVE this one way or the other? I do think we should PROVE IT or ask the developer directly before spreading possible misinformation. The web site CANIUSE.COM (Can I use dot com) kind of does HALF the work for us, but it only narrows down what we would have to test within Supermium. https://caniuse.com/?compare=chrome+123,chrome+124,chrome+125,chrome+126,chrome+127,chrome+128,chrome+129,chrome+130,chrome+131,chrome+132,chrome+133,chrome+134,chrome+135,chrome+136,chrome+137&compareCats=all Basically all boils down to CSS. Note that this and this both specifically state (for v122, for example) that the #enable-experimental-web-platform-features is REQUIRED.