
NotHereToPlayGames
MemberContent Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by NotHereToPlayGames
-
Jeff Dunham Christmas Special
-
Awesome! Many thanks! Monitor the "Manage Search Engines" page in Settings -> Basics. If you see the Default search settings on search bar change, try to keep track of what steps you took leading up to them changing. The Other search engines is "designed" to change itself (unless you use Tampermonkey to disable "OpenSearch").
-
But you changed the SKIN file (and I know that D.Draker does also, that's where his Chinese is coming from, he shared a link but I was unable to download so I cannot verify fully). The way that all of the puzzle pieces fit together, that really is all it takes for things to not work as intended. One "text string" can exist, literally, in AT LEAST four different files. When you change the SKIN file, you change the "priority" of where that text string is pulled from. My ungoogled v11 should look like this - only one default search engine and it's not the original Google but a replaced Google without the telemetry.
-
Sounds like you are deleting/preventing too many .log files (especially anything HIGHER than v13 build 2206). I personally do not encourage anything NEWER than v13 build 2206 - the NEWER versions (inclucing all of the v13.5's) have extension settings and telemetry data saved in the SAME LOG FILES whereas OLDER versions had two separate files and you could delete/prevent the telemetry without having any effect on your extionsion settings.
-
Yes. I personally keep that option UNCHECKED.
- 2,340 replies
-
1
-
My Browser Builds (Part 3)
NotHereToPlayGames replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
The most recent Arcticfox has no status bar. I didn't see any even when hovering over a link. Previous Arcticfox versions had the status bar always shown. The latest doesn't have any status bar. None at all. Not even on hover. -
Thanks. Have not tried the --no-sandbox parameter yet. The "disappearing act" does seem to only be v11 (which is unfortunate because it is my favorite because the GUI loads the fastest on my systems). But it's also completely random. I haven't found a repeatable do A, then B, then C to force it to happen.
-
My Browser Builds (Part 3)
NotHereToPlayGames replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
I disagree. Developers have the intellectual knowledge to know the probability of a "theoretical vulnerability" that will STATISTICALLY NEVER HIT A REAL-LIFE COMPUTER versus applying a patch that 100% STATISTICALLY DEGRADES PERFORMANCE. And you also know the large number of "patches" that tend to be graphic-based vectors and scalars, really nothing to do with "security". But that DEGRADE performance. I no longer follow the patches, but I do know that a very large number have NOTHING to do with "security". "Stability", perhaps. But not "security". At any rate, keep up the great work, it may appear that I'm "arguing" but I'm not trying to, just trying to paint the full picture. -
My Browser Builds (Part 3)
NotHereToPlayGames replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Well, the "security" answer WAS NOT AN ANSWER. It was a "copout", plain and simple. I *guarantee* you it will not be "reverted" - because that answer tells us that it's a THOUSAND different "patches" and cannot be tracked down to "a few", so the "security" answer was thrown out willy-nilly. Security is a RED HERRING. Tell people that changing a pixel color from white to black and that it was done for "security" and most people will BELIEVE YOU. Security schmacurity. Don't get me wrong, Roytam is doing it the way the MAJORITY of his followers prefer it, sacrifice PERFORMANCE for the sake of "security". It is a VALID approach! I am not trying to undermine that. But I take the opposite approach, I use OLDER versions of Roytam's browsers and prefer PERFORMANCE over "security". WE ALL HAVE THAT OPTION. Don't be "fooled" by the claim that newer offers more "security". Just my two cents. Greatly appreciate Roytam's work. It's all a matter of personal preference and we can all decide for ourselves if an older version best fits our needs or if a newer version best fits our needs. -
My Browser Builds (Part 3)
NotHereToPlayGames replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
"theoritically"... "red herring"... -
Good news! I think! I've kinda avoided using v13 (still avoid v13.5 but for different reasons!) because v13 was randomly crashing (especially here at MSFN!) With Accelerated 2D canvas disabled, I've had this reply box open for an hour or so, had YouTube playing random videos, and had a Stylus stylesheet editor window open. I think Accelerate 2D canvas is what was causing my random crashes. Mileage may vary. Will continue to run v13 as default for the next couple of days for verification.
-
Why my post number is stable, stopped...
NotHereToPlayGames replied to msfntor's topic in Site & Forum Issues
Same here! Seems to me that only "attention-seeking" folks would really even CARE what the "count" is. The Facebook "like/dislike" crowd! -
My Browser Builds (Part 3)
NotHereToPlayGames replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Basemark Web 3.0 test locks up at 9/20 in 55 and completes in 52. Other than that it seems that 55 is microscopically faster than 52. -
Why my post number is stable, stopped...
NotHereToPlayGames replied to msfntor's topic in Site & Forum Issues
Can we put a LIMIT to how many posts any single member can post in one day? waka waka waka -
Marquee was one of the most CHILDISH elements ever to exist! edit -- and thankfully, although able to "marquee" when creating this post, the forum software does REMOVE the marquee element.
-
My Browser Builds (Part 3)
NotHereToPlayGames replied to roytam1's topic in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
I'm curious as well. NEITHER one will work for American Water billpay. BUT it has always been my perception that 52 is more advanced that 55, despite the numbering confusion of 55 being higher than 52.