NotHereToPlayGames

How many of you have bumped into portions of text disappearing? The "fix" suggesed in 2019 in the thread I pulled this image from cited disabling Hardware Acceleration (which I never enable to begin with, has always caused more harm than good and DISABLING is always the "go-to" suggestion to "fix" things). I'm currently DISABLING Accelerated 2D canvas, will keep you posted if I see portions of text disappear while this flag is disabled.

Thanks. Thanks. Looks like that's the end of the line for my Arcticfox, I gotta have an always-on status bar. Everyone has their must-have's, that's one of mine.

I have zero clue on what that gitbub page is saying. What is the last version of Arcticfox that still has the always-on status bar?

Speaking of Arcticfox, when did it lose the always-on status bar?

THERE it is! See msfntor, it has NOTHING to do with YOUR posts on MSFN. The nitter site admin is not an MSFN member. The world does not revolve around MSFN (especially not the "Older NT-Family OSes" threads). The nitter bug reports on the proper channels (which is not MSFN) was reported on November 21 by GitGondola. Your first post regarding nitter ( https://msfn.org/board/topic/182993-360-extreme-explorer-arcticfoxie-versions/?do=findComment&comment=1209723 ) was Friday, December 17. TWENTY SIX DAYS LATER, if I counted correctly. My point being, the world does not revolve around MSFN. The nitter cite Admin is not an MSFN member and nitter was not fixed by complaining about nitter on MSFN. There are proper channels to report nitter bugs and it was GitGondola that got that ball rolling. But anywhoo...

Your point being? Of course an MSFN site Admin will read your hundreds of posts. A Google site Admin will not. A Twitter site Admin will not. A Facebook site Admin will not. A Nitter site Admin will not.

I guarantee that the nitter admin did NOT see our posts here at MSFN. Think what you want to. But you place WAY TOO HIGH of an opinion on MSFN if you think web site admins are reading forum posts dedicated to Older NT-Family OSes.

lol, wasn't trying to stand out. The log file is not new, I've seen it in the past, it is why I use a different loader .ini file after I install all extensions, I delete that log file, and have for the last 14 months or so since I've switched over to 360Chrome. BUT, you are correct, I didn't PUBLICLY announce that log until we (you and I) were looking at write-prevents for files/folders. And because I cannot delete that .log file in v13.5 whereas I can in v11 and v12 -- making me distrust any 360Chome version higher than v13 build 2206 [which are also the versions which default Incognito Mode Developer Tools to Chinese]. It honestly didn't strike me as out of the ordinary - BUT only because I do not keep any data between browser sessions.

Right, what D.Draker said. It's not the browser but the JAVASCRIPT that we HAVE TO allow in order to use MSFN.

Very lengthy discussion spanning several pages -- starts here - https://msfn.org/board/topic/182993-360-extreme-explorer-arcticfoxie-versions/?do=findComment&comment=1208958 Log location discussed here - https://msfn.org/board/topic/182993-360-extreme-explorer-arcticfoxie-versions/?do=findComment&comment=1209035

What is "polyfill"? I've seen tons of references to it and I really am clueless (I abandoned Mozilla-based and awaiting patiently for Mypal 2.0), what is it?

I've had SATURDAY'S where I'll install Windows TWO DOZEN TIMES. I do a completely unattended install with a very large number of AutoIt executables and the best way to fully test is to "fully test". The full install on an XP x86 SP3 only takes about 40 minutes whereas an XP x64 SP2 takes closer to 70 minutes. It's actually kinda fun to watch. Mouse moving around unattended, program file locations typing themselves unattended, programs opening and moving to a different monitor then closing so that their last position is memorized so that they open on the correct monitor when I go to use the program (all six of my computers have anywhere from 2 to 5 monitors, none of them only have one), mouse wheel and buttons configures unattended, desktop icon locations set unattended, EVERYTHING that has a setting is pre-set for me, fully automated!

You do not owe anybody an explanation! "We're not here to play games."

Agreed! Reply-box logging is done on pretty much every site with a reply box. It's only when you see this type of logging being performed on username and password fields that you should tie your knickers into a knot. But a reply box? Who cares, in my view. You wouldn't be IN the reply box if you didn't "support" the web site. And the reply box isn't even there until AFTER you LOG IN. If it truly concerns you, then I guess you're more than welcome to READ the content at MSFN, but you can't ADD content to MSFN.

My view is that nefarious keyloggers will send data BEFORE we hit that "submit reply" button. I've watched network packet traffic and I see no evidence of data being transferred WHILE our reply-box typing is being "logged". And you can open that log WHILE typing in this reply box and see just what it logs. I see nothing nefarious going on, just a "feature" that SOME will see as "value-add". I would rather this reply-box NOT be logged AT ALL. It was ME that reported this logging and I've seen ZERO people leave MSFN on account of it. And I have no plans to leave on account of it either. What you chose to do is totally up to you. But I am convinced that we will NOT get MSFN to change their code just for OUR preference. Nor should they, in my opinion. I'm all for privacy and security, but I think way too many people use it as an excuse for paranoia. And everybody's definition of "privacy", "security", and "paranoia" are DIFFERENT. All we can do is do the talking with our FEET, to be perfectly honest. I do that with Twitter and Facebook and 60% or so of Google (I do use some Google services). Twitter and Facebook is blocked. Oh, a lot of Yahoo is blocked also. If I feel like MSFN becomes "nefarious", then my feet will walk. In the meantime, it's all just "talk".

There is a keylogger for the sake of restoring typed content. Some users may see that as a "pro" and not a "con". I'm with D.Draker and see it as a "con". BUT even so, I can only prove that the keylogger is LOCAL, I cannot prove that MSFN is storing this log forever. Even if so, I kinda don't care. Why? Because if I have the reply box OPEN and I'm TYPING in that reply box, those are the ONLY keys being logged, and I'm about to POST it anyway. So what if the "log" show a TYPO that I had to backspace over and there may be a DELAY before the typo is corrected. Point is, this "keylogger" only logs the reply box. And anything beyond that "could" be considered conspiracy theory. I agree with D.Draker that we don't need this keylogger. But it's only logging this reply. It's not like I open the reply box, type profanities for the keylogger to log, then close the log without submitting those profanities. I only use the reply box for content that I'm in-process of submtting to the forum. Like I'm about to do as soon as I scroll the submit button into view...

YES. We let nitter drop! Or face the music and go out and buy a computer with Win10. And that's assuming nitter works on Win10, as none of the Win7 or Win10 crowd has chimed in. Why? Because none of us really care about nitter. Just my opinion, of course.

And I would not necessarily assume that faking a "new" User Agent (Latest User-Agent I see: for Mac Os X 10_7 with Firefox 92.0) would be the correct attempt either. But rather try a User Agent from 2017 or 2018. Keep trying older User Agents. At the very least, try a mobile phone User Agent. And if you never get anything that says something like "your browser is not supported", then that web site has been specifically coded to not care what your User Agent is. Faking User Agents is actually OLD SCHOOL. This isn't 2020 anymore. The "modern web" 'evolves' a crapload faster than it did way back in 2008 or so when "faking" User Agents became so common that some of our parents even know how to do it.

Theoretically, yes. There is a Compiling Chromium thread that was started in 2017 and only hit 3 pages by 2019 and has been recently bumped -- https://msfn.org/board/topic/177191-compiling-chromium-browser-for-xp/?do=findComment&comment=1208782 But the thread has found little to no traction and I wouldn't be able to be the first person to perform such a task until my retirement years 20 years away as it would be a full-time job to learn it all.

MOVE ON! Please. When you stumble upon a web site like nitter and you can't get it to work in TEN different web browsers, then hello, nitter is the problem, not your web browser. You've directly cited issues on nitter with v13.5 r 5, v13 r 6, v13 M, Cent, Slimjet 50, Iron 49, SuperBird 44, Serpent 55, IceApe, and NM28. This is NOT a "browser bug". Are you "reporting" this in forums of all TEN of those browsers? If so, your OCD is worse then mine You're kinda gonna have to ACCEPT that nitter is simply a JUNK web site that WILL NOT WORK (at least in XP, I'm still waiting for Win7 or Win10 users to chime in).

With nitter not working on basically ALL browsers (at least in XP), it's time to MOVE ON and ACCEPT that nitter is simply NOT GOING TO WORK (at least in XP). Has anyone tried nitter in any browser on Win7 or Win10? Has anyone tried changing the User Agent in any of the browsers they've tried in XP?

I totally understand you. I'm simply emphasizing the importance of "modern web" compatibility OVER AND ABOVE "extensions". I could care less about "extensions", I want a browser that can handle the "modern web" FIRST AND FOREMOST.

This is where I highly disagree! To me, the MOST IMPORTANT aspect of a web browser is that if I have 1000 weekly web sites that I visit, then the browser MUST work on ALL 1000 without any extensions installed. If so much as ONE of those web sites does not work without any extensions installed, then that web browser does not serve my needs and not worth my time! Period! This is the case with NM27 / NM 28 / BNav / St52 / St55 -- I cannot pay one of my utility bills with ANY of them so they serve ZERO purpose for me to use them on my other 999 weekly web sites. So "more extensions" means NOTHING to me! ESPECIALLY given that extensions are a "dime a dozen". MOST written by kids that are kinda clueless, but need to get their start somewhere. Extension ecosystems, in my view, are kinda better managed by Mozilla-based than Chromium-based. I do give Mozilla-based that. How many times have you searched for an extension on the Chrome Web Store and found one dated over a decade old!? It should have been DELETED a LONG time ago. Extensions have NEVER dictated what browser I use. AND NEVER WILL.

Agreed! I actually thought MAT was on the right track on this one and disagreed with Roytam's file names of palemoon and basilisk right in the file name (still disagree, to be honest, but no skin off my back). UNTIL we saw what happened with the "raccoon-branded" Mypal. MAT lost all accountability from that point forward in my eyes. BINGO!

As an MSFN member throughout this entire "mess", I never felt that MSFN was targeted specifically by Moonchild, only by Tobin. I didn't really follow it that closely (Mozilla-based lost to Chromium-based long before the "mess" arrived). As an XP user, I feel that official Pale Moon owes XP nothing. I really strongly believe that. If official Pale Moon is looking toward the future, then XP-compatibility is "backward-looking" and not "forward-looking". I can't help but feel that EVERYBODY in the UNIVERSE that is still using XP and needs a browser to also run on XP, those people are already HERE at MSFN. And we can count them on two hands! Add one foot if we need some toes to count the Vista folks. Official Pale Moon's future isn't XP and Vista. I know that "goes against the grain" of MSFN collective-opinion, but I really don't think that official Pale Moon's "future" is XP and Vista. There isn't that big of a "market share" for that audience. And we are all already members here at MSFN.