NotHereToPlayGames

Does the original Chinese v13.0.2206 also crash for you against html5test? I still wouldn't use html5test as "the" tell-tale.

Yep. All of my extensions are over a year or so old. Most are NOT the "latest and greatest" because the OLDER versions are lighter and more efficient.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very curious on the newer v13.1 and v13.5 because of the random crashes in v13.0. I've been using v12 as my default because of those random crashes. But it still seems odd that I ran v13.0 for close to six months or so before it started doing those random crashes - it was ROCK SOLID for very close to six months, NEVER a single solitary crash. Almost like a "time bomb" was embedded into the code that hasn't been found yet. We axed all of the telemetry we could find - but "did we?" Is there some sort of "time bomb" that 'collects' data for six months or so and these random crashes are because it's now trying to "do" something with that 'collection'? But CAN'T because we axed the code. Just seems very strange to me that I was running v13 for that long without a single solitary crash and now it crashes daily. ~ "Things that make you go hmmm"...

Yeah, I guess basically ALL browsers are "beta". Weekly updates. Nightly branches. Impossible to keep up. False sense of security by end-users thinking the only way to be "secure" is to update their software three or four times PER DAY. Googled for curiosity, found three articles in less than 15 seconds that "recommend" you set your anti-virus software to check for updates every 30 minutes - b#llcr@p, I don't even install anti-virus software! Oh well...

And there really is HOURS upon HOURS of work required in order to build these rebuilds. I cannot spend HOURS upon HOURS for a BETA then turn around and do it again for a "better BETA" a month from now, then again for another "better BETA" two months from now. As mentioned earlier, once v13.1.x or v13.5.x makes it out of "beta" then I'll likely revisit - WAAYYY too many hours involved to construct beta after beta after beta.

Address positions do not line up, can't just copy files between different build numbers.

Documentary Letter of Credit ??? Data Link Control ??? Developmental Learning Center ??? Distributed Leader Course ??? Disability Law Center ??? Dominion Lending Centre ??? Democratic Leadership Council ??? Digital Loop Carrier ??? Dual-Layer Capacitor ??? Date of Last Contact ??? Diamond-Like Carbon ??? Diamond Like Coating ??? Dioxin-Like Compound ??? Diagnostic Link Connector ??? Oh! Downloadable Content! But I had to get this far into an acronym list to find out what in Hades this "joke" was all about.

Same here. MSFN is one of those random crashes - start to reply to a topic, walk away from the computer for a minute or two, return and browser has crashed, seems to only happen when a reply has been started. I've not been able to track down the actual cause - but this happens in XP only and happens in all three of v13's -- in my v13 [2206], in Humming Owl's v13 [2250], and in Dixel's v13 [1106].

I cannot replicate any crashes on html5test but nor would a crash there prevent me from using the browser elsewhere as far as that is concerned.

Upon some trial runs on v13.1.x and v13.5.x, I will be keeping my v13 rebuild at build 2206. There has been no "engine" upgrades to any of the 'newer' releases (they all use the same exact Chromium Engine used by build 2206). Just a TON of "bloatware" and useless features not needed to just "browse". Crashes on html5test do not concern me - by the time we wittled away all of the "bloatware" cr@p then html5test would likely continue to crash, no real loss in my view. Once v13.1.x or v13.5.x makes it out of "beta" then I'll likely revisit - but for now, there is no "value-add" beyond 2206 from what I can see, just a bunch of added JUNK (even an added SERVICE that continues to run even after you close the browser!).

<blocked iframe> I'll look into an updated v13.1.4010.0 but it will likely be a couple of weeks.

I'll look into it, might be a couple of weeks.

I thought that most browsers already included this without any need for an extension. In Chrome-based, you do this by holding Ctrl-Shift down then clicking on the link - the link then opens in a new tab and that new tab is activated. I know this throws the keyboard into the mix and a context menu would be mouse-only, but does Ctrl-Shift (or similar) do the same thing for FF-based? FF used to have a browser.tabs.loadInBackground preference setting (set to false for your desired result), unsure if this is still usable in St52. edit - oops, you did say "without reaching for the keyboard"... hopefully setting browser.tabs.loadInBackground to false will work for you...

I don't think it's going to be a "two-line summary" but I'll wait for other Win 98 users to chime in. Best of luck.

You can't be serious! If you have a real interest in running 98, then reading this thread in its entirety should not be too hard to follow. Certainly a better solution then some sort of (paraphrasing), "I don't have the time to follow this thread, can somebody spend a dozen hours or so and compile a summary for me?". ~ Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

Don't waste your time! Unless you're one of those folks that "like" 'reality tv' or 'Judge Judy' "crap".

Every single one of those is prevented using the Tampermonkey script I provided earlier. This "feature" is best "blocked" via Tampermonkey extension and not by "breaking" it at the browser coding (because while a nuisance to you and I, a lot of people will see this feature as "value-add" [Firefox, Edge, and Safari all have this "feature" also (deployed slightly differently though].

Hmm... Odd... Technically 13 r 5 is doing what the browser is "supposed" to do.

Same here, @Mr.Scienceman2000. A LOT of folks here at MSFN like to post YouTube "content" and I always just get gigantic empty space because I do not allow YouTube content unless the domain I am on is YouTube. So my Stylus kills the gigantic empty space and I just read on past it, "Not worth seeing if it's an embedded YouTube on a non-YouTube domain."

Hmm, interesting. Would you be able to repeat the test with 13 r 4 and 13 r 5 three times each with new profiles for all three tests (six total)? I'm curious to see if all three new profiles for 13 r 4 especially DOESN'T add for all three new profiles.

I've always kind of been a "browser junkie". I'll have ONE default browser that has to work on ALL of my 24 bookmarked finance, news, and entertainment websites. But tend to always have a small handful of browsers "on the side". My longest-running default was GreenBrowser coupled with Proxomitron - 17yr run at least, could be more (going by my archived installation disks). During that run, my secondary tended to be Sleipnir and I kept Maxthon and Opera around but didn't really use them that often. It became a daily "tweak" to keep Proxomitron happy with all of my bookmarks (back then a much longer list of daily forums and whatnot that I've lost track of). A couple finance sites would no longer work so that lead me to "official" Pale Moon which I used for three, maybe four years, right in through there. I discovered Mypal to load FASTER and work on everything I needed it to work on and used it for two or three years. NM28 became my default for a few months or so but then opted for NM27 and it was my default for two or three years. I grew tiresome of updating WEEKLY and also found that NEWER versions of NM28 and NM27 were actually performing SLOWER than older versions. So I dropped back down to Mypay 27.9.4 for only about a year until having issues with the same couple of finance sites that lead me to "official" Pale Moon in the first place. I then ran 360Chrome v13 for several months and have been on 360Chrome v12 for the last couple of months. I use 360Chrome v11 in most of my VirtualBox VMs.

The user has to USE the search engine in order for it to be added to the "other" list. You can VISIT the search engine and it won't be added to the list, but if you USE the search engine then you basically "opted in" for it to be added. I personally dislike this so I use Tampermonkey to prevent it.

I wouldn't classify FF as "that good" (far from, in my opinion). FF did have a "Lemmings-Like" "Cult Following" in the late 90s - and a "cult" seems like the best way to describe it "in hindsight". People "flocked" (pun intended, Flock was the name of another web browser back in that era) to FF in droves, "no questions asked", it was touted as the "safest" and most "secure" and people bought into the HYPE. According to this article ( https://www.visualcapitalist.com/internet-browser-market-share/ ), FF peaked at 32% market share (I guess it actually surprises me that it peaked that LOW, but it was during an era of cell phone browsers carving out small slices of market share). Also according to the same article, it looks like Chrome is on track to be only the third web browser to surpass 90% market share. This page ( https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share ) puts Chrome at 65%.