NotHereToPlayGames

I assure you that I hate that as much as you do What is one to do -- "Mongo only pawn in game of life."

Build 1054 Note: file 13581 for 2206/2250 = file 13579 for 1054 This is the Incognito "background" - I have opted to remove it completely but the file is just a compressed .gz if other users want to keep this "background". I leave these Russian/Chinese translations for those that opt to keep the "background".

I'm hoping to have a rebuild of Build 1054 posted sometime over the next couple of days. I would be interested on Cisco Webex feedback once the rebuild is ready.

follow-up note: IPs not in chrome.dll... this connection is Chromium/Chrome and not 360Chrome, not sure if I can break this but still digging...

Just found some more un-translated Chinese. If you have a file downloading in the background, a Chinese dialog will popup if you attempt to exit before download is complete.

Here You Go! THREE YouTube tabs on XP x86 SP2 VM with 2 GB RAM! Audio was a bit choppy (but come on, who listens to THREE videos simultaneously!) And that comes from a guy that DOES watch TWO televisions simultaneously! No crashes for a good five minutes of this "unrealistic scenario" - but I didn't let it run for 3hrs either. Did the test twice because the first screencap I forgot to have the v13 build version dialog open as proof.

Awesome, thanks!

I agree. Though SP2 by itself is misleading. My fully-updated x64 does not have an SP3, only an SP2 and several post-SP2 updates. My fully-updated non-hacked (no POSReady 'hacks' because they broke some of my apps) x86 is SP3 and several post-SP3 "legit" (no POS) updates. Truth be told, I wouldn't even bother trying to hunt down a 360Chrome for x86 SP2 and the "niche user" thereof. I have ZERO issues on YouTube with Build 2206 and if the aforementioned YouTube issues are only with x86 SP2, then I would be inclined to "move along, there's nothing to see here". I even quite literally threw my hands in the air when I discovered that the YouTube issues folks were posted were on SP2, "Are you kidding me?!", but maybe SP2 was mentioned previously and I just read past it. Seeking out a modern web browser for a fully-updated EOL OS [2014] is one thing, seeking out a modern web browser for x86 SP2 [a full DECADE older, 2004] seems very much a "niche market" in my humble opinion. But having said that, I have had an occassional crash using Build 2206 when accessing Dropbox (which, ironically, would never even be used if I didn't need a way to share rebuilds or post screencaps here at MSFN). So my vested interested in Build 1054 (or maybe 1032) has more to do with Dropbox as far as on my end - if it happens to solve the YouTube issues for x86 SP2, then that is really just more of a "bonus".

Has anyone figured out just what the "System DPI" setting is supposed to do? I'm showing builds 1032 and 1054 to not crash XP x86 XP2. 1032 did not have the System DPI setting, it was introduced in 1054. 1054's version notes cite performance optimization so i'm inclined to use 1054 as my next rebuild. But 1032 seems to also be a good candidate because that DPI "feature" is not part of 1032.

Okay, I've installed an XP x86 SP2 VM with 2GB RAM and I can repeat crashes on v13 builds 1106, 1088, 1006, 1002, and 1000 - EVERY attempt to launch results in the VM crashing, so it's not even an intermittent issue, it's an always-issue. But there is good news - I can get v13 builds 1054 and 1032 to fully load without any crashes. The original release date between the two builds is only 7 days so I'll focus on the newer of the two and will post a Rebuild Build 1054 in the next day or two. I don't really want to spend a lot of time figuring out why the XP x86 SP2 VM has no internet connection in VirtualBox and nor on how to actually activate it, but it gives me a way to verify crashes at least.

Thanks for the feedback. What's an "IG account"?

Okay, abandoning build 1106. Let me do some digging on this end and see if I can come up with something else.

Okay, it would be helpful to know if it is the LOADER (X-360cse.exe) so I kinda need one of you two to either load directly (360chrome.exe in Chrome\Application) or try to use the loader from newer builds to rule out the loader in older builds.

@we3fan -- On second thought, let's see if it is the "loader". Instead of using X-360cse.exe, open the Chrome\Application folder and see if you can launch 360chrome.exe instead. Alternatively, you could make a copy of the build 2206 then replace the Chrome folder in it with the Chrome folder from 1106, thereby using a newer loader that you know already works in x86 XP2.

@IXOYE -- Please try version 1106 a couple posts up. @we3fan -- I'm afraid you might be on your own with regards to x86 XP2 as I think you are the ONLY person on the entire forum running x86 SP2.

For those of you that are having problems with YouTube, can you please try this version and report your findings? https://www.dropbox.com/s/j0eunski5jxc0i2/360Chrome%2013.0.1106.0.zip Please note that this is a Russian Repack (with the bundled extensions removed) and is still in Russian as far as the menus and settings. I would like to know how stable this is for those of you having issues on YouTube (as I cannot replicate these issues here but at the same time I am hunting for a version with more mass-appeal). Thanks in advance.

I appreciate your assistance. We have different goals and I continue to encourage you to provide a public release of your version. Again, we can all learn from each other. Your goal is to break portions that Chrome itself contains - I have no problem with that. In fact, I see great benefits to that approach! My goal, so far, is to keep the Chrome stuff intact and only break Russian and Chinese "additions" that they added on-top-of Chrome. There's really only SIX of us (?) here that even use 360Chrome. If you want total and complete honesty, and personality clash aside, I feel like you want that SIX to drop down to ZERO and I'm hoping for that SIX to become SIXTY. Onward and upward... From 6 to 60...

Because I am SHARING my rebuilds PUBLICLY and how trusting would my builds be if I just took "your word for it"? And in the spirit of that trust, I have posted each-and-every modification that I have made so that users can read-and-see for themselves what modifications were made. I have attempted to provide every detail required for users to even build the rebuild themselves if they so desire. You are aware that you kind of have a "reputation that precedes you"? (No worries! I probably do also!) I welcome you to offer up your rebuilds for PUBLIC USE and we can all learn from each other's modifications.

Project Update: My next release is going to be Build 1106 and not Build 1006 as previously planned. Build 1106 is the last release in the 13.0.1xxx branch and is the first release to not contain gamebox.dll (have not tested but I assume it can just be deleted from earlier beta releases).

So I "broke" Cloud Print, Web Store, and Identity API but I can't really say if it was "worth it" or not. There is a gstatic connection made on FIRST RUN and first run ONLY (frow what I have been able to witness), but this FIRST RUN connection is still made if I "break" those three embedded extensions. That FIRST RUN gstatic connection seems to occur with EVERY chromium/chrome browser I have tried, so I'm not really sure if it is worth tracking down and preventing. I seem to recall that Mozilla-based browser have a FIRST RUN connection also, but I recall it being harder to spot because Mozilla-based browsers have an odd "loopback" test on every start (those with firewalls that block ports are familiar with the difficulty in creating trusted port-blocks for Mozilla-based browsers).

Here's my findings running three "flavors" of Chromium in a Win7 x86 VM. I opted for v88 because that was the last version to not require SSE3. I expect 360Chrome to take longer to launch, it is afterall a Win7 Chrome that has been "degraded" to run on WinXP.

For reference -- https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium/blob/master/patches/series

research into ungoogled-chromium (version 88.0.4324.190) follow-up: contains Cloud Print (file 152 in resources.pak) -- but two URLs were modified from containing the word google to now containing the word 9oo91e (the g's were changed to 9's and the l was changed to a 1) [note: .qjz9zk/] same two URLs were modified in same fashion for embedded Web Store extension (file 155) PDF Viewer remains intact (file 156) -- ungoogled adds 'wasm-eval' to content_security_policy where 360Chrome does not [note: possibly due to v86 versus v88, not sure] Feedback remains intact (file 160) -- 100% identical !!! CryptoToken remains intact (file 162) -- 100% identical !!! Identity API Scope (file 10643) modifies one URL in same fashion as Cloud Print and Web Store So based on this, "ungoogled" KEEPS the Feedback and CryptoToken embedded extensions 100% fully intact, only modifies security policy for the PDF Viewer, and "breaks" Cloud Print, Web Store, and Identity API by doing nothing but changing URLs. Since my rebuild uses the --js-flags=--noexpose_wasm command line switch, we are not affected by the security policy for the PDF Viewer. So from this, I'm content with "breaking" Cloud Print, Web Store, and Identity API -- ungoogled-chromium has a LARGE following and they kept Feedback and CryptoToken 100% fully intact so I see no reason to not follow their lead.

We use Acronis at work. I think they have a free version but I admit it's been a few years since I did any cloning - nowadays I have fully unattended installations that install "everything" so I just install from scratch in 40 minutes versus a cloning process taking 140 minutes. edit - I didn't see any free version of Acronis, I'll have to dig through some of my archived disks to find what I used to use, I know it was free and I know I used it from XP to back up a laptop with XP, 7, and 10 partitions.

I still remember one of the most hilarious parts of having to use FOUR different browsers. To drop it down to THREE, I gave Chase MasterCard a call and cancelled a credit card account and when they asked "Why?" I told them that their website has forced me to change web browsers three times in two years and "three strikes, you're out". I've never owned a Chase credit card since. I've threatened to close other accounts, very adamant phone calls, "You will NOT tell me what web brower I can or can not use, you will NOT tell me what Operating System I can or can not use!". Maybe I'm just getting old... "Get off my lawn!"... Or something like that...