NotHereToPlayGames

Totally agree! The admin that runs a Proxomitron Forum picked it up over a decade ago while still on a college-kid budget, vowed to always keep it running, is not an ad-supported web site, has only single-digits visits per month, has never asked for donations, and true to his vow is still up-and-running to this day. And of course our own Roytam is another perfect example. I'll even throw AstroSkipper into that mix.

I'm afraid to open that Pandora's Box. We can only speculate.

It's actually been on my To Do List to revisit Pale Moon. It actually used to be my default but I was (as many here do, to each their own) holding myself back by "sticking to my guns" and staying on XP way longer than I should have. I don't regret the XP Years, still a big fan, but the BEST decision I have made in recent months was to LET GO of using XP and moving on. I'm on Win10 nowadays. 2016 LTSB. So perhaps still a few years behind, lol. The Speedometer bit, it's not my only quantifiable metric, but I simply do not condone "gut feelings" and when a new browser version is released, I seek PROOF that I "need" the upgrade before performing said upgrade. As this topic clearly suggests, "newer is not always better". Technically, it was only the "sticking to my guns" and being on XP that ever pulled me away from Pale Moon in the first place. But from that also stemmed the witnessing that Chromium Forks are "maybe" better suited for my needs. Though as mentioned, I still do plan on revisiting Pale Moon one of these days.

Yeah, it seems that MSFN is losing random posts lately.

Yep. The more often you visit, the more often you prevent what you are trying to achieve. You cannot attempt to achieve "non-uniqueness" by visiting over and over and over and becoming a "regular" to the wait-staff.

<OT> Your comment made me curious, lol. https://sensoneo.com/global-waste-index/

I also suspect that our recent "experiments" where a User Agent of "Chrome" all by itself probably yielded the same "observations" a DECADE ago. It's just that there is more of us performing these "experiments" and discussing them here at MSFN nowadays because of so many here at MSFN using not exactly "mainstream" browsers and/or computers.

The highest I've ever scored was 330 - on a retired laptop from work that they let me keep for home use. That would have been Ungoogled Chromium v94, v96, v97, I don't recall exactly which one. Scores kept DROPPING with each new Ungoogled Chromium release - until v114 and that's when it became my default. We're now back in the development cycle where scores are DROPPING. v120 is the gaudawful SLOWEST Ungoogled Chromium I've yet to ever encounter! If this is the result of "webp mitigation", than I can do WITHOUT! I've been monitoring Supermium development from a distance, I wish the project huge success. It's not yet quite where my needs kind of need it to be so I have not done any performance testing. Home-use performance isn't as big of a deal as office-use performance. There really is a GIGANTIC difference between a browser that scores below 100 (ie, *all* of the Roytam releases) and a browser that scores over 200. That said, I am a fan of Serpent 52 - but I run a version that is six months old and (inline with this very thread topic) will likely be stuck with it as "newer isn't always better". Edge is blocked on office computers (no clue "why" exactly), so I've never experimented with Edge. Browser performance is very important to me. Teams is the perfect example - I do not use the "desktop app", I strictly use the web site (and therefore have never been thrown out mid-call for an "automatic update" which I boycott on all software). And Teams could also by the perfect example of why below-100 and above-200 makes such a GIGANTIC difference - I do not use "dark mode" under ANY circumstance (dark mode gives me migraines, literal migraines). So my web site Teams is not only heavily Stylus'd to convert default "dark" to "normal light", but I also have style sheets that will convert the video being displayed for when the Teams "host" is using "dark mode" on his/her computer.

Corrected link -- https://github.com/da2x/fluxfonts This is something that Proxomitron also can do (works in XP and MyPal 68). But even better as it can be with each and every browser session, no matter how many times you open or close your browser in an hour. For those that use Proxomitron, the methods are very similar to what was known as the Jakx Pack.

Along these lines, my Ungoogled Chromium v114 scores 262 while Ungoogled Chromium v120 is nearly cut in half all the way down to an abysmal 145! And YES, that is an EXTREMELY noticeable difference here at the office!

Actually, I think something else might be going on and you should be able to keep the smaller icudtl.dat. The German trustedshops.de website pulls javascript from profiles.trustedshops.com Are you blocking the javascript coming from the .com ? The German website displays the time-and-date in German format and after a few seconds it is the .com javascript files that convert that display. For some reason, that javascript is not detecting your language preference correctly and the icudtl.dat is perhaps falling back to a default?

I can get in and see the CSS in 360Chrome v13.5 BUT only if I route through Proxomitron and defuse PORTIONS of the web site's javascript. This has always been the downfall of things like uBO or NoScript - "all or none" approach doesn't always work. You need something like Proxomitron where you can take a 200-line javascript file and defuse ONE line of those 200 lines. I'll try to visit over the next day or two and find out just "what" my Proxo Config defused to let me in. I suspect a simple polyfill will be more for the masses than a Proxo Fix.

"It's complicated." I could illustrate some Ghidra flowcharts to answer this if you truly want a complex answer to a complex question. It's something even Opera used to do, I think it was called Opera Mini but I'd have to revisit. The web browser world calls them "loaders" - Opera, PortableApps, winPenPack, X-Chromium, Portable PaleMoon... MAME would call them "front ends". Other similar apps would be called "wrappers" or "sandboxes". 360Chrome's "loader" is more of a "loader plus wrapper" utility. You don't need the "loader" to launch 360Chrome (ie, HummingOwl versions do not contain the "loader"). I use the "loader" because it doubles as a "wrapper". Which is just a generic term that was shortened from what it does - "registry wrapper". I limit the number of programs that are allowed to KEEP data in my Windows Registry. The 360Chrome "loader" stores/redirects registry read/writes to a local .reg. 1000 people will have 500 definitions of what is meant by a browser being "portable", this loader-controlled .reg carried from one computer to the next is "part of" being "portable".

Now we're on to something. Google has often discussed that the pros and cons of reducing the icudtl.dat file size tilts heavily towards the "we will not reduce it" side of the argument. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aC64nJZ4nKeah-KwsGuAAf2vDApYhkPPhdz2km3zlrg/edit# I've seen some Chromium Forks where this file size is only 2 MB and I've seen other Chromium Forks where this file size is 20 MB. Between 10 MB and 12 MB seems to be most common. I use the 2044 file even in my 1030 version because of file size AND because it "works" for en-US. You can't use just "any" icudtl.dat file HOWEVER the files between 1030, 2022, 2036, and 2044 are interchangeable (limited testing, 360Chrome won't launch if incompatible). So you can use the larger file from 2044 and replace the smaller file in 1030 and your de-DE may be what you are wanting.

You've reported time issues several times, even with v11. Each and every time, they seem to be you and only you. I really think this is something to do with your operating system settings and nothing to do with 360Chrome. Times display correctly for me, as I've pointed out several times.

I get the identical date (the "correct" date) in Mypal 68, 360Chrome, Serpent 52, and Ungoogled Chromium v114.

I've never had any issues with just using the Russian Repack loader for 360Chrome (accompanied by a heavily customized .ini). I only use the winPenPack loader for Ungoogled Chromium v114. It technically has only ever been people that don't even use this browser that "cast aspersions" upon the loader. That type of "assistance" should always be taken with a grain of salt.

You do realize that this is NOT A GOOD THING. Another way to say this is that they know EXACTLY who you are, that 190,855 people have visited and they know *EXACTLY* which one of those 190,855 people is YOU.

Patience. Scroll to the bottom and you'll see some very promising tidbits.

I guess I see these "browser uniqueness" tests along these lines -- I visit a restaurant that I've never been to and none of the staff know me. My uniqueness score is the best it is ever going to be because NOBODY KNOWS ME, I'm literally just another person, BLENDING IN WITH THE CROWD. I like the food so I visit again a couple weeks later. One person in the staff of 20 employees remembers seeing me from a couple weeks ago. My uniqueness score starts to drop. I start to visit more regularly and before you know it, the entire staff of 20 sees my car pull into the parking lot and before I'm even out of the car, they have my table ready, my favorite drink ready, and when I walk in they ask, "Will it be Entree A or Entree B today?" ie, the MORE I VISIT to "test my uniqueness", the MORE these tests "get to know me".

Worldwide? My guess would be TWO. If even that high.

LOL - so this ad violates MSFN Forum Rules?

The topic clearly asks for each of our OPINIONS. If you want to be truly HONEST, then those OPINIONS have clearly concluded that the FEARS are EXAGGERATED. Being of the opposite OPINION than most have stated in this thread but "shouting the loudest" is not going to sway OTHER folks' OPINIONS. In my OPINION, these WebP "fears" are like being afraid of being struck by lightning so we "never go outside" because of our "paranoia" of being hit by lightning.. Despite - the odds of being struck by lightning is less than one in a million 90% of all lightning strike victims SURVIVE about one third of lightning injuries occur INDOORS MALES are four times more likely than FEMALES to be struck by lightning source: https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/lightning/victimdata.html