Jump to content

cmccaff1

Member
  • Posts

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Country

    United States

cmccaff1 last won the day on July 9

cmccaff1 had the most liked content!

About cmccaff1

Profile Information

  • OS
    XP Pro x86

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

cmccaff1's Achievements

95

Reputation

  1. It is great to see some activity in this thread once more! Just as a reminder for everyone, the "?dl=1" trick still works with Dropbox links and will allow you to automatically download a file without actually having to use the Dropbox online interface. Here is the link NHTPG posted, with the "?dl=1" trick applied (to NHTPG: thank you VERY much for sharing another 360 build with us!) https://www.dropbox.com/s/0hh440tcbpmzb9y/360ChromePortable_13.0.2170_rebuild_1_ungoogled.zip?dl=1
  2. Sorry for the bump...I just wanted to post here to move this thread up again. It's been almost a month since the last post, and while the development on Mypal 68 has been very exciting to watch, NHTPG's 360 builds are still VERY much useful, and still run great in XP SP3. Hopefully I won't have to do this too often, but I would like this thread to be noticed and valued for as long as possible. Thank you again for your efforts, @NotHereToPlayGames!
  3. Thank you very much for your archival efforts! Admittedly, I don't use or install Java all that often, but it does have its uses, so it is wonderful to have multiple EOL versions available in one convenient collection. I'm genuinely surprised Java 7 was supported for that long...from what I recall, the last (latest?) known Java 8 release doesn't even work/function in XP properly (I believe 8u152 is the final version of Java 8 that installs properly and works as it should in XP, while others install but fail to work).
  4. Otter Browser is definitely a good option for XP, especially if you like WebKit and/or the Opera 12.x interface...I still like to use the original Opera 12.18 for some lightweight browsing from time to time, but this is a worthy successor to the classic Presto Opera legacy browsers. It has a lot of capabilities that classic Opera lacks (including correctly rendering this forum; in fact, I am writing this reply from the latest stable Otter Browser release with JavaScript enabled!), but is behind other browsers such as the UXP-based ones in other useful features. In general, it's a great browser if you understand WebKit's strengths and weaknesses (it beats Presto in rendering but doesn't quite get up to higher Gecko/UXP/etc. levels) and can live without some of the fancier features you'll find in UXP-based browsers, MyPal 68 and the like. It's also a lot more stable than it used to be, though I can imagine earlier releases may have had speed advantages over the latest builds (though speed ultimately doesn't mean very much if the browser itself isn't particularly stable). Otter Browser gets my stamp of approval (for what VERY little that's worth)!
  5. The fact that Feodor has been able to do as much as he has, given the circumstances, is truly incredible. I admire his dedication and enthusiasm for the projects he's worked on over the years...his 'old' MyPal (29.3.0) is still one of my primary daily-use browsers in XP, and it's been very exciting to see the progress that has been made so far on the newer 68. He's one talented coder, as his 'resurrected' MyPal 68 has proven...it's a shame to look back on that whole fiasco nearly one year later, because the Pale Moon developers had an opportunity to take the highest of high roads by inviting Feodor to work with them and even help them restore official compatibility to benefit XP/Vista users, but instead they fought and alienated him and many others. In a more ideal world, there would have been a mutual respect that could have led to a long-term partnership, maybe even a friendship. I'm genuinely praying for him, his family, and all of his friends...and of course, I'm keeping Roy in my thoughts too as he's in Hong Kong. They both come from places that have been through so much, especially in recent times. To Roy and Feodor: thank you both VERY much for everything you have done. Your efforts have never, ever been in vain.
  6. Absolutely sensational! Just when you think XP is down for the count...it's back once again! I'm going to stick with the older/faster browsers that work well for me on my Pentium D, but it's great to know that running very recent versions of Chrome is now an option for the future. Hopefully by the time I find myself needing to use Chrome 102, the One Core API will be more stable and reliable. The fact that it can even run Chrome 102 at this point is a jaw-dropping feat. Thank you for bringing this to our attention...this REALLY made my day!
  7. Without a doubt. I recently tried 360v9.5 again and was quite impressed with the speed myself. Its Chromium engine is only 6 releases older than the version used in 360v11, and seems to offer comparable if not slightly better performance on my Pentium D machine. A meaningful advantage that 360v11 does have is a better TLS 1.3 implementation (I believe TLS 1.3 is supported up to "Experiment 3" in 360v9.5, but in 360v11 it goes all the way up to "Final"), but most sites shouldn't give you trouble on that front. Chromium-based browsers seem to fare better with sites like Twitter, and 360v9.5 loads the desktop site and runs it with good speed, despite the Chromium 63 engine beginning to show its age now. It definitely handles it better than old Chrome 49, which once ran it like a champ but now struggles with it (probably because aspects of the JS backend had 'modern' JS features added that didn't exist or weren't fully implemented when Chrome 49 was first released). For people who really like Chromium and don't want to touch anything Mozilla-based, my recommendation is to keep two browsers around: Chrome 49 for basic web surfing, and 360 for sites that won't load in 49 + more serious tasks (with 9.5 or 11 advised as a starting point if you want to keep CPU usage down; you can experiment from there if you absolutely need something more modern).
  8. Hear, hear!!! Long live Windows XP--and thank you for your own contributions! All of you have played a very big part in keeping XP alive!
  9. Honestly, what you've done is still very impressive either way. Even if you did not do any coding in the traditional sense, you've still done some tremendous work in compiling these binaries...the fact that support is retained for pre-SSE2 processors is no small miracle, and you can rest assured I know it will get harder as time goes on. I'm grateful because you could have just as easily decided to keep your binaries for yourself--instead, you chose to share them with others, and in a world full of selfish people I am always grateful to ANYONE who is as generous as you have been. Thank you for being humble enough to be so honest--you've earned the right to pat yourself on the back, but that's all up to you. Speaking only for myself, I am definitely looking forward to your future releases! Thank you VERY much!
  10. If I may say so, I think that's a great idea! Personally, I've been sticking with VLC 1.1.11 for years...for me, 1.1.x was when VLC truly hit its peak, but newer versions I've tested also seem to work quite well. After more than a decade, this old version still gets the job done, and can play a lot of formats with very little toll on the CPU (I believe experimental GPU acceleration was introduced with the 1.1.x series, which really helps if your GPU supports H/X.264 decoding). Also, I agree with everything you said about VLC...for me, it's still the 'heavyweight champ' of media players, and even the newest 3.0.x still knocks a lot of other programs out of the ring. I appreciate that the devs haven't changed the program too much over the years! They've added a lot of support for modern formats and other cool features, while keeping the same great interface we all know & love.
  11. Thank you very much for your work on all of your great ffmpeg builds--and thank you for keeping all of them archived, going back several years! From the oldest available to the newest, they run with no problems on my Pentium D...it's amazing to be able to play so many different formats, and the CPU/RAM usage is kept extremely modest because you did such a great job with the optimization. I don't stop by often, but when I do I always like to show appreciation...you've done some fantastic work, and I appreciate it very much!
  12. Wow...that is REALLY awesome! I have yet to test it with Flash Player, but Invidious-style HTML5 playback works. Doesn't look quite as polished as Invidious (the video window still needs to be properly resized because there's a lot of dead space that isn't being used), but this is quite amazing. I'm almost 30 now and remember using YouTube when it still looked like that, so this is a VERY nice throwback! Ah...are you referring to Nitter? I had a chance to try it and it's amazing--the only thing that sucks about it is that you can't log in, but I've been considering getting off of Twitter recently, so it's not a big drawback in my book. I'll have to try historio.us! Thank you!
  13. I know you didn’t specifically ask. I’m sure you may have wondered about it, and I have done the same thing. I’ve been excited for a while to see if there will be any more updates, and there might be if NHTPG feels the need to address any remaining loose ends. But it seems all the meaningful stuff has been taken care of, and I can confirm from my end that 11 runs with the efficiency of a nuclear clock. While 11 is my go-to version, I do have uses for 12 and 13.x, and they do run well on the Pentium D for most things. I will absolutely use one of these versions for a site that has problems in 11, but I haven’t run into a major one yet. Audio/video tend to stutter in these versions, but I’m sure they have no issues on more powerful hardware. In 11 there are almost no problems with stutter, and you have to load a lot of tabs to get it to the point where there is stuttering. In 12 and 13.x it takes only a few to get to that point. I appreciate your work, my brother, and I am thankful for how you have kept us posted on these newer versions. I understand NHTPG’s perspective on how newer doesn’t always equal better, and his efforts to ensure that the fastest versions of each browser, based on a series of tests, were the ones he targeted. I think at this point that he’s happy with his last few releases…after months of daily use, I can say that they are as close to perfect as you can get. If the 360 developers had retained 32-bit XP compatibility with the latest version then it would probably be a non-issue as I have no doubt NHTPG would have taken a look at it and would be working with it right now if he felt the urge or desire to do so. It’s all up to him and however he feels, and what he wants to do. The best thing we can do is to be encouraging and show gratitude. If all that has changed with the later 13.x versions is that they moved the telemetry around, then I agree with him that it doesn’t necessarily warrant putting in the effort to make custom versions of them. If rendering improvements from later Chromium versions were to be backported to the Chromium 86 engine, or if a later Chromium engine were to be targeted for XP, then that would constitute a major change and would definitely warrant taking a closer look. But again, that’s all up to NHTPG.
  14. Speaking only for myself, I want to thank you for your work on the versions of 360Chrome that you targeted. Having experimented with your final releases from January for the last few months, at this point I can say with tremendous confidence that you got them as close to perfect as possible. It's interesting to compare the differences between 11/12/13.x...on my Pentium D, 11 absolutely smokes the others as far as speed goes but is the weakest of the bunch in web compatibility, 12 balances speed/compatibility quite well and 13.x is extremely compatible while not being as fast (of course, on more powerful hardware, the speed gap becomes less apparent). You can count me among the 11 users, and I use it on a daily basis now; while I was using 13.x for a while for 'future-proofing' purposes, the majority of websites still work great in 11 (and run significantly faster there than in 12 and 13.x). Without any doubt, you earned the right to take some time for yourself (after all, you were doing this in your free time anyway), but I'm very thankful for your efforts in making it possible for us to have some great, telemetry-free modern Chromium browsers in XP. To Draker and anyone else who may be wondering "when is he going to release a new version?", I say to you that this man has no obligation to do a thing for you, me, or any others in this forum. This was a project pursued with personal passion and interest in mind, and it's a fortunate bonus that we have all been able to reap the benefits as he was kind enough to share his mods (which he put a significant amount of effort into, over a long period of time) with all of us. There's nothing ruling out a comeback, and I'm sure if he finds something that interests him as much if not more than 360 11/12/13.x did, he might be willing to do some more work, at least in his free time for his personal use. If he shares any of it with us, we can count it as a bonus too. Thank you very much, @NotHereToPlayGames!
  15. Not a bad idea! It's up to you which versions you want to make available, but my recommendations would be 32.0.0.371 (last version without "time bomb") 29.0.0.171 (last version that doesn't require SSE2) 10.3.183.90/11.1.102.55 (last ESR and last regular version for vanilla Win2K) 9.0.289.0 (last version for vanilla Win98) 8.0.42.0 (last version for NT 4.0) 7.0.73.0 (last version for Win95 [and NT 3.51 with some effort]) Alternatively, for Flash 7, you could also (with his permission) mirror Nathan Lineback's custom hex-edited Flash 7 "YouTube Spoofer" that disguises itself as 8.0.42.0 (and will be recognized by browsers as Flash 8) and include it alongside the 7.0.73.0 installer (the idea being that a user would install Flash 7 as normal, then overwrite the NPSWF32.dll file with Nathan's version). Though it no longer serves the purpose it was designed for on YouTube, it can be helpful for some rare sites that reject Flash 7 and expect at least Flash 8 (a surprisingly high number of which are still available to this day and can be found by simply searching for "this site requires Flash 8"). My apologies if I've gone off-topic here...I'll try to keep my posts relevant as much as possible!


×
×
  • Create New...