Jump to content

66cats

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    177

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    United States

 Content Type 

Posts posted by 66cats

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Dixel said:

    google-quic-is-vulnerable-to-cyber-criminal-activity-creates-a-‘black-hole’-that-hackers-can-exploit/

    Let me understand this correctly -- you're concerned about security implications of a protocol currently used by the majority of the world,  this in the context of Windows XP (an OS that hasn't received security updates for roughly a decade)? 

    5

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    2 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

    A CPU can only do so much per clock cycle

    My single-core laptop goes through 1.8 BILLION clock cycles a second. 

    Take a few, they're small :)

    2 hours ago, Dixel said:

    The question is, why (if both @win32 and Alexi are trying to implement at least something similar to Ungoogled) didn't cut  it out first.

    Because it matters not at all? And no, current Thorium and Supermium builds are *not* trying to be "ungoogled." For instance, vanilla Chromium doesn't have functional Google account/Sync(what can be more googled than that?), both Supermium and Thorium do. Think "Googled Chromium" :)

    2 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

    On my weak machine, these unnecessary connections do have an impact to my CPU

    Saying they don't, in any perceptible way, would be a waste of breath, wouldn't it? 

    2

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    1 minute ago, AstroSkipper said:

    there is no such behaviour.

    There's nothing remotely malicious/harmful about those packets, simply normal Chrome behavior. For Chromecast, i guess, maybe other stuff.

     

    26 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

    As I already mentioned in my Antimalware thread, Windows 10 Firewall Control is great and is doing a perfect job in controlling all system and application connections like, for example, Thorium. :thumbup

    No need to add any firewall rules, it's not a routable address.

    0

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted · Edited by 66cats

    14 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

    made me prick up my ears

    Literally how device discovery (SSDP) works -- on Windows, on Linux, on Android; On Chrome, on Chromium, on Firefox.  What's in any way noteworthy about Thorium behaving exactly like Chromium?

    0

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

    I am using the version Thorium_SSE2_122.0.6261.168_WINXP_x32

    I'm trying the same, but in "go and write to the registry & wherever else you want" mode. Just installed the latest Supermium, pretty dramatic difference between the two (on a single core): Thorium's painfully slow but usable, Supermium pegs the CPU at 100% (just like the previous version) & has to be killed with Task Manager (which also freezes, so rebooting now). 

     

    1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

    I've only tried Supermium (and Thorium) on a single-core

    That explains it. 

    1

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted · Edited by 66cats

    1 hour ago, AstroSkipper said:

    I would like to know about experiences of users who have installed Thorium under real (bare metal) Windows XP 32-bit on very weak hardware, especially equipped with a 32-bit (single-core) CPU like,

    Fired up my Satellite A100 just for you (core solo t1350, 32-bit, single core). Supermium runs, but is unusable (nearly freezes with 100% CPU usage -- as advertised, win32 mentioned it needs 2 cores min.), Thorium (latest, all versions) is not recognized as a valid Win32 app (errors out, doesn't run). Might be my fault, though other browsers (Kafan Minibrowser, 360Chrome) run fine[ish. pretty slow].  Disregard, wrong windows version. Downloading/installing now, will update in a few mins

    Specs: XP 32 SP3, Core Solo T1350@1.86GHz, 4GB installed RAM.

    1

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted · Edited by 66cats

    31 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

    Real-time anti-virus "bloat", for example, slows your system down.  PERIOD.

    Agree, Disabled on this box, wouldn't recommend to others.

     

    31 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

    My former company IT forced disk defrag periodically and we had no control on when it ocurred.  Walk away from the computer for THREE HOURS when that is churning "in the background".

    Why IT couldn't schedule such tasks for downtime is a mystery. Anyhow, defragging isn't a thing for SSDs, TRIM takes a second or two. 

    31 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

    4th Gen i7

    Posting from one now (it also runs a bunch of other OS).

    17 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

    The reader will not learn anything worth knowing about Thorium here. :no:

     

    Thorium, which emits alpha particles and mild gamma rays, is mildly carcinogenic. Back on topic: anyone else dropping frames in YT under XP? Supermium seems to have the same issue, 

    0

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    28 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

    doing this COSTS MORE (both in personal time and CPU/RAM usage) then UPGRADING

    Don't think most people who run XP/Vista today do it out of practical considerations/because their HW can't handle a later OS. For me, it's more like running a vintage car as a daily driver -- impractical, hard to explain the appeal, but fun nevertheless. 

    2

    Root Certificates and Revoked Certificates for Windows XP

    in Windows XP

    Posted

    52 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

    TRUST ME, it is EXTREMELY easy to release a web browser who's address bar ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS shows a "secure padlock" with made-up details

    Are you suggesting that win32 is doing this? If not, relevance?

     

    1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

    Supermium uses an INTERNAL cert store (hidden from the user as far as I can tell)

    You keep stressing that, does current Chromium handle it differently, and only Supermium (& Thorium) go out of their way to obfuscate it? Genuine question.

    0

    Thorium

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    37 minutes ago, UCyborg said:

    It's still same after another 10 years.

    A George King fan, his driver collection has been a lifesaver, but it's not the same -- the source code was leaked, many new exploits found. Update packs (past whatever Legacy Update installs/are already a part of XP Integ One Who Must Not Be Named) seem a bit like installing more locks in a house of straw. Posted from XP x64/Supermium btw.

    1
×
×
  • Create New...