Dave-H

Any update on this @jumper? I realise you're working on many other things too, but I just wondered if this is going to go any further. Cheers, Dave.

Great, glad it worked!

It should be this - P&n"y9j5V23Khb1%vA7vM9CreU3BYzI429TD$h6K§ The passwords have always worked for me by just copying and pasting them, so I don't know why this wouldn't work. Your string starts with a lower case "p", which won't work as the passwords are case sensitive. Welcome to the forum BTW!

I tried the acceleration test which @mockingbird linked to, and my Firefox on XP only makes 20fps! I guess no hardware acceleration then! As an off-topic aside, I tried the test in Windows 10 as well, and was surprised that 64 bit FF 66 only made 60fps. IE11 and Edge both made well over 200fps on the same test!

Is that the "Use hardware acceleration when available" option that's in the options? I take it that is doesn't do anything on XP systems then?

Opera 12 does have a custom user-agent spoofer, it always had to because so many sites didn't acknowledge it! Right click>Edit site preferences>Network tab. Set Browser identification. The default strings offered are very out of date as you can imagine, but it's possible to have whatever string you want by manually editing the site's entry in the override.ini file.

Glad you fixed it @mockingbird! Having assessed things for a day or two, I can report that the performance of Firefox 52.9.1 ESR on my system is now vastly improved since I finally managed to enable multiple processes. On script-heavy sites like Facebook and YouTube, it was always quite slow and hesitant loading and updating pages, with scrolling being jerky and inline Facebook videos stopping and starting. Now it's much faster and smoother, in fact I would say it's pretty much as good now as the "latest and greatest" 64 bit Firefox 66 on Windows 10! It is now a bit of a RAM hog, it's sometimes using nearly 1GB of RAM with two processes running, but as I only very rarely use it with loads of other stuff running as well, it's not a problem for me, although it might be if you have less that 3GB of accessible RAM. I've not had any stability problems (touch wood!) and all my add-ons seem to be performing normally, despite me getting an add-on compatibility warning when I first tried the tweak. I have dom.ipc.processCount set to 4. All in all, I would personally well recommend doing this tweak. YMMV of course, but it's definitely been a great performance improvement on my system!

Thanks again. I will keep an eye on things and if I do get any stability problems I now know to check this out as a possible cause.

Could this be because 52.9.0/1 is an ESR version? IIRC some things are disabled by default on ESR versions, but the code is still there and can be re-enabled (serviceworkers is another example).

Thanks for that, good to know, but is there any disadvantage in leaving it as it is?

Thanks, that's good to know!

Windows 98SE on my system is seeing over 3GB of RAM too, but I get a BSOD on boot if I don't have HDATSR loaded in Autoexec.bat.

I've put browser.tabs.remote.force-enable back in and set it to "true" and now it's working! I have two processes in Task Manager. I don't know what the problem was before, but thanks everyone for all the advice! All my add-ons still seem to be OK, no error messages anyway.

Sorry I had to go to bed yesterday before responding to the last few messages. I now have - browser.tabs.remote.force-enable = no longer present browser.tabs.remote.autostart = true (in bold) browser.tabs.remote.autostart.2 = no longer present extensions.e10sBlocksEnabling = false (in bold) dom.ipc.processCount = 1 (not in bold) The Multiprocess Windows troubleshooting entry still says "0/1 (Windows XP)". Still only one process in Task Manager. So, am I onto a loser here?

Thanks @heinoganda!

Thanks guys, and thanks @dencorsofor the new thread! I checked the configuration details and it said "0/1 (Disabled by add-ons)". So, I changed extensions.e10sBlockedByAddons to "false". It now says "0/1 (Windows XP)". I still have only one process! browser.tabs.remote.autostart.2 is in bold and set to "true" dom.ipc.processCount isn't in bold, and set to "1" I've reset browser.tabs.remote.force-enable browser.tabs.remote.autostart is in bold, and set to "true"

Well just as an experiment I tried setting all these settings in Firefox 52.9.1 ESR - browser.tabs.remote.force-enable = true browser.tabs.remote.autostart = true (The setting browser.tabs.remote.autostart.2 is also set to "true") extensions.e10sBlocksEnabling = true dom.ipc.processCount = 1 I've still only got one process in Task Manager, no matter how many tabs I have open! I realise this is actually off-topic, but i just wondered if I'm doing something wrong, or (very likely) I've fundamentally misunderstood something!

That's certainly the first thing to try as the add-ons are probably trying to update it and can't!

I would love to think that MS are addressing the Office 2010 compatibility problem, but I'm not holding my breath!

My first PC had Windows 3.1 on it! I've still got it, and it dual boots Windows 95 and Windows NT 3.51. Love the avatar @Josey!

My updating setting stayed the same over the update as well. I'm not sure about the other settings as I couldn't tell you what they were set to originally!

52.9.1 needs to be downloaded and installed manually, there's a thread about it here. It's only available in US English, but that's fine for you! I fixed my add-ons signing problem by manually installing the new certificate using the information I was given here. It's a bit fiddly, but it did work! You will need to enable running commands in the browser console by setting "devtools.chrome.enabled" to "true" in the configuration editor. You also need to reset the "app.update.lastUpdateTime.xpi-signature-verification" entry after installing the new certificate for an immediate fix!

Still using it! Many happy returns to it! Thanks of course due to @Xeno86 and @jumper for doing so much to keep it alive!

Thanks, I followed that and was offered the update. It's still version "0.0.0" though, I guess that's correct?

Thanks, that is the behaviour I'm seeing now too, but I'm sure it didn't used to be like that. Most other forums I use seem to remember where I last looked at threads when I go back to them, and automatically go back to that point when I re-visit the threads. It would be a lot better IMO if this forum did the same again!