Dave-H

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!

So you uninstalled version 0.0.0 of the add-on, and were then offered version 1.0? If so, I will try that, as version 0.0.0 is ancient, and I might as well grab a later version while it's still available!

I have the .NET Framework Assistant add-on in Firefox, but it's version "0.0.0". I'm not being offered any update to it.

Thanks. My FF 52.9.1 ESR's add-ons are working fine, but still have the verification warnings on most of them on the add-ons page list. I'll wait awhile to see if this corrects itself automatically, as there seems to be no actual loss of functionality.

It seems to be fixed now. A certificate had expired apparently, which presumably nobody at Mozilla had anticipated! I didn't have the problem with FF 52.9.1 ESR on Windows XP, but I did have it on FF 66.0.3 on Windows 10. It was very annoying while it lasted!

Yes, the "New content begins here" marker is very useful when you click on the last page number, but it would be better still if it did what it did before, where you just had to click on the thread title and it would automatically take you to the last post that you looked at in that thread, not to the very first post in the thread, which on some threads is ancient of course! I suspect that you're right, that the necessary data is still being stored, but the forum software is not now using it for some reason.

Ah right. In that case it looks like it isn't being stored anywhere at the moment! Are you seeing the same behaviour, just to make sure it's not just me?

@xper As you have presumably been working on the forum software recently, hence the issue with the flags, I just thought I'd ask about something else that I've been meaning to mention for a long time, . For many years, when you clicked on a thread title in the forum lists, it would automatically take you to the last post you viewed, even if that was some time ago. Suddenly a while ago, I noticed that this no longer happens, and I am always being taken to the first post in the thread instead, which is quite annoying! I assume this is a cookies-related thing. I've got used to clicking on the last page number on multi-page threads, which helps of course, but it would be a lot better if the original behaviour could be restored. Thanks, Dave.