Jump to content

Chrome 49 Update


sdfox7
 Share

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, GrofLuigi said:

On another note, can anyone please tell me which is the last version of Chrome that doesn't block npapi (java)? I need it for work.

Exact version and subversion, please.

I know that for a long time there were only warnings that could be overridden, but around version 45 the kill switch was supposed to be toggled.

I have version 44 and Google (the site) is nagging me to update. I have disabled all updaters (scheduled tasks etc.), set group policy (I use business edition), but I want to find the last usable version and forget about it.



 



 

Yes chrome 44 is last version that supports NPAPI.

for sites, grab User Agent Switcher to workaround it.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/user-agent-switcher-for-c/djflhoibgkdhkhhcedjiklpkjnoahfmg

Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 3/30/2016 at 7:49 PM, FranceBB said:

I'm gonna take a look at chromium source code to find out what's going on and I'll be back with a build in a few days, hopefully.

My thoughts now are about a thing: chromium is open source, but chrome is not. Everyone is allowed to submit a change, but it has to be tested and approved by Google, so... I'm really curious to see what will happen when me (or someone else) will submit something to bring XP compatibility back. It would be hilarious to have chromium xp-compatible and chrome not XP compatible.

Generally, you can explain how to make something work with hacks/modification. However, you cannot make modifications and then redistribute the modified product.

Most EULAs prohibit modifying software and then redistributing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I gave it a shot!

I tried to compile the last chromium version (51) using Visual Studio and it didn't work at the very beginning, 'cause I found out that it requires at least Visual Studio 2013, so I had to do it running Windows Server 2008 r2 (yep, sadly enough I didn't have a computer running Win7 xD) and it worked, I compiled it for x86, but it doesn't work in Windows XP displaying a weird error. I'm gonna find out what's that about in my spare time and I promise I will be back with a working chrome build.

p.s I tried to run it using mono as well, just to find out whether is some silly dll that is missing, but it didn't work. I think (I think) it's related to Windows Aero that simply fails to load under XP. Since Windows Vista has Aero, Vista users should be able to run my custom build. So... since I don't have a computer running Vista (and I don't wanna set everything up to run it in a Virtual Machine), if I'll upload my custom test build somewhere, will Vista users give it a shot? It would be very helpful!

p.ps Dibya, I think we have something we can work on together ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, FranceBB said:

Ok, I gave it a shot!

I tried to compile the last chromium version (51) using Visual Studio and it didn't work at the very beginning, 'cause I found out that it requires at least Visual Studio 2013, so I had to do it running Windows Server 2008 r2 (yep, sadly enough I didn't have a computer running Win7 xD) and it worked, I compiled it for x86, but it doesn't work in Windows XP displaying a weird error. I'm gonna find out what's that about in my spare time and I promise I will be back with a working chrome build.

p.s I tried to run it using mono as well, just to find out whether is some silly dll that is missing, but it didn't work. I think (I think) it's related to Windows Aero that simply fails to load under XP. Since Windows Vista has Aero, Vista users should be able to run my custom build. So... since I don't have a computer running Vista (and I don't wanna set everything up to run it in a Virtual Machine), if I'll upload my custom test build somewhere, will Vista users give it a shot? It would be very helpful!

p.ps Dibya, I think we have something we can work on together ;)

I would be glad to give it a try, I have Vista running on several machines. Thank you for your work.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, sorry for the delay.

A friend of mine is testing it right now.

It should work on Vista sp2, but I want to try a bunch of stuff, 'cause it has some weird behaviours on Windows 7 (which is natively supported), which means that I probably have screwed up something while I was modifying stuff. 

Off topic:

You might not know me, but I'm an encoder and we are about to receive some new masters with a new standard that is not supported by our frameserver. I'm very very busy in trying to figure out how to implement it, so this project (Chrome for XP and Vista) will proceed, but slowly. 

P.s if someone works in the video industry and wants to help me with the IMF, feel free to contact me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, FranceBB said:

OK, sorry for the delay.

A friend of mine is testing it right now.

It should work on Vista sp2, but I want to try a bunch of stuff, 'cause it has some weird behaviours on Windows 7 (which is natively supported), which means that I probably have screwed up something while I was modifying stuff. 

Off topic:

You might not know me, but I'm an encoder and we are about to receive some new masters with a new standard that is not supported by our frameserver. I'm very very busy in trying to figure out how to implement it, so this project (Chrome for XP and Vista) will proceed, but slowly. 

P.s if someone works in the video industry and wants to help me with the IMF, feel free to contact me.

Do you know whether or not aero works on Vista? Normally instead of using the native UI like it used to do before v41, it just uses the XP theme because basically, it's just the XP version of chrome running on Vista. I've heard that there's some lines of code you can remove to remove that restriction as someone did it on the Chromium forums a while back before Google dropped Vista support. 
Link (see comment #68): https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=451733#c68

This whole situation is very strange. When I ran Chrome on Windows 7 in Vista compatibility mode, it behaved very similarly to the screenshot that I posted above. It refused to load web pages, and I know for a fact that Windows 7 can't be missing anything to make chrome work properly. Is Google intentionally crippling Chrome now for XP and Vista to prevent users from making attempts to run it like this? :wacko:

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bluebolt said:

Chrome Portable 49.0.2623.112 was released today and is working fine on Windows XP.

I confirm it: Google Chrome, normal version, was also updated to 49.0.2623.112 m today and is working fine on Windows XP. :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google's wording on the matter has been ambiguous, to say the least. If you refer to my first post in this thread, the original "will soon stop receiving" and the new "will no longer receive" phrases apparently both mean the same thing. I would have thought that "will no longer receive" meant that the updates were done.

Of course, it was stated support would end in April, but they did not specify the exact date. Who knows, they could backtrack and continue to release updates as long as it isn't negatively impacting their R&D. Firefox has not set a date, although they did drop 2000/XP SP1 back in 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe v. 49.0 may be the last for Vista/XP. But there might be at least some more builds before they actually move on...
Is there something like the FF ESR (Extended Support Release) version, but for Chrome instead?
If not they could very well start it on v. 49.0...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just thinking that this .112 update could be strictly related to the Flash Player bug that was announced by Adobe a few days ago. I just updated my FTP copy with the .112 version.

The changelog does not address this, but I noticed that my .110 folder has Flash 21.0.0.197 while .112 has a new Flash 21.0.0.213. (Chrome's embedded Flash is called PepperFlash if anyone did not know)

gc49x110.jpg

gc49x112.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link.

Besides, as Dencorso said, chrome 49 is probably gonna be the last supported one, since the tests I'm doing are with the chrome 51 source code and it's clearly not working. Anyway, after some other tests, I'm pretty sure Google is clipping Vista compatibility by purpose. Tonight/this evening I'm gonna make one last test and upload my temporary custom build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Multi-language] Google Chrome 51 Vista x86 x64

There we go!! Feel free to test it BUT remember to read the "README.txt" first!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzH7YVbfkU3oQkRYcFhWOFJVWjA/view?usp=sharing

README:

Quote

This is a custom build that is supposed to run on Vista computers.
In order to run on Vista OS, it requires SP2.
Trying to run it on Windows XP SP4 will result in an error
and the program will close itself.
Running it in XP compatibility mode in Windows 7 or later will result in an endless loading.
The program is LAA (Large Address Aware),
which means that it will run on x64 OS 'till 4 GB per process.

If you find any issues, please report them to FranceBB (franceopf@gmail.com)
or post them in MSFN (XP forum) in the main topic.

Cheers and regards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Attempting to run on XP results in my previously mentioned GetThreadID call to API which does not exist in XP.

However, as I suspected, there is a way to remove/modify the call. LeapMotion is no longer officially supported on XP, and "programmers" over there figured out how to restore XP compatibility.

Windows XP and GetThreadID and the resolution Restore Windows XP build compatibility

gtthrdid.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotcha. That's simple!

I'm gonna try to replace that call with GetCurrentThreadID. It will lead us to another issue (another error), for sure, but it's still another step ahead. As to Vista, I would like some feedback: is it working fine? I know that my final target is Windows XP, but having Vista support would be a great starting point. :)

@sdfox7, thank you! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...