Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


Win2000Fan

Aero Glass in Chrome 41 and later

Recommended Posts

I have seen screenshots of Chrome 49 on Windows Vista with the Glass enabled.

As far as I know, I do not know why Google put lines to restrict the Aero in Vista.

What is the way to do it?

 

 

16-migrated_attachments-41bc5dadcb8.jpg

16-migrated_attachments-41bc5da9e38.JPG

Edited by GianLuca18092004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why are you running service pack 1? install service pack 2 , google wanted to seperate vista from the windows 7 branch and merge it with windows xp's branch thus its blocked afaik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, burd said:

why are you running service pack 1?

Because one can! It's bad netiquette on MSFN to ask such a question... I'd imagine that, at 400, posts you'd know that by now... :angel

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, dencorso said:

Because one can! It's bad netiquette on MSFN to ask such a question... I'd imagine that, at 400, posts you'd know that by now... :angel

Well, I find it a "legit" question (as long as noone asks why I run XP SP2 ;) ).

jaclaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2018 at 7:10 AM, VistaPAE said:

I do not know why Google put lines to restrict the Aero in Vista. 

It is all explained (but not in a convincing fashion) in

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=451733#c19

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=451733#c66

as a result of:

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=426573

TL;DR : At the time that decision was made, Vista user base was very thin, compared to either the XP or Win7+ one, so for code refactoring/simplification they decided to merge the Vista codepath to the XP one; for Google, it is only numbers that count :realmad:; plus, that gave them a perfect opportunity to dump Vista altogether (along with XP) a whole one year prior to Vista SP2 becoming EOL by M$ (and close to 5 years before Vista's Server counterpart, Windows Server 2008 SP2, reaches EOL in Jan 2020 :angry::realmad:). Once Google made the first move (dragging along with them all webkit-based browsers), many other software makers soon followed (they had a "nice" justification) in a trend that put Vista, 1.5 years after its official EOL, in the sorry state it is currently in... :(

On 11/17/2018 at 7:10 AM, VistaPAE said:

What is the way to do it?

The only way to properly fix this is to first grab the source for Chromium 41 (-50?) - Chromium, yes, because Google Chrome itself is closed-source - and then revert

https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/f29562d138f8c2222c6f24bddbd1a665ed036658

Some additional details in

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=426573#c10 =>

https://codereview.chromium.org/755293003/diff/1/ui/base/win/shell.cc#newcode153

This isn't a task for the faint-hearted :} ... You would need a Win7+, 64-bit, machine with lots of RAM and a powerful multi-core CPU, MS Visual Studio 2013+, lots of time/patience and, of course, you should be well versed in that field (compiling open-source browsers in VS)... Two MSFN members come to mind, @roytam1 and @FranceBB, but I am unsure whether they're interested in compiling Google Chrome 49.0.2623.112 (last officially supported build on Vista) or 50.0.2661.102 (last Vista compatible, but not officially supported) with Aero-Glass enabled in Vista... I, as much as other Vista users, would be all up for this, even if it is realised purely as a challenge only, given that both Chrome 49+50 are quite outdated (in both security and performance aspects) when dealing with the web of 2019... -_-

On 11/20/2018 at 1:08 PM, burd said:

why are you running service pack 1?

Those two screenshots @VistaPAE posted in OP are not from his own system ;)...

First one is taken from

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=451733#c83

That person compiled Chromium 49.0.2579.0 64-bit with the aero-disabling commits reverted...

So did this one (Chromium 45.0.2415.0 64-bit) :

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=451733#c68

The second screenshot in the OP is taken from

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=451733#c67

It emerged that this was actually a hoax/cheat :lol: ; the OS used to generate the shot is Win7 SP1 64-bit, disguised as Windows Vista (much like @WinClient5270 's guide found in his signature...)

So now you know ;)

PS: For the history of it, the last build on Vista SP2 with Aero turned ON was Google Chrome 41.0.2243.0 in the dev channel; I keep a portable copy of it on my system just for fun, it's not used for normal browsing: 

wqrnd3x.jpg

Next build 41.0.2245.0 had Aero turned OFF in Vista...:(

Edited by VistaLover
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love and hate Chromium at the same time.

I didn't like the decision Google took to remove support for XP and Vista, especially 'cause the project is open source, but only for the things they like.

Open-source developers who published commits had no say on this whatsoever (there were many devs that were willing to drop XP support, of course, but there were others that didn't want to as well).

Anyway, even if I didn't post on MSFN my failures, I tried to backport Chromium several times during these years. It's a project I hate, 'cause I always end up starting it, then I find something that has to be re-implemented, I do it, but I either break it or produce a several number of bugs, then, after fixing those bugs, I end up having memory leak issues and once I get them sorted, I go on with the code and I find another thing that has to be re-implemented. In the meantime, things changes, new commits are done and so on, but even if I stick with an "old" version, it just doesn't work. Eventually, I end up giving up and going back to it after a few months, then I give up again.

@Dibya knows that, as he tried to backport it several times as well and we shared informations on Skype, but we both failed. :(  (For instance, I never got the sandboxing working).

"Taokaizen" actually made a project with a backported Chromium 54, though, but it's not exactly Chromium 54, it's more like a "best of", a "mesh-up" of Chromium 54, Chromium 51 and Chromium 49, with parts of the code replaced entirely. I give credit to Taokaizen, anyway, 'cause he did manage to get it working, however there's still a call to a non-existent kernel function on the settings page (instruction 0x04d670ed referenced memory at 0x00000000. The required data was not placed into memory because of an I/O error status of 0x75b2b11c), pepperflesh implementation is broken, it has some concerning memory leaks and it calls WNetRestoreConnectionA and SHGetKnownFolderPath when it's not supposed to.

In other words, it has some issues, but it works.

@VistaLover... if you wanna take a look at the source code patched by Taokaizen, it's here: http://browser.taokaizen.com/download/patch.txt - build by Taokaizen http://browser.taokaizen.com/download/Advanced_Chrome_v54.20.6530.0.zip

It doesn't re-introduce Aero for Win Vista, though and he's not planning to release any new version for XP/Vista.

If only @blackwingcat was still around... :(

Edited by FranceBB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2018 at 8:43 PM, dencorso said:

Because one can! It's bad netiquette on MSFN to ask such a question... I'd imagine that, at 400, posts you'd know that by now... :angel

yea i was just asking , it felt a bit odd , not picking a fight or so :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why anyone would use such an old version of Chrome, Chrome is famously notorious for its CPU/RAM usage and general rot after a while of usage, even compared to Firefox... but I'll not judge...

This experiment is quite interesting however...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2018 at 5:45 PM, FranceBB said:

If only @blackwingcat was still around... :(

Isn't him anymore? The blog seems quite alive...  :dubbio:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...