siria Posted April 6, 2020 Share Posted April 6, 2020 cc333 said: > I've found this forum to work quite nicely on both Opera 12.02 and @roytam1's special > Firefox 3.6 build, particularly if I switch the forum theme from "Switch (Default)" to "IPS Default." > "Switch (Default)" is usable, but kinda glitchy with the odd layout issues that people here have reported, > whereas "IPS Default" renders almost perfectly (although the reply box is broken on Firefox) Goodmaneuver said: > I can confirm the IPS Theme fixes width issue in Opera and Mozilla cannot reply Confirm too (but checked only width) So that's why some people got this verry narrow view and some other people not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc333 Posted April 6, 2020 Share Posted April 6, 2020 6 hours ago, Bruninho said: Hate to say, but I did try to run FX 24.x esr, it did install and run, but only without JS. Not good enough for me, plus it crashed a lot often for me. I couldn’t access vogons forums because of ciphers anyway. Haven’t tried msfn forums but I suppose it would be the same problem. I ditched the snapshot later anyway Yeah, the point isn't necessarily that it's usable as is, but that it shows progress, and eventually, a working solution (plus maybe a fork of 24.x, such as, say Pale Moon 25 or 26, modified to be somewhat more 9x friendly) can be possible. I agree that broken js is a dealbreaker, but if the bulk of the UI and rendering engine works (as it appears to), then there's some hope that js can be made to work or mostly work, eventually. c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruninho Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 I know its a bit late for an April Fools joke, but I was busy with my new website version (nothing “new”, just dark mode added and a few JS tweaks). While I was doing that I thought of a good April Fools joke: ”KernelEx released for Windows 3.11!” LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 Not funny, disrespectful. No more criticizing 98/ME or KernelEX please. MSFN has less active ME/98 member support than 2K we do not need knockers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruninho Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 Huh? The joke was not even a critic, I never criticized KernelEx. Yes I like it on 2000, 98 isn’t that bad at all but it’s not their fault because browsers, security protocols, have evolved quite fast these years that Win98/KernelEx can’t keep up with them nowadays. And my criticism was always targeted towards the browsers and the excessive number of custom browsers for XP but almost nil options for 98/Me. I don’t get why there are more custom browsers for XP when even official browsers still work perfectly on XP. IMHO people should be more focused in doing custom browsers for 98/Me/2000 than XP. In one or two years, 2000 will be where 98 is now. Youtube is starting to break for 2000 with their revamped version, so 2000 users will soon be where 98 users are now. It’s normal - HTML, JS and CSS are always evolving. Retro compatibility are one of the reasons why I want people to stop using jQuery and learn vanilla JS. But jQuery has taken so much dominance these days that its now incredibly hard to go back to the vanilla. (Trust me, I tried to do that with my new website and a week later, I was doing jQuery again). Don’t get me wrong - I like 98, that was my 1st and favorite choice for a retro gaming pc, for nostalgia reasons, but without browsing options I had to resort to the closest thing to the 98 that exists- 2000. I’m not happy with that either but I can live with that. Anything that is not Windows 10, I’m good. However, I’m pretty sure that the number of 98/Me enthusiasts aren’t going down because of my, or someone elses criticism, but yes because of the lack of news on KernelEx or updates for these systems. We are pretty much stuck with what we have now. People want to go forward so you can’t blame them for looking elsewhere for other options such as 2000. I have spent months and lost nights trying to improve 98 for better browsing. No luck, sadly. I did all I could. If anything, I made the joke with the intention to praise what KernelEx has done for both systems, not as a critic. I just caught myself thinking “what if we had that for 3.x too? Oh, I can dream.” And hey presto, there was an april fools joke. I’m sorry if you didn’t get it the way I did. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 Roytam1 has done a great job with the cipher and TLS2 updates. There are some things open for debate still as to what stops the later browsers from operating with differing ideas we do not all agree on. Negative feedback is what is implied though if joking about KernelEx on 3.11, for me anyway. You have done good testing and your comments have been genuine. MSFN is an information source that is much appreciated, I doubt whether you have got in the way anymore than I have. There is some advantage for those who have started earlier with the KernelEx project in that they would be more knowledgeable about it. Do not be perturbed by my last post. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruninho Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 Yeah, I don't deny that, he did an awesome job and even brought back Netscape 9 with his cipher & TLS2 update just because I asked about it - I'm also a big fan of Netscape browsers. I can assure you that my joke was an innocent one. I am a big fan of the Windows for Workgroups 3.11, 16 bit style operating systems. Another reason for the joke was that I believe it would be simply impossible to do a kernelex for that operating system in particular and even if we could, theoretically speaking, MAYBE we would only be able to windows 95 apps from early 32 bit era. But one can dream, right? Now, back on the subject, currently for me the most usable browsers on Windows 98 are Netscape 9.0.0.6 (with Roytam1's update) and Retrozilla 2.2. I have Netscape as my main browser actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABCDEFG Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 14 minutes ago, Bruninho said: I am a big fan of the Windows for Workgroups 3.11, 16 bit style operating systems. Another reason for the joke was that I believe it would be simply impossible to do a kernelex for that operating system in particular and even if we could, theoretically speaking, MAYBE we would only be able to windows 95 apps from early 32 bit era. But one can dream, right? But something like this already exists, it was called Win32s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruninho Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 22 minutes ago, ABCDEFG said: But something like this already exists, it was called Win32s. Yeah, I have it installed there! It was the reason why it came to my mind. That's the closest thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABCDEFG Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 So, you're looking for an additional compatibility layer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruninho Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 Nope, nope. I like it the way it is. That VM of Win 3.x is working almost exactly as it was 30 years ago when I first used it, along with my DOS era games. The Win 98SE VM actually I just left shutdown - It has KernelEx 4.5.2 and Netscape 9.0.0.6. And the Win 2000 SP4 VM has BlackWingCat's kernel extender along with more updates. Running almost smoothly with SeaMonkey 2.49.5 skinned to look like Netscape 4.x. Although SeaMonkey takes a LOT of time to load before first run. And has all my 9x era games (as far as I can remember them all). I thought of a Win 10 VM for more recent games, but not worth it. I'll just bootcamp it one day when I have time to follow the guide about removing some features from it and reducing footprint & data collection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roytam1 Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 (edited) On 4/2/2020 at 4:58 AM, cc333 said: By the way, I've got 31.8 ESR working too! can you try my seamonkey 2.28 build? http://o.rths.ml/gpc/files1.rt/seamonkey-2.28-win32.7z and if gecko31 works, you may try KM75RC3 as well? Edited April 7, 2020 by roytam1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruninho Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 (edited) Let me try it and report to you in a couple of minutes. I've installed Firefox 9.0.1, It still has the wrong system fonts all over the UI, but its working somewhat and I don't know how. 1 hour ago, roytam1 said: can you try my seamonkey 2.28 build? http://o.rths.ml/gpc/files1.rt/seamonkey-2.28-win32.7z and if gecko31 works, you may try KM75RC3 as well? EDIT: For SeaMonkey 2.28, I need MSVCR100.DLL, it's complaining about this missing DLL. I don't know where to get km75rc3 either. EDIT 2: Got the DLL from my Win2K VM. Now complains about KernelXP.DLL and NTDLL.DLL... I definitely need to start using dependency walker. Edited April 8, 2020 by Bruninho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc333 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 I will! I shall report back here soon with my findings. c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruninho Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 SeaMonkey 2.28 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now