My Browser Builds (Part 3)

[InterLinked]

19 minutes ago, Mathwiz said:

Looks like an add-on for the globalThis polyfill should be targeted to NM 27, since globalThis is apparently implemented in UXP (NM 28, etc.) already.

NM 27 isn't UXP? (Apologies for the ignorance, but I've only used 28...)

19 minutes ago, Mathwiz said:

Speaking of polyfills, I poked around in JustOff's github-wc-polyfill add-on a bit. It seems to implement custom elements, which has been a JavaScript standard for some time, but still not implemented in UXP.

But his add-on limits the polyfill to GitHub/GitLab. Anyone know why? Since it's a standard, I'd think you'd want to add it to all Web pages, wouldn't you?

It looks like some of the code specifically targets GitHub webpages (DOM parsing), so I'm not sure how much of that would generalize, so it's not as simple as changing the permissions as with the manifest.json for a Chrome extension.

Might be helpful though in terms of things to add on!

[Mathwiz]

58 minutes ago, InterLinked said:

NM 27 isn't UXP? (Apologies for the ignorance, but I've only used 28...)

No. It is confusing though. MCP forked the UXP engine (used in NM 28, Serpent 52, IceDove/IceApe, and MailNews/BNavigator) from the last XP-compatible version of Firefox, 52 ESR. (I think version 52.6 specifically, but I wouldn't swear to it.) And they've made some improvements since, including, apparently, globalThis and modules support for Javascript.

NM 27, along with ArcticFox and K-Meleon, were forked from a much earlier Firefox version and hasn't received as much attention in terms of improving the Javascript engine.

[Mathwiz]

14 hours ago, UCyborg said:

No, you're not.

Well, at least Micro$oft uses Javascript to remove the "browser not supported" banner, rather than just looking at the User Agent and "assuming" the browser isn't supported! Most sites just don't work at all if the Javascript errors out, and/or give "browser not supported" if the UA is unexpected, even if the page's Javascript does work!

The https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winuser/nf-winuser-createwindowexa page renders correctly in 360EE v13, but shows "browser not supported" in Serpent 52 even with 360EE's user agent.

That said, there's nothing on that page that requires any particularly advanced Javascript. Micro$oft just wants you to use their Edge - and of course a Windows version that supports it (not to mention a PC that will run that Windows version). How dare you try to browse a Micro$oft site with XP!

[InterLinked]

Just now, Mathwiz said:

Well, at least Micro$oft uses Javascript to remove the "browser not supported" banner, rather than just looking at the User Agent and "assuming" the browser isn't supported! Most sites just don't work at all if the Javascript errors out, and/or give "browser not supported" if the UA is unexpected, even if the page's Javascript does work!

The https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winuser/nf-winuser-createwindowexa page renders correctly in 360EE v13, but shows "browser not supported" in Serpent 52 even with 360EE's user agent.

That said, there's nothing on that page that requires any particularly advanced Javascript. Micro$oft just wants you to use their Edge - and of course a Windows version that supports it (not to mention a PC that will run that Windows version). How dare you try to browse a Micro$oft site with XP!

Yeah, what surprises me most is how they even cannibalized their own product (IE) in doing so.

IE 11 was/is actually pretty decent, at least when it came out and it worked pretty well with everything. It still works with everything I do since I don't do anything too radical in my web dev/design.

But now, if you go to a MSFT site, they deliberately break it and try to get you to use edge.

At least I'm using Windows 7.... no Edge crapware on here, so it can't force open a different browser on me!

[Mathwiz]

I have Windows 7 too, which actually isn't too bad (someone once joked that Windows 7 was just Vista SP2; M$ just bumped the version so they could charge you for it again). And I do have a copy of ChrEdge on it, although I rarely use it anymore - I just use the same 360EE v13 as on XP.

[UCyborg]

14 hours ago, Mathwiz said:

That said, there's nothing on that page that requires any particularly advanced Javascript. Micro$oft just wants you to use their Edge - and of course a Windows version that supports it (not to mention a PC that will run that Windows version). How dare you try to browse a Micro$oft site with XP!

You still have regular mortals writing code with new syntax who don't check which browsers support it because who doesn't run always-up-to-date Chrome/Firefox. None of these two browsers have checkbox in their settings pages to turn off updates.

Over a month ago I adapted Return YouTube Dislike user script to use classic syntax with those conditional statements, I still use Pale Moon often (link to the script if anyone cares, no warranty or promise for updates).

Some time ago, the place I work at put "latest Firefox, Chrome or Internet Explorer" in the system requirements of the software it develops. Ridiculous. Exact versions used to be specified. I suspect only Internet Explorer is keeping them from going nuts with recent JS bells and whistles, I had to report a bug a while back since those damn ?? appeared in the code.

Funny I still have Chrome 79 on my phone, thought it'll last longer before I find something that doesn't work in it and it's only one version behind the one that added nullish coalescing and optional chaining operators. For the record, the "important" stuff that I use still works in Pale Moon for me.

14 hours ago, InterLinked said:

At least I'm using Windows 7.... no Edge crapware on here, so it can't force open a different browser on me!

14 hours ago, Mathwiz said:

And I do have a copy of ChrEdge on it, although I rarely use it anymore - I just use the same 360EE v13 as on XP.

I'll probably sound like an old broken record now, but I consider Edge the only usable Chromium browser on Windows ATM. I cannot stand Chrome's font rendering, it irritates my eyes if I read text for too long. Edge makes it better with edge://flags/#edge-enhance-text-contrast flag for my eyes at least, much closer to Firefox based browsers, though it's not exactly 1:1, I detect a slight added blur to it compared to Firefox, which I can still tolerate, at least it doesn't irritate my eyes.

I don't know what's with the added blur or why there's more of it as some slight amount is supposedly inherent with anti-aliasing, haven't found an explanation for that specifically, but general official explanation regarding default font rendering in Chromium and with the new flag in Edge is here: https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2021/06/02/improving-font-rendering-in-microsoft-edge/

I used to be of opinion that Windows 7 is my minimum preferred version, last year I changed that opinion to 8.1 solely because I detected some slight font rendering defects while browsing in Firefox based browsers that don't occur on 8.1 and 10 with same ClearType settings.

Don't get me started ranting on XP font rendering, edgy fonts all over the place that ClearType tuning doesn't fix.

Chromium renders OK on Linux though, changing system font settings actually makes a difference in font appearance.

For the record, last time I used CRT computer screen was at least 15 years ago, so no clue how any browser/OS fonts would appear with different settings on those. Only LCD TFT screens have been used since.

Edited January 23, 2022 by UCyborg

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Totally agree on font rendering.  Win 7 and Vista anti-aliased ClearType-tuned fonts give me migraines.
Win 10 does not (no interest in even trying 11).  I'm not talking just Chrome font rendering, the entire Windows GUI gives me migraines due to font blur, in ALL applications.
The "edgy" fonts in XP are far from 'perfect', but at least they do not send me to the ER or put me in dark closet for four hours waiting for a migraine to subside.

[InterLinked]

3 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Totally agree on font rendering.  Win 7 and Vista anti-aliased ClearType-tuned fonts give me migraines.
Win 10 does not (no interest in even trying 11).  I'm not talking just Chrome font rendering, the entire Windows GUI gives me migraines due to font blur, in ALL applications.
The "edgy" fonts in XP are far from 'perfect', but at least they do not send me to the ER or put me in dark closet for four hours waiting for a migraine to subside.

So why not turn off ClearType then?

Presumably that is unchecking "Smooth edges of screen fonts"?

[NotHereToPlayGames]

That doesn't "completely" disable anti-aliased fonts on 7 and Vista.  You would think that it would, but it does not.

[InterLinked]

58 minutes ago, InterLinked said:

So why not turn off ClearType then?

Presumably that is unchecking "Smooth edges of screen fonts"?

What if you use Windows Classic?

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Don't recall offhand.  When Windows 7 landed me in the hospital for migraines that i've never had in my entire life until Windows 7's font rendering came along, I promptly returned to XP.

I actually thought I had brain cancer when hit with migraines two or three times a day for several days and never knowing what a migraine was!

My issues with sub-pixel anti-aliased fonts actually landed me (and others like me) in medical journals - I've kind of always regretted not getting a "copy" just for nostalgia or whatnot.

Most people's eyesight just "adjusts" to sub-pixel anti-aliased fonts.

It is NOT because my eyesight is "worse" than others, it's because it is more accute and accurate than others.

I mean, I can't fly around like a hawk and swoop down for a field mouse, but I guess you could say it's something like that, lol.

[D.Draker]

3 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

When Windows 7 landed me in the hospital for migraines that i've never had in my entire life until Windows 7's font rendering came along,

I feel you man !!! Windows 7 is the worst nightmare and you're absolutely right : NO way to turn it off on win7 !!! Yet you're mistaken about Vista . It can be switched OFF completely !

Do not consider yourself somewhat special though , I too can see the bloody dancing pixels. I think most folks won't notice because of their junk monitors though.

Windows 7 is pure evil.

Here's the proof with AA on and OFF on Vista .

And here's my upvote for ya , of course.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

7 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

Here's the proof with AA on and OFF on Vista .

Cool!  I admit that I've never owned or used Vista.  Was afraid to after my experience with Win 7!

7 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

And here's my upvote for ya

"Et tu, Brute?"  I use MSFN's "ignore feature" to ignore members that play that game!  This isn't Facebook or Instagram or Twitter or TikTok or YouTube or Reddit or Vimeo.  Our "value" here has NOTHING to do with "upvotes".

[InterLinked]

14 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

I feel you man !!! Windows 7 is the worst nightmare and you're absolutely right : NO way to turn it off on win7 !!! Yet you're mistaken about Vista . It can be switched OFF completely !

Do not consider yourself somewhat special though , I too can see the bloody dancing pixels. I think most folks won't notice because of their junk monitors though.

Windows 7 is pure evil.

Here's the proof with AA on and OFF on Vista .

And here's my upvote for ya , of course.

If I disable smoothing in Windows 7, it looks like this:

Isn't that the same result?

And here it is with dark theme in Windows 7:

I fail to see how WIN7 is evil... Win8+ though, yes, definitely!

 

[D.Draker]

@InterLinked, Windows 7 gives me headaches too ! I mean, I'm obvioisly a bit tougher , so no migranes . Yet win7's  picture (visual) quality is like if someone spilled a  bottle of milk over one's monitor . It is NOT sharp . It's blurry . Yet I can work with Vista for over than 12 hours no prob.

Why win7 is evil for us ? LOL.

Besides, it's a huge piece of spyware , logging every move . You like win7 ? Fine , we don't.