360 Extreme Explorer ArcticFoxie Versions

[rereser]

http://retrobrowsers.com/windowsxp
send them an email several days ago.
got a reply and now this topic is added to the browser list for xp. (portable versions)
 

Edited November 26, 2021 by rereser

[D.Draker]

3 hours ago, msfntor said:

YES. No problem, very interesting topic for me, author is friendly... 

Yes , I think so too , very informative topic and the member @Dixel is friendly . I hope we shall have a similar tool for our favourite 360 Explorer (version 13.5.1030 or 13.5.1060) some day !

https://msfn.org/board/topic/183169-an-ex-dj-from-holland-hacked-mozillafirefox-code-and-wrote-a-tool-to-mock-this-pitiful-browser/

Edited November 26, 2021 by D.Draker
forgot to add the author's name

[D.Draker]

3 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Feel free, if you think it will add to the user-base.  (I am doubtful!)

Tripredacus once wrote he knows many use the website without creating accounts . So it could be more users than you think. Just sayin'.

[msfntor]

3 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Feel free, if you think it will add to the user-base.  (I am doubtful!)

Personally, I had a vested interest in getting the "new web" to work and I have achieved that goal - "my work here is done", so to speak.

"interested" in progress is one thing, telling my to update my computers for your own personal gain is another altogether.

ALL of the info that you need to CREATE YOUR OWN version exists here at MSFN.

"Teach a fellow to fish and you've fed him for a lifetime" - I'd encourage you to start creating your own v13.5 and no question is too small, ask away when you need help with the next step - "my work here is done", so to speak.

You wrote: "(I am doubtful!)" - Don't cry about it, pull yourself together and look at the audience that supports your work on 360Chrome...

You wrote: " "my work here is done" " - sure you have big achievements, you have great achievements, but we are waiting for your 13.5 (and other) new releases!  

"for your own personal gain" - what ... I don't understand your reasoning, no personal gain on my part, none.

"CREATE YOUR OWN version" - thank you, but I'm NOT developer like you... when I was in school (a very long time ago..), nobody taught me this... I don't know anything about it, sadly...

Hope and perseverance for you!

Edited November 26, 2021 by msfntor
Hope and perseverance

[NotHereToPlayGames]

4 hours ago, rereser said:

http://retrobrowsers.com/windowsxp
send them an email several days ago.
got a reply and now this topic is added to the browser list for xp. (portable versions)
 

Cool !!!

My v13.5 seems to only have that first-launch-after-reboot lockup nuance on MULTI-MONITOR computers.

Not sure why that would cause any issues but that's the best I got so far.

Any computer with only ONE monitor is totally and absolutely USELESS to me  

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Even without the first-launch-after-reboot lockup issue, I cannot even "force" myself to use v13.5.

It's an outrageously gigantic RAM hog and I don't use any of my computers to "just browse".

They'll all have several programs open and have several browser windows each with several tabs.

 

I'm reminded of several weeks/months ago where it seems like the ONLY "endurance test" that ANYBODY cared about for these browser was "How many YouTube tabs can I open before it crashes?"

You may recall that it made ZERO sense to me at the time, why would ANYBODY want to have twenty YouTube tabs open?  I can only watch ONE.  I can only listen to ONE.

Point is, we all use our computers for different things and we all have different needs.

v13.5 is not the wave of the future for 360Chrome, it just isn't.  We will just have to "agree to disagree".

My focus remains on "low-end" "older" hardware.  We simply should not need 3 GB RAM or more just to launch a web browser.

 

Apologies if I came across as in a "bad mood" earlier.  But I'll have to take this stand that v13.5 is not the wave of the future for 360Chrome.  I do firmly believe that.

I am interested in keeping all of these as up-to-date as is reasonable.  But I see no advantage to dropping v11 or v12 just because v13.5 is "newest".

 

In other news, I know that Humming Owl likes to keep his releases at the "latest" (whereas I try to benchmark different builds and cherry-pick among them)  --  v13 build 2250 has been updated to build 2256 as far as the original Chinese goes.

[D.Draker]

5 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

My focus remains on "low-end" "older" hardware.  We simply should not need 3 GB RAM or more just to launch a web browser.

You show as someone living in United States , am I right ? That makes me wonder where do you get these numbers ?

Low end hardware in 2007-2008 = 2-3GB and some Core Duo E6400.

Low end hardware in 2021-2022 = 8-16GB and some G4400-G4560 Pentium . Approx. 65-80 Euro at max. (second hand, good condition) . And this hardware is already "older" because it's 5-6 years old , at least.

I hope you don't mind giving you my opinion , please don't get angry , I'm not forcing you to do anything and I'm saying once again , thank you for the work on 13.5.1030 build ! 

Sticking with old versions will definitely reduce the userbase , that's for sure . People will not force themselves to become nurds so they could browse Twitter on a super-duper ancient hardware from 2007. They'll go amok and upgrade to Windows 66 , just to use some newer browsers.

[Mathwiz]

Keep in mind that if you're running 32-bit Windows (except server versions), 3 GB is just about all the OS will use since the address space is only 4 GB and the graphics card will eat up a big chunk of that. So if a browser uses 3 GB, you can't do much of anything else while it's open!

Remember this is in the "Browsers for older OSes" forum. Technically that includes some 64-bit and server versions that can use lots of RAM, but I'd bet over 95% of the folks visiting this forum are using 32-bit Windows XP or Vista.

Now, I do find some of these browsers useful even on 64-bit Windows 7 - 360Chrome v13 lets me run Flash without nags, while still handling pretty much any Web site I browse to - but I'm a minority of a minority. Win 7 has plenty of other browser choices, at least for now.

Oh, and BTW, it's spelled "nerds...."

[D.Draker]

3 hours ago, Mathwiz said:

Keep in mind that if you're running 32-bit Windows (except server versions), 3 GB is just about all the OS will use since the address space is only 4 GB and the graphics card will eat up a big chunk of that. So if a browser uses 3 GB, you can't do much of anything else while it's open!

Remember this is in the "Browsers for older OSes" forum. Technically that includes some 64-bit and server versions that can use lots of RAM, but I'd bet over 95% of the folks visiting this forum are using 32-bit Windows XP or Vista.

Now, I do find some of these browsers useful even on 64-bit Windows 7 - 360Chrome v13 lets me run Flash without nags, while still handling pretty much any Web site I browse to - but I'm a minority of a minority. Win 7 has plenty of other browser choices, at least for now.

Oh, and BTW, it's spelled "nerds...."

No, I'm not . I run 64-bit Windows Vista, it can use all 16GB of my RAM . If a browser uses 3 GB, doesn't matter to me , but I agree it's no good, I think I said it earlier.

Yes , I remember this is "Browsers for older OSes" forum. And I run 15 years old Vista .

Oh, and BTW, it's spelled "nurds...." in Europe and pretty much the rest of the World .  UK , AU , NZ and so on . Yes , I know how it spelled in the States , but this is a European forum and I'm from Europe.  Also , we spell colour , favourite , harbour , lift (not elevator) . Elevator here means a harvesting machine. 

I think you wouldn't want to argue with Collins English Dictionary.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/nurd

An agricultural harvesting machine , example how to use  the word elevator :

 

http://europepmc.org/article/PAT/EP1825741

[LowLander]

12 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

only five or six of us that use 360Chrome and that is mine

Be sure the number is more than that,

i use your build 11 & 12 for more than a month and i'm more than satisfied

i ven talk about it around, last week two friends adopted it as main browser...

for the record version me too i don't like version 13.5 and you know why.

[jumper]

On 11/25/2021 at 7:51 PM, bphlpt said:

I was going to agree with @UCyborg  I'm not sure how XP does it, but for my Win 7 system, I'll have one instance of explorer.exe for the desktop, then another for each instance of Windows Explorer I open. But since it hasn't happened again, then maybe it was just a glitch, so never mind.

Cheers and Regards

I can reproduce. A second, high priority, Explorer process is created when Opening Containing Folder from search results if Launch...in a separate process is enabled.

 

[rereser]

@NotHereToPlayGames ,
maybe a solution for your issue with v13.5 and a multi monitor setup.
https://support.google.com/chrome/thread/77251594/chrome-freezes-while-using-two-virtual-desktops?hl=en

also i forgot something i got in the reply from retrobrowsers.com.
he said he also updated a wiki ...
https://xpforever.miraheze.org/wiki/360_Extreme_Explorer

[NotHereToPlayGames]

7 hours ago, D.Draker said:

Low end hardware in 2007-2008 = 2-3GB

Low end hardware in 2021-2022 = 8-16GB

 AGREED !!! 

HEAVILY AGREED !!!

My "workhorse" is an i7-4770 at 3.4 GHz with 16 GB RAM.  Purchased late 2014 with 8 GB RAM for just shy of $700.  I've since upgraded to 16 GB RAM.

It came pre-loaded with Win 7 x64 but "updated itself" within 6 months or so to Win 10 x64.

I was pretty much immediately "enraged" with Win 10 and how dare my computer "upgrade itself" !!!

I should have known better, I disabled all of that auto-update crap in XP but forgot to (or just never got around to) disabling in 7 and here I was in 10 and hated it!

I was going back to 7 no matter what but took time to contrast real-world same-hardware performance metrics between XP and 7 and the winner, bar none, was XP.

This "workhorse" has been on XP every since (we can all "agree to disagree" on why MILLIONS of us worldwide have come to the same conclusions and REMAIN on XP).

Though I should add here that I have since tweaked my 7's and 10's but haven't repeated the contrast-and-compare same-hardware performance metrics to XP.

 

My main point is this - me buying the i7-4770 did not make my Core 2 Duo's and my Core 2 Quad's "useless"  --  why would I throw them away when they are EXTREMELY usefull as-is?

But that also doesn't mean they are "worth" throwing money at (and I do take issue with forum members 'telling me' to go buy RAM for my Core 2 Duo's and my Core 2 Quad's!).

 

I own four "classic" cars.  A '55, a '61, a '90, and a '91.  Cars and computers are "hobbies".  I will "throw money" at a '55 or '61 without hesitation, there will be hesitation at how much money is thrown at a '90 or '91.

But if my "daily driver" starts to require "money thrown at it', you have to wheigh the pros and cons very heavily  --  if that "daily driver" requires money thrown at it "left and right", then HELLO, trade it in for something more reliable!

 

Again, I take very serious issue with forum members 'telling me' to go buy RAM for my Core 2 Duo's and my Core 2 Quad's  --  not going to happen!

They are VERY useful to me as-is and I will cut bait with them as soon as they are no longer useful to me.  But I will not "throw money at them"!

Edited November 27, 2021 by NotHereToPlayGames

[NotHereToPlayGames]

6 hours ago, Mathwiz said:

but I'd bet over 95% of the folks visiting this forum are using 32-bit Windows XP or Vista.

Bingo!

[NotHereToPlayGames]

5 hours ago, D.Draker said:

I think you wouldn't want to argue with Collins English Dictionary.

Too hillarious.  Nice to start the day off with a good chuckle.