Jump to content

360 Extreme Explorer ArcticFoxie Versions

NotHereToPlayGames
 Share

Recommended Posts

NotHereToPlayGames

NotHereToPlayGames

Posted
  • Author
Posted
56 minutes ago, XPerceniol said:

I created a fake [User Data\Default\Local Storage] leveldb empty file.

This one will depend on your extensions.  Some extensions will not save their own settings if they cannot use the Local Storage folder.

The way around that is to prevent all session-to-session storage AFTER all extensions are installed and all of their settings have been set - basically preventing the .ldb database file to be updated.

I do this by using one loader .ini file for creating my profile (ie, installing extensions and their settings [done with no internet access]), then a second loader .ini after my profile is created and only then is internet access enabled.

During setting up profile  ==  FileDelete=%Profile%\Default\Local Storage\leveldb\LOCK;LOG;LOG.old

Day-to-day browsing after profile is created  ==  FileDelete=%Profile%\Default\Local Storage\leveldb\LOCK;LOG;LOG.old;*.log

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anbima

Anbima

Posted
Posted
On 4/29/2022 at 9:51 PM, UCyborg said:

Easiest way is downloading it from https://www.crx4chrome.com/ and you'll need KeePass from https://keepass.info/ along with KeePassRPC plugin. Portable version should work out-of-the-box on XP if you have at least .NET Framework 2.0 installed, best to have 4.0 for the best compatibility though, particularly with 3rd party extensions. This little app is totally unsupported on old Windows and presumably .NET Frameworks, but it's coded in a way that lack of features it can use simply makes them unavailable rather than entire application to not work at all.

I looked at that and that looks very complicated. I also don't find it suitable for Windows XP.
Is there no easy way to safely save the passwords?

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
D.Draker

D.Draker

Posted
Posted

 

NEWS

The new version 13.5.2001 is out ! (not sure if it's the last)

The new version 13.0.2310.0 is out but already abandoned. (last) 

Why ? Because 13.5 and 13.0 are now merged under 13.6. 

The 13.0 is completely gone to history.

No news regarding the engine itself , still the old one , but they claim to make fixes .

That's why I partially moved to Kaftan Browser (had to) . It has newer engine and java.

Despite what some say , it's very fast for me.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AstroSkipper

AstroSkipper

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

That's why I partially moved to Kaftan Browser (had to) . It has newer engine and java.

Despite what some say , it's very fast for me.

Kaftan Browser? Never heard of it! Any links? I googled it and found nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UCyborg

UCyborg

Posted
Posted
Just now, Anbima said:

I looked at that and that looks very complicated. I also don't find it suitable for Windows XP.
Is there no easy way to safely save the passwords?

Well, it's how I do it regardless of whether I'm on Windows 10 or XP. I'm rather spoiled so probably wouldn't use it if it wasn't relatively easy to manage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anbima

Anbima

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, D.Draker said:

That's why I partially moved to Kaftan Browser (had to) . It has newer engine and java.

 

The Kafan browser is very slow and sluggish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anbima

Anbima

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, UCyborg said:

Well, it's how I do it regardless of whether I'm on Windows 10 or XP. I'm rather spoiled so probably wouldn't use it if it wasn't relatively easy to manage.

I installed KeePass with the extension and it works.
However, 360 chrome 11 now needs much more memory.
Could it be that this extension needs so much memory?

Is it possible to display the memory requirement of the individual extensions in V11?

Edited by Anbima
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NotHereToPlayGames

NotHereToPlayGames

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Anbima said:

Is it possible to display the memory requirement of the individual extensions in V11?

Hit "Shift-Esc" and the Task Manager will display the memory footprint for the larger extensions.  It will not show the memory footprint for smaller extensions though.

image.png.6340c6f4e86982d6a61a562b4101d9da.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
D.Draker

D.Draker

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Anbima said:

The Kafan browser is very slow and sluggish.

Any proof to back this up ? Or you just say so ? I don't know why it's "slow" for you. I run it on ANCIENT PC from another century. 13 years old or so . Manufactured somewhere in 2009. Model :

Fujitsu Celsius W380 MT with Xeon x3470 2.93Ghz, DDR3 16GB , SATA II x6,

GTX Tian X and Vista x64. I'm sorry , I couldn't find anything older to try it on. Both 360 Explorer v13. and the Kaftan browser just fly. But the latter is faster overall

and opens everything very fast . I wouldn't say the difference is huge , no ! But it can open newer websites quite a bit faster . Well , I haven't tried it on win98. So... 

P.S. 

Seems like it needs less RAM also , I wouldn't bother myself to measure though . There's always be someone who disagrees , etc. And I don't care about RAM , honestly.

Doesn't mean I don't like 360EE v13.5 ! I'll wait in hope when/if @NotHereToPlayGames releases the new 13.6 to try it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anbima

Anbima

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

Any proof to back this up ? Or you just say so ? I don't know why it's "slow" for you. I run it on ANCIENT PC from another century. 13 years old or so . Manufactured somewhere in 2009. Model :

 

I tested this for a while (but no measurements).
Since I always use the same websites, I can very well assess how quickly a browser is.
V11 is significantly faster than Kafan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NotHereToPlayGames

NotHereToPlayGames

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Kafan is a no-go for me.
We all have our own "must-have" list when it comes to software and for me, one of them is a real TITLE BAR (all of my computers have multiple monitors and I have an app that places icons in the title bar, click an icon and the window moves to a different monitor).
It's actually one of the reasons that I used Pale Moon / New Moon for as long as I did - because "hate" is not a strong enough word for Chromium browsers not having a real TITLE BAR.
It was only 360Chrome and it having a real TITLE BAR that brought me to Chromium-based browsers.
"Trivial" to most people, but GIGANTIC to me  :cool:

As far as Speedometer 2.0 goes, 360Chrome v11 scores higher for me in very low-end systems but Kafan scores higher on anything with multiple cores and more then 2 GB RAM.
But the scores are so close to each other than neither one can really be called "faster", the scores are basically within margin of error and would require flash photography in a neck-and-neck horse race.
"Mileage may vary."

Edited by NotHereToPlayGames
Link to comment
Share on other sites
D.Draker

D.Draker

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Anbima said:

I tested this for a while (but no measurements).
V11 is significantly faster than Kafan.

Excuse me . What's the point of such "comparison" ? You compare browsers from different eras. Might as well compare to chrome v 0.9 (from 2009) in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...