Future of Chrome on Windows 7

[Cixert]

*I think I have read in the past that this browser was officially supported by Google, right now I can't find information to confirm it

[mjd79]

23 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I advise you to remove the main website link for Thorium.

A moderator "pointed me" with a "permanent" point for posting that link in the past.

You're right, because you can download for example warez there.

Edited May 4, 2023 by Tripredacus

[NotHereToPlayGames]

That was my mistake.

Other forum member(s) were asking about Thorium, I did a 10-second Google, and posted the link.

I've never actually tried Thorium.

I do not, never have, and never will condone the use of "warez".

Edited May 4, 2023 by Tripredacus

[NotHereToPlayGames]

22 hours ago, mjd79 said:

You're right, because you can download for example warez there.

Technically, no, you cannot!

It does have a link to GitHub for a something called a "warez" as some sort of "warez".

But it does not HOST whatever a "warez" is - GitHub is doing the hosting.  Semantics, I guess.

MSFN does not blanket-ban GitHub links, regardless of the wide array of content, legal or otherwise, hosted via GitHub.

 

At any rate, I still advise the poster to learn from my mistake and remove the link to Thorium's main website.

Edited May 4, 2023 by Tripredacus

[Tripredacus]

Do not post a link to that website and do not mention the types of things that are on that website. Even mentioning the names will cause those terms to be indexed by search engines and leading to here. So don't do it, use a generic term. I edited some posts to remove the specific terms and replace them with warez.

[Cixert]

On 5/3/2023 at 2:50 PM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I advise you to remove the main website link for Thorium.

A moderator "pointed me" with a "permanent" point for posting that link in the past.

what is the reason? @Tripredacus

I respect that but I don't know the reason ...

[D.Draker]

7 hours ago, Cixert said:

what is the reason? @Tripredacus

I respect that but I don't know the reason ...

Because the low self-esteem Ivan (why else one would call oneself a Norse God's name?) has illegal software on that website.

 

Edited May 5, 2023 by D.Draker
bold text

[D.Draker]

16 hours ago, Tripredacus said:

Do not post a link to that website and do not mention the types of things that are on that website. Even mentioning the names will cause those terms to be indexed by search engines and leading to here. So don't do it, use a generic term. I edited some posts to remove the specific terms and replace them with wreaz.

I bet there are many Ivans that use "wuaraez" (I grossly misspelled it on purpose) in their search queries. A more generic (and more official) term would be smth like illegal soft , non-legit,.

I doubt they would be searching for "illegal software" . 

But whaddaIknow. 

[kar1]

Woah, the bandwagon hate is weird against that Thorium developer.

Why the hate against him? Because he links to 'ultrabad illegal software'?

 

If the software he links to is ever illegal, then it's illegal no matter whether it's modified or not.

 

- There's no such thing as illegal software, only what you do with it.

 

- In fact, weapons are also not illegal no matter where you live, it's just that it's a restricted material that's illegal to possess without a license.

- And coincidentally, the licenses tend to granted to law enforcement personel only.

 

- Replace 'weapons' with 'vehicules', and it's the same thing. If driving licenses were only given to law enforcement personel, you could be arrested upon sight for using a car.

- However cars would still not be illegal, otherwise even law enforcement couldn't drive them.

 

- The people who produce the 'illegal software' are more inline with the FSF (Free Software Foundation) than the 'leeches' who just want paid stuff for free.

- They do it more for freedom than for the price, even a $5 software with DRM will eventually end up being 'illegalized' anyway even if it's strongly protected. It will just take more time & effort.

 

- Reverse-engineering any software is legal, it doesn't matter what the EULA of a software says.

- All illegal contracts are illegal, you could sign a contract saying that you agree to die tomorrow, and if you don't die tomorrow you won't be arrested anyway.

- It's the redistribution of the licensed material that's restricted, so you can perfectly reverse-engineer a software and keep it for your own personal use.

 

- It's perfectly fine (and encouraged) to use re-engineered movies, softwares & games that you already purchased yourself once.

- You could legally purchase a Windows 10 Pro key and activate it with a local server anyway afterwards, and that will be fine.

 

I already purchased Windows 7 long ago, so there's no problem with using a third-party DRM-free activation.

It gives me more freedom and protects me from Microsoft influence incase it tries to takedown its Windows 7 activation servers.

 

This developer who seems to be getting bandwagon hate here is just linking to resources that allow using Windows 7 past its EOL even after licenses are no longer sold.

Well, it's abandonware now. Where is the problem?

 

Calm down...

 

If all 'illegal software' was made legal overnight you would all be so proud of how much premium stuff you got for free today.

And if it becomes illegal again you will be trashing each other about how criminal you all were yesterday for downloading these files online.

[D.Draker]

3 hours ago, kar1 said:

Woah, the bandwagon hate is weird against that Thorium developer.

Why the hate against him? Because he links to 'ultrabad illegal software'?

 

If the software he links to is ever illegal, then it's illegal no matter whether it's modified or not.

 

- There's no such thing as illegal software, only what you do with it.

 

- In fact, weapons are also not illegal no matter where you live, it's just that it's a restricted material that's illegal to possess without a license.

- And coincidentally, the licenses tend to granted to law enforcement personel only.

 

- Replace 'weapons' with 'vehicules', and it's the same thing. If driving licenses were only given to law enforcement personel, you could be arrested upon sight for using a car.

- However cars would still not be illegal, otherwise even law enforcement couldn't drive them.

 

- The people who produce the 'illegal software' are more inline with the FSF (Free Software Foundation) than the 'leeches' who just want paid stuff for free.

- They do it more for freedom than for the price, even a $5 software with DRM will eventually end up being 'illegalized' anyway even if it's strongly protected. It will just take more time & effort.

 

- Reverse-engineering any software is legal, it doesn't matter what the EULA of a software says.

- All illegal contracts are illegal, you could sign a contract saying that you agree to die tomorrow, and if you don't die tomorrow you won't be arrested anyway.

- It's the redistribution of the licensed material that's restricted, so you can perfectly reverse-engineer a software and keep it for your own personal use.

 

- It's perfectly fine (and encouraged) to use re-engineered movies, softwares & games that you already purchased yourself once.

- You could legally purchase a Windows 10 Pro key and activate it with a local server anyway afterwards, and that will be fine.

 

I already purchased Windows 7 long ago, so there's no problem with using a third-party DRM-free activation.

It gives me more freedom and protects me from Microsoft influence incase it tries to takedown its Windows 7 activation servers.

 

This developer who seems to be getting bandwagon hate here is just linking to resources that allow using Windows 7 past its EOL even after licenses are no longer sold.

Well, it's abandonware now. Where is the problem?

 

Calm down...

 

If all 'illegal software' was made legal overnight you would all be so proud of how much premium stuff you got for free today.

And if it becomes illegal again you will be trashing each other about how criminal you all were yesterday for downloading these files online.

It's not "hate", it's facts and the rules of the forum. But you have you right to go to your local court and try your luck with such opinions.

And I am calm, where so you see I'm not ?

I'm calm, cheerful, helping, sociable, friendly, a very nice person in general.

 

[kar1]

Not you but I mean the general attitude in this last page.

People being like 'ho no that developer is very very bad, worst criminal ever, I would never be so bad like him. I can't even.'

As he if had a contagious disease and everyone fleeing away trying to say 'no worries I ran away from bad developer so I'm clean!'

Also, countless times we had court rulings on technical matters that were incorrect and made with bias.

You indeed need a thorough lawyer in cases of intellectual property & P2P offense proceedings.

Otherwise the courts just blindly believe whatever the big IP Alliances say even if technically fallacious, and they rule based on this.

So if I had tried my luck this way, it would fail miserably but I'm still correct that illegal contracts hold no value and can be broken without penalty.

It's just very hard to disprove the technical fallacies that the accusers submit as evidence when the judges & juries aren't technically literate enough (technology-wise).

The technically competent jury candidates are rejected.

If we could steal YouTube videos for example, then YouTube's disk usage would be down to exactly 0 bytes and there would be exactly 0 videos left on it.

And no problem with the rules of this forum, it's just best to be correct when claiming that anything is 'illegal'.

[D.Draker]

3 hours ago, kar1 said:

Not you but I mean the general attitude in this last page.

People being like 'ho no that developer is very very bad, worst criminal ever, I would never be so bad like him. I can't even.'

As he if had a contagious disease and everyone fleeing away trying to say 'no worries I ran away from bad developer so I'm clean!'

And what exactly does that "developer" develop ? Enlighten us, please.

EDIT : Isn't it the old Chrome 109 from the last year ?

Then it's not only about the illegal content the "developer" provides, it's also off-topic, simply because the thread is about the future of Chrome,

not its past , old versions.

Edited May 5, 2023 by D.Draker

[NotHereToPlayGames]

D.Draker - we are on the same page on this one, "personality conflicts" aside.  Honestly, we really are.

But as I read kar1's comments, I have to agree with him as well.

There is a "fine line" and it is all "relative" (or is "subjective" a better word?) on just when and where that line is crossed.

I am not trying to go off-topic and it is kind of all tied together.

 

For one, the future of Chrome on Win7 is likely (I reiterate "likely", this is purely speculative) going to follow the lead of what the XP Crowd has been doing since Chrome abandoned XP.

ie, one or two years behind.  There is decompiling, recompiling, backporting, debug, dependency checks, trial-and-error, et cetera - "software doesn't write itself".

Will that workflow "work" for the Win7 Crowd?  Only time will tell.  It is all "speculative" as soon as the word "future" enters the scene.

There is also "intended audience" if this Future Chrome on Win7 is going to gain true traction.

What I perceive a "car" to be in the future may very well differ from what you perceive a "car" to be in the future - it's all speculative...  and subjective...

 

Secondly, I propose that we have to view the previously-mentioned browser and in turn the previously-mentioned web site the same way we (MSFN) views Extended Kernels.

I guarantee that Microsoft does not view an Extended Kernel in the same way that the end-consumer views an Extended Kernel.

And unless I'm mistaken, even MSFN Forum Rules do not allow "links" to Extended Kernels (I could be wrong on this, this falls back on "intended audience" and I do not use Extended Kernels nor follow those MSFN Threads).

But MSFN does allow us all to use the phrase "extended kernel" even though it may be indexed by search engines.

You see how that "fine line" comes into play?

 

Does the Future of Chrome on Win7 force the intended audience to utilize an Extended Kernel?

Or will traction only be gained by giving in to the demands of the Vanilla Win7 Crowd and the Future of Chrome on Win7 not require an Extended Kernel?

Only time will tell...  And have a great day, my friend, and note that I strived to word this reply without triggering any "personality conflicts"  

Edited May 5, 2023 by NotHereToPlayGames
typos

[Tripredacus]

8 hours ago, kar1 said:

Well, it's abandonware now. Where is the problem?

Win7 will never be abandonware as long as Microsoft exists. Abandonware is to be products that have an abandoned license or copyright, and has nothing to do with whether a product is actively being sold or supported.

I personally don't care about the Thorium website, or the developer, or the browser, or warez, or whatever else. The forum has rules about what can be posted about and what is directly linked to, and this is only because in the past we have received complains and nasty letters from lawyers about things. So we don't allow those types of posts as a measure to protect the forum from disappearing entirely. And sure, you don't need to point out the gray area that exists with the rules, with regards to extended kernels or updates (updates are the big thing really) so let's hope MS continues to not care about those things so we can still talk about them here.

[D.Draker]

21 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

D.Draker - we are on the same page on this one, "personality conflicts" aside.  Honestly, we really are.

But as I read kar1's comments, I have to agree with him as well.

There is a "fine line" and it is all "relative" (or is "subjective" a better word?) on just when and where that line is crossed.

I am not trying to go off-topic and it is kind of all tied together.

 

For one, the future of Chrome on Win7 is likely (I reiterate "likely", this is purely speculative) going to follow the lead of what the XP Crowd has been doing since Chrome abandoned XP.

ie, one or two years behind.  There is decompiling, recompiling, backporting, debug, dependency checks, trial-and-error, et cetera - "software doesn't write itself".

Will that workflow "work" for the Win7 Crowd?  Only time will tell.  It is all "speculative" as soon as the word "future" enters the scene.

There is also "intended audience" if this Future Chrome on Win7 is going to gain true traction.

What I perceive a "car" to be in the future may very well differ from what you perceive a "car" to be in the future - it's all speculative...  and subjective...

 

Secondly, I propose that we have to view the previously-mentioned browser and in turn the previously-mentioned web site the same way we (MSFN) views Extended Kernels.

I guarantee that Microsoft does not view an Extended Kernel in the same way that the end-consumer views an Extended Kernel.

And unless I'm mistaken, even MSFN Forum Rules do not allow "links" to Extended Kernels (I could be wrong on this, this falls back on "intended audience" and I do not use Extended Kernels nor follow those MSFN Threads).

But MSFN does allow us all to use the phrase "extended kernel" even though it may be indexed by search engines.

You see how that "fine line" comes into play?

 

Does the Future of Chrome on Win7 force the intended audience to utilize an Extended Kernel?

Or will traction only be gained by giving in to the demands of the Vanilla Win7 Crowd and the Future of Chrome on Win7 not require an Extended Kernel?

Only time will tell...  And have a great day, my friend, and note that I strived to word this reply without triggering any "personality conflicts"  

I don't share your obsessive desires to bring down the ex-kernel projects. This is not the first (far from it) and (looks like) not the last of your posts with such attempts.

Thankfully, DAVE deleted them.  @win32 already aswered you regarding your "concerns" about the legality of his work (search his account for links) .

His actions are well within his country laws and out of your jurisdiction.

The answer about Chrome will follow later, when I'm back.

18 hours ago, Tripredacus said:

Win7 will never be abandonware as long as Microsoft exists. Abandonware is to be products that have an abandoned license or copyright, and has nothing to do with whether a product is actively being sold or supported.

I personally don't care about the Thorium website, or the developer, or the browser, or warez, or whatever else. The forum has rules about what can be posted about and what is directly linked to, and this is only because in the past we have received complains and nasty letters from lawyers about things. So we don't allow those types of posts as a measure to protect the forum from disappearing entirely. And sure, you don't need to point out the gray area that exists with the rules, with regards to extended kernels or updates (updates are the big thing really) so let's hope MS continues to not care about those things so we can still talk about them here.

I suggest the mods do the same with these ones (read above) , including my answer (not to bring any unnecessary attention).

Also, maybe permanently ban linking to any and all russian websites - simply because they will most likely surely contain wzarez.

Less russians, less troubles, you know.