13 hours ago, UCyborg said:

Specifically, WidevineCdm folder taken from fresh install of latest Windows 7 compatible 32-bit Chrome 109 and put into 360Chrome's "components" folder as "widevine12" will work, at least it should on Windows 7+ at the time of this writing. Don't have ready Win7 install anywhere, but it worked on 10.

I also tried period correct Widevine version from Chrome 86, this one does not work anymore, got SOURCE_ERROR on https://bitmovin.com/demos/drm.

There were numerous amounts of posts all over MSFN, where they wrote WidevineCdm is only Vista+, I think now it's even worse, it's Win 10+ only.

12 minutes ago, Cocodile said:

There were numerous amounts of posts all over MSFN, where they wrote WidevineCdm is only Vista+, I think now it's even worse, it's Win 10+ only.

No.

W7 is working perfectly, see my previous edited post.

Minibrowser is working here under Xp 64.

3 hours ago, seven4ever said:

W7 is working perfectly, see my previous edited post.

Then it's like they said, Vista+.

3 hours ago, seven4ever said:

Minibrowser is working here under Xp 64.

Then it's this browser fault, but I still doubt it will work under 32bit XP, did you try?

I don't have Xp32, my UEFI is 64 bit

2 hours ago, dmiranda said:

Articfoxie, nice stuff. Just reporting two things related to your buid. When firing it for the first time, going to youtube generates an error. This is so, I think, because I block gstatic systemwide. Once I return (with an identical profile unexposed to a gg site), I can get in. I thought that would stick even after a reboot, because I recreate my profile every single time in normal use, without rebooting. On rebooting the os, though, the thing starts again. First launch of youtube with the same profile, gstatic calls are blocked. On second launch, all is good again. For google sites. ungoogling goes so far with my system settings.  

 

Your YouTube first-launch error cannot be related to gstatic.

I also block gstatic systemwide and YouTube works fine for me.

I do intentionally block the first-launch "suggested videos" or whatever they are called.

All of the crap videos that load on first launch are intentionally not displayed to me, I never watch them and have no interest in the type of crap that the first-launch is POLLUTED with.

I have zero interest in whatever the latest "viral" video is, I use YouTube for research or background music, zero interest in anybody's "five minutes of fame".

I also intentionally disable any video classified as a "short".

On 10/23/2023 at 9:51 AM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

To the rest of us though, I think it fair that the dark theme files be thoroughly tested for telemetry by those of us not resorting to the blocks I have to assume you have in place.

Regarding the user-shared dark theme files.

I can report that I did not witness any Chinese IP Addresses being pinged when trial-running them for an hour or so last night.

I obviously only used them as theme replacements within "rebuild 2".

They are extremely "bloated" though and this thread is more about running a fully-functional debloated variation of 2044 versus running "upstream" 2044.

Debloat will of course vary from one system to the next.  WinXP x64 requires some "extra" dll's that are not required for Vista and higher.  WinXP x86 can't use the dll's that are required for XinXP x64.  Et cetera.

I've test https://bitmovin.com/demos/drm concerning DRM on Mypal 68 (x86) and Basilisk 52 (X64), boths are working. 

Can it be "bitmovin" demo?  Is there another test that can be ran?

I've never used DRM but the "bitmovin" is detecting Widevine on 360Chrome 2044 after manually adding it, but I'm on Win10 at the moment.

Bitmovin has to say "widevine", if it says "No DRM", you're watching plain unencrypted stream, so Widevine isn't working.

2 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Can it be "bitmovin" demo?  Is there another test that can be ran?

I've never used DRM but the "bitmovin" is detecting Widevine on 360Chrome 2044 after manually adding it, but I'm on Win10 at the moment.

Under Win7 bitmoving is working with widevine. Under Xp(64) it can't, missing dependancies.

I've donwnloaded ealier dlls from the net, but I have missing matching widevinecdm.dll.sig file. Versions 1610 and below don't loose time, they was hacked.

Edited October 24, 20232 yr by seven4ever

1 hour ago, UCyborg said:

Bitmovin has to say "widevine", if it says "No DRM", you're watching plain unencrypted stream, so Widevine isn't working.

That's what it said, even after putting WidevineCdm folder (from Chrome 109 32-bit) under 360Chrome's components folder on Windows 7 64-bit.

15 hours ago, dmiranda said:

When firing it for the first time, going to youtube generates an error.

Maybe posting the contents of the error message you get when you go to YouTube could help. Here, I don't get an error message when I go to YouTube.

Hi @mina7601, it is attached, but just to satisfy curiosity, This doesn't happen to me in a vanilla set up (in vm). It's just a product of my settings. Now, are my settings safer than vanilla? I think so. That's why I report, based on usage, what I reported. 

Is it something really to worry about? No. I know the risks I take usding this mod, relative to not using it (beginning with the fact that some sites would be unusable or subpar). But I guess knowing is always good.

Edited October 25, 20232 yr by dmiranda

Ive made more tests with this version. Under Win 7 on real stream, controls seems always at top instead at bottom, perhaps a setting ?

After that, I've read this : https://splaitor.com/how-to-update-widevine-content-decryption-in-google-chrome-microsoft-edge-opera-and-firefox/#google_vignette

Seems on all 360 chrome versions, page : chrome://components/  is not working. Haven't test with original.

Again on Win7, Chrome 109, update is still possible :

Edited October 25, 20232 yr by seven4ever

2 hours ago, seven4ever said:

controls seems always at top instead at bottom, perhaps a setting

Not a setting unless it's a special "player" with its own settings (like Flash used to have).

Sounds to me like a .css type of position reset (I forget what the actual name is), something that was implemented post-v86 and that v86 would need a custom style sheet to resolve.