Chrome 115 working on Windows XP 32 bit

[XPerceniol]

1 minute ago, Dixel said:

Asian Google, so they say.

https://iplocation.io/ip/34.104.255.255

Thank you for reminding me - believe it or not - I actually forgot I can do that.

[Dixel]

3 hours ago, XPerceniol said:

Thank you for reminding me - believe it or not - I actually forgot I can do that.

You're welcome, friend. Keep in mind, I took a random IP from the range he pointed us to. It's better to see and know the actual IP from that range he saw.

[mina7601]

1 hour ago, win32 said:

The "expires in one year" is a restriction in the application itself. If you try running the browser in August 2024 or later, it will silently crash. However, there is a logic error in the timebomb so it will run for the first seven months of the following years. However I think a patch for it would be technically a crack as it is proprietary software with restrictions on launching.

Oh, I thought it means that it would stay on GitHub in 1 year. This is the first time to know about a Chromium browser having a timebomb, though.

[win32]

4 minutes ago, mina7601 said:

Oh, I thought it means that it would stay on GitHub in 1 year. This is the first time to know about a Chromium browser having a timebomb, though.

It turns out that it is supposed to be a commercial product: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/29#issuecomment-1821936051

[Dixel]

Nothing out of the ordinary, Opera was a paid browser, too. But with Opera we knew where it comes from.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_(web_browser)

With this browser, I support the author, nothing wrong with it being paid, though he'd have to be more transparent.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

7 hours ago, Dixel said:

Opera was a paid browser, too.

Key word being "was".  I've never met anyone that pays for a web browser.  Doesn't mean they don't exist, especially for the mobile phone community.  But certainly not the "norm".

 

7 hours ago, Dixel said:

nothing wrong with it being paid

Agreed.

[Milkinis]

On 11/21/2023 at 11:21 PM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Also saw a 34.104.x.y in the list, not sure I've seen that one in other Chromium Forks,

I have spotted these ones 

https://iplocation.io/ip/42.101.4.38

https://iplocation.io/ip/60.188.66.38

https://iplocation.io/ip/103.235.46.9

https://iplocation.io/ip/104.193.88.123

https://iplocation.io/ip/185.10.104.115

https://iplocation.io/ip/175.4.51.38

https://iplocation.io/ip/39.156.68.81

https://iplocation.io/ip/113.105.172.38

https://iplocation.io/ip/124.239.243.38

https://iplocation.io/ip/60.188.66.38

.......                                                   

[Mathwiz]

I realize this is beating a mostly-dead horse, but I wonder if the author included the fix for the WebP vulnerability in his code? I don't believe it was incorporated into Chromium until V117 (although Google and Micro$oft both back-ported it into V109 for the benefit of Win 7 users).

[Dixel]

On 11/21/2023 at 4:46 PM, win32 said:

The "expires in one year" is a restriction in the application itself. If you try running the browser in August 2024 or later, it will silently crash. However, there is a logic error in the timebomb so it will run for the first seven months of the following years. .

Kind of makes one wonder whether the browser itself has bugs of the same "quality".

[NotHereToPlayGames]

22 minutes ago, Dixel said:

Kind of makes one wonder whether the browser itself has bugs of the same "quality".

Way too early to tell.  This is beta.  Too quick to judge at this stage of the game.

We have all witnessed such "bugs in quality" in very early releases of everything from web browsers to extended kernels to start menu alternatives.

Even a Supermium release has this note - "An earlier release of 118.0.5991.0 was withdrawn due to a critical bug specific to Windows 7."

We should give the author/creator of this Chrome 115 on XP every benefit of the doubt we give "early releases" of Supermium, extended kernels, StartIsBack, et cetera.

[Dixel]

3 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Way too early to tell.  This is beta. 

Chrome 115 is more than a half year old, are you sure? 

The current Chrome is 121, mind you.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

<dead horse>

Edited November 26, 2023 by NotHereToPlayGames

[Humming Owl]

I do have to say that I was not expecting chromium 115 to be able to be ran on XP . I do notice that even if it runs it has to be very resource consuming on old computers in which XP is the only choice to go. Extensions work well on it?

[mina7601]

48 minutes ago, Humming Owl said:

Extensions work well on it?

Yes, at least a user has reported his experiences with it:

[Montana Slim]

On first startup... the app tried to access my PC's floppy drive !?!