Dave-H Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 Thanks. FWIW, the display of the DigitalSpy site is exactly the same in the new Thorium Legacy 122.0.6261.169. I have reported it again on GitHub (in the right place this time!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkinis Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: If you want a good reveal on that, feel free to dive into Tobin vs Moonchild, roytam vs basilisk-dev, Chrome vs Chromium, et cetera. for sure we could have a better browser than the Serpent 52 @roytam1 but the @basilisk-dev has no actual interest on WinXP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 5 hours ago, Milkinis said: has no actual interest on WinXP Technically, me neither as far as that goes. Listen, I "clung" to XP until just a month-plus ago, I really did "think" I was doing the right thing by doing so. I was wrong! Sometimes in LIFE, we get NOWHERE because it is we ourselves that HOLD OURSELF BACK! And MOST of the XP Users here at MSFN have admitted that periodically over the recent couple of years, they rely on their phone or tablets to get REAL work done, not their XP Dust Bunny. But yeah, "to each their own". 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) That's not to be "misread" though. We (the XP Crowd) have "clung" to XP because we had TWENTY-SOME YEARS to tweak it to our liking! But then we FOOLISHLY turn around and compare that tweaked XP to a "default install" of newer Operating Systems! OF COURSE the tweaked XP is going to "win" !!! But "get off your rocker", old dogs CAN learn new tricks (it just takes them longer, lol) and tweak a newer Operating System - then compare that tweaked OS to your tweaked XP. My fully-updated (no POSReady!) XP SP3 x86 only runs 14 processes and only 212 threads. Update: XP SP2 x64 shows 16 processes and 219 threads. I don't really recall what a default install has in regards to processes and threads - but I'm sure it's quite a bit higher. My Win10 only runs 31 processes and 550 threads. Again, not sure what a default install runs as far as processes and threads. A quick internet search indicates anywhere between 70 and 90 processes is "normal" for a default out-of-the-box install. You tell me, which setup do you think is quick and snappy, the 31 processes or the 90 processes? Edited May 1 by NotHereToPlayGames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seven4ever Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 We can suppose one is 32 bits OS and second is 64 bits ? To compare, you must use same exe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) Very true! My *host* OS is always 64bit. Even my XP is 64bit. I do prefer 32bit OSs for all of my VirtualBox VMs. The process count does fluctuate by one or two, of course. Edited May 1 by NotHereToPlayGames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
66cats Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) 3 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: You tell me, which setup do you think is quick and snappy, the 31 processes or the 90 processes? Both roughly the same. Here's a basically stock W10, running on a decade-old box, idling @ 1% CPU usage. If we get rid of all the unnecessary processes & even the necessary ones, we'd gain < %1 :\ Edited May 1 by 66cats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 6 minutes ago, 66cats said: Both roughly the same. I most definitely do not agree. Depends on just what the process is, of course. Real-time anti-virus "bloat", for example, slows your system down. PERIOD. Even if that anti-virus runs in only "one process" (most are several processes). My former company IT forced disk defrag periodically and we had no control on when it ocurred. Walk away from the computer for THREE HOURS when that is churning "in the background". Sure, the computer is "usable", but when you are accustomed to "fast and efficient", the slowdown is INFURIATING - so "walk away" is good "conflict avoidance". Yeah, our IT department is STUPID. Blame Singapore IT. Here is the office computer right after startup, before launching my several Ungoogled Chromium windows and other open-all-day applications. This is a fairly modern "business" laptop and runs well for such a high number of processes/threads - but my home computer and its 4th Gen i7 is, without a doubt, "faster" than this process-bloated 12th Gen i7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) Wow! Is this thread here about hardware? And performance comparisons between Win XP and Win 10? The answer is crystal clear: Definitely not! This thread should actually provide information about the Thorium browser. Thus, the last 7 posts are therefore completely off-topic. The reader will not learn anything worth knowing about Thorium here. No matter how you feel about this browser. Edited May 1 by AstroSkipper Update of content 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
66cats Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) 31 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: Real-time anti-virus "bloat", for example, slows your system down. PERIOD. Agree, Disabled on this box, wouldn't recommend to others. 31 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: My former company IT forced disk defrag periodically and we had no control on when it ocurred. Walk away from the computer for THREE HOURS when that is churning "in the background". Why IT couldn't schedule such tasks for downtime is a mystery. Anyhow, defragging isn't a thing for SSDs, TRIM takes a second or two. 31 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: 4th Gen i7 Posting from one now (it also runs a bunch of other OS). 17 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said: The reader will not learn anything worth knowing about Thorium here. Thorium, which emits alpha particles and mild gamma rays, is mildly carcinogenic. Back on topic: anyone else dropping frames in YT under XP? Supermium seems to have the same issue, Edited May 1 by 66cats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) 27 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said: Wow! Is this thread here about hardware? And performance comparisons between Win XP and Win 10? The answer is crystal clear: Definitely not! This thread should actually provide information about the Thorium browser. Thus, the last 7 posts are therefore completely off-topic. The reader will not learn anything worth knowing about Thorium here. No matter how you feel about this browser. What I write is not a criticism of what you wrote. Readers will learn little about Thorium (but also for other browsers) if the most important issues consist of feature changes that are left to the developers. It would probably be more useful to develop advice/opinions on how to improve the default settings of the various browsers. Edited May 1 by Sampei.Nihira 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) Personally, I would like to know about experiences of users who have installed Thorium under real (bare metal) Windows XP 32-bit on very weak hardware, especially equipped with a 32-bit (single-core) CPU like, for example, Pentium 4. Which Thorium version has been used? How does this browser behave there? How does the browser start? What does the loading behaviour of websites look like? What about performance and resource consumption in general? And above all, which settings and Chrome flags are used in those installations? It would be great to provide your hardware and OS specs when sharing any experience. Edited May 1 by AstroSkipper 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-H Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Yes, back on topic please, this thread is to specifically discuss the Thorium browser, not the relative merits and disadvantages of different operating systems. Back to the Digital Spy site problem yet again. I've now discovered that the missing icons are actually being caused by Stylus. If I switch off Stylus, the missing icons come back, but of course the page font is then wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 I personally wouldn't generally advise attempting to use a one-line global font setting like you are doing. One line is never going to catch ALL circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
66cats Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, AstroSkipper said: I would like to know about experiences of users who have installed Thorium under real (bare metal) Windows XP 32-bit on very weak hardware, especially equipped with a 32-bit (single-core) CPU like, Fired up my Satellite A100 just for you (core solo t1350, 32-bit, single core). Supermium runs, but is unusable (nearly freezes with 100% CPU usage -- as advertised, win32 mentioned it needs 2 cores min.), Thorium (latest, all versions) is not recognized as a valid Win32 app (errors out, doesn't run). Might be my fault, though other browsers (Kafan Minibrowser, 360Chrome) run fine[ish. pretty slow]. Disregard, wrong windows version. Downloading/installing now, will update in a few mins Specs: XP 32 SP3, Core Solo T1350@1.86GHz, 4GB installed RAM. Edited May 1 by 66cats 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now