Thorium

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I have.  Regardless of what you and D.Draker think on this matter, I CANNOT LAUNCH 360CHROME ON XP x64 "when I follow your advice" regarding VULKAN FILES.

Does the same happen with Thorium?

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

lol, my Thorium experience is EXTREMELY limited - until when/if it ever becomes "ungoogled".

In that case, go to chrome://net-internals/

Tell me what you see in:

Attribution Reporting is currently "insert here" in this browser.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

2 minutes ago, Dixel said:

Does the same happen with Thorium?

YES!

My only conclusion is that these are not "100%" VULKAN files.  The UPSTREAM Chromium programmers seem to be using "something" contained within these SO-CALLED "vulkan" files for some other purpose.

And forgive the directness, but I lose confidence in those that tell me I do not need these files.  I am not a "dumb" computer user, I know my way around computers.  I'm no "genius", but I know my way around computers.

I need these "vulkan" files on my XP x64.

[AstroSkipper]

1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Did you try --enable-low-end-device-mode?

I have not tried this yet.

I tried it on my Windows XP Pro SP3 + POSReady installation months ago. It didn't do anything interesting, so I removed it a short time later. I should mention that RAM consumption of Thorium is not the problem on my computer. And just for clarification, this flag actually can't be a solution for my issue, as Thorium works fine without it on my Windows XP Pro SP3 + POSReady installation. But I'll give it a try anyway. Just to be sure. 

[NotHereToPlayGames]

1 minute ago, AstroSkipper said:

I tried it on my Windows XP Pro SP3 + POSReady installation months ago. It didn't do anything interesting, so I removed it a short time later.

I am "fairly certain" that I have tried this flag IN THE PAST and witnessed the same - no effect in XP.

I would have to retest in XP, to be honest, it was too long ago, but I am certain that I did try it.

And I also removed it and perhaps even "unconsciously" discredited those that suggested it.

It is working in Win10 - but that serves no purpose for this thread, THANKS FOR REPORTING YOUR XP TRIAL.

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

I tried it on my Windows XP Pro SP3 + POSReady installation months ago. It didn't do anything interesting

It depends on the user's behavioural patterns, one would need to extensively use youtube or instagram to notice, twitter maybe, which I think you don't.

[Dixel]

12 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

--enable-low-end-device-mode

Here you can see what Chrome thinks of your device. Go to:

chrome://metrics-internals/

Click on "variations"

Look at the "Low End Device" param.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

49 minutes ago, Dixel said:

Look at the "Low End Device" param.

It says "no" for my work computer (no surprise).

Will have to see what the home computers say.

My hunch is that my home i7 is also a "no" but that anything single-core is a (resounding) "yes".

[AstroSkipper]

After all my measures, and I performed many of them, I have to confirm my last null hypothesis H0. Thorium behaves unstably on my Windows XP Pro SP3 without POSReady. Sometimes, the browser opens and lasts for a few seconds or minutes, very often the browser closes during startup. There is no recognisable pattern.  I also tried different combinations of command line flags. No success.   The internal site chrome://metrics-internals/ doesn't provide any information on my old machine. The good thing about the story is that my Windows XP Pro SP3 without POSReady installation is now absolutely error-free and updated. 

Edited August 13, 2024 by AstroSkipper
correction

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Interesting indeed.  But if I am keeping track properly, there has been THREE reports of Thorium WORKING without POSReady to ONE report of Thorium NOT working without POSReady.

My statistics classes in college would refer to the ONE as the OUTLIER.

[AstroSkipper]

4 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Interesting indeed.  But if I am keeping track properly, there has been THREE reports of Thorium WORKING without POSReady to ONE report of Thorium NOT working without POSReady.

My statistics classes in college would refer to the ONE as the OUTLIER.

Yep! That's why I modified my null hypothesis H0 some days ago. 

On 8/12/2024 at 5:03 PM, AstroSkipper said:

Here is my modified null hypothesis H0: "Thorium crashes due to the lack of one or more POSReady updates under certain hardware conditions". Personally, I tend to accept H0 due to my experiences and deep investigations.  Unfortunately, the probability of type II error for this decision cannot be determined again due to the too small sample size, either. 

I tend to assume that my computer is such certain hardware. 

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Regarding --enable-low-end-device-mode   ---  I have officially ABANDONED its usage.  I listen to YouTube all day long here at work and with this mode, my audio stops about once an hour for only a second or so, but IRRITATING AS H#LL.

Even if I only hear 6 to 8 of those "stops" throughout a work day, that's 6 to 8 too many.

[AstroSkipper]

49 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

Yep! That's why I modified my null hypothesis H0 some days ago. 

On 8/12/2024 at 5:03 PM, AstroSkipper said:

Here is my modified null hypothesis H0: "Thorium crashes due to the lack of one or more POSReady updates under certain hardware conditions". Personally, I tend to accept H0 due to my experiences and deep investigations.  Unfortunately, the probability of type II error for this decision cannot be determined again due to the too small sample size, either. 

I tend to assume that my computer is such certain hardware. 

The reason for my assumption is that everything works in my Windows XP Pro SP3 without POSReady partition. I have never had such problems. Firefox, New Moon and also Mypal 68 work perfectly there. This partition is configured in exactly the same way as the one with Windows XP Pro SP3 + POSReady updates. Actually, my issue can only be due to a missing patch or update. And the only updates missing there are the POSReady ones. 

[NotHereToPlayGames]

I really REALLY don't think it's that "easy" to deduce/conclude.

Have you ever MANUALLY edited the registry in your POSReady?

Have you ever ran Malwarebytes in your POSReady and it removed registry entries that a "default XP install" places there that Malwarebytes sees as "malware"?

Did you REPEAT those registry tweaks/fixes/cleans/optimizations in your non-POSReady?

Didn't you say your XP partition was first installed DECADES ago and that you do not reinstall often, that you can keep your XP running smooth by fixing registry entries?

Don't you really have to perform "all of that" in the non-POSReady before claiming that POSReady is the "only changed variable in this multi-variable equation"?

Edited August 13, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames

[NotHereToPlayGames]

I reinstall my XP at least three times per year!

I know EXACTLY the state of my XP.

What I'm hearing you say (if I recall correctly) is that you do NOT install this often.

So no offense, but I really do not believe for one second that you can "remember" what you did to the registry 5 years ago, let alone 20.

I *DO* think that something you did in your registry 20 years ago is *WHY* your POSReady is not behaving the same as your non-POSReady as far as Thorium is concerned.

How many "default" browsers did you install and uninstall in those 20 years?  Did they have MALFORMED registry entries such as the Thorium .reg file?  (I do not use the Thorium .reg file, I have no clue if this claim of inaccuracy is correct or not.)