Thorium

[NotHereToPlayGames]

12 hours ago, UCyborg said:

Guess Alex has other priorities. His Thorium build for Win10+ is at 128, this caught my eye (source):

This is the part that caught my eye - "More WebUI stuff is reverted to its pre-Chrome 2023 appearance."

I have not tested the "Th24/M128" version yet.  I have been "stuck" at Chromium v122 out of immense dislike over the changes upstream made with the UI that most forkers just followed the Lead Lemming.  

[VistaLover]

8 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I have been "stuck" at Chromium v122 out of immense dislike over the changes upstream made with the UI

Thorium (legacy) v122 and, likewise, Supermium v122 are the last versions not tainted with anything CR2023 related  ; starting with Sm-v124, CR2023 "curves", icons, color schemes are already sneaking in  ; and Sm-v126 is just full of them, even when all CR2023 flags have been disabled; my OCD suffers when I have explicitly opted for "classic" GUI features (omnibox, trapezoidal tabs, etc.) only to be infuriated by CR2023 elements still present!

However, I'm not dissing the (forked) browser author(s) (since Google  are to blame, again); at the end of the day, I need a working browser the most, I can teach myself (or not? ) to just ignore (small) GUI annoyances... Chrome is at 132-something, the web engine of Th/Sm-v122 will be deprecated by Google soon-ish ...

[NotHereToPlayGames]

1 hour ago, VistaLover said:

(since Google  are to blame, again)

Technically not true.  What most people don't realize is that Chrome (ie, "Google") is not "first".  Chrome is based from Chromium, so these UI changes were implemented by CHROMIUM (open-source project NOT affiliated wit Google), then Google just pushed them to the public.  More often than not, the CHROMIUM developers get enough "feedback" and then REVERT these types of changes by adding flags that Chrome (ie, "Google") does not add.

There would be no Chrome if Chromium did not exist first.  But yeah, "semantics".

[UCyborg]

Chromium is maintained in large part by Google, Chrome is just public release with different branding and some proprietary bits.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Fair enough.  Chromium is not exclusively coded by Google employees.

But yes, "most" developers are Google employees.  I cannot find if that is 51% of developers work for Google.  Or if it is 99% of developers work for Google.

I admit that I've always ASSUMED it to be closer to the 51% side of the spectrum.

But I have no data to back up that assumption.  Nor any data to suggest 99%.

[UCyborg]

Aye, Wikipedia just suggests large part might be Google's, but how much others, no idea where to get the data. Supposedly there are others from other big companies. So we live with speculations, but one thing is certain, regular mortal doesn't have much say regarding its development direction.

Edited November 19, 2024 by UCyborg

[NotHereToPlayGames]

32 minutes ago, UCyborg said:

regular mortal doesn't have any say regarding its development direction

Nor should they, in my honest opinion.

How many of these regular mortal "resist change", of any kind?
How many of these regular mortal are fine with "change" - but resist any form of "lack of control" in how that "change" unfolds?  ie, elevated sense of self-worth?
How many of these regular mortal are fine with "change" - but despise the "transition" phase?
Et cetera...

Whether we like to "witness" all of these "transitions", one must admit that if we let the "regular mortal" have TOO MUCH SAY, then we'd all be running Win98SE and driving cars without seat belts.
(Which I'm okay with, I own two cars that DO NOT HAVE SEAT BELTS and it's actually ILLEGAL [in my state of the US] for "the law" to force me to install them in a car that did not come with them from the factory!)

[Saxon]

On 11/18/2024 at 3:09 AM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I have been "stuck" at Chromium v122 out of immense dislike over the changes upstream made with the UI that most forkers just followed the Lead Lemming.  

Why nor 121? In 122 you can't disable client hints.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

11 hours ago, Saxon said:

Why nor 121? In 122 you can't disable client hints.

I've discussed that elsewhere on the forum.  Because my bank account only works in v122, v123, and v124.  I cannot use v121 and older.  I cannot use v125 and newer.

I never could figure out exactly why these three, and ONLY these three, work for my bank account.  Password submission fails on EVERYTHING outside of these THREE versions.

I speak strictly for UNGOOGLED ONLY.  I cannot (and will not) use any Chrome Fork that is not 100% UNGOOGLED.  Supermium and Thorium both FAIL a 100% UNGOOGLED test.

I'm still OPTIMISTIC that hopefully THORIUM will eventually become 100% UNGOOGLED.  I am NOT as optimistic on Supermium (the developer himself has stated that some Google features will not be removed).

All I can do is sit back and watch and cross my fingers that by the time my bank no longer works with v122 (at which point I can realistically assume that v123 and v124 will also NO LONGER work) that THORIUM v150 (or wherever we are at at that time) WILL work.

If not, then I will have to do my own browser again.  Like I had to with 360Chrome when faced with that the last time around.

Edited November 20, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Also, I should add, I do NOT support DISABLING client hints !!!

I prefer, and recommend to all, to SPOOF THEM INSTEAD.  Do not DISABLE them, but SPOOF them to the most recent version of CHROME to best blend in with the crowd.

You SHOOT YOURSELF in the "privacy-conscious foot" to DISABLE them.  Been over this 100 times.  Not sure why it's not SINKING IN to some of you folks, lol.

[D.Draker]

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

UNGOOGLED test.

Link, please, I wanna try.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

No "link" required.  I'm at work so I can only show via screencap from OFFICIAL Chrome v122 (I cannot run Ungoogled, Thorium, or Supermium here at work).

The "test" for TRULY *UNGOOGLED* is to CLEAR YOUR CACHE !!!  And if you see THIS *after* clearing your cache, THEN YOU ARE NOT "UNGOOGLED".

[D.Draker]

23 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

No "link" required.  I'm at work so I can only show via screencap from OFFICIAL Chrome v122 (I cannot run Ungoogled, Thorium, or Supermium here at work).

The "test" for TRULY *UNGOOGLED* is to CLEAR YOUR CACHE !!!  And if you see THIS *after* clearing your cache, THEN YOU ARE NOT "UNGOOGLED".

I get that crap even with my LAN cable OFF, after I cleared up the cache. Do you know where it's physically located?

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Just be cautious is all I'm saying.  That "crap" just LISTED as HOSTED APP DATA is a PERMANENT LINE OF COMMUNICATION between your browser and Google!

Monitor your DNS traffic dilegently.  That "crap" is SNEAKY about how OFTEN that line of communication is OPENED/USED.

Do not be fooled into thinking there is no communication just because your log didn't show any "at launch", "at exit", or "once per hour".

I know "where" it is located in 360Chrome [I disable in "ungoogled" but keep in "regular"], but no, I do not know (nor care) where it is located in Supermium and Thorium.

Their developers both seem to claim they are incorporating "ungoogled" code but they keep missing this most OBVIOUS permanent line of communication.

It's a 15-second "test" to see for one's self if this HOSTED APP DATA is present or not.  If it is present, then you are communicating with Google!

If it is NOT present, then you have a TRULY *UNGOOGLED* web browser.  It's up to every user to decide for themself if that is "important" or not.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

The other "test" is to monitor your cookies.

Open your browser but never visit any web site.

Clear your cache and again, never visit any web site.

Keep that browser open for several hours, if not DAYS, and again, never visit any web site.

Just let the web browser sit idle on a computer you are not using.

May have to exit and relaunch the browser every couple of days or so, do not recall.

These are the types of tests I performed before ever claiming my releases to be "ungoogled".

My "ungoogled" versions of 360Chrome can be launched 1000s of times over the course of an entire MONTH and so long as you do not visit any web sites, then NOTHING TALKS TO GOOGLE.

I am HUGE into the belief that a web browser should NEVER make ANY network traffic just to launch and close 1000s of times over a month.

I've personally only witnessed ONE mozilla fork meet this critera, but I forget the name of it offhand.

This HOSTED APP *will* bring in a GOOGLE COOKIE.  But it might take one hour or it might take one week.

Edited November 20, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames