Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Does anyone here use PortableApps Portable Chrome?

More specifically, I am attempting to gain familiarity with the "loader" / "appinfo" .ini file.

Other Chrome/Chromium "loaders" have the ability to DELETE files/directories when the browser is closed (I am not wanting to use a .bat file).


Posted (edited)

Listen, I hear ya...  No, please, I said listen...  I ignored your "reply" all of yesterday, I guess I chose to break that silence this morning...  Listen...

I've "been there, done that".  I was part of the "death to IE" Firefox userbase back in the day.  I hear the same tone in your reply.

Again, I hear ya, I had to sift through my registry to manually axe sixty-some references to "Google Updater" and that was from running a so-called "portable" version of Chrome!

"...even under torture" reply = no help to anyone = pushing an agenda = no service to me = no service to you = no service to any reader hereof = et cetera...

My very own "death to IE" narrow-minded mentality served nobody, not even myself.  Again, "been there, done that".

Whether "you" see it or not, I am no longer that single-focused narrow-minded "Firefox Only, Death to IE" user.

I've used Netscape, AOL, IE, Firefox, Sleipnir, Maxthon, GreenBrowser, Pale Moon, New Moon, Serpent, Basilisk, 360Chrome, Ungoogled, Chrome, Iron, Opera, Edge, Flock, LibreWolf, Floorp, IceCat, K-Meleon, Lunascape, SlimBrowser, ane more!

I'm not talking trial runs of a few hours, I've used every single one in that list for MONTHS ON END as my then-default ONE-AND-ONLY web browser.  [edit:  I take that back - Flock, LibreWolf, Floorp, and K-Meleon were DAYS, all others were MONTHS]

 

I'm not sure why you aren't "hearing" this, because I've stated it more than once, I am NOT interested in "this browser for this, that browser for that".

As far as MODERN forks, IceCat did come VERY close.  But it does not work for ALL of my web sites and I will have ONE browser for ALL of my web sites - it really is THAT simple.  :thumbup

So far, that ONE-for-ALL remains Ungoogled v122.  Turns out that all versions (at least back as far as v94 and as new as v131) ALL work for ALL of my needed web sites.

So long as I conjunct them with the PortableApps "loader" and not the winPenPack "loader".

And to prevent the PortableApps "loader" from falling down the same rabbit hole that took the winPenPack "loader", I will likely create my own loader using AutoHotkey or recompile one of my own old Opera loaders.

We all have options.  One size will never fit all.

Edited by NotHereToPlayGames
Posted

I do remain "irrationally exhuberant" that IceCat v128 (whenever it is released) may work for ALL of my web sites.  I can only cite that current IceCat (based on v115) does not work for ALL of my web sites.  So that alone makes it "not for me".

Posted

:dubbio:

Right.
I have ONLY externalized my personal opinion.

Acceptable?
In you case, no.

You have also often given me many of your personal opinions that are completely opposite to mine.
On security updates,Firefox,Policies,MV3 extensions,lists of filters used in uBlock Origin.....

Acceptable?
In my case, no.

You can express your personal opinions,and so can I.
That seems fair don't you think?<_<

Posted
On 12/18/2024 at 4:34 AM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Does anyone here use PortableApps Portable Chrome?

More specifically, I am attempting to gain familiarity with the "loader" / "appinfo" .ini file.

Other Chrome/Chromium "loaders" have the ability to DELETE files/directories when the browser is closed (I am not wanting to use a .bat file).

Not sure about the latest version, but not long ago it was crappy as hell, all the usual writes to the registry, etc.

Doesn't speed up the browser start, in contrast to the famous old Dixel's starter.

Posted
On 12/18/2024 at 9:53 AM, Sampei.Nihira said:

Sorry I would not use Chrome (even the portable version) even under torture.

Unfortunately, you're on the wrong path, again. This comment wasn't needed at all, just like @NotHereToPlayGames told you, I'm telling you the same.

You're expected to be helpful and polite on the forum. Take example from @D.Draker.

Posted
48 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

Doesn't speed up the browser start

Agreed.  I don't use "loaders" as some sort of attempt to speed up browser start.  In fact, I kind of prefer not to.

Although the very slow FIRST-LAUNCH-ONLY after a restart or hibernate bugs me and it happens on ALL browsers, literally ALL browsers, something with my hardware, but other members cite the same exact FIRST-LAUNCH-ONLY slow-start phenomenon.

Those that do speed up browser start basically load at Windows startup or run "partial load" in the background.  I don't want additional startup or additional background tasks.  I don't even allow the OS to do any "prefetch" (which could be PART OF first-launch-only).

What I liked (but can do without if needed) about the winPenPack loader (and 360Chrome's loader) is that they enable a very robust session-only browsing scheme.

With winPenPack/360Chrome loaders, I set a "default state" of extensions, config settings, even allowed history/cookies/logins and I can have the loader do file-copies and file-deletes to revert to the "default state".

I can install/test 100 different extensions, but as soon as I exit the browser, NONE of them "stay" but my "default state" extensions DO STAY.

I still haven't quite figured out HOW a bank web site and the US Post Office web site can DENY a login only when the winPenPack loader is being used.

The best I (we) can figure thus far (and based on Brave browser discussions on the same banking web site) is NEW SSL SCHEMES.  Basically how certain SSL certificates are very difficult to "pass" as 'secure' on XP.

Posted
2 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

You have also often given me many of your personal opinions that are completely opposite to mine.
On security updates,Firefox,Policies,MV3 extensions,lists of filters used in uBlock Origin.....

Perhaps.  But I have also sought advice on how to get IceCat to perform FASTER and my requests for before-and-after Proof-of-Concept were denied.

I have no doubt that your Firefox performs FASTER then your Edge.  All I can tell you is that I CANNOT REPLICATE THIS CLAIM (my tested Chrome-based forks are much MUCH faster than my tested Mozilla-based forks - NO CONTEST FASTER).

But that point is MUTE and MEANINGLESS.  Because, as I have stated, I want ONE browser to perform ALL of my browsing needs.  ALL OF THEM.  I really do have ZERO interest in "this browser for this, that browser for that".

I was faced with Ungoogled v94 all the way up through v131 not meeting that ONE and ONLY criterion (looks weird, but that is the singular spelling of the plural criteria).

I spent five days all but non-stop awake-hours to get my IceCat profile to where I wanted it - only later to discover it does not meet that ONE and ONLY criterion.

Heck, it kind of makes me think of creating a new CHALLENGE for any-and-all - find me ONE, just ONE web site!, that WORKS in Firefox but does NOT work in Chrome!  Just ONE!  I don't think we can find ONE.  But I could be wrong, lol.  They did exist in the 90s!

 

2 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

That seems fair don't you think?<_<

Seems fair to me.  :cool:

Posted

:thumbup

If you want I can show you 1 website that works in my Firefox,but doesn't work in my Edge.
Not in another user's Edge,in mine.

I have not been able to find,in an acceptable time,a remedy for this “inconvenience”.
So I gave up.:(

Yesterday for example I wrote for a user a subsequent exception rule (there are 2 possible syntaxes) for my scriptlet that blocks WebRTC + SDP Log with Adguard Adblocker.
The first rule,for reasons unknown,currently,even to the AG team,was not working.

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

If you want I can show you 1 website that works in my Firefox,but doesn't work in my Edge.
Not in another user's Edge,in mine.

Yes, what website?  But more importantly, are we comparing Firefox INCOGNITO to Edge INCOGNITO?

Why do I ask?  Because I could fairly easily create a uBO filter or a Stylus style or a Tampermonkey script that could crash a web site for no other reason than not liking the web site's color scheme, lol.

Posted
12 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Those that do speed up browser start basically load at Windows startup or run "partial load" in the background.  I don't want additional startup or additional background tasks.  I don't even allow the OS to do any "prefetch" (which could be PART OF first-launch-only).

Dixel's starter didn't do any prefetch, it optimised by disabling google sound recording (yes, using your in-built microphone without telling you), and other numerous processes we don't need, thus freeing RAM andad CPU cycles.

It still allowed all the usual writes to the registry.

Posted
4 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Your scenario LOADS THE PAGE FOR ME.  If I let my guard down!  Because it is an HTTP site and I generally DO NOT LOAD NON-HTTPS web sites!

Not sure if that really counts as a "good example".  An HTTPS site with an HTTP IP-ADDRESS hosted link is BAD PRACTICE.

Right.
My browsers undergo a significant security/privacy hardening that is roughly similar in both browsers.

But with my Firefox the website is usable and with my Edge it is not.

Hardening with Firefox is more harmonious than hardening with Edge (and probably with the other chromium-based browsers).

If you block WebRTC with Firefox you can access Discord's Login.
If in Edge (also Chrome) you block WebRTC with a rule in uBlock Origin or AdGuard Adblocker you need an exception rule otherwise the login is not visible.

 

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...