18 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

Besides, it will give you the proper date format, apart from proper spelling.

Wrong again!  "Proper" is relative.  It's all relative.  Heck, when I travel just my own country, I hear dialects that sound like they stopped school in the 3rd grade.  I do not tell them how to talk and spell, WHY DO YOU INSIST SO MUCH ON IT ???

18 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Wrong again!  "Proper" is relative.  It's all relative.  Heck, when I travel just my own country, I hear dialects that sound like they stopped school in the 3rd grade.  I do not tell them how to talk and spell, WHY DO YOU INSIST SO MUCH ON IT ???

Only one English language is proper, the one they speak in England, everything else is a dialect. Removing letters from words or saying elevator instead of lift doesn't make it another, standalone language, ir's still a dialect, and a very odd one.  Not to mention rather new. I don't "insist" on anything, I just assumed it'd be more convenient to use normal, not upside down dates and normal. internationally recognised spelling. It's your choice if you don't want to. Then don't whine when we spot you over a mile on github or anywhere else. Look how your favourite Supermium author spells, or the iconic @AstroSkipper, Dave and my dear friend @Jody Thornton. BTW, just so you know, on joint NATO missions, we all communicated in English-English, not the American dialect.

Runs very good on the original Vista 32 bit (January 2007 ISO). Funny, it still says.

"Chromium may not function correctly because it is no longer supported on Vista",

On 3/20/2025 at 6:02 PM, D.Draker said:

Don't work. Sadly. @ED_Sln, could you ask the developer to implement them? Thanks.

How can I check if they work? I wrote these parameters in the shortcut, launched, but the browser does not write messages that some parameters are not supported, in chrome:// it also says that the browser is launched with these parameters. I checked in chrome 136 regular and for Vista, but in 7 SP1.

On 3/20/2025 at 7:02 AM, D.Draker said:

--disable-machine-id

--disable-encryption

Don't work. Sadly. @ED_Sln, could you ask the developer to implement them? Thanks.

 

3 minutes ago, ED_Sln said:

How can I check if they work? I wrote these parameters in the shortcut, launched, but the browser does not write messages that some parameters are not supported, in chrome:// it also says that the browser is launched with these parameters. I checked in chrome 136 regular and for Vista, but in 7 SP1.

 

For those two parameters, the test is to copy your browser profile to a USB Memory Stick or a shared network folder and then copy that profile to another computer then launch the browser in that other computer.

If your extensions are still there, then these two parameters did their job.

If the other computer starts with an empty profile, then these parameters did not do their job.

If you are not migrating a profile from one computer to another, then you do not need these two parameters to begin with, these flags are for portability and migrating between computers.

On 3/24/2025 at 3:55 AM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

 

 

For those two parameters, the test is to copy your browser profile to a USB Memory Stick or a shared network folder and then copy that profile to another computer then launch the browser in that other computer.

Yes, Also. Some browsers require --disable-encryption-win , not just --disable-encryption.

On 3/22/2025 at 10:19 AM, Saxon said:

Runs very good on the original Vista 32 bit (January 2007 ISO). Funny, it still says.

"Chromium may not function correctly because it is no longer supported on Vista",

Yes, and it's so snappy! Also, NO memory leak like was observed in the ported browser by the allegedly super-duper Russian "hacker" Balunovitch.

This could be of interest to @mjd79

Yes, when I moved the profile to another computer, the extensions disappeared. I created an issue.

On 3/20/2025 at 4:16 PM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

https://github.com/e3kskoy7wqk/Chromium-for-windows-7/releases/tag/ungoogled-chromium_133.0.6943.126

https://github.com/e3kskoy7wqk/Chromium-for-windows-7/releases/tag/ungoogled-chromium_132.0.6834.159

These are his *ONLY TWO* ungoogled versions.  You can NOT use those flags and migrate a profile from one computer to another in anything *OTHER THAN* these *TWO*.

22 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

could you ask the developer to implement them?

PATIENCE.

He releases his ungoogled only once a month or two, a faster pace than that is ridiculous.

Just because Official Chrome is updated every 2 to 4 *weeks* or so, *NONE OF US* should expect forks to be released *BY ONE PERSON* on such a *RAPID-FIRE* pace.

It really "will not kill you" to run v133 for a month or two and *WAIT* for the *one-person project* to release an ungoogled v137 or v138.  Maybe a v136 will be released, maybe it won't.

If an end-user must-must-must have "cutting edge latest-and-greatest", then that user can not rely on FORKS - seems more than fair to me!

1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

These are his *ONLY TWO* ungoogled versions.  You can NOT use those flags and migrate a profile from one computer to another in anything *OTHER THAN* these *TWO*.

Yes, he already answered that this is only possible on ungoogled versions.

17 hours ago, ED_Sln said:

Yes, he already answered that this is only possible on ungoogled versions.

Thank you very much, could you then ask if he makes an Ungoofed version for Windows 7 without SP or any other updates, which would also work on Vista, like v136.

18 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

PATIENCE.

He releases his ungoogled only once a month or two, a faster pace than that is ridiculous.

Just because Official Chrome is updated every 2 to 4 *weeks* or so, *NONE OF US* should expect forks to be released *BY ONE PERSON* on such a *RAPID-FIRE* pace.

It really "will not kill you" to run v133 for a month or two and *WAIT* for the *one-person project* to release an ungoogled v137 or v138.  Maybe a v136 will be released, maybe it won't.

If an end-user must-must-must have "cutting edge latest-and-greatest", then that user can not rely on FORKS - seems more than fair to me!

You had been explained last week. Re-read why. Or like the folks here suggested, follow me to stay tuned and nothing like this will ever happen again.

You don't want "updates", why should I?

https://msfn.org/board/topic/186741-firefox-and-chromium-running-on-windows-7-by-e3kskskoy7wqk/page/2/#findComment-1278895

32 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

follow me

Not going to happen.  Sorry, just isn't!  Call it a "personality clash".

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Not going to happen.  Sorry, just isn't!  Call it a "personality clash".

It's only for convenience, no one expects you to share my beliefs.