14 hours ago, D.Draker said:

Thanks, it doesn't disable the API, I already tried it before. This non-working flag is a gift from @VistaLover.

From the times he was trying to make Supermium somewhat usable.

Created Issue.

Does anyone know if the default builds are compiled for SSE4.x/AVX?  I have Thorium-Win7 on my Ivy Bridge, but the author hasn't updated it in a while and I want to switch.

Thanks

Another good idea is to remove the portion of the code which creates BrowserMetrics-xxxxxxxx-xxxxx.pma in the BrowserMetrics folder and BrowserMetrics-spare.pma in the data folder.

I suggested several years ago.

https://msfn.org/board/topic/184046-future-of-chrome-on-windows-7/page/38/#findComment-1245198

On 4/1/2025 at 11:13 AM, mockingbird said:

Does anyone know if the default builds are compiled for SSE4.x/AVX?  I have Thorium-Win7 on my Ivy Bridge, but the author hasn't updated it in a while and I want to switch.

Thanks

Sorry, don't know, but's is faster than Thorium with SSE4.x/AVX anyways, and 12 versions (1) year newer. Not to mention, I highly doubt Thorium was a real 122 version to begin with.

 

On 4/2/2025 at 1:04 AM, D.Draker said:

Sorry, don't know, but's is faster than Thorium with SSE4.x/AVX anyways, and 12 versions (1) year newer. Not to mention, I highly doubt Thorium was a real 122 version to begin with.

 

Thanks, I will try to compile myself with support, maybe also an AVX2 version for my Haswell Win7 PC.

Good browser, version 137 for legacy OS released, leaving Thorium 15 versions behind.

https://github.com/e3kskoy7wqk/Chromium-for-windows-7/releases/tag/137.0.7106.1

On 4/3/2025 at 4:55 AM, mockingbird said:

my Haswell Win7 PC.

Wasn't Haswell (2013) not supposed to work with 7? And what is the purpose of AVX being integrated in Chrome?

On 4/1/2025 at 2:05 AM, ED_Sln said:

Created Issue.

Thanks! Shall we point out to numerous variations fingerprints? Can be seen at the bottom of chrome://version/

Flags to reset them don't work.

@D.Draker there is good news and bad news. The good is that the --disable-features=UserAgentClientHint flag has been returned, and the bad is that there will no longer be support for Vista and 7 without SP1. A project https://github.com/Chuyu-Team/YY-Thunks was used to return compatibility, but the author no longer wants to use it.

On 4/3/2025 at 9:13 PM, Karla Sleutel said:

Wasn't Haswell (2013) not supposed to work with 7? And what is the purpose of AVX being integrated in Chrome?

Huh?

I am completely confused by this post.

On 4/5/2025 at 8:23 AM, ED_Sln said:

@D.Draker there is good news and bad news. The good is that the --disable-features=UserAgentClientHint flag has been returned, and the bad is that there will no longer be support for Vista and 7 without SP1. A project https://github.com/Chuyu-Team/YY-Thunks was used to return compatibility, but the author no longer wants to use it.

As usual, thank you for the update, on this sad note, @D.Draker leaves this topic.

Just a small detail to ask.

--disable-features=UserAgentClientHint flag had been returned in the Vista version?

On 4/5/2025 at 10:45 PM, mockingbird said:

Huh?

I am completely confused by this post.

What is there to be confused about? People didn't see any actual proof, speed tests and whatnot, regarding the alleged AVX in Thorium, are you sure it's not a placebo?

And, BTW, AVX is not a part of this browser, I checked, and it's Chrome OS only. Intel official source:

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/avx-enabling-chromeos.html

 

8 hours ago, D.Draker said:

Just a small detail to ask.

--disable-features=UserAgentClientHint flag had been returned in the Vista version?

No, he hasn't updated the Vista version.

The good news is that I've already run ungoogled 135 and the latest 137 on Vista SP2 x64 (without the 2019 platform update BTW), with some March 9, 2023 extended kernel files redirected locally.

On 7 SP0 the problem at least for ungoogled 135 appeared to be with advapi32, I will also check if it can be transferred from SP1 without too much trouble, or if you will have to use the wrapper included in Supermium.

I'll show the screenshots later

For now I'm also talking only about x64 versions, in Vista Extended Kernel there are unfortunately only wow64 files and not for x86, in addition, mostly flawed. On 7 SP0 it should be possible to run any combination.

Edited April 7, 20251 yr by mjd79

Very cool indeed !!!

 

44 minutes ago, mjd79 said:

or if you will have to use the wrapper included in Supermium

I still can't help but see some sort of over-competitive don't-steal-credit "shenanigans" going on behind the scene.

Just seems to me that if we are going to use Supermium's wrapper, then why selfishly not inform the creator of that wrapper just how it is being used for other projects.

Maybe I'm over-thinking it, wouldn't be the first time, just still all sounds "selfish".  But what do I know?