Jump to content

Future versions of Firefox on Windows 98


ivanbuto

Recommended Posts


  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi BenoitRen,

any progress on your end? We are probably nearing Gecko 1.9 Beta stage soon, and the more delay, the less of a chance that Mozilla folks will provide help (at least that's my fear).

Edited by ivanbuto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was bored, so I figured I could continue with the documentation. I got updated on the state of things by the developer that offered help last time.

Almost everything got its Win9x support code ripped out. At this point, the shim library idea that was proposed a year ago likely wouldn't do the trick. The way to go would be to make a Win9x-only build. To do this, I'd have to go through bonsai and revert the changes.

The real work will be making Cairo, the new rendering front-end, compatible with Win9x. I have the impression that emulating the SetWorldTransform API would be crucial in doing this.

I still haven't got room for my new PC to do all this on, though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been doing some reading.

Is it possibly to use the windows xp application program interface in windows 9x?

This way to fool firefox3 to install thinking it is xp, when it is really windows 9x?

What got me thinking of this is if Axcel216 has a program that can replace windows 98 with the windows me shell without installing windows me it called 982se2me

http://www.mdgx.com/

By using the program, he was able to install windows movie maker to run in windows 98se thinking it was windows me.

I do not see why you can not do this with api.

This program can also replace other windows 98se files with windows me files.

My complaint

I have at least a 10 year old computer. It is still working.

It could be upgraded to xp pro but I would rather stick with windows 98se. Vista would not work on this computer.

I never did like xp when I had it. That computer broke down after 1 year of service.

Edited by webworm98
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well the thing about 98se2me by mdgx on this forum is that 98se and me are of the same windows line where as xp is part of the nt line.

the problem isnt fooling the installer to install that can be done fairly easy it is the apis that are important and they have to be implemented

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it is probable that developing Firefox 3 for win98SE is going to be more difficult than originally envisaged, would it not be an idea to look into extending Firefox 2 as a parallel activity?

My thoughts exactly :hello:

What gains will we get from Firefox 3 that makes us really want it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it is probable that developing Firefox 3 for win98SE is going to be more difficult than originally envisaged, would it not be an idea to look into extending Firefox 2 as a parallel activity?

Honestly I think it would be a better idea to make a list of APIs Firefox 3 needs that are unavaliable in Windows 98, and then help Xeno86 implement them in KernelEx, so there would be no need to maintain a special Firefox version for Windows 98.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it is probable that developing Firefox 3 for win98SE is going to be more difficult than originally envisaged, would it not be an idea to look into extending Firefox 2 as a parallel activity?

My thoughts exactly :hello:

What gains will we get from Firefox 3 that makes us really want it?

There's a whole bunch of stuff scattered around on that topic. Here's one reasonably comprehensive link:

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/3.0a3/releasenotes/

My thoughts are (roughly) as follows:

1. Firefox 2 does everything one could wish for (at present).

2. Assuming official support for it drops in 2009 (?) there's still at least nearly two years of using it left.

3. Need to keep an eye on any emerging "must have" feature being brought into Firefox 3 and see if FF2 can be adapted to support it -- much like the approach to win98SE in this forum.

4. Security updates...what happens when official support ends?

5. Conclusion: If (3) and (4) can be dealt with/resolved adequately, there's no reason I can see why FF2 might not be used for a number of years yet.

6. FF3 for win98/win98Se/ME is a great idea. But has anyone looked into the feasibility? Who would be responsible for security aspects?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6. FF3 for win98/win98Se/ME is a great idea. But has anyone looked into the feasibility? Who would be responsible for security aspects?

On a old system. Which would be a better bet use an insecure Firefox2 or an insecure IE?

I would go with a insecure Firefox.

Technically all browsers are not secure and neither is any operating system. No mater how many updates or patches are installed.

Edited by gpatrick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not about Firefox, it's about Gecko.

Gecko.

GECKO.

Gecko 1.9 will bring a lot of new things to the table, the most important being a better rendering engine.

Security vulnerabilities are in Gecko, Mozilla will be responsible for security, as always. This doesn't need to be a concern for the people who want to maintain a Win9x-compatible build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...