Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Support board for people running on (retail/OEM) Windows XP (32/64-bit).

Moderator: satrow

Forum rules
This is a self-serve support board for our community. The development team can't provide any support for Windows XP (and compatible versions of Pale Moon for it) any longer.
JodyThornton
Banned user
Banned user
Posts: 314
Joined: 2014-05-13, 11:40

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by JodyThornton » 2016-07-15, 01:54

If I were on XP, i would really want to use the x64 build and an x64 browser, but alas I could not. I suppose I would use SeaMonkey for both my browser and mail client, for as long as it was supported. But it sounds as if SeaMonkey's future is severely limited.

There are the efforts of the KernelEx crowd over at MSFN. They've even got recent mainline builds of Pale Moon to run on Windows 2000, never mind XP. So you can bet that as soon as Moonchild yanks support, they'll be working feverishly to make Pale Moon v27 run on Windows XP. Right now on MSFN, they've been trying to get Google Chrome releases from the last couple of months working on XP and Vista.

I'd be a tad concerned with system stability running KernelEx though, and besides, I'm comfy with Windows 8 (even it's out of support, but it's a whole lot more modern). So I've moved on.

User avatar
armedandsafe
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: 2015-03-30, 20:31
Location: 98837

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by armedandsafe » 2016-07-21, 06:59

Well, I'm probably going to be using XP Pro SP3 for some time yet, as my little ITRONIX GoBook is stuck there. I've read that one can upgrade it to W7, but it is hard on it as it has only 2Gb memory.

I'll miss PM if/when they abandon XP and will probably go back to FireFox. That will be interesting, as I have PM on 4 different computers here, covering XP, W7 and W10. FirstInLine is running W7, so she won't be bothered for awhile.

Pops

User avatar
LimboSlam
Board Warrior
Board Warrior
Posts: 1029
Joined: 2014-06-09, 04:43
Location: USA

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by LimboSlam » 2016-07-21, 23:21

wsn90 wrote:Unfortunately though, they, too, will be dropping support for XP with SlimJet version 12 / Chromium 52
No, security updates and minor bug fixes will still be applied for the 10.0 branch of Slimjet. It's just no major features will be introduced in this 10.0/ESR branch.

See below:
flashpeak wrote:Despite our efforts, Slimjet 11 still has compatibility issues with Windows XP that we are not able to fix so far due to widespread changes made by the Chrome team to make it incompatible with XP. The issues we are aware of are these:

1. Can't view PDF with the internal pdf viewer.
2. Can't install any extensions from the web store.

If these issues don't bother you, you can stay on Slimjet 11. Otherwise, please install Slimjet 10 instead from this archive directory: http://www.slimjet.com/release/archive/10.0.8.0/. From now on, when users visit Slimjet.com with a Windows XP PC, they will be automatically redirected to the download page of Slimjet 10. We will continue to fix bugs for Windows XP users on the Slimjet 10 (Chromium 50) branch. That is a slight change from the original plan of maintaining Slimjet 11 for XP users.
Last edited by LimboSlam on 2016-07-23, 20:47, edited 2 times in total.
With Pale Moon by my side, surfing the web is quite enjoyable and takes my headaches away! :)
God is not punishing you, He is preparing you. Trust His plan, not your pain.#‎TrentShelton #‎RehabTime

riiis
Lunatic
Lunatic
Posts: 445
Joined: 2014-05-17, 15:51
Location: USA

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by riiis » 2016-07-23, 19:05

wsn90 wrote:... my present experience (using a SATA slipstreamed version of XP, on recent hardware)
For many, if not most users of XP, using XP also means using older hardware, on which recent or future versions of browsers (or websites) may not run or not run well. So, I would keep and use the last XP-compatible version of Pale Moon, as long as this version still works. Nevertheless, users of Pale Moon with XP may want to consider the following additional browsers:

Both Firefox and SeaMonkey provide up-to-date versions AFAIK fully compatible with Windows XP. Most of the Pale Moon extensions (not themes or language files) also will work in Firefox ( albeit using later versions for Firefox). For ad-blocking, uBlock Origin (with anti-malware and anti-tracking filters enabled) is recommended and available for both Firefox and SeaMonkey. To transfer your Pale Moon bookmarks and cookies, copy "places.sqlite", "cookies.sqlite", and "permissions.sqlite" from the Pale Moon profile to the Firefox and/or SeaMonkey profiles (after closing all browsers and perhaps restarting Windows).

Opera version 36 is an older version of this Chromium/Blink browser, said by its authors to be fully XP-compatible and still getting bug-fixes and security-updates. AFAIK, Opera extensions and many Chrome-store extensions, including uBlock Origin, still work in this slightly older version of Opera.

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Off-Topic Sheriff
Off-Topic Sheriff
Posts: 5883
Joined: 2012-10-09, 19:37
Location: Sector 001

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2016-07-23, 19:12

So your contention riiis is that most people running XP are using computers older than 2007? Because any computer made after that is fully capable of running a newer version of Windows comfortably. Assuming, that is the true in most cases.. WHY are people running ancient computers?

half-moon

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by half-moon » 2016-07-23, 20:47

Matt A Tobin wrote:WHY are people running ancient computers?
A lot of people are poor, like me. I just got VERY lucky with being able to build my Pentium G and AMD A6 systems, and that was mostly with money received as a gift. In fact, the one ram stick in my A6 system was one of the ram sticks in my Pentium G system.

Lurker_01
Apollo supporter
Apollo supporter
Posts: 35
Joined: 2015-06-12, 14:59
Location: Uruguay

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Lurker_01 » 2016-07-23, 21:18

Off-topic:
I am poor and one of my computers is basically old dual-core with 1-2 gb of ddr1 ram, honestly i wish i could afford new computers. Please pay for it Matt and i wouldn't annoy you with old hardware
I find this "You can move to the next window debate pointless because it will be same for windows 7 in a few years and i am surely will not migrate to (8 maybe) or (10 definitively not)."
I do find that xp look is dated but with a different shell i was at home as with my windows 7 computer that is slightly better at 4gb ddr2 ram, better intel dual-core and nvidia 620 card.

Thehandyman1957

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Thehandyman1957 » 2016-07-23, 21:40

Lurker_01 wrote:
Off-topic:
I am poor and one of my computers is basically old dual-core with 1-2 gb of ddr1 ram, honestly i wish i could afford new computers. Please pay for it Matt and i wouldn't annoy you with old hardware
I find this "You can move to the next window debate pointless because it will be same for windows 7 in a few years and i am surely will not migrate to (8 maybe) or (10 definitively not)."
I do find that xp look is dated but with a different shell i was at home as with my windows 7 computer that is slightly better at 4gb ddr2 ram, better intel dual-core and nvidia 620 card.
Off-topic:
This is also my case. I was given my Dell by a friend who owns a business and he thought it was dead.
Turned out it just needed a power supply which thankfully
my other friend had a brand new 700 watt unit still in the box a customer had not picked up. Got it for $ 20.00

I simply cannot afford to go and buy a new computer and frankly I don't need to.
This baby does everything I want it to do and I actually downgraded it to Xp as
it came with W7. I also use a shell to update the look of my XP and I have had zero issues
running it on a Adata SSD Sata drive that I pulled out of my laptop before I sold it to a friend.
Thankfully I do not have the newest Sata controllers on this board and XP runs just fine.
I will continue to use Pale Moon 26.3.3 for as long as I can. ;)

mainziman

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by mainziman » 2016-07-25, 19:10

As it seems today - date 25-july-2016 - Pale Moon is the only browser*) that renders the recent infamous actions of the somewhat strange webmasters ...

thanks that I could find this browser, which I'm able to use an important site again, that my old browser (FF 17.0.11esr) didn't any more;

*) with other browsers I get 'eye cancer'

mainziman

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by mainziman » 2016-07-25, 19:41

Matt A Tobin wrote:So your contention riiis is that most people running XP are using computers older than 2007?
mine is newer and I'm running it with WinXP x64 SP2;
Because any computer made after that is fully capable of running a newer version of Windows comfortably.
the change from NT 5.x to NT 6.x would be possible with newer computers but also something other
aspects must be thought of; e.g. the introduction of the UAC with WinVISTA brought strange problems
or some expensive programmes won't run with Win7 or only with a 32-bit OS;
Assuming, that is the true in most cases.. WHY are people running ancient computers?
[/quote]
Nowadays there isn't really the need of a new computer because it is old ...;
when you have this much RAM in your computer that is needed doing your work, everything is fine;

I will keep my computer as long as possible ...

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Off-Topic Sheriff
Off-Topic Sheriff
Posts: 5883
Joined: 2012-10-09, 19:37
Location: Sector 001

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2016-07-25, 19:57

UAC can be disabled. This has been common knowledge since 2007 so this cannot be a valid excuse. Also, amount of ram is not the only limiting factors of not being on at least Windows 7 or a Kernel 3+ linux distro. Perhaps, some research should be done.

Thehandyman1957

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Thehandyman1957 » 2016-07-25, 23:43

Perhaps we should start a new thread called

Why I think people should upgrade from XP :mrgreen:

I mean, why not. I'm all for beating this dead horse until I get some glue.

How about you? :lol:

Oh look, I'm a poet and I didn't even know it. :angel:

mainziman

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by mainziman » 2016-07-26, 05:55

when I think of the harddisk space of my boot HDD (it is a 60 GByte SSD),
about 35 GByte are unused (free), even there is a pagefile.sys with 2 GByte,
and in C:\AMD64 resides a full copy of the WinXP x64 CD-ROM;
a full backup - using Acronis True Image - only takes 13-15 GByte;

with W7 this would be alomst out of disk space ...

after the first logon my system takes about one half GByte RAM,
a compareable W7 system would take about 2 GBytes RAM;

of course UAC can be deactivated, and it is not sure,
that the strange problems with UAC are gone, when it is deactivated;

it is quite strange that a feature that can be enabled in the WinXP registry,
works there as expected without any problems;
but in W7 it is enabled by default and doesn't work ...
(as this is just a bug and no security hole this won't be fixed any more)

so there doen't really exist a reason for me to upgrade to W7
(and also not to upgrade to W8, W8.1 or W10)

I still use Excel 5.0, I don't miss any feature (mostly bug) of newer releases;
(this is used in a virtual machine running WinNT)
Moonchild wrote: ... so one of the options included should probably also be "keep using the last version of PM that works on XP".
of course and as soon as the webadmins do some paranoia*) somene couldn't think of now, there will exist a big problem then;

*) using SHA2 instead of SHA1 was one in the past;

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 24457
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: 58°2'16"N 14°58'31"E
Contact:

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Moonchild » 2016-07-26, 09:05

Off-topic:
mainziman wrote:of course and as soon as the webadmins do some paranoia*) somene couldn't think of now, there will exist a big problem then;
*) using SHA2 instead of SHA1 was one in the past;
FTR: this forum uses a SHA2 certificate. If you can post here, then that's not a limitation ;)
"If you want to build a better world for yourself, you have to be willing to build one for everybody." -- Coyote Osborne
Image

User avatar
Sailor Moon
Moongazer
Moongazer
Posts: 8
Joined: 2016-07-21, 23:00

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Sailor Moon » 2016-08-06, 07:27

Hello,
I've just made an account here to post (which took three hours for the activation e-mail message to arrive Image) but I'm a longtime lurker, user, and admirer of Pale Moon.
wsn90 wrote:It's unfortunate that Pale Moon has run out of time and resources to keep the support going for XP. A very
warm thanks for keeping it going so long. I've cherished using PM.

In response to the internet's ubiquitous, regurgitated propaganda about XP having 'seen its day,' I would say that, in my 25 years of casual, general computer use, my present experience (using a SATA slipstreamed version of XP, on recent hardware) has never been better or faster. XP also continues to be supported by the excellent free programs LibreOffice, GIMP, VLC media player, Audacity, as well as Vuescan and almost all printer and camera manufacturers.

That XP was also designed with the individual in mind also resonates with me. Not only can XP be easily fine-tuned to the users' preference, but one also gets the sense with XP that it's the user that commands, and the system that obeys. I sense the opposite with subsequent MS OS offerings, which disable choice and increase surveillance, and which were really designed (as seen in MS' own marketing literature) more for the wants and needs of corporations than for individuals.
I totally agree with this post. [I'd be quite interested in seeing this marketing literature!]
Windows 95 was certainly the greatest leap forward in UI design of the '90s, and the greatest UI paradigm ever created IMO.
Though Windows 98 did contain a lot of UI refinement, gradients, 256-colors throughout, etc. Despite being the visual and functional peak IMO, it was also the beginning of the end for user choice toward the overreaching control of Microsoft.
In Windows 95, you could choose your own shell if Windows Explorer didn't do it for you, and elect not to install Internet Explorer if you preferred another Web browser. Or none at all!
Windows NT 4.0 brought the state-of-the-art Windows 95 desktop to the power of the NT platform, and then I think Windows 2000 was the beginning of the UI decline.
Windows XP's UI changes were pretty drastic looking, but they were all pretty easily reversible; my systems look indistinguishable from Windows 98 to the untrained eye.
Vista was the real leap of the 2000s. Tons of drastic design changes, new kernel (NT 6.0), and lots of functionality issues, many due to it not being ready for release.
Vista, Internet Explorer 7, and probably worst of all, MS Office 2007 gutted the tried-and-true Menu Bar, (standard element since the Apple Lisa) and fully customizable toolbar system (standard since Office 97, Windows 98, and IE 4) for the "Ribbon", which is nonstandard, takes up an enormous amount of screen space, and is not customizable.
Windows Explorer, certainly a core part of the Windows eXPerience, is ribbonized and no longer customizable which for me, makes the system an enormous pain to use.
"Windows 7" (NT 6.1) tweaks the UI, moving from full shininess of Mac OS X and Windows Royale to the flatter and plainer Aero Glass, and removing the ability to use the heavily researched and user tested Classic Start Menu (more here) with the new one which requires scrolling to view more than a few programs since the cascading feature is removed.
"Windows 8" (NT 6.2) of course flushes the past fifty-odd years of UI design research down the toilet by attempting to force a universal "one size fits all" approach, with a UI that is in limbo between smartphone and desktop PC design, ripping out the start menu entirely to replace it with a ridiculous smartphone lock screen followed by an "app screen", and fragmenting the control panel functions even further between the desktop and smartphone UIs.
"Windows 8.1" (NT 6.3) and finally the signifier of postmodernism, the * "Windows 10" milestone we have finally have reached by fudging the version number and skipping one entirely, as far as I can tell, have simply restored some of the previously ripped out functionality such as returning some semblance of a start menu in Windows 10. (Remember I am not addressing the underlying changes to the OS such as SecureBoot or what have you)

As Windows XP continues to be the best solution for many people due to its incredible efficiency, stability, and compatibility, it is not difficult to understand why so many people have stuck with it for so long.

I understand that the newer Windows NT 6/10 OSes which are now being targeted by Mozilla and the increasing differences between them, such as DirectX support, etc., it would take more developers we have to keep up, or as Moonchild puts it: "To develop Pale Moon to its full potential".
wsn90 wrote: For me, upgrading from XP would be much more than just a simple technical task. In addition to the loss of my familiar, friendly, finely-tuned system that I have no complaints about, an upgrade would also create multiple headaches due to the purchase, activation, and learning of various new replacement software.

My situation is similar. I cannot accept the downgrades in functionality and customization that come with any OS past NT 5.
wsn90 wrote: In planning for the transition away from PM, I would like to solicit from the PM staff, and anyone else, your ideas on 'Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?'
Since I began using the Web, it in the days of Internet Explorer dominance. I was quite happy to use IE, and blissfully unaware of the browser wars and broader situation at the time, as it did everything I wanted, supported all the plugins I cared about (Macromedia Flash and Sun Java for games), a superbly designed, fully customizable UI (I'm talking IE 4-5 here), and system-integrated Favorites (the best bookmarking system IMO) as well as colourful favicons (which it pioneered). Eventually, I upgraded as far as IE 8, which is the highest version for XP, as well as the last one customizable to a sane interface (with registry hacks).
Eventually, the Trident in IE 8 became slow and unusable for many big Web sites such as Facebook, but I found Google Chrome Frame, which was essentially Chromium running inside the chrome of Internet Explorer, so Favorites, etc were still usable, which was an inefficient way to allow the running of newer Web sites (though the best solution at the time.)
It was some time after that solution was deprecated that I discovered K-Meleon through the "ballot box" found in the start menu of the new IBM PC I'd just built (to run Windows XP on the newest Intel chipset which supported it btw [Intel B75; Ivy Bridge/Sandy Bridge LGA 1155; ~2012])

For those who aren't familiar (I had never heard of it) K-Meleon was an attempt to run the Gecko engine inside of the native Windows environment. This began in 2000 (so while the remnants of Netscape were being developed (with the new NGLayout/Gecko engine), but before any Phoenix, Firebird, or Firefox had risen from the ashes. So this program had been around for a while, but Firefox caught up and surpassed it due to resources (being backed by Mozilla). Also, with a native Windows interface, from what I understand, that would make it inherently more work to update, since Mozilla browsers have their own abstracted platform-agnostic interface, so essentially K-Meleon has to maintain its own native Windows interface, which seems similar to what SeaMonkey does except more difficult and time consuming.
K-Meleon stopped development around 2010 when it seemed that Mozilla was going to stop being co-operative, but fortunately when I started using it (2014), they learned it was a misunderstanding, and development began again based on Gecko 24, Extended Support Release!
Development was very fast and the browser improved a lot for a few years, but the one seemingly part-time developer running the project seems to have lost interest, and things have been much slower lately.

It's quite a nice, lightweight, and fast browser, especially for older computers, which (at least attempts) to keep updated with the latest ESR from Mozilla.
It's quite easy to customize, create themes for, and I assume easier to learn expansion with K-Meleon Macro Language, etc. than the mainstream Mozilla method, though I haven't personally been involved further than basic theming.
Supposedly better performance natively in Windows (and even quite good through Vine), especially on older machines.
Native support on Windows XP, SP2; no SSE requirement.
Supports Windows 2000 to XP SP1 as well with KernelEx I believe.
The community is very different from this one, and most members don't speak English as their first language.

Unfortunately for the average user, it is much more difficult to install extensions, upgrade to a new version, or make any changes.
Nothing is automated like it is with mainstream Mozilla browsers.
It has some native extensions and some Mozilla ones modified to work, but of course not as many as the million on addons.mozilla.org

For those who use older machines or OSes, the future does look frightening. I fully realize that Moonchild always tries to strike a sane, moderate approach to development, considering what's commonly used by the community and the things we'd like the browser to include. This overall sane, moderate, and community-considerate approach is something I laud and admire Moonchild and everyone else here for. It is truly a breath of fresh air in these times.
The problem is that there no longer seems to be a sane option left for those who value backward compatibility as well as a sane, customizable user experience. I want an OS/UI as well as a Web browser/UI that is sane, and if not to my liking out of the box, then customizable for the user. It seems that I will soon have to choose one or the other, which is a painful choice considering that I've so enjoyed both for the past two decades!

Though I understand the reasons for dropping NT 5.x support, it seems even more of a shame since projects like K-Meleon and SeaMonkey are finding it ever more difficult to keep up with the increasingly wild changes coming from Mozilla, and being the One True Fork®, Goanna could have been the stable foundation upon which the future of these great projects were continued, without being forced to drop support for NT 5.x.

I think that what's been done with Pale Moon is nothing short of a heroic achievement, the community is incredible, and I don't intend to disparage either in any way. Nor do I believe it's necessarily anyone's "responsibility" to continue to develop our user agents in a sane direction. This fork, as well as the other Mozilla projects all seem to be lacking in resources. I am simply noting the sadness of the situation for many of us.

To me, the ideal situation would be to somehow accrue more resources without corrupting or selling out like the Big Three. I know that we already have a bug bounty system. I know we already have advertisements on the forum. I personally haven't any unique ideas other than for the users who depend on Firefox plugins and extensions to get in touch with developers and ask them to consider moving to Pale Moon once Mozilla deprecates itself. This is the only way I can see to attract more users and developers - by being genuinely better than the competition, and then spreading the word!

This is not just about resources for XP support, but for all the other platforms Pale Moon hopes to support such as Linux, Android, and the Macintosh OS X, as well as the ability to keep up with the other browsers in terms of features we can implement! The reality is that we are at both the mercy of the Big Four, as well as the way that Web developers abandon graceful degradation/progressive enhancement, in favour of making basic functionality dependent on non-standard methods available in only the Big Four or even just Chromium browsers! (Not to mention when Pale Moon or other browsers do contain functionality but are indiscriminately blocked by user agent string)

Before the end of Pale Moon 26.x, ending suport for NT 5.x and Firefox extension compatibility (again, I understand why; I'm not complaining), I would be overjoyed if my two most longstanding and frustrating Mozilla bugs be fixed.
  1. The Web page border is missing (though this is somewhat mitigated by the Foxscape theme I've been using.
  2. The button for drop-down menus doesn't work in any Mozilla product since Gecko 1.9.2, whether in a Web page or XUL chrome. This one really is vexing, as there is no workaround other than switching to IE 8, which is no longer usable for everyday browsing, as I've said (though I'm using it right now)
Both of them have already been reported to Bugzilla, and though (as far as I understand) fixes have been submitted for both of them, neither has been implemented yet.

Believe it or not, I've tried to keep this post short and succinct, but I might have gotten carried away.

If this really is the end of the line for me, then thanks to all developers for this wonderful gift to the community!
Last edited by Sailor Moon on 2016-08-07, 20:00, edited 2 times in total.

Joel Cairo

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Joel Cairo » 2016-08-06, 10:41

I just re-installed yet again! XP x64 - though purely as a maintenance OS (and the ability to delete wallpapers while in Slideshow mode. I have a couple of thousand wallpapers). I use Pale Moon Atom build. Though I won't be going online (or even booting XP very much).

Thehandyman1957

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Thehandyman1957 » 2016-08-07, 20:06

Sailor Moon
Unfortunately for the average user, it is much more difficult to install extensions, upgrade to a new version, or make any changes.
Nothing is automated like it is with mainstream Mozilla browsers.
That is the understatement of the day :shock:
I took some time just playing with K-meleon and sent it on it's way 2 hours later. :thumbdown:
And it still would not play Twitter Videos :(
It made Pale Moon look like heaven on earth. :mrgreen:

What a difference.

Thehandyman1957

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Thehandyman1957 » 2016-08-07, 23:27

flashpeak wrote:Despite our efforts, Slimjet 11 still has compatibility issues with Windows XP that we are not able to fix so far due to widespread changes made by the Chrome team to make it incompatible with XP. The issues we are aware of are these:

1. Can't view PDF with the internal pdf viewer.
2. Can't install any extensions from the web store.

If these issues don't bother you, you can stay on Slimjet 11. Otherwise, please install Slimjet 10 instead from this archive directory: http://www.slimjet.com/release/archive/10.0.8.0/. From now on, when users visit Slimjet.com with a Windows XP PC, they will be automatically redirected to the download page of Slimjet 10. We will continue to fix bugs for Windows XP users on the Slimjet 10 (Chromium 50) branch. That is a slight change from the original plan of maintaining Slimjet 11 for XP users.
Well, it turns out there is another issue with using Slimjet on XP. I tried both 9.0.7.0 and 10 and both have issues with verifying SSL certificates on certain sites.
I even went and updated my certificates just to make sure.

They do seem to be having issues with HTTPS as noted here
http://www.slimjet.com/en/forum/viewtop ... ates#p4008
Re: Error when "https everywhere" enforce the SSL connection

Postby flashpeak » Tue May 24, 2016 12:05 am
We are aware of this issue. I think it's an overlooked bug by the Chrome team when they took off support of XP. We can't expect them to fix the problem since it only happens to XP and the guys at Google won't even care. If it's a critical issue for you, you can stay with 9.0.7 for now while we look into this issue.
Perhaps they can get it ironed out. Aparently their forum responses are pretty slow.

wsn90

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by wsn90 » 2016-08-09, 05:30

Sailor Moon, thank you. I enjoyed reading your post.

Sorry I don't have time to post at length today.

May I add yet another reason why I'd rather not 'get on board' and upgrade: I don't support the Orwellian nightmare that MS currently stands for… https://theintercept.com/2016/08/04/microsoft-pitches-technology-that-can-read-facial-expressions-at-political-rallies/

User avatar
Sailor Moon
Moongazer
Moongazer
Posts: 8
Joined: 2016-07-21, 23:00

Re: Which browser would you use if you had to remain with XP?

Unread post by Sailor Moon » 2016-08-09, 06:23

Thehandyman1957 wrote: That is the understatement of the day
I took some time just playing with K-meleon and sent it on it's way 2 hours later.
And it still would not play Twitter Videos
It made Pale Moon look like heaven on earth.

What a difference.
I'm sorry to hear you had as much difficulty with K-Meleon as I did!
I've spent hours trying to get various versions to work to my liking over the years, and while it was a huge improvement in functionality over IE 8, Google Chrome, or Firefox, which I'd used previously (at least before I'd discovered the wonderful PlainOldFavorites Mozilla browser addon), and I love it so, it really is more difficult for the average user.

wsn90,
I'm happy that someone appreciates my post!:)
It really does seem like Orwell's nightmare becomes more real every day!
I'll have a look at that article tomorrow.

In reply to the last post from this support thread which is more related to the subject of this thread:

Matt A Tobin wrote: Sucks, I know, but that is, as they say, is that. The world for the most part has moved on. Perhaps you guys should too.
Call us romantic, but some of us long for the continuation of the Personal Computer, in the spirit of the visions of Vannevar Bush, Doug Englebart, the Xerox PARC team, Steve Wozniak, Richard Sapper, and user-first design methodology as exemplified by the Windows 95 User Interface Design Team. This is as opposed to the user-ignorant or even user-hostile software and hardware so common today.

I really do appreciate the work of this project which has truly done a lot of great work in this spirit, creating something which is all at once user-centric, user-customizable, user-friendly, follows a generally moderate and sane direction, and genuinely considers the opinion of the users in developmental direction.

Perhaps I'm being too idealistic. Perhaps it's too much to expect this extraordinary period in personal computer history to end, the height of Microsoft Wintel IBM PCs and their beating Apple at their own game.

You mention Linux. Yes, I know it exists, and while it would run the Pale Moon of the future, every distribution and windowing system I've heard of fails to meet the high standard of user experience I have enjoyed for the past twenty years. So at present, I am not willing to abandon my operating system and user interface, which represents the culmination of about seventy years of incredible work and vision because of one program, as important as a Web browser is, especially these days; the main Window to the World [Wide Web].

This impression I see of throwing out the window years of incredible work might be relatable to some you by reviewing the truly moving about:mozilla page that is found in Pale Moon. Likewise, the about:palemoon page really renders clear to me how Pale Moon must be the true successor to Netscape, Mozilla, and Firefox, at least in spirit. As it says, "The soul of the Beast seemed lost forever." What has resulted from this project is incredible to me, and truly inspired hope for the future of the Web browser, but the life of the great operating system beast seems much more frail.

I partially realize that I may have to take you up on one of your suggestions some day with the way things are going, but I do hope that it isn't for some time to come.

Locked