Bill in Co wrote:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Bill in Co
writes:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Bill in Co
writes:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message ,
Andy writes:
Is anyone else getting frequent crashes with Firefox Quantum ?

I didn't think Quantum (alias Firefox 57, I think) runs under XP; I
thought 52 was the last that would.

Yup, it says FF 52 is the last version for Windows XP, so am I missing
something? :-) Speaking of which, the older versions still work
fine, at least over here. I'm hoping we don't get to a point where
that doesn't happen anymore, but I may be too optimistic.


(I was really wondering why Andy was asking here - as have others.) If
you've got an old version that is working, it will continue to do so;
the only reason for that to appear not to be the case will be if web
page designers start to include features that only work with the newer
versions. So far, most companies that do this, I've found an
alternative, so all they've done is lose my custom; however, there may
come a time when all the alternatives are using the new "feature" as
well.

OR are just compiled with a newer compiler that uses some revised DLLs
that are not compatible with the Windows XP OS. IOW, it's not just the
added features of the browser, but the actual code still being
compatible with the

The actual code of what? If you mean the browser, then up to 52 it _was_
compiled (so I understand; I'm still on 26) and runs under XP. And will
continue to do so, for ever. The only thing that will make that appear
not to work will be if web page creators use features not supported in
52, rather than not supported in XP - i. e. it's the version of browser
that's the limiting factor, not XP. Of course, in practice the effect is
similar, unless those features _are_ supported by some other browser
that runs under XP.

Windows XP OS as I understand it. You can see that happening when you
try to install some other newer programs, and you get those cryptic DLL
error messages, and it won't install..

I don't _think_ web pages will call DLLs.

The problem is waaay before that. If you try to install some newer
programs (or newer versions of some older programs) on a Windows XP
system (I should have said System, as that also includes the older Visual
C stuff and whatnot on that older system), it will often fail in one of
three ways: 1) the installer refuses to install it, or 2) the installer
tries to install it and fails, and gives some cryptic DLL error message
about some missing DLL parameters (due to a newer version DLL supporting
them but not the older version), or 3) it can't find some DLL file(s) on
your system.

An addendum and a question for Paul (or someone else who might know):

What I don't understand is whether or not these DLL incompatibility issues
arise from the older Visual Basic or C libraries on a Windows XP system, OR
from some newer DLLs added by the newer program version itself, OR from the
(older) DLLs found on a Windows XP system, at large. Or maybe I'm missing
something here.