Best Browser for WinXP?

Hi,

I currently use FF52.8 on one of my XP PCs. Also have Chrome 49 on that
same PC.

I was unable to log into my Lowe's account using FF, but was able to log
in using Chrome.

At www.pepboys.com site, I tried to search (pep boys search slot) for a
specific item using FF, but no response when I clicked on the search icon. I
was able to get a response using Chrome.

I like FF more than Chrome because I turned off Remember History.
Also, I can specify a blank page when I launch FF. I was unable
to find these options with Chrome.

What do you consider to be the best browser for WinXP?

Thank You in advance, John

jaugustine wrote:

I currently use FF52.8 on one of my XP PCs. Also have Chrome 49 on
that same PC. I was unable to log into my Lowe's account using FF,
but was able to log in using Chrome. At www.pepboys.com site, I
tried to search (pep boys search slot) for a specific item using FF,
but no response when I clicked on the search icon. I was able to get
a response using Chrome.

Start the web browser in its safe mode. Could be you installed an
add-on into the web browser, like adblocking, that is modifying the page
content (adblockers are supposed to break web pages to eliminate the
blocked content).

In message ,
writes:
[]
I like FF more than Chrome because I turned off Remember History.
Also, I can specify a blank page when I launch FF. I was unable
to find these options with Chrome.
[]
Unbelievably, Chrome doesn't offer that option. There is an extension -
called, perhaps unsurprisingly, "Blank New Tab Page" that gives it to
you (though it actually loads a blank page rather than no page, so it
[a] appears in the history [b] takes a short but non-zero time).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Of course, this show - like every other cop show on earth - massively
overstates the prevalence of violent crime: last year, in the whole of the UK,
police fired their weapons just three times. And there were precisely zero
fatalities. - Vincent Graff in RT, 2014/11/8-14

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

jaugustine WROTE:

I like FF more than Chrome because I turned off Remember History.
Also, I can specify a blank page when I launch FF. I was unable to
find these options with Chrome.

Unbelievably, Chrome doesn't offer that option. There is an extension -
called, perhaps unsurprisingly, "Blank New Tab Page" that gives it to
you (though it actually loads a blank page rather than no page, so it
[a] appears in the history [b] takes a short but non-zero time).

At one time, there was a setting of what URL to load for a new tab, like
using about:blank. Google took that away, so users had to resort to
add-ons to programmatically control the new-tab page. For that I use
the "New Tab Override" add-on.

Firefox used to let you configure the new-tab page (what it would load).
Then it disappeared and users had to discover the gear icon at the top
right of the new-tab "top sites" page Mozilla then foisted on its users.
Now they're assisting sites with tracking your most-recently-visited
site (because those tiles connect back to those sites when you load a
new tab). Instead of installing an add-on, I customized the content or
maybe changed something in about:config. I think Mozilla gave up on
trying to push users around and now has a blank new-tab page. Hard to
tell because Mozilla keeps adding **** that I have to figure out how to
disable or workaround.

For cleaning, there is the Click&Clean add-on for Google Chrome. Google
changed how add-ons can run. No longer could then run when shutting
exiting Chrome - unless you configure Chrome to allow add-ons to
continue running after Chrome exits (not a good idea). So, instead
Click&Clean will do cleanup when it loads which is when Chrome loads.
That is, instead of cleaning on exit, it cleans on load. Click&Clean is
adware, so I didn't keep it. Instead I just run CCleaner using a
shortcut in a toolbar in the Windows taskbar that runs "ccleaner /auto",
and I schedule it to run in Task Scheduler, too.

Users have been wailing ever since Google Chrome showed up to have an
option to bring new tabs to the front; i.e., to give them focus when
they load. Never happened, so I use the "Tabs to the Front" add-on.

Google took away navigating backwards with the Backspace key. So I had
to install the "Go Back With Backspace" add-on.

Firefox will let me disable WebRTC (media.peerconnection.enabled =
False) to avoid some site peaking inside my intranet to get at the IP
address of my PC. It is a rather brute force method that will break
WebRTC used anywhere. Yep, in Google, an add-on is required. I use
WebRTC Leak Prevent which is more elegant as to what gets blocked. Go
to ipleak.net to see if your web browser exposes your local IP address
of the host on which you run the web browser.

By they time you get Google Chrome to have all the inbuilt functions
available in Firefox, you've installed over half a dozen add-ons into
Chrome. Google really isn't interest in the security and privacy of
their users. They will add features to support what web sites want.
Alas, Mozilla went that way, too.

On 29 Jun 2018, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote
in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

Unbelievably, Chrome doesn't offer that option. There is an
extension - called, perhaps unsurprisingly, "Blank New Tab Page"
that gives it to you (though it actually loads a blank page rather
than no page, so it [a] appears in the history [b] takes a short
but non-zero time).

Can you not create your own local blank page and tell Chrome to make it
your home page?

Nil wrote:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Unbelievably, Chrome doesn't offer that option. There is an
extension - called, perhaps unsurprisingly, "Blank New Tab Page"
that gives it to you (though it actually loads a blank page rather
than no page, so it [a] appears in the history [b] takes a short
but non-zero time).

Can you not create your own local blank page and tell Chrome to make it
your home page?

You're going to install a web server on one of your hosts just so you
can open a blank home page? Besides, opening to a blank home page is
not the problem being discussed. Google Chrome DOES let you specify
about:blank as your home page. That's how I configure the home page in
every web browser, including Google Chrome. It's the *new tab* page
being discussed.

about:blank in Google Chrome will load a blank document (web page) but
also populates the address bar with "about:blank". You have to erase
the address bar before you can start entering the URL to where you
intend to visit. While Google Chrome already has a home page setting,
its handling of about:blank becomes a nuisance regarding the address
bar. An add-on that overrides all new tabs will force a blank document
load while not polluting the address bar.

Back to the topic of a blank *new tab*, in Google Chrome's settings
there is no longer an option of where to connect a new tab. Google took
that setting away. Going through all the work to setup a local web
server to deliver a blank document won't work because you cannot
configure Chrome to go there when a new tab is loaded. Users are now
forced to use an add-on to programmatically choose to where a new tab
connects.

For first or initial new tab (home page), use about:blank -- and then
clear the address bar to enter a URL. For subsequent new tabs, use an
add-on since Google removed the setting. If the add-on also works on
the initial new tab tab, you don't have to erase "about:blank" from the
address bar before you enter the URL for where you want to visit.

Some new tab add-ons do nothing more than direct a new tab to
about:blank. In many web browsers, that is okay. In Chrome, you get a
blank document and a polluted address bar. Pick a new tab add-on that
loads a blank document and doesn't populate the address bar.

VanguardLH wrote:
Nil wrote:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Unbelievably, Chrome doesn't offer that option. There is an
extension - called, perhaps unsurprisingly, "Blank New Tab Page"
that gives it to you (though it actually loads a blank page rather
than no page, so it [a] appears in the history [b] takes a short
but non-zero time).
Can you not create your own local blank page and tell Chrome to make it
your home page?

You're going to install a web server on one of your hosts just so you
can open a blank home page?

Would a file:/// type item work ?

You might not need a web server, if it accepts
a variety of URI formulations.

Other example URIs (not related to this discussion)
would be ftp:// and gopher:// . Your browser may or
may not accept all the old URIs back to the dawn of time.

If you want another formulation:

chrome://flags

If you type "chrome" into the chrome URL bar, the
auto-hint will provide around four lines
intended to bootstrap you into the chrome:
URI space. So you don't have to look them up.

Paul

On 29 Jun 2018, VanguardLH wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

You're going to install a web server on one of your hosts just so
you can open a blank home page?

Every browser I've ever seen will display a page on the local file
system. No web server needed. "file:" is a valid protocol I believe.

about:blank in Google Chrome will load a blank document (web page)
but also populates the address bar with "about:blank". You have
to erase the address bar before you can start entering the URL to
where you intend to visit.

I always go to the address bar with Ctrl-L, which selects the
existing URL and disappears when you start typing. I rarely use the
mouse for that, but even then the URL is selected unless you fumble.

Paul wrote:

VanguardLH wrote:

Nil wrote:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Unbelievably, Chrome doesn't offer that option. There is an
extension - called, perhaps unsurprisingly, "Blank New Tab Page"
that gives it to you (though it actually loads a blank page rather
than no page, so it [a] appears in the history [b] takes a short
but non-zero time).

Can you not create your own local blank page and tell Chrome to
make it your home page?

You're going to install a web server on one of your hosts just so
you can open a blank home page?

Would a file:/// type item work ?

Sure -- but where are you going to configure Google Chrome to load that
document when opening a new tab?

Also, as noted about the problem of using about:blank polluting the
address bar, using file: means that URI will be listed in the address
bar and you have to erase it before you can enter the URL that you
actually intended to visit.

chrome://flags

If you type "chrome" into the chrome URL bar, the auto-hint will
provide around four lines intended to bootstrap you into the chrome:
URI space. So you don't have to look them up.

Usually I just enter chrome://about (or chrome:about since an internal
resource doesn't require the double slashes). "chrome" wants to suggest
"chrome://chrome-urls" but I get the same with chrome://about.

Nil wrote:

VanguardLH wrote:

You're going to install a web server on one of your hosts just so
you can open a blank home page?

Every browser I've ever seen will display a page on the local file
system. No web server needed. "file:" is a valid protocol I believe.

Yep, didn't think about that. Of course, you didn't say how the
document was delivered. The problem with using file:// is that it will
display in the address bar. The point of a blank page is to NOT load
anything, so you can immediately go somewhere you specify; however,
you'll have to erase the address bar of the filespec before you can
enter where you really intended to go.

Since Google Chrome still lets you configure what document to load for
the home page (initial tab), no need to point at a file to load an empty
document. Just configure home page to about:blank. Chrome will pollute
the address bar with "about:blank" (as it would if you used file://) but
your Ctrl+L hotkey nullifies that nuisance.

In contrast, other web browsers, like Firefox, load a blank document but
NOT pollute the address bar with "about:blank". No idea why Google
thinks they need to show the URI of an internal resource in their
address bar. Maybe they're being consistent, like chrome://flags and
chrome://about showing the URI in the address bar.

With file://, you are relying on an external resource to load a blank
document. It works but I prefer to reduce external dependencies. You
mentioned home page but you can already use about:blank for that. The
OP was asking about new tabs, and Chrome no longer has a setting for
what new tabs should load. That has to be done programmatically now.
Chrome doesn't even have the advanced configuration (about:config) of
Firefox where you can dig to find options not presented in the
configuration GUI page (aboutreferences).

I've found Firefox to be far more configurable than Chrome; however,
Mozilla was creating such a highly moving target with their change in
behaviors and technologies in Firefox that I moved to Chrome (which
required several add-ons to get built-in features in Firefox). I'm
leaning to going back to Firefox. I don't like having to delve into
about:config to find all the settings but, at least, there are more
in-depth settings available.

In Firefox, I can change a setting in about:config to disable WebRTC.
No such setting in Chrome (and Google removed the chrome:flag that let
you disable WebRTC). Yet is it a brute force method. The WebRTC Leak
Prevent add-on is a more elegant approach along with being configurable.
With WebRTC disabled en masse in Firefox, I cannot use it to go to
Google Voice (hangs after login because it is a WebRTC app). With the
add-on in Chrome, ipleak.net still reports Chrome has not divulged my
hosts intranet (local) IP address but Google Voice still works. I have
WebRTC disabled in both web browsers which means I can use Google Voice
in Chrome but not in Firefox.

Google has its advantages, though, over Firefox and why I continue to
use it. For example, Google came out with the Spectre mitigating
Retpoline API to which webclients can use (after recompiling them) and
incorporated it into Chrome. Mozilla's compromise was to enable further
isolation between firefox.exe instances by enabling
privacy.firstparty.isolate = true, and to slow down the return from
functions to avoid the timing attack (which required recoding and
recompiling of Firefox). I liked Google's Retpoline solution much
better and dodges the performance hit. Disabling Javascript is another
choice but has become no longer a viable option since way too many sites
nowadays rely on dynamic web pages to determine what content gets
delivered to you. Google has had time to tweak their multi-process
Chrome. Mozilla is new to this and their default is conservative (and
figuring out to further tweak it takes a while to test). Mozilla
changed their extension support in v57 which killed a lot of old
extensions. They changed their chrome. They changed their engine.
I've forgotten all the other changes they've made in the last year, some
of which were unwanted (by me). I grew weary of the high rate of
changes and went to Chrome. I do like having more internal settings to
lockdown Firefox rather than using add-ons in Chrome but you can stand a
square tire for only so long.

about:blank in Google Chrome will load a blank document (web page)
but also populates the address bar with "about:blank". You have
to erase the address bar before you can start entering the URL to
where you intend to visit.

I always go to the address bar with Ctrl-L, which selects the
existing URL and disappears when you start typing. I rarely use the
mouse for that, but even then the URL is selected unless you fumble.

That's a workaround. It works as you describe. Thanks for the hotkey.

It is rare when I load the web browser to a blank document (whether that
be about:blank or an add-on loading a blank document. Typically I am
clicking on a URL (aka hyperlink), selecting one from a shortcut or
bookmark, or entering a URL in an address bar (Explorer, taskbar's
address bar, etc). While I have the home page set to about:blank, it is
rare that I load the web browser and then decide to go elsewhere. I
have already decided where I'm going before I load the web browser.

Mostly I configure about:blank as the home page to thwart any of that
crap Mozilla or Google want to shove at me, and why I also don't like
their choices for the default document for the home page (initial tab)
or for subsequent new tabs.

In message , VanguardLH
writes:
[]
hosts intranet (local) IP address but Google Voice still works. I have
WebRTC disabled in both web browsers which means I can use Google Voice
in Chrome but not in Firefox.

Google has its advantages, though, over Firefox and why I continue to
use it. For example, Google came out with the Spectre mitigating
[]
I can log in to YouTube (now Google generally, but I had a YouTube login
before the takeover, if that's relevant) with my old Firefox 27, but not
my up-to-date Chrome. (This is on a Windows-7/32-with-Classic-Shell
machine, if that's relevant.)

When I click SIGN IN from a YouTube page, I get:

Sign in
Continue to YouTube
___Email or phone___
Forgot email?
Not your computer? Use Guest mode to sign in privately.
Create account NEXT

, where "Email or phone" is a line I can type on, Forgot and Create are
links, and NEXT is a button. If I type my email into the relevant line
and either press enter or click NEXT, nothing happens. (Well, the NEXT
button darkens briefly, so the click is registered.) If I click Forgot
or Create, again they darken briefly which shows the click has been
registered, but nothing else happens.

I _don't_ get any error message of _any_ sort - not even "you are
already logged in"; I've even tried logging out via Firefox in case that
_was_ the problem, and it didn't make any difference.

I wondered if it was due to some entry in my hosts file that is causing
the problem, but surely that would prevent me from being able to log
back in via Firefox 27, which I _can_ do. FWIW, the sign-in page in
Firefox 27 looks different:

Sign in to continue to YouTube
[picture of me]
[my email]
Password box
Sign in button

It's obviously using cookies or something as it knows it's me and
displays my picture and email. But, if I type my password and press
enter, it logs me in. (The email I'm trying, in Chrome, is the same one
as is pre-filled for me in Forefox 27.)

Obviously, my concern is that eventually, they'll break their system so
that I can't log in at all with Firefox 27 - plus, various aspects of
YouTube don't work properly with it anyway (but do with up-to-date
Chrome). OK, some people have strong objections to logging in to YouTube
(and thus Google) anyway, but that's outside the scope of this puzzle.
(I mainly use it for adding comments in YouTube.)

I have far fewer - only six! - addons to Chrome; the only one that could
conceivably have any effect is their own "Google Analytics Opt-out
Add-on (by Google)"; it would have been ironic if that was the cause,
but I've just tried unticking it, and no change. And I don't think I've
disabled scripting or whatever - I can login to and use, for example,
ebay, and many other sites.


Any suggestions? [Unhelpful ones, such as "stop logging in to YouTube",
will of course be ignored (-:!]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Reality television. It's eroding the ability of good scripted television to
survive. - Patrick Duffy in Radio Times 2-8 February 2013

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Any suggestions? [Unhelpful ones, such as "stop logging in to YouTube",
| will of course be ignored (-:!]

You can lead a horse to water.....

I wonder if it could be two different server functions.
You mention a password for FF but email/phone for
Chrome. My guess would be that the page FF goes to
is sending the password to one server/script while the
Chrome page sends email/phone to a different server/
script -- and that your account is not updated for the
new system.

But then you mention the Chrome page not working
at all. In that case I'd look for 3rd-party script being
blocked. Do you have NoScript? That can easily tell
you what external script/cookies links are being used,
which you could compare to your HOSTS file. I think
uMatrix can also tell you that.

Since the two pages you get perform different tasks,
it can't be assumed they're the same. They're either
different URLs or Youtube is checking the userAgent on
load and customizing the page.

In message , Mayayana
writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Any suggestions? [Unhelpful ones, such as "stop logging in to YouTube",
| will of course be ignored (-:!]

You can lead a horse to water.....

I wonder if it could be two different server functions.
You mention a password for FF but email/phone for
Chrome. My guess would be that the page FF goes to

FF used email as well, but had pre-filled it in for me. I've just
"opened a private window" in FF, and gone to YouTube - the Sign in
button has appeared, so it's not reading cookies or whatever (doesn't
know I'm already logged in). I click it - it goes to
https://accounts.google.com/ServiceL...ttps%3A%2F%2Fw
ww.youtube.com%2Fsignin%3Fhl%3Den-GB%26app%3Ddesktop%26next%3D%252Fsuppor
ted_browsers%253Fnext_url%253D%25252F%26action_han dle_signin%3Dtrue%26fea
ture%3Dsign_in_button&service=youtube&passive=true &hl=en-GB#identifier,
which now shows an "Email or phone" box and a Next button. Entering my
email, so going to the subsequent page that has a password box, results
in a successful login. (Despite lots of warnings that the browser is no
longer supported!)

is sending the password to one server/script while the
Chrome page sends email/phone to a different server/
script -- and that your account is not updated for the
new system.

When I click SIGN IN in Chrome from a YouTube page, it goes to
https://accounts.google.com/signin/v...ue&hl=en-GB&ui
lel=3&continue=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fsig nin%3Fnext%3D%252F%26ac
tion_handle_signin%3Dtrue%26hl%3Den-GB%26app%3Ddesktop&service=youtube&fl
owName=GlifWebSignIn&flowEntry=ServiceLogin, which has the page I
described before - an "Email or phone" box and a NEXT button, along with
a few other things.

But then you mention the Chrome page not working
at all. In that case I'd look for 3rd-party script being

When I say it doesn't work at all, I mean nothing happens, apart from a
brief flash of different colour of the button or link when I activate
them. It isn't replaced by another page, what's in the address bar
doesn't change - nothing moves.

blocked. Do you have NoScript? That can easily tell
you what external script/cookies links are being used,
which you could compare to your HOSTS file. I think
uMatrix can also tell you that.

The only extras I have in Chrome a
Blank New Tab Page
Easy! Show Title Plus
EditThisCookie
Google Analytics Opt-out Add-on (by Google)
Show Title Tag
Video DownloadHelper [not enabled]

(Chrome is not my _default_ browser). I can't see _any_ of those
blocking scripts (apart from the Analytics Opt-out, but I tried
disabling that and it made no difference).

Since the two pages you get perform different tasks,
it can't be assumed they're the same. They're either
different URLs or Youtube is checking the userAgent on
load and customizing the page.

I assume the latter. They certainly _look_ (now that I've invoked the
Private Browsing function in Firefox 27) as if they perform the _same_
function, i. e. logging me in by prompting for email.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Radio 4 is one of the reasons being British is good. It's not a subset of
Britain - it's almost as if Britain is a subset of Radio 4. - Stephen Fry, in
Radio Times, 7-13 June, 2003.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

FF used email as well, but had pre-filled it in for me.

That's probably FF remembering form fields, rather
than a cookie.

I don't know what to make of all that, but it does
seem like you're getting different scripts. The two
URLs are different. They then each load the same
URL, but with different parameters. The basic
differences are like so:

next=/supported_browsers
next_url=/
feature=sign_in_button
passive=true

next=/
flowName=GlifWebSignIn
flowEntry=ServiceLogin

There's no explanation for that based on simply
using different browsers. But Google webpages
are extremely complex, with a lot of script. It's
hard to know what they might be doing. It could
also be a bug on their end.

I wonder what would happen if you enter the
FF URL into Chrome.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

snipped the quoting of my prior reply - doesn't seem relevant
this should have been a new thread instead of hijacking another

I can log in to YouTube (now Google generally, but I had a YouTube login
before the takeover, if that's relevant) with my old Firefox 27, but not
my up-to-date Chrome. (This is on a Windows-7/32-with-Classic-Shell
machine, if that's relevant.)

When I click SIGN IN from a YouTube page, I get:

Sign in
Continue to YouTube
___Email or phone___
Forgot email?
Not your computer? Use Guest mode to sign in privately.
Create account NEXT

, where "Email or phone" is a line I can type on, Forgot and Create are
links, and NEXT is a button. If I type my email into the relevant line
and either press enter or click NEXT, nothing happens. (Well, the NEXT
button darkens briefly, so the click is registered.) If I click Forgot
or Create, again they darken briefly which shows the click has been
registered, but nothing else happens.

I _don't_ get any error message of _any_ sort - not even "you are
already logged in"; I've even tried logging out via Firefox in case that
_was_ the problem, and it didn't make any difference.

I wondered if it was due to some entry in my hosts file that is causing
the problem, but surely that would prevent me from being able to log
back in via Firefox 27, which I _can_ do. FWIW, the sign-in page in
Firefox 27 looks different:

Sign in to continue to YouTube
[picture of me]
[my email]
Password box
Sign in button

It's obviously using cookies or something as it knows it's me and
displays my picture and email. But, if I type my password and press
enter, it logs me in. (The email I'm trying, in Chrome, is the same one
as is pre-filled for me in Forefox 27.)

Obviously, my concern is that eventually, they'll break their system so
that I can't log in at all with Firefox 27 - plus, various aspects of
YouTube don't work properly with it anyway (but do with up-to-date
Chrome). OK, some people have strong objections to logging in to YouTube
(and thus Google) anyway, but that's outside the scope of this puzzle.
(I mainly use it for adding comments in YouTube.)

I have far fewer - only six! - addons to Chrome; the only one that could
conceivably have any effect is their own "Google Analytics Opt-out
Add-on (by Google)"; it would have been ironic if that was the cause,
but I've just tried unticking it, and no change. And I don't think I've
disabled scripting or whatever - I can login to and use, for example,
ebay, and many other sites.

Have you tried the following?

- Try incognito mode. From a current instance of Chrome, use incognito
mode which opens a new window, or use the --incognito command-line
switch.

- Exit the web browser and use Task Manager to ensure there are no
remnant instances of the web browser process(es). Then load Chrome in
with any extensions (use the --disable-extensions command-line switch)
and retest.

- Disable all security software (anti-virus/malware, 3rd party firewall,
URL filtering, privacy software, etc), exit Chrome, load it again, and
retest.

- Boot into Windows' safe mode with networking to ensure no startup
programs are interfering with Chrome, and retest.

- Check that Chrome is NOT using a proxy (that you told it to use, a VPN
changed, or malware altered): Settings - Advanced - System - Open
proxy settings). Looks like Chrome uses the proxy settings in the OS,
so I would think Firefox would also be affected; however, Firefox
presents its own proxy settings dialog instead of opening the one from
the OS. I don't know if Firefox is merely presenting its own dialog
that duplicates the OS dialog or if Firefox uses its own independent
proxy settings. Firefox tends to use internal functionality rather
than rely on platform-dependent functionality; e.g., Firefox has its
on internal certificate manager instead of using the OS' cert manager
(certmgr.msc), so a web browser using the global cert store from the
OS might work but not Firefox which is missing a cert.

- Firefox lets you do a reset. That creates a new profile. Chrome lets
you do the same using chrome://settings/resetProfileSettings (or go to
Settings - Advanced - Reset and cleanup - Restore settings to
their original defaults - Reset settings).

- A reset in Firefox creates a new profile, or you can do it manually
through Firefox's Profile Manager. Chrome has profiles, too. Go to
Settings - People - Manage other people. You can add and remove
users, so create a new user and test using that profile. See:

https://www.howtogeek.com/255653/how...mac-and-linux/

- Under settings - Advanced - System, try disabling hardware
acceleration. Doesn't seem Youtube should use it just to deliver
streaming video but then maybe they do. GPU acceleration relies on
support from the video driver but too often the interface between the
web browser and driver doesn't work correctly.