If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Latest version of Firefox for Windows XP query
According to the website, version 52.9 is the last "supported" version (and
is what I am using now). But that version does have some issues on some sites (esp with regards to videos, which need more HTML5 (and mp4) capability, than is provided by FF version 52.9). (case in point - try to watch some videos on ted.com without having to fall back to a somewhat jerky flash version). I'm wondering if anyone has tried to install a later version (to get the benefits of some code updates, particularly in regards to HTML5 video playback capability). And if so, how far up in version numbers could you go, before it refused to install or work? (It looks like anything below version 62 is at least not "Quantum", which is a plus, to me). |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Latest version of Firefox for Windows XP query
Bill in Co wrote:
According to the website, version 52.9 is the last "supported" version (and is what I am using now). But that version does have some issues on some sites (esp with regards to videos, which need more HTML5 (and mp4) capability, than is provided by FF version 52.9). (case in point - try to watch some videos on ted.com without having to fall back to a somewhat jerky flash version). Firefox ESR 52.9 is the last version for Windows XP. I'm wondering if anyone has tried to install a later version (to get the benefits of some code updates, particularly in regards to HTML5 video playback capability). And if so, how far up in version numbers could you go, before it refused to install or work? (It looks like anything below version 62 is at least not "Quantum", which is a plus, to me). FF version 57 is the Quantum release, not version 62. v57 is when XUL/XCOM legacy extensions got cut off and when Webextensions were required. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Latest version of Firefox for Windows XP query
VanguardLH wrote:
Bill in Co wrote: According to the website, version 52.9 is the last "supported" version (and is what I am using now). But that version does have some issues on some sites (esp with regards to videos, which need more HTML5 (and mp4) capability, than is provided by FF version 52.9). (case in point - try to watch some videos on ted.com without having to fall back to a somewhat jerky flash version). Firefox ESR 52.9 is the last version for Windows XP. I'm wondering if anyone has tried to install a later version (to get the benefits of some code updates, particularly in regards to HTML5 video playback capability). And if so, how far up in version numbers could you go, before it refused to install or work? (It looks like anything below version 62 is at least not "Quantum", which is a plus, to me). FF version 57 is the Quantum release, not version 62. v57 is when XUL/XCOM legacy extensions got cut off and when Webextensions were required. Thanks for the correction on that. But my question was regarding "installability", and if anyone had even tried to install and run an updated version (updated beyond 52.9). I know it's not "supported", but that doesn't mean you can't install it and run it. I figured somebody here might have tried, and was curious as to their results. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Latest version of Firefox for Windows XP query
Bill in Co wrote:
VanguardLH wrote: Bill in Co wrote: According to the website, version 52.9 is the last "supported" version (and is what I am using now). But that version does have some issues on some sites (esp with regards to videos, which need more HTML5 (and mp4) capability, than is provided by FF version 52.9). (case in point - try to watch some videos on ted.com without having to fall back to a somewhat jerky flash version). Firefox ESR 52.9 is the last version for Windows XP. I'm wondering if anyone has tried to install a later version (to get the benefits of some code updates, particularly in regards to HTML5 video playback capability). And if so, how far up in version numbers could you go, before it refused to install or work? (It looks like anything below version 62 is at least not "Quantum", which is a plus, to me). FF version 57 is the Quantum release, not version 62. v57 is when XUL/XCOM legacy extensions got cut off and when Webextensions were required. Thanks for the correction on that. But my question was regarding "installability", and if anyone had even tried to install and run an updated version (updated beyond 52.9). I know it's not "supported", but that doesn't mean you can't install it and run it. I figured somebody here might have tried, and was curious as to their results. The stub installer (aka web installer) you get from Mozilla will check your OS to determine which is the latest version of Firefox it will retrieve and install under your OS. Even with the best compression possible, there is no way all of the Firefox product is contained inside a 308KB stub installer. https://www.ghacks.net/2018/05/11/ho...ne-installers/ To get the full installer aka offline installer, see: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/ As I recall, some of the "all" downloads were accidentally stub installers, so I can't be sure which are stub versus full installers. Size would indicate which; however, the "all" page doesn't list file size, so you have to download to check the installer's file size. I suspect the offline installer will also perform an OS check. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb...fox-on-windows You could see if using an offline installer gets you up to the "Set up shortcuts" dialog in the installer or if the installer immediately balks at running on Windows XP. That is, run the offline installer to see if it even starts. You aren't trying to install Firefox but just see if the offline installer even lets you proceed. You could trying copying the following folders from a Windows 7+ host to your Windows XP host: C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox %appdata%\Mozilla %localappdata%\Mozilla but those won't include all the registry entries for Firefox. Note that Mozilla didn't just say FF ESR 52 would be the last supported version of Firefox on Windows XP. They also stated ESR 52 would be the last /compatible/ version of Firefox on Windows XP. Other than the warning in Mozilla's article below, why can't you use FF ESR 52 (52.9) on Windows XP? https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb...s-xp-and-vista Anytime you use an old versioned web browser, sites may not behave or they refuse connections or somehow throttle their site (because they want to use new features in the web browser that you won't have with an old version). Complain to the site that they still need to provide backward compatibility (alternate content) for old web browsers. Windows XP is down to 4.6% of the marketshare, so don't expect a site to bother with requests from a tiny share of their visitors. The sites move forward to use new or enhanced features in the newer versioned web browsers, and they don't retain compatibility of their site with old and unsupported web browsers. There are sites where you cannot visit using IE3, either. By the way, Adobe is dropping Flash at the end of 2020. So, those sites where you are still watching Flash streamed videos will stop working or get worse (since Adobe won't be providing an updated plug-in). https://theblog.adobe.com/adobe-flash-update/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/new...ven-years-ago/ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Latest version of Firefox for Windows XP query
VanguardLH wrote:
Bill in Co wrote: VanguardLH wrote: Bill in Co wrote: According to the website, version 52.9 is the last "supported" version (and is what I am using now). But that version does have some issues on some sites (esp with regards to videos, which need more HTML5 (and mp4) capability, than is provided by FF version 52.9). (case in point - try to watch some videos on ted.com without having to fall back to a somewhat jerky flash version). Firefox ESR 52.9 is the last version for Windows XP. I'm wondering if anyone has tried to install a later version (to get the benefits of some code updates, particularly in regards to HTML5 video playback capability). And if so, how far up in version numbers could you go, before it refused to install or work? (It looks like anything below version 62 is at least not "Quantum", which is a plus, to me). FF version 57 is the Quantum release, not version 62. v57 is when XUL/XCOM legacy extensions got cut off and when Webextensions were required. Thanks for the correction on that. But my question was regarding "installability", and if anyone had even tried to install and run an updated version (updated beyond 52.9). I know it's not "supported", but that doesn't mean you can't install it and run it. I figured somebody here might have tried, and was curious as to their results. The stub installer (aka web installer) you get from Mozilla will check your OS to determine which is the latest version of Firefox it will retrieve and install under your OS. Even with the best compression possible, there is no way all of the Firefox product is contained inside a 308KB stub installer. https://www.ghacks.net/2018/05/11/ho...ne-installers/ To get the full installer aka offline installer, see: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/ As I recall, some of the "all" downloads were accidentally stub installers, so I can't be sure which are stub versus full installers. Size would indicate which; however, the "all" page doesn't list file size, so you have to download to check the installer's file size. I suspect the offline installer will also perform an OS check. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb...fox-on-windows You could see if using an offline installer gets you up to the "Set up shortcuts" dialog in the installer or if the installer immediately balks at running on Windows XP. That is, run the offline installer to see if it even starts. You aren't trying to install Firefox but just see if the offline installer even lets you proceed. You could trying copying the following folders from a Windows 7+ host to your Windows XP host: C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox %appdata%\Mozilla %localappdata%\Mozilla but those won't include all the registry entries for Firefox. Note that Mozilla didn't just say FF ESR 52 would be the last supported version of Firefox on Windows XP. They also stated ESR 52 would be the last /compatible/ version of Firefox on Windows XP. Other than the warning in Mozilla's article below, why can't you use FF ESR 52 (52.9) on Windows XP? https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb...s-xp-and-vista Anytime you use an old versioned web browser, sites may not behave or they refuse connections or somehow throttle their site (because they want to use new features in the web browser that you won't have with an old version). Complain to the site that they still need to provide backward compatibility (alternate content) for old web browsers. Windows XP is down to 4.6% of the marketshare, so don't expect a site to bother with requests from a tiny share of their visitors. The sites move forward to use new or enhanced features in the newer versioned web browsers, and they don't retain compatibility of their site with old and unsupported web browsers. There are sites where you cannot visit using IE3, either. By the way, Adobe is dropping Flash at the end of 2020. So, those sites where you are still watching Flash streamed videos will stop working or get worse (since Adobe won't be providing an updated plug-in). https://theblog.adobe.com/adobe-flash-update/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/new...ven-years-ago/ Thanks for that info. I can - and am - using FF version 52.9, and so far it works fine *except* when accessing some websites with videos, like ted.com. That website (and a few others now) expect .h264 compatibility to work (unless you fall back to flash). And as you have already pointed out, flash is deprecated, and is going away soon. But I've finally found an article that resolves that .h264 issue for this old version of FF, but it is a bit tedious setting it up. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Latest version of Firefox for Windows XP query
VanguardLH wrote:
Bill in Co wrote: VanguardLH wrote: Bill in Co wrote: According to the website, version 52.9 is the last "supported" version (and is what I am using now). But that version does have some issues on some sites (esp with regards to videos, which need more HTML5 (and mp4) capability, than is provided by FF version 52.9). (case in point - try to watch some videos on ted.com without having to fall back to a somewhat jerky flash version). Firefox ESR 52.9 is the last version for Windows XP. I'm wondering if anyone has tried to install a later version (to get the benefits of some code updates, particularly in regards to HTML5 video playback capability). And if so, how far up in version numbers could you go, before it refused to install or work? (It looks like anything below version 62 is at least not "Quantum", which is a plus, to me). FF version 57 is the Quantum release, not version 62. v57 is when XUL/XCOM legacy extensions got cut off and when Webextensions were required. Thanks for the correction on that. But my question was regarding "installability", and if anyone had even tried to install and run an updated version (updated beyond 52.9). I know it's not "supported", but that doesn't mean you can't install it and run it. I figured somebody here might have tried, and was curious as to their results. The stub installer (aka web installer) you get from Mozilla will check your OS to determine which is the latest version of Firefox it will retrieve and install under your OS. You can avoid the stub and get a file directly. The EXE is an installer. http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/fire...4/win32/en-US/ Firefox Setup 57.0.4.exe 34MB If a person compiles the program from source, there will be an opportunity to bypass the NSIS installer. Or, find some article that mentions how to make Firefox "portable", and bootstrap that way. AFAIK, the NSIS installer is a Windows installer which was available for free. Which is why they're using it for the Windows builds. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Latest version of Firefox for Windows XP query
Paul wrote:
VanguardLH wrote: Bill in Co wrote: VanguardLH wrote: Bill in Co wrote: According to the website, version 52.9 is the last "supported" version (and is what I am using now). But that version does have some issues on some sites (esp with regards to videos, which need more HTML5 (and mp4) capability, than is provided by FF version 52.9). (case in point - try to watch some videos on ted.com without having to fall back to a somewhat jerky flash version). Firefox ESR 52.9 is the last version for Windows XP. I'm wondering if anyone has tried to install a later version (to get the benefits of some code updates, particularly in regards to HTML5 video playback capability). And if so, how far up in version numbers could you go, before it refused to install or work? (It looks like anything below version 62 is at least not "Quantum", which is a plus, to me). FF version 57 is the Quantum release, not version 62. v57 is when XUL/XCOM legacy extensions got cut off and when Webextensions were required. Thanks for the correction on that. But my question was regarding "installability", and if anyone had even tried to install and run an updated version (updated beyond 52.9). I know it's not "supported", but that doesn't mean you can't install it and run it. I figured somebody here might have tried, and was curious as to their results. The stub installer (aka web installer) you get from Mozilla will check your OS to determine which is the latest version of Firefox it will retrieve and install under your OS. You can avoid the stub and get a file directly. The EXE is an installer. http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/fire...4/win32/en-US/ Firefox Setup 57.0.4.exe 34MB If a person compiles the program from source, there will be an opportunity to bypass the NSIS installer. Or, find some article that mentions how to make Firefox "portable", and bootstrap that way. AFAIK, the NSIS installer is a Windows installer which was available for free. Which is why they're using it for the Windows builds. Paul I hate those stub installers, no matter who or what they are for (and that includes the ones for Adobe Flash. Adobe just loves to make things difficult). But as Vanguard pointed out, it's easy to see if that's what your getting, by simply checking the file size when you click on the download link (if it doesn't already state it). If it's just a few KB, or even MB, chances are it's a stub. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Latest version of Firefox for Windows XP query
Bill in Co wrote:
I can - and am - using FF version 52.9, and so far it works fine *except* when accessing some websites with videos, like ted.com. That website (and a few others now) expect .h264 compatibility to work (unless you fall back to flash). And as you have already pointed out, flash is deprecated, and is going away soon. But I've finally found an article that resolves that .h264 issue for this old version of FF, but it is a bit tedious setting it up. Don't know what is the unidentified solution you found. If the problem is not having the appropriate decoder to match whatever coder was used in the video (hence the name codec: coder-decoder), maybe you don't have the needed codec installed with the old version of Firefox. Many media filetypes are passed onto handlers; i.e., the program itself as the player doesn't decode the video but has a codec do that. Codecs are code, so often they are installed and reused just like other libraries. You may need to install the necessary codecs for whatever videos you are trying to watch. I use the K-Lite Codec Pack to install and register many codecs. Some programs bring along their own private library of codecs which reside in a fixed location the program knows about, like a subfolder under the installation path for the player program. For example, VLC has its own private codec library. Other players relie upon already installed codecs that are found through their handler defintions in the Windows registry (hence registering the codecs). With VLC, if there is a problem with a codec in its private library, you have to hope that a later version of VLC comes with a fixed codec. With programs that use registered (global) codecs, you can update the codec, and that's why I use the K-Lite Codec Pack to get most of them. I only get the standard package of codecs. I don't every codec available. K-Lite comes in several flavors: basic, standard, full, and mega. I've never needed the mega pack but do use the full pack. However, I don't bother installing the included MPC-HC (Media Player Classic - Home Cinema). It's redundant to the other media players that I already have. It is also possible some compression method was used in reducing the size of the video hence its bandwidth consumption. At one time, I had to get the DivX codec because lots of video authors liked that compression scheme. K-Lite includes DivX codec support; see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-Lite_Codec_Pack In Windows 7, Windows Media Player uses the MPEG-4 decoders that Microsoft bundled in Windows but those can cause playback problems. K-Lite suggest changing the default preference order for codecs; see https://codecguide.com/faq_playback_issues.htm#item44 (CTT = their Codec Tweak Tool program). I don't know if that applies back on Windows XP, or Window XP came with anything other than Microsoft's own codecs which are limited in scope. Been way too long since I used Firefox 52, or earlier. As I recall, there was a preferences or settings on which handler to use for various media types. There was a list and you could specify what to use. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb...-handles-files That only lists handler definitions within Firefox. If a MIME type is not defined in Firefox, presumably it uses whatever is the currently registered handler for the MIME type (and why I suggested K-Lite). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|