A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

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.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows XP » General XP issues or comments
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Latest Firefox ESR



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old August 12th 18, 07:43 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,629
Default Latest Firefox ESR

"Mark Lloyd" wrote

|
| I'm guessing what's wrong is that he neglected
| to lift the toilet seat first.
|
| I never understood that problem. It seems a lot easier to LOOK where
| you're sitting than to try to manipulate others, and blame them for your
| problem.
|
Yes. That was just a joke. But maybe you're
referring to women who complain? I always thought
penis envy was a silly idea until I shared an apt
with women who got very worked up about the
toilet seat being left up. It *really* bugged them.
Jealousy over the male convenience seemed to
be the only credible reason.
Having grown up with only brothers I'd never
thought about it. You just adjust the seat and
cover as necessary when you arrive and the next
person does the same.

But these women were seething. So I thought
about it and decided that the most proper and
neat approach, without getting into sexual politics,
would be to always close the cover after use.
I've done that ever since.
But do the angry feminists bother to close the
cover? Noooooooo. They do just as I did previously,
leaving the toilet state in whatever way they'd
finished with it. Lazy, sexist buggers.


Ads
  #47  
Old August 12th 18, 07:48 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,629
Default Latest Firefox ESR

"Mark Lloyd" wrote

| BTW2, I do have a XP installation, for several reasons, including
| checking on the latest versions of browsers that run in XP (so I can put
| this information on my webpage). It's also a way to run older MSIE.
|

For what it's worth, I find that there's no need to
think about OS. My pages work in all versions
of all browsers except IE, as far as I know. I test
them periodically. But I also don't use script.

For IE I use a bit of script and design for quirks mode.
That means the pages display dependably in IE5-10
and in IE11 if people set an exception for the domain.
(I have no intention of accommodating Edge.) So I
have two separate versions of the pages that I load
dynamically with php. (Plus a 3rd version that says,
"Sorry, but Edge won't work. Use *any* other browser.")

If you don't use quirks mode it's a nightmare. But
you probably know that.


  #48  
Old August 12th 18, 09:14 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
R.Wieser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 651
Default Latest Firefox ESR

Mark ,

I got a lot of vague problem statements. One was "it doesn't print". The
user would refuse to give any more information.


A colleague of mine, directly opposite of me, had a problem with his 'puter.
So I ask "whats on your screen" (text, as this was when DOS was in its
prime).
The reply ? "Nothing".
I ask again, "There is really *nothing* on your screen ? There should be."
Reply: "Nope, nothing."

I knew that that could not be true, so I walk around, see the informational
message I wanted him to read, point him to it and ask "and whats this than
?"
The response ? "Yeah, besides that".

It has served me, over the years, as a reminder that people are not to be
trusted when you ask them for pertinent information regarding a computer.

... and never thought to try anything else


I think thats where the famous ".. or you you plug it in" joke comes from.
:-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


  #49  
Old Yesterday, 10:09 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
R.Wieser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 651
Default Latest Firefox ESR

David,

At the least, SeaMonkey does not protect me from things
from which I definitely do NOT want any protection


In other things it seems to be nannying and worse: as-braindead as FF (52
ESR) is:

Quote:
.... even if you are not using Safebrowsing because the lists are always
fetched.
I don't need or want safebrowsing, as I'm not comfortable with it.

But even though I disable it, they fully ignore it and call back to the
mothership regardless - for lists I will never use. Why ? :-(

Its comparable to FF 52s NewTab tiles: even when you disable them and set it
to a "blank page", it will *still* visit all the stored URLs to make
screenshots from them (and to add insult to injury: while purposely
disabeling all plugins and by it all kinds of protections the user has
choosen to install with them - I never visit, directly or indirectly,
servers from, for example, doubleclick. But NewTab does).


It also means that SeaMonkey seems to fail at pretty-much the same points
for why I want to ditch FF 52 for something else. In short, not a good
replacement (just exchanging one mothership for another).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


  #50  
Old Yesterday, 10:54 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Daniel60
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default Latest Firefox ESR

R.Wieser wrote on 12/08/2018 11:35 PM:
Daniel60,

The moderator of the mozilla.support.* groups maintains that ...


Too bad that that isn't made clear in those newsgroups themselves.

Did you also note my suggestion about a mozilla.dev.apps.firefox
newsgroup??


No such newsgroup exists.


Yeap, just checked. You're right. I wonder why not!!

Therse is exactly *one* newsgroup with "firefox" in its name, and it
is aimed at people using the product, not at any kind of programmer.
In other words, its of no use to me.

Firefox has deviated from SeaMonkey Browser!


Lets hope they are enough of the same that the devs could give me a
bit of a pointer. Heck, even knowing how SeaMonkey deals with it is
more than I currently have. :-)

Regards, Rudy Wieser

Then my other suggestion, irc, might be the go!!

irc://moznet/firefox

"Topic for #firefox is “Firefox community & support channel ||
Permission isn't needed to ask your question. If well after asking
nobody responds, say "help!" or try http://support.mozilla.org || Get
Firefox from http://mozilla.org/firefox || This channel is logged at
https://mozilla.logbot.info/firefox”

--
Daniel
  #51  
Old Yesterday, 04:43 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
PeterC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 80
Default Latest Firefox ESR

On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 11:09:16 +0200, R.Wieser wrote:

It also means that SeaMonkey seems to fail at pretty-much the same points
for why I want to ditch FF 52 for something else. In short, not a good
replacement (just exchanging one mothership for another).


Pale Moon?
http://www.palemoon.org/
https://forum.palemoon.org/
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway
  #52  
Old Yesterday, 04:52 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,629
Default Latest Firefox ESR

"R.Wieser" wrote

|
| But even though I disable it, they fully ignore it and call back to the
| mothership regardless - for lists I will never use. Why ? :-(
|

For what it's worth, I always remove all URLs
in about:config. Safe browsing updates is one
of those.

| Its comparable to FF 52s NewTab tiles: even when you disable them and set
it
| to a "blank page", it will *still* visit all the stored URLs to make
| screenshots from them

I'm using FF52 with a custom homepage. I'm
not aware of it calling home to anything. But
again, it might help to remove URLs in prefs.

| I never visit, directly or indirectly,
| servers from, for example, doubleclick. But NewTab does).
|

Why don't you have doubleclick in your HOSTS file?


  #53  
Old Yesterday, 06:11 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
R.Wieser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 651
Default Latest Firefox ESR

Peter,

I see you've changed the follow-up to alt.windows7.general. I do not visit
that newsgroup (guess which newsgroup I'm reading and posting in :-) ).
Further communication would therefore be rather hard ...

Also, you DO NOT DO THAT. At least not without clearly mentioning it.


As for your suggestion :

Pale Moon?


I see that the last version for XP (which is what I'm running) is version
26.5.0 from 09/16 (two years old). Apart from some "we fixed issue X"
entries there is no indication which features it has (features I want/need,
but also features I definitily do *not* want). As such I cannot say if it
would be better (or worse!) than what I currently have.

So thank you, but I don't think "I will just hope for the best" and replace
my functioning browser with it.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


  #54  
Old Yesterday, 06:31 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,810
Default Latest Firefox ESR

R.Wieser wrote:
Peter,

I see you've changed the follow-up to alt.windows7.general. I do not visit
that newsgroup (guess which newsgroup I'm reading and posting in :-) ).
Further communication would therefore be rather hard ...

Also, you DO NOT DO THAT. At least not without clearly mentioning it.


As for your suggestion :

Pale Moon?


I see that the last version for XP (which is what I'm running) is version
26.5.0 from 09/16 (two years old). Apart from some "we fixed issue X"
entries there is no indication which features it has (features I want/need,
but also features I definitily do *not* want). As such I cannot say if it
would be better (or worse!) than what I currently have.

So thank you, but I don't think "I will just hope for the best" and replace
my functioning browser with it.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


Posts to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general are archived on Google Groups.

Posts to alt.windows7.general are not archived.

Crossposting to both groups, should cause it to be archived on GG.
The "microsoft.public.windowsxp.general" helps ensure it's captured.

Paul

  #55  
Old Yesterday, 07:41 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
R.Wieser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 651
Default Latest Firefox ESR

Mayayana,

For what it's worth, I always remove all URLs
in about:config.


Yeah, that was pretty-much what I did too (though I prepended all URLs with
a "no place like home" IP, allowing me to see when it calls home, and with
what).

But take care when creating a new profile though, as you than need to do all
of that again*. And you better do that while being offline, otherwise
you're too late. :-)

*you can change the default settings file in the browser\omni.ja lib though.

Also, it will not stop those NewTab tiles from connecting to all stored URLs
(needs some more tampering of that omni.ja).

But I wanted to se if I could get it to behave before judging it though.
And that ment that I tried to use its own settings to get it to stop to call
out. It turns out I can stop quite a few, but definitily not all that way.
And than there is the brain-dead "no matter if you use it or not, we will
retrieve it nonetheless" NewTab shennigans ofcourse.

I'm using FF52 with a custom homepage. I'm
not aware of it calling home to anything.


I'm also using a custom homepage. But *every time* I start FF the first
thing it tries to do is to connect to both locations as well as tiles.
Even though I've set geo.enabled to false, and NewTab to a blank page.

Why don't you have doubleclick in your HOSTS file?


I did not think I would need to, not with RequestPolicy installed. But
yes, I did as soon as I noticed. Though by deleting the contents of
NewTab.js (inside the browser/omni.ja file) it will not try to call out that
way anymore (actually, I replaced it with a few lines to display my custom
homepage again).

But actually thats pretty-much the problem: Instead of having a
well-behaving browser it "just does stuff" and I have to try to box it in.
I don't know about you, but to me that feels like having a guest you cannot
trust not to ransack your house. :-(

I think I would love it to have a browser which only visits the webpages I
direct it too and the resources it contains - filterable (by plugins)
ofcourse. Nothing more, nothing less. You know, a *well-behaved* FF.
Yeah, I'll just dream on. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


  #56  
Old Yesterday, 07:52 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
R.Wieser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 651
Default Latest Firefox ESR

Paul,

Posts to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general are archived on Google Groups.

Posts to alt.windows7.general are not archived.

Crossposting to both groups, should cause it to be archived on GG.
The "microsoft.public.windowsxp.general" helps ensure it's captured.


You don't get it, do you ? By chopping off
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general from it I would not see my own post
appear, and neither would I see any responses to it. It would be as if the
thread suddenly died.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


  #57  
Old Yesterday, 09:52 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,880
Default Latest Firefox ESR

In message , Paul
writes:
R.Wieser wrote:
Peter,
I see you've changed the follow-up to alt.windows7.general. I do
not visit that newsgroup (guess which newsgroup I'm reading and
posting in :-) ). Further communication would therefore be rather
hard ...
Also, you DO NOT DO THAT. At least not without clearly mentioning
it.


+1.

As for your suggestion :

Pale Moon?

I see that the last version for XP (which is what I'm running) is
version 26.5.0 from 09/16 (two years old). Apart from some "we fixed
issue X" entries there is no indication which features it has
(features I want/need, but also features I definitily do *not* want).
As such I cannot say if it would be better (or worse!) than what I
currently have.
So thank you, but I don't think "I will just hope for the best" and
replace my functioning browser with it.


You can install it _as well as_ your "functioning" browser; in fact last
time I tried it (though that _was_ some years ago, and under XP), that
was the default way it installed itself. (Well, I can't remember if it
defaulted to making itself the default browser - though if it did, I'm
sure you had the option to say no - but it certainly didn't uninstall
any existing browser.)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


Posts to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general are archived on Google Groups.

Posts to alt.windows7.general are not archived.

Crossposting to both groups, should cause it to be archived on GG.
The "microsoft.public.windowsxp.general" helps ensure it's captured.

Paul

Good thinking; but that's justification for _adding_ a 'group, not
_changing_ the list (i. e. adding one and _removing_ another). (And even
_adding_ should usually be done by including a comment saying you're
doing so, though I admit I don't always - except in one group who get
very cross if I crosspost even if I _do_ tell them; they like to think
they're in their own little world and the rest of the world either
doesn't exist, or can go hang. I still _do_ crosspost from there
occasionally though!)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Sarcasm: Barbed ire
  #58  
Old Yesterday, 10:16 PM posted to alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,629
Default Latest Firefox ESR

"R.Wieser" wrote

|
| But actually thats pretty-much the problem: Instead of having a
| well-behaving browser it "just does stuff" and I have to try to box it in.
| I don't know about you, but to me that feels like having a guest you
cannot
| trust not to ransack your house. :-(
|
Yes. I feel similarly. But it seems to be the lesser
of the evils. They keep adding crap like geo-location
and push, and we just have to keep track of it.

I guess I think of it kind of like.... FF is a flakey but
well meaning friend who often shows up trying to
sell me some new junk. But my Microsoft friend is
usually drunk and probably has venereal diseases.
And nothing we do together ever works out. So I don't
like to do much with that one. While my Google friend
is no friend at all. Just a sleazeball trying to record my
activities to sell to someone else, or trying to get
me to buy into some product he's getting a cut of.
And my Apple friend.... that one can't even seem to
find my house. If it did I'm sure it would be expensive
or spyware or both. So in context, FF seems like
a nice guy.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.