![]() ![]() (For instance, I never got the sandboxing working). Eventually, I end up giving up and going back to it after a few months, then I give up that, as he tried to backport it several times as well and we shared informations on Skype, but we both failed. In the meantime, things changes, new commits are done and so on, but even if I stick with an "old" version, it just doesn't work. It's a project I hate, 'cause I always end up starting it, then I find something that has to be re-implemented, I do it, but I either break it or produce a several number of bugs, then, after fixing those bugs, I end up having memory leak issues and once I get them sorted, I go on with the code and I find another thing that has to be re-implemented. Open-source developers who published commits had no say on this whatsoever (there were many devs that were willing to drop XP support, of course, but there were others that didn't want to as well).Īnyway, even if I didn't post on MSFN my failures, I tried to backport Chromium several times during these years. I didn't like the decision Google took to remove support for XP and Vista, especially 'cause the project is open source, but only for the things they like. I love and hate Chromium at the same time. 0 in the dev channel I keep a portable copy of it on my system just for fun, it's not used for normal browsing: PS: For the history of it, the last build on Vista SP2 with Aero turned ON was Google Chrome. It emerged that this was actually a hoax/cheat the OS used to generate the shot is Win7 SP1 64-bit, disguised as Windows Vista (much like 's guide found in his signature.) ![]() The second screenshot in the OP is taken from 0 64-bit with the aero-disabling commits reverted. Those two screenshots posted in OP are not from his own system. I, as much as other Vista users, would be all up for this, even if it is realised purely as a challenge only, given that both Chrome 49+50 are quite outdated (in both security and performance aspects) when dealing with the web of 2019. 102 ( last Vista compatible, but not officially supported) with Aero-Glass enabled in Vista. 112 (last officially supported build on Vista) or. ![]() Two MSFN members come to mind, and but I am unsure whether they're interested in compiling Google Chrome. You would need a Win7+, 64-bit, machine with lots of RAM and a powerful multi-core CPU, MS Visual Studio 2013+, lots of time/patience and, of course, you should be well versed in that field (compiling open-source browsers in VS). The only way to properly fix this is to first grab the source for Chromium 41 (- 50?) - Chromium, yes, because Google Chrome itself is closed-source - and then revert Once Google made the first move (dragging along with them all webkit-based browsers), many other software makers soon followed (they had a "nice" justification) in a trend that put Vista, 1.5 years after its official EOL, in the sorry state it is currently in. TL DR : At the time that decision was made, Vista user base was very thin, compared to either the XP or Win7+ one, so for code refactoring/simplification they decided to merge the Vista codepath to the XP one for Google, it is only numbers that count plus, that gave them a perfect opportunity to dump Vista altogether (along with XP) a whole one year prior to Vista SP2 becoming EOL by M$ (and close to 5 years before Vista's Server counterpart, Windows Server 2008 SP2, reaches EOL in Jan 2020 ). It is all explained (but not in a convincing fashion) in I do not know why Google put lines to restrict the Aero in Vista. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |