What browser can replace my Chrome?

[Cammygirl192]

More on topic I am kind of leery of using a browser based on an older version of FF although I suppose that 27 isn't so bad as I was imagining it to be 3.x or 4.x. I am definitely concerned about using a browser based on the antiquated Netscape. Are these forks completely up to date with all of the fixes and patches for the recently discovered major security flaws or are they just rehashes of the old browsers to appease holdouts?

The patches should be fairly up-to-date and working fine, I've not heard of many exploit issues directly rendered by SeaMonkey, since both of them use the Gecko engine. However SeaMonkey more or less has a bigger open community goal than Firefox seems to: FF is more about making a modern browser while SM is more about the community.

It might also be better to compile a stable version yourself rather than install the 2.40 version too, just to note.

 

[Vistaar]

IMO Vista is much more secure than XP due to UAC especially if users usually run as a standard user instead of an admin...My biggest concern for older versions of windows is when antimalware vendors stop supporting them. Secondary to that is when browsers stop pushing compatible versions or when Flash stops updating.

Good point about UAC, the concept is much like sandboxing. I rarely open a browser as administrator myself. Even though http://www.vistax64.com/system-security/304411-vista-no-longer-supported-some-security-software.html, the selection is still quite large. Webroot has promised to support XP until 2019. Vista might not be so fortunate, but I believe that MSE definition updates will be obtainable for as long as Windows 7 is supported, if not longer. IMO browsers will prove to be the downfall of both XP and Vista. Whenever Firefox finally ends support for XP, I'm afraid that Vista will be swept out with the trash. Bottom line: Firefox is my choice too.

 

[townsbg]

I hardly ever run an admin account on my VMs or my Mac anymore unless I need the elevated privileges for an extended period of time. Why do you think that Webroot would support XP longer than Vista?

 

[Cammygirl192]

Because a lot more have used XP than have ever used Vista, I suppose.
Customer demand dictated even Microsoft to extend support.

 

[ilikefree]

Don't think of Pale Moon as an older version of Firefox, it is a very up to date modern browser.
I said it looked like an earlier version of Firefox meaning things like tabs on bottom.
It is just looks not function that is old.

 

[Cammygirl192]

Don't think of Pale Moon as an older version of Firefox, it is a very up to date modern browser.
I said it looked like an earlier version of Firefox meaning things like tabs on bottom.
It is just looks not function that is old.

Well said, it has now basically become its own thing, I remember when it still used to use Gecko at 25.7.3 or whenever, that was when I first tried it.

 

[erpster4]

Good point about UAC, the concept is much like sandboxing. I rarely open a browser as administrator myself. Even though http://www.vistax64.com/system-security/304411-vista-no-longer-supported-some-security-software.html, the selection is still quite large. Webroot has promised to support XP until 2019. Vista might not be so fortunate, but I believe that MSE definition updates will be obtainable for as long as Windows 7 is supported, if not longer. IMO browsers will prove to be the downfall of both XP and Vista. Whenever Firefox finally ends support for XP, I'm afraid that Vista will be swept out with the trash. Bottom line: Firefox is my choice too.

Firefox will end support for XP & Vista right around version 52 or 53 as versions 51 & 52 ESR will be the last ones to support XP/Vista:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1303827

 

[Vistaar]

Firefox will end support for XP & Vista...

Yes, Brink posted a Vista News item about 3 weeks ago: http://www.vistax64.com/vista-news/304724-firefox-53-will-drop-support-windows-xp-vista.html. There has still been no official announcement from Mozilla (I'm keeping an eye on https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/), so the details might change; but bugzilla posts leave little doubt that they are planning to end support.

Pale Moon now shines somewhat more brightly in my eyes; but it seems unlikely that NPAPI plugins will support Vista much longer than Mozilla, so Pale Moon and SeaMonkey might also prove to be less than ideal in the long run. Forum member virtual6 thinks we can persevere by using Sandboxie for added browser security.

Since the Chromium Project already ended support for Vista six months ago, it is almost absurd to imagine that any Chromium-based browser or PPAPI plugin will support Vista any longer than Firefox. Nevertheless, I have lately been trying to find out more about the Chromium-based options. I wonder if any forum member is currently using Slimjet? Slimjet 11 might be the only browser based on Chromium 51 that supports Vista; however it might not be possible to update its embedded pepperflash on Vista, and Slimjet 12 isn't going to support Vista: Both XP and Vista users will be supported on Slimjet 10 branch | Slimjet Developer's Blog. On the other hand, Slimjet promises continued support for Slimjet 10. That version still supports NPAPI plugins, so it might be possible to use the NPAPI Flash Player instead of the embedded Chrome version. Certain other Chromium-based browsers such as Opera 36 use a non-embedded Flash Player PPAPI plugin that can readily be updated. Flash Player PPAPI version 23.0.0.162 evidently did not function with Vista or XP, but Adobe appears to have resolved that issue with version 23.0.0.185: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2208589.

 

[sant14]

i am using Slimjet 12 about a week now. It is based on Chromium 53.0.2785.89 and it has not any problem with flash...they have repaired that.
You can download Slimjet 12 from http://www.slimjetbrowser.com/release/sjtsetup_x86.exe
or portable version http://www.slimjetbrowser.com/release/sjt7z_x86.exe

If you want a Chromium base browser, then there is one more choice, the Yandex browser
The version 16.9.1 is based on Chromium 52.0.2743.116 and the link is https://browser.yandex.com/desktop/main/

 

[Vistaar]

i am using Slimjet 12 about a week now. It is based on Chromium 53.0.2785.89 and it has not any problem with flash...they have repaired that.

What version of Flash does Slimjet 12 have? My main concern is whether the embedded Flash can ever be updated on Vista, but it would be even worse if it did not work to begin with.

 

[sant14]

the flash version is 23.0.0.185

 

[Vistaar]

the flash version is 23.0.0.185

That is the current version released on October 11, which is encouraging. Is there a simple way to manually update Flash?

I will probably try Slimjet 10 (based on Chromium 50) before long, since that is where continued support for Vista is being promised - in fact their download site currently redirects Vista users to version 10.0.10.0, released on October 4 (see their October 6 entry Both XP and Vista users will be supported on Slimjet 10 branch | Slimjet Developer's Blog). Slimjet Version History says this about version 10.0.10.0:

Disabled auto-update of flash plugins for vista users to avoid compatibility issues. (Flash v23 or later doesn't support xp or vista)

Slimjet developers evidently assumed that Flash 23.0.0.162 PPAPI's incompatibility with Vista was a permanent end of support, but it was actually just a bug that Adobe has now fixed. Still, Adobe will sooner or later end PPAPI support for Vista, so auto-update might be more trouble than it's worth, if manual updates are not terribly difficult.

 

[Vistaar]

I'm a Slimjet newbie now, using version 10.0.11.0 (released October 20) which includes the current PepperFlash version 23.0.0.185 that works on Vista (at least with 32-bit Slimjet). I can also watch YouTube videos using HTML5 by deselecting the default Misc setting "Force the use of flash player on youtube.com."

CCleaner Free does not appear to support Slimjet, but I will try adding CCEnhancer before long. Of course Slimjet has settings to clean selected items upon exit.

I use Security Essentials, which was a concern for me because Microsoft only claims to support IE and Firefox. However I visited the AMTSO testing site discussed earlier in this thread using Slimjet, and MSE was able to block the EICAR test file. If your antivirus explicitly supports Chrome, so much the better.

 

[Cammygirl192]

I was having problems installing the 64-bit version of SlimJet in the past, but your 32-bit link works perfectly. Congrats, I can now use a great browser!

 

[Vistaar]

I was having problems installing the 64-bit version of SlimJet in the past, but your 32-bit link works perfectly. Congrats, I can now use a great browser!

Hello Cammygirl192. It's a pity that hardly any 64-bit browsers support Vista, but I don't think Flash Player supports 64-bit browsers on Vista anyway (correct me if I'm wrong). I assume that you have now installed Slimjet 12.0.5.0? I have recently switched to that version myself. Contrary to Slimjet's October 6 blog entry stating that Slimjet 12 "is not able to load any plugins under Vista," I have found that sant14 was quite correct about pepperflash 23.0.0.185 working well, and Chromium PDF Viewer also. One thing I dislike about Slimjet is the Chromish inability to manually update the embedded pepperflash to the latest 23.0.0.205 version. (I have been hesitant to bump this thread because forum visitors might miss Brink's "Latest version of Adobe Flash Player" post.) We must await a Slimjet update to get a Flash update? Still, it's too bad that Slimjet does not plan to maintain a Slimjet 12 branch on behalf of Vista, so I will eventually have to move back to Slimjet 10 with the XP diehards.

One thing I like about Slimjet 10.0.11.0 is that it still has support for NPAPI plugins. Since my last post in this thread, I found that it is possible to switch between pepperflash and the NPAPI version installed for Firefox, including the latest 23.0.0.205 security update. That might prove to be important if Adobe ends PPAPI support for Vista long before NPAPI. Speaking of Adobe, I was also able to switch between Chromium PDF Viewer and Adobe Reader 11.0.18. (Contrary to a myth started by Adobe itself, Reader XI is quite compatible with Vista.)

To uninstall Slimjet, use Control Panel rather than the Start Menu item suggested by their FAQ, which failed for me.

Edit: There was another Flash update on November 8 (23.0.0.207), but still no way to update pepperflash from 23.0.0.185 in Slimjet 12.0.6.0 or 10.0.11.0. I'm tempted to give Opera 36 a try.

 

[Vistaar]

Getting back to Slimjet: I tried versions 10.0.11, 12.0.5, 12.0.6 and 12.0.7, all of which include Flash 23.0.0.185 but offer no means of updating it to the current 23.0.0.207 version. Using an outdated Flash plugin is a serious security risk (e.g. here is a Microsoft post from November 1: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/mmpc/2016/11/01/our-commitment-to-our-customers-security/ ) so I uninstalled Slimjet version 12.0.7 and installed 11.0.7, which predates their decision to disable Flash updates (see Slimjet Version History). I then checked for a pepperflash update via slimjet://components and at last received the current 23.0.0.207 version, and found that it does in fact work on Vista. For now, 11.0.7 (or perhaps 10.0.9, which I haven't actually tried yet) is the only Slimjet version I could recommend to Vista users who don't intend to keep pepperflash disabled. Hopefully Slimjet's developers will come up with a better solution for Flash updates before long.