Guest teebo Posted September 28, 2008 Posted September 28, 2008 Hi! Have anyone here tried firefox 3.03 with windows98 and kernelex 0.3.5? does everything work as it should? btw, is ff3 slower than ff2 (for example on firefox recomended 500MHz/128MB computer) ? -- Använder Operas skitkassa nya e-postklient: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Guest Don Phillipson Posted September 28, 2008 Posted September 28, 2008 Re: have anyone here tried firefox3 with win98 and kernelex? "teebo" <no@mail.no> wrote in message news:op.uh7ez4zubr8ivg@300pl... > Have anyone here tried firefox 3.03 with windows98 and kernelex 0.3.5? > does everything work as it should? > > btw, is ff3 slower than ff2 (for example on firefox > recomended 500MHz/128MB computer) ? Version 3 works with WinXP, not tried with Win98. Main flaw with XP is that Mozilla mangled the HTM display routines, i.e. we should expect an upgrade soon. Clicking on a saved HTM icon gets the Windows error message "cannot recognize filetype "." or something similar. -- Don Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada)
Guest Dan Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Re: have anyone here tried firefox3 with win98 and kernelex? Thanks for letting us know about Firefox 3, Don. BTW, I certainly hope Mozilla will fix that flaw if Mozilla plans on ending Firefox 2.x in the middle of December. I can only hope Mozilla will consider extending support for Mozilla Firefox 2.x to next year especially if Mozilla Firefox 3.x is not fully ready in this regard and in regard to being fully compatible with all the extensions available for Mozilla Firefox 2.x. Sometimes, it just pays to wait but I certainly am enjoying trying out Internet Explorer 8 beta 2 for Windows XP and fortunately Microsoft fixed a problem with IE 7 on IE 8 beta 2. Anyway, my work place still uses IE 6 with Windows XP Professional computers and also with Windows Server 2003 computers. "Don Phillipson" wrote: > "teebo" <no@mail.no> wrote in message news:op.uh7ez4zubr8ivg@300pl... > > > Have anyone here tried firefox 3.03 with windows98 and kernelex 0.3.5? > > does everything work as it should? > > > > btw, is ff3 slower than ff2 (for example on firefox > > recomended 500MHz/128MB computer) ? > > Version 3 works with WinXP, not tried with Win98. > Main flaw with XP is that Mozilla mangled the HTM > display routines, i.e. we should expect an upgrade soon. > Clicking on a saved HTM icon gets the Windows error > message "cannot recognize filetype "." or something similar. > > -- > Don Phillipson > Carlsbad Springs > (Ottawa, Canada) > > >
Guest someone watching Posted October 3, 2008 Posted October 3, 2008 Re: have anyone here tried firefox3 with win98 and kernelex? I tried it some time ago; all I remember is Kernelex was removed because it caused freeze-ups in 98. Was hoping it would work!
Guest Dan Posted October 3, 2008 Posted October 3, 2008 Re: have anyone here tried firefox3 with win98 and kernelex? Thanks for the reply. I guess that means that the date of the middle of December 2008 stands for Mozilla Firefox 2.x support for Windows 98 Second Edition and that Windows 98 and 98 Second Edition users will have to switch browsers to another supported browser after that date if they continue to use Windows 98 Second Edition on the 'Net and want to be more safe and secure. I may try Kernelex at the end of Mozilla Firefox 2.x support and see if it works for me with Mozilla Firefox 3.x and 98 Second Edition but there is no current need to use it since support for Mozilla Firefox 2.x continues for now. "someone watching" wrote: > I tried it some time ago; all I remember is Kernelex was removed because > it caused freeze-ups in 98. Was hoping it would work! > > >
Guest fleeting Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Re: have anyone here tried firefox3 with win98 and kernelex? "teebo" <no@mail.no> wrote in message news:op.uh7ez4zubr8ivg@300pl... > Hi! > > Have anyone here tried firefox 3.03 with windows98 and kernelex 0.3.5? > does everything work as it should? > > > btw, is ff3 slower than ff2 (for example on firefox > recomended 500MHz/128MB computer) ? does it support Star Downloader yet? I'm sticking with my early version till they do,, probably wont follow technology anyway,,, cos' the more they expand/invent, the more things stuff up. I think the biggest problem relies with users,, cos' 90% are bent on 'updating', whether to newer drives or more cpu's or larger rams....... yet they dont even know what they want it for.. chuckle. fleeting glimpse /\/\/\/\/\8
Guest Dan Posted October 8, 2008 Posted October 8, 2008 Re: have anyone here tried firefox3 with win98 and kernelex? Warning: Long and Rambling Post on Computing and Soda and Chocolate How true and the surprising thing is that many consumers and I think sometimes even businesses and the government but definitely less so with many businesses especially in a slowing economy feel the need to update and upgrade to the latest and best so supposedly there programs will work better. I don't think that Microsoft would have released the "Threat Mitigation Guide for Windows 98 and Windows NT 4" if there was not a demand by businesses and perhaps governments and some consumers for support to protect their companies and the infrastructure that businesses and governments rely on especially with expensive programs that work so well for these older operating systems. People need to start following the doctrine with computers that if it is not broken why fix it and if I do not need more capabilities then why am I asking for them. Remember, if you work in a sensitive job for the government or even in most businesses it is a good idea to just get the information you need to do your job well and only get more information when you need it because if you are compromised in the field then you can only provide what you know. I have also learned the hard way to focus on my job at hand and only ask for additional responsibilities that I know I can handle and that I have already researched. The unfortunate incidents at Albuquerque Public Schools with the computers taught me that much and more of course. I feel in this day and age backwards compatibility must meet the safety and security requirements of the modern age and the best way to do this is by having multiple computers and multiple operating systems. Sure, you can do virtual computing and it is nice but I feel virtual computing will never be as good as the real thing because it will have limitations built within the virtual operating system and more broadly within virtual computing. I for one would not want "Cloud Computing" for any sensitive and secure information especially with DOD and DHS classified and sensitive information because then the federal government is reliant upon businesses to have the same safeguards on their computers and their people that is put upon when these people are hired for the positions. The best way will always be the real thing because look at what happened at Los Alamos, New Mexico with the lost hard drives that later magically turned up behind a desk. I certainly think the hard drives were taken and whether or not the person or people were able to hack them and steal the information is relevant but the main problem was the hard drives disappeared in the first place. At my work, we had a similar problem with keys that disappeared and then locked stuff disappearing from the workplace. It was eventually resolved but the problem remains who did it and yes we have a logbook to track keys and cameras everywhere but the thefts happened in the middle of the night which made it more difficult to track. Sorry, I am getting sidetracked but my main point is that the real thing is always better than a substitute like many would say Coke from Mexico with real cane sugar is better than corn syrup Coke and I certainly think so or that chocolate made with cocoa butter is better than imitation chocolate made with vegetable oil. Finally, I was disappointed that Nestle Crunch chocolate bar that is supposedly made with richer ingredients now tasted terrible and called Nestle about it and found out that the ingredient mix was changed since production was changed from Brazil to the USA and now I certainly would not be surprised if the so-called richer chocolate was cheaper ingredients that were made to try and fool consumers because it seems that many countries are much better than the States about using real ingredients and not fake ones and I would not be surprised if that contributes to a huge weight problem in the States. "fleeting" wrote: > > "teebo" <no@mail.no> wrote in message news:op.uh7ez4zubr8ivg@300pl... > > Hi! > > > > Have anyone here tried firefox 3.03 with windows98 and kernelex 0.3.5? > > does everything work as it should? > > > > > > btw, is ff3 slower than ff2 (for example on firefox > > recomended 500MHz/128MB computer) ? > > > does it support Star Downloader yet? > I'm sticking with my early version till they do,, probably wont follow technology anyway,,, cos' > the more they expand/invent, the more things stuff up. I think the biggest problem relies with > users,, cos' 90% are bent on 'updating', whether to newer drives or more cpu's or larger > rams....... yet they dont even know what they want it for.. chuckle. > > fleeting glimpse /\/\/\/\/\8 > > >
Recommended Posts