have anyone here tried firefox3 with win98 and kernelex?

[Guest teebo]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

>

>

>