things wrong with chromiumportable
and chromium and www browsers and everything in general
chromiumportable version 25.x (17xxxx) and everything before then probably doesn't work with almost everything anymore.
chromiumportable version 26.0.1410.12 (183726) is the last decent version. but everything is stupid so nothing works now.
it is the last version that doesn't have the annoying and nagging
:Google API Keys are missing. Some functionality of Chromium Portable will be disabled."
that you have to read - every time - you start it. every time. every. time. - it does not work with most "extensions" now.
"tampermonkey legacy" says it works for chromium 17 and 20. but then "incognito" is broken and says upgrade to vesion 28.
and no tampermonkeylegacy scripts seem to work for it at all. making it useless.
it is useless if you want to use any chromium scripts besides the super basic 1's like adblock plus, etc..
- also this version may have some minor problems that may not be present in earlier versions.
but - since tampermonkeylegacy apparently doesn't work well with version 28 and lower - no reason to bother. doesn't work.
chromiumportable version 27.x (19xxxx) doesn't exist. for no reason!!
chromiumportable version 28.x (19xxxx) doesn't exist. for no reason!!
chromiumportable version 29.0.1541.0 (206856) is compatible with tampermonkeylegacy and scripts do work for it.
however stupid little problems like "strawpoll.me"'s "create poll" button being broken ruin it.
and since i use stuff like that a lot - stupid little things like that add-up and get to me more than it does not.
chromiumportable version 31.0.1650.8 (226087) is like version 29.0.1541.0 (206856). has no clear benefit.
stupid things like site buttons being broken is still not fixed. - apparently not fixed for any in-between versions too.
- also you can resize the window to a minimum of 229x112. later versions are a minimum of over 340 pixels in width.
this is extremely useful if you need to work with multiple windows and need certain windows to be an extremely small size.
that and there's no reason to not take useful stuff like this out other than the meme "it will confuse stupid users".
stupid users deserve it. also they don't care in the 1st place. way to make everyone dumber. endlessly. instead of smarter.
chromiumportable version 32.0.1700.6 (233388) is even more broken.
butons don't work, drop-down menu's don't work, html5 videogames, pages, etc. freeze, high cpu usage, crashes, etc..
- since chromium 32 is the most broken version - i have no idea why we didn't get an update until chromium 35. no reason.
chromiumportable version 34.x (24xxxx) doesn't exist. for no reason!!
chromiumportable version 35.x (25xxxx) doesn't exist. for no reason!!
chromiumporable version 35.0.1916.27 (262261) does actually work. it seemingly fixes everything and has no problems.
but apparently from this version onwards you cannot copy-paste a chromiumportable folder and have it retain extension data.
that means if you want to copy-paste a chromiumportable folder and use it for other purposes -
then you will have to waste your time re-installing every single 1 of the extensions. every time. for no reason!!
chromiumportable version 36.x (26xxxx) onward has all of these problems and loses flash, etc.. for no reason!!
so in conclusion the only thing you can do is use chromium 26 or earlier and chromium 29 to 31. so. now everything sucks.
by the way firefoxportable version 28 isn't even portable and doesn't contain your data in its folder at all. sucks.
operaportable-(chrome) is even worse because they have a default minimum width of 500 pixels for no reason. 12 was small.
googlechromeportable depends on downloading it from google and doesn't work. google is stupid. it is the worst of all.
however. apparently no one really talks about this. everyone has apparently given up fighting against it.
you're still reading this. when a couple of guys, who were up to no good, started making trouble in my neighborhood...
so. chromiumportable sucks, apparently everyone-but-me's become complacent animals, everything sucks. the end.
too long; didn't read: everything is stupid and almost everyone is really dumb.
also i apologize for this being "too long; didn't read". i originally intended this to be a lot shorter. so i'm sorry...
thank you...
You can't stay on a browser forever and expect shit to keep working. Surely there's a way to fix Flash in recent versions, it's open source.
>>693427202
Yes you can. And it wasn't working back then. Doesn't work. It's not only flash. Alright then do it. You can't? Well we're right back where we started. Easier said than done. Doesn't work. All of those words don't help. I need something that "just werks" right now.
If you want 4chan X working with stuff this old, you can install an old version.
https://github.com/ccd0/4chan-x/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#v11135
>>693427795
>If you want 4chan X working with stuff this old, you can install an old version.
>
>https://github.com/ccd0/4chan-x/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#v11135
'bout time you showed up, ccd0. - I wasn't expecting anyone to show up before this thread 404'd so soon. - Certainly a lot faster than making threads in /g/ before this "auto-report" stuff.
It was already working with this before an update came out of nowhere suddenly.
I just started using chromiumportable after switching from firefox because I'm trying to be more "porable" now.
So I don't know a lot of stuff like how to turn off extension updates in tampermonkey; Also I was using greasemonkey and not tampermonkey, etc., etc...
Anyway. Trying that now, I guess... Thank you, I guess...
>>693427568
Not to mention jewgle obscures and makes shit difficult to get on purpose. They shove their "un-open" "chrome" shit down everyone's throats then have "chromium" be difficult to download for a lot of users and not automatically update etc.. Even "chrome" portable - which I wanted to try - only came with online installers and jewgle didn't let you download it anymore. Jewgle is shit.
I know Debian has Flash working in their build of Chromium so it should be possible to get it working, at least in principle. It does require downloading Chrome to get a copy of Flash, though.
>>693428063
>I know Debian has Flash working in their build of Chromium so it should be possible to get it working, at least in principle. It does require downloading Chrome to get a copy of Flash, though.
Oh. Well. Thank you for that information.
To tell you the truth I want to push towards gnu linux debian ubuntu whatever. That's part of why I'm trying portable by itself. But I don't have enough computing power to run gnu linux and windows at the same time blah blah blah whatever you guys know where i'm going with this.
If only chromeportable installers were available instaed of downloading from jewgle...
Also again I apologize for the thread. To be honest this thread was sort of an "autism macro" "meme" joke since it became so long; but with some actual substance in it anyway. I wasn't expecting any responses, or to get errors, or for the errors to be responded to so quickly, etc.. Yeah, sorry about all this...
Anyway. I appreciate the suggestion and help again. As always. Thank you.
Jewgle is run by the jews.
Fucking jews...
>>693427795
>If you want 4chan X working with stuff this old, you can install an old version.
>
>https://github.com/ccd0/4chan-x/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#v11135
I'm using the same version of chromiumportable on an alternate computer that didn't get the 4chan-x "update".
ChromiumPortable 31.0.1650.8 (226087) - Tampermonkey Legacy 3.9.202 - 4chan X 1.12.0.8
Interestingly... it says that those are the same versions on this 1 that I'm on now that is broken.
So there was an "update" of 4chan-x to the same version and now it's broken?
Maybe something's wrong with how 4chan-x is updating chromium 31? Like it's sending the firefox or "gecko" version by mistake or something? I don't know... again; it was working before with the same version. Then it updated and stopped working; But it says it's the same version. That don't make no sense... Something's not right...
>>693428891
Maybe you just haven't refreshed the tab since the update and the old version is running in that tab?
Is the Chromium Portable that's on SourceForge the thing you're using?
>>693429251
>Is the Chromium Portable that's on SourceForge the thing you're using?
yeah. i don't know of any other 1's. so yeah.
>>693429122
>Maybe you just haven't refreshed the tab since the update and the old version is running in that tab?
nah that's not it...
i should also mention that it's technically working right now. i'm just getting a lot of error messages whenever i go onto a new page; or when a new post appears. otherwise no error messages apparently...
also i'm somewhat limited in what i can do since i reformatted my computer because i thought i had an undetectable critical cpu error or something. but it was only chromiumportable 32 sucking. 31 would've solved it... but i'm glad i did. i wanted to push myself to attempt to be portable - or as portable as possible anyway. still. don't quite have everything setup like i did before, and stuff...
>>693429641
Well, based on the error messages, Quote Threading isn't working. And whatever else the error messages mention. Which will be whatever uses the Set class, which 4chan X now assumes your browser has instead of trying to polyfill it.
>>693429465
I'm seeing instructions for copying Flash from Chrome portable. Are those not working?
>>693430426
Just tested it, seems like they aren't.
>>693431667
Actually I think I downloaded the wrong version, checking again.
>>693431931
I did. The Flash copying thing works for me (Win10, Chromium Portable 53.0.2783.4 64-bit from the SourceForge page, Chrome Portable 51.0.2704.106 x64 from portableapps.com, linked from the help page).
alright i'm ready.
finally. after everyone probably left. and i'm in "didn't read" mode until i get this done and post this.
Need some kind of alternative to dropbox that can be posted here that isn't url-banned to post things like zip files etc.. Please post suggestions, anyone.
It took a long time to re-install dropbox and re-download and uploading everything at 56k.
I'm not on dial-up. It just said it was uploading at 56k.
Dropbox sucks. Too.
This one doesn't work after it automatically updated.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/155802973/31.0.1650.8%20%28226087%29%202%202.zip
This one works and it didn't automatically update.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/155802973/31.0.1650.8%20%28226087%29%203%203.zip
Also the main error after a new post appears is apparently that it doesn't tell me how many new posts have been posted on the tab since I last looked at the tab; Apparently.
>>693430364
>Well, based on the error messages, Quote Threading isn't working. And whatever else the error messages mention. Which will be whatever uses the Set class, which 4chan X now assumes your browser has instead of trying to polyfill it.
I don't think I have quot threading turned on. I don't know. I don't even... oh. So you're saying it's dependent on something it assumes the browser has instead of adding it itself because the browser already has it, I guess... Alright...
>>693430426
>I'm seeing instructions for copying Flash from Chrome portable. Are those not working?
I can't see it, it's tl;dr, and I probably won't be able to do anything with that information anyway. Flash works in 31 and probably some later versions. But again the main issue is that when you copy paste chromiumportable that it doesn't retain the extension data. Note that when I posted the 2 zip files of chromiumportable that all of the extensions "just werks". If I did that with version 35 or later then I wouldn't be able to send it to you. The benefits of copy-pasting and retaining extension data are endless. Also again I need the minimum width to be 340 pixels or less. You see it's too many problems to the point where I'm like "forget it" and use what "just werks", I guess...
>>693431667
>Just tested it, seems like they aren't.
I guess not and to be honest I'm not too sure what you mean. But. I'm guessing because jewgle doesn't let you download the necessary files to install an older version of chrome or chromeportable anymore and there's no way of doing that. I don't know...
Jewgle a shit. Chrome a shit. Chromium a shit. Everything a shit.
>>693431931
>Actually I think I downloaded the wrong version, checking again.
K den.
>>693432456
>I did. The Flash copying thing works for me (Win10, Chromium Portable 53.0.2783.4 64-bit from the SourceForge page, Chrome Portable 51.0.2704.106 x64 from portableapps.com, linked from the help page)
Oh. I see. Well I'm using Windows 7 because of reasons. Also again I need it to copy-paste-retain-extension-data and be a smaller window resolution than the new trash versions as well.
It's nice to be an anonymous user on "github" junk and easily report things now. Surprisingly not many have reported things. I wonder if you could ban someone for sending too many reports like I seem to be doing. It's not like I'd intentionally flood the report system with error reports, or anything...
There.
All caught up.
>>693437428
>Well I'm using Windows 7 because of reasons.
Can't really blame you there as Win10 is pretty shit in my experience, but I need it to test stuff in Edge.
>Also again I need it to copy-paste-retain-extension-data and be a smaller window resolution than the new trash versions as well.
Not sure what you mean by the copy-pasting extension data part. I tried installing 4chan X in one and making a copy of the folder, and it's still installed.
>>693437741
>Can't really blame you there as Win10 is pretty shit in my experience, but I need it to test stuff in Edge.
Ah. I understand.
>Not sure what you mean by the copy-pasting extension data part. I tried installing 4chan X in one and making a copy of the folder, and it's still installed.
Alright basically when you take chromiumporable 35 and past that and you copy that folder and paste that folder and open up that browser then all of the extensions are gone and you have to re-install them 1 by 1. I'm surprised if what you say is true. That would imply that that is fixed in later versions. I remember trying something like version 41 and 45 in the past and that not working; So I assumed it would never be fixed; Just like not being able to make the window really small or any size you want; For no reason. Well if flash is fixed and there's a way to retain extension data then there's still the issue of not being able to make the minimal size of a window small. Or in particularly 340 pixels or less. Believe it or not this is pretty critical. and important to me. Because of the way I do things. Still. Thank you.
What I want is so simple. That is the conflict...
>>693438054
Minimum size for me seems to be 275x125px.
I also have another program called "Sizer" that lets you easily see the exact sizes of windows by putting the arrow on the edge and clicking down to change its size.
It can also easily snap windows to edges of the screen. You right click a window and select what you wanna do. It doesn't work in everything tho.
Ironically not in any of the "native" windows 7 applications such as windows explorer, notepad, paint 7, etc.. So I've been using stuff like tednpad, mspaintxp clone for winodws 7, etc. - that does let you manipulate the windows.
Usually foss software gives sizer the information to change stuff and non-foss usually doesn't. Again tednpad does. But stuff like speccy doesn't.
Anyway, maybe that'll help, anyone...
36 WHAT THE FUCK
GET THE LATEST PORTABLE BUILD OFF WOOLYSS, OR RUN CHROME.EXE FROM THE BIN DIRECTORY OF THE X-CHROMIUM RELEASE
CURRENT VERSION IS 54 OR SOME SHIT
I put the sizer I use in a zip file.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/155802973/Sizer.zip
You can use it; if you want to.
That's what I do.
I guess someone could scream "virus" or something but to be honest if you ever do strawpoll's in an o.p. vs. the inside of a thread then it's usually 10's and 100's of votes in the o.p. and 0 to 10 votes for things posted in the thread. And doing it manually with this whole setup. It's inefficient. And stupid to try it with cautious users. It's more efficient to do it with spam-bots to target stupid users, etc... Ah, well, whatever...
It's very difficult to get a feel for what's going on in the thread when you're doing other things and can't see the amount of new posts in a thread.
All of that and everything still works in the version that didn't automatically update; By the way.
>>693438336
>Minimum size for me seems to be 275x125px.
In the new version?!! Wow. Okay... Uhh... yeah. I guess if extension data is kept, flash works, and I can make the window really small - Maybe I can try to use a newer version of chromiumporable again.
Any specific recommendations?
Also how to set it up, etc... Like re-add flash to chromiumporable, etc...
I never had to do this before, so I never did this before, so I don't know how to do it.
>>693438892
For the Flash thing there are instructions in the Help.html file that comes with it. It's just installing Chrome Portable and copying two files from there to a folder you make in the Chromium portable directory.
>>693438527
54 WHAT THE FUCK
GET THE JUST WERKS VERSION OFF SOUREFORGE, OR GET SOMETHING HTAT JUST WERKS
JUST WERKS VERSION IS 31 OR SOME SHIT
>>693438527
>36 WHAT THE FUCK
I don't use 36. I use chromiumporable 26 and 31. It's from 2012 to 2014. Windows XP and Windows 7 is older. It's not that long ago.
>>693438527
>GET THE LATEST PORTABLE BUILD OFF WOOLYSS, OR RUN CHROME.EXE FROM THE BIN DIRECTORY OF THE X-CHROMIUM RELEASE
I don't know what that is. I don't know how to do that. I don't know what that is.
>>693438527
>CURRENT VERSION IS 54 OR SOME SHIT
Yeah, but when I downloaded the latest version - back then - everything was broken for no reason.
>>693439063
Oh alright. Yeah; I'll try... Thank you...
>>693439245
54 JEST WERKZ
THERES EVEN A SCRIPT FOR UPDATING FLASH
>>693439063
I'm assuming you mean chromiumportrable 53.0.2783.4 ; by the way...
>>693439772
Yeah, that's the one I tried. It's probably similar in the others, but I don't know without testing.
>"Quote Threading" crashed on node Post No.693439843 (b). [report]
ReferenceError: Set is not defined
(4chan X ccd0 v1.12.0.8 userscript on blink at 21877,4791,22725,17146,16934)
>Chromium Portable | PortableApps.com Installer
>( i ) Please close all instances of Chromium portable and then click OK.
>The portable app can not be upgraded while it is running.
Alright.
Here I gooo...
>Error: You cannot delete a post this old.
drat
>>693440086
It's all being archived anyway. Surprisingly archived.moe is actually working for this thread.
>>693439772
>chromiumportrable 53.0.2783.4
>>693439843
>Yeah, that's the one I tried. It's probably similar in the others, but I don't know without testing.
Are you sure? The lowest resolution I get with that is 343x110. Can you check with sizer? Are you sure it's that exact version? If it is - does it seriously let you make the window smaller only because you're using windows 10? I don't get it.
ChromiumPortable Version 53.0.2783.4
also it doesn't say the build because jewgle sucks and new neo future chromiumportable sucks too
also if you haven't already i recommend that you download these 2 zip files and compare them. again 1 works and 1 doesn't. again 1 broke after an update. maybe you can fix that for users who do want to use older versions because of reasons.
you know. since it was already working until apparently the "update" or something that apparently didn't change the version number broke it, and stuff...
>jewgle chromium doesn't work with windows xp since version 49
jewgle chromium is shit.
>jewgle chromium 49 doesn't scale below 348x121
jewgle chromium is shit.
>>693441128
If you want to use old browsers that worked before for whatever reason, you should be able to install an old version from the changelog and have it work at least until it's broken by 4chan (which doesn't happen that often). The versions linked in the changelog deliberately have auto-update disabled. The archive list can update separately from the script now, so that's not a problem anymore. It's really not a good idea to run ancient versions of web browsers due to all the exploits, though. These things are old enough that they've probably already published the details of all the exploits they patched. I know they've done that for Firefox 28, and they had a working example where a test page could use a notification to open up calc.exe (and by implication, run something more sinister).
>>693439556
>Not sure what you're saying here; is it that you're opening Strawpoll in a bunch of tiny windows so you can vote multiple times quickly?
No. Not at all. I mean if you post a link to anything that isn't actual full-jew botnet like jewtube etc. then stupid people can spam "virus". So. It's a preemptive disclaimer. The example given there is saying for example is that if you post something like a strawpoll link in an o.p. then it will get a lot of responses but if you post 1 in the thread then it will get little to no responses. So that'd mean that you'd get little to no responses to anyone downloading the zip file - if I was trying to spread a virus. Etc., etc...
>>693440180
>It's all being archived anyway. Surprisingly archived.moe is actually working for this thread.
Yeah I know. But still. Yeah I found that out before. "i.k.r.". Thank you for the information.
>>693441026
I wouldn't be surprised. On Debian (running Gnome) the minimum size seems to be 369x86, albeit with Chromium 51.
You can open really small windows using window.open:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8681903/browser-doesnt-scale-below-400px
>>693426298
>by the way firefoxportable version 28 isn't even portable and doesn't contain your data in its folder at all. sucks.
Do recent versions of Firefox Portable have this bug?
>>693444998
>>by the way firefoxportable version 28 isn't even portable and doesn't contain your data in its folder at all. sucks.
>Do recent versions of Firefox Portable have this bug?
I don't know. Is it a bug? Assumed it was always like that.
I don't like how firefoxportable and firefox in general changed after version 28. I can't manipulate or change anything. So now instead of firefox having more features and being more customization etc. than chromium it's just a shitty slower less feature-rich imitation of chromium. So. A lot of reasons I dislike firefox as well.
But another big reason not to use firefoxportable is that I can't run multiple instances at the same time. That's 1 of chromium's key advantages.
I still run firefoxportable 28 sometimes. There's just no huge purpose to it at this point. Other than being able to restore closed tabs; And having a "warning" for when you are going to close a window with multiple tabs open.
I don't know...
>>693443789
>You can open really small windows using window.open:
>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8681903/browser-doesnt-scale-below-400px
Well thank you for the help but I need the 1st window I open to be a really small size. Every time. It doesn't work if a new window open is larger than I need it to be and I open a smaller window.
That and it's a tedious step step that keeps adding up and wasting time vs. "just werks". I really dislike it when everyone does stupid arbitrary stuff like this. Taking away more options from everyone for no reason. Instead of letting everyone decide for themselves. The way it should be. Makes sense...
But thank you.
>>693443179
>I wouldn't be surprised. On Debian (running Gnome) the minimum size seems to be 369x86, albeit with Chromium 51.
Really?!! Really really?!! God. That's so messed up...
>>693438892
>>Minimum size for me seems to be 275x125px.
>windows 10
>275x125
>winodws 7
>343x110
>same
>version
Why.
>>693442122
>If you want to use old browsers that worked before for whatever reason, you should be able to install an old version from the changelog and have it work at least until it's broken by 4chan (which doesn't happen that often). The versions linked in the changelog deliberately have auto-update disabled. The archive list can update separately from the script now, so that's not a problem anymore. It's really not a good idea to run ancient versions of web browsers due to all the exploits, though. These things are old enough that they've probably already published the details of all the exploits they patched. I know they've done that for Firefox 28, and they had a working example where a test page could use a notification to open up calc.exe (and by implication, run something more sinister).
I assumed you're ccd0 or something and know why they worked for whatever reason. Again; there's your broken and working 1 in self-contained portable zip files. So the answer should be right there. I found the page you post it before but lost it; So it could be easier to find, I guess. Good the versions in the changelog have auto-update disabled. Alright, good. It's not ancient. It's from a relatively short time ago. I'm probably going to act like 2 years ago and 2 years from now etc. is really ancient and I'm so old etc. from now on. I have an anti-virus and I don't visit a lot of things anyway. That and chromium is notoriously safe anyway; Isn't it. It should be good enough for basic protection. Not to mention I have an up-to-date definition adblock plus and even ghostery also helping. No need to block something multiple times that's already blocked. But I get what you're saying.
>>693442122
- Yeah, don't they always... tl;dr junk nobody cares about. Did they, well that's probably under idle circumstances... amazing how the built-in calculator can be used to run something more sinister like you imply. But considering and remembering that everything is a computer in the end then I guess it's not too far-fetched. My guess is that most won't go thru that trouble and again the anti-virus and as-up-to-date-as-possible add-on's probably block all of that anyway; Unlike their fake and worst-case-scenario nothing-stopping-the-virus-besides-the-www-browser b.s. fake scenario.
Again if things worked then I'd use it. If things didn't have stupid updates for no reason then I'd use it. I used to always update firefox and chromium all of the time. Now everything sucks. So. Gotta use what "just werks".
Then any time you make a suggestion or talk about how something's shit you gotta just sit there and let the mod bully you, threaten to ban you, and ban you. Like all the rest. Instead of just fixing the fucking shit. Like you're supposed to. Mods are faggots.
And they don't do shit to fix anything or listen to anyone at all. Because they think everything has to cater to full-retard for no reason. Because they think having an "advanced" version which by implication implies that since you're advanced enough to find it then you're advanced enough to use it. I mean at least windows 8 onward has an option for desktop instead of no option at all. The retarded argument "'desktop' [sic] computers aren't designed to be mobile". Bullshit the world wide web wasn't designed to be "mobile" shit either. What's your point? Fucking hypocrites.
Of course. Like I said before. Allow me to repeat myself yet again. Again. I always updated everything all the time. Only when I was given a reason not to update them did I stop updating them. As before I had no reason not to update them so I updated them. So of course I wouldn't -not- update my anti-virus; As I have no reason -not- to update them. Like I said before. Makes sense...
>Error: You cannot delete posts this often.
Not being able to delete posts as many posts as fast as you want is bullshit, too.
I remember when you were able to delete as many posts as fast as you want with absolutely no limits before.
>archived anyway
Archives are bullshit, too.
I want to be able to be an anonymous user and post things without a reputation or some idiot pulling up an archive and making it like they revealed some great big secret for accessing public information and the idiots treating it like such.
Oh well...
Then again I enjoyed all the /b/ archives so far - and - like most archives - they all seem to relatively quickly all die off eventually. So it doesn't matter. Let's enjoy it, I guess...
>updated to 1.11.35
Doesn't seem to be any errors now.
Thank you.
Still sucks how the new www browsers suck.
Still sucks how the new everything sucks.
Still sucks how how everything sucks.
>>693427795
>If you want 4chan X working with stuff this old, you can install an old version.
>
>https://github.com/ccd0/4chan-x/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#v11135
It's not that old. But thank you.
Seems to work. For now.
Using the broken folder "2 2" and fixing that with that version change; by the way.
The version "3 3" continues to "just werk" without any errors. Like "2 2" did before. Since "3 3" is just copy-pasted "2 2" before the "update" broke it. Again.
>>693427795
>https://github.com/ccd0/4chan-x/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#v11135
>Some workarounds for old browsers have been dropped. Those using versions older than Chromium/Chrome 38, Maxthon 4.9, or SeaMonkey 2.35 may need to upgrade for 4chan X to work.
Why.
test
Well I'm disappointed I wasn't able to upgrade chromium to the latest version over something stupid like they still don't make the minimal window size small enough. Also disappointed that they stopped supporting windows xp after version 49. I was careful not to get my hopes up in case like something like this would happen. Still sucks. Oh well...
>>693437741
>Can't really blame you there as Win10 is pretty shit in my experience, but I need it to test stuff in Edge.
You at least foss, right?
>edge
Is that even open-source?
I'm very disappointed in all of you...
well... thanks anyway...
The phrasing of almost every single one of the posts in this thread pisses me off more than anything. Hasty, horrible structure paired with ungrateful bitching. Christ this is annoying.
>>693451668
The phrasing of only this single one posts in this thread disgusts me more than anything. Hasty, horrible structure paired with ungrateful bitching. Christ this is annoying.
>tfw when part of something that can cause so much anal devastation without even trying
I'll never regret joining the internet
It's like I get delivered a fresh bottle of tears every day
>>693451990
The posting of only this single one phrase in this disgust threads me more than anything. Structured, horrible haste bitched with ungrateful pairing. Christ this is annoying.
>>693452874
The singling of this post phrase one this in thread disgusts more me anything than. Horrible, structured bitched haste ungrateful with pairing. Christ this is annoying.
>>693453241
Anything singling one of this phrase post the confuse in disgusts more anything than this me. Pairing, bitched, haste disgust with structure. Christ this is annoying.
>>693453633
Singling anything of one phrase this the post in confuse more disgusts than anything me this. Bitched, pairing, disgust haste structure with. Christ this is annoying.
