[Nomen]

What is the latest (or last) version of Firefox that can run more-or-less trouble-free on a win-98se system with KernelEx?

Also, for any win-98 system that has had IE removed from it - does that have any impact on web-browsing (using other browsers) in terms of causing problems with proper rendering of web pages, handing scripts (jscript, etc) ?

[rainyd]

Nomen, on 20 February 2013 - 07:01 AM, said:

What is the latest (or last) version of Firefox that can run more-or-less trouble-free on a win-98se system with KernelEx?

Also, for any win-98 system that has had IE removed from it - does that have any impact on web-browsing (using other browsers) in terms of causing problems with proper rendering of web pages, handing scripts (jscript, etc) ?

As far as I know Firefox 3.6.28 is the last version which you can use without problem (maybe except Java support).
Of course it's possible to run newer versions but there will be issues with bookmarks/history etc.

Regarding your second question: it shouldn't have any.
Alternate browsers use their own rendering engines - Firefox/Gecko and Opera/Presto.

http://en.wikipedia...._browser_engine
http://en.wikipedia....browser_engines

This post has been edited by rainyd: 20 February 2013 - 08:05 AM

[Nomen]

The " KernelEx Apps Compatibility List" thread lists version 10.0.2 as being compatible with Kex. Explain?

When it comes to removing IE from a win-98 system, I was under the impression that there are some (many?) dll files that are associated with IE that are needed (or are useful) in terms of rendering web content. Especially scripting (like jscript).

For example, the 5.7 scripting host update for win-98 requires IE 5.5 or 6.

So my basic question is, if you go to the trouble of setting up a win-98 system and strip IE from it, do you lose something in terms of web functionality?

One last question: If someone does not like or want to use Opera, and if they have a Win-98 system without IE, and if they have KernelEx, then what is the most recent, most advanced, most functional (working history, bookmarks, etc), most HTML5-compatible browser available to them?

[jds]

Nomen, on 20 February 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

The " KernelEx Apps Compatibility List" thread lists version 10.0.2 as being compatible with Kex. Explain?

When it comes to removing IE from a win-98 system, I was under the impression that there are some (many?) dll files that are associated with IE that are needed (or are useful) in terms of rendering web content. Especially scripting (like jscript).

For example, the 5.7 scripting host update for win-98 requires IE 5.5 or 6.

So my basic question is, if you go to the trouble of setting up a win-98 system and strip IE from it, do you lose something in terms of web functionality?

One last question: If someone does not like or want to use Opera, and if they have a Win-98 system without IE, and if they have KernelEx, then what is the most recent, most advanced, most functional (working history, bookmarks, etc), most HTML5-compatible browser available to them?

AFAIK, FF 10 can be made to work but requires some trickery. For trouble-free, there's 8.01 and (I've less experience with this one) 9.01. If you need Java (not to be confused with JS) support, then you need 3.5.

Yes, IE is required by some other things, which may or may not be things required by you.

I don't know much about HTML 5 or which browsers support it. BTW, Opera 12.02 works very well.

Joe.

[schwups]

HTML5 Test

[LostInSpace2012]

if you use a 56k dialup modem like me.... I use Firefox 3.5.19 with javascript turned off.

This is my preferred KernelEx browser.

....believe it or not, Firefox 3.5 still works pretty good. It's a good browser for the "lower end" Win9x machines with under 256 MB ram.

[Nomen]

I tried running several version of FF 3.x.y (don't recall what x.y was) a few years ago, and couldn't tolerate it because it was drawing thin white lines across any bitmapped images that were on the web-page I was viewing. These lines would appear when I scrolled the page such that the images were partially out of view and they were scrolled up or down into view. The white lines would appear at the cut-point where that portion of the image was out-of-view.

I very likely might have had KernelEx version 3.6 installed at that time - don't know if that's a factor or not. Have also changed a few system DLL files since then...

[LostInSpace2012]

Those white lines appear for me as well. And I'm using version 4.5.1.