(ms has stopped delivering updates to windows 7 SSE cpu computers since juli or august). and windows 7 cant update any longer without SSE2, there is EOL of such systems right now.
That's great to know that FF-ESR 45.90 is more secure than the regular FF 49.0X.īrummelchen wrote:there exist NO current firefox build for XP, neither with´or with or without SSE2. In the meantime, I've also acquired the latest ESR 60.X version for other systems, though normally I am a Seamonkey user and am only using Firefox as a back up browser. So in this case, it was necessary to select the latest available non-SSE2 required ESR version, which was indeed ESR 45.9, which is what I've got installed now. Only ESRs will comply with that configuration switch value. Yes, the SSE2 compatibility issue was the constraint at hand hence the pre-version-49.0 requirement, but since then I've also discovered that ESRs also allows unverified plug ins / extensions to be installed without being blocked, despite the fact that in the regular Firefox consumer releases, it ignores the ABOUT:CONFIG parameters that disables the plug in signatures requirements. The ESR versions were based on 10.0, 17.0, 24.0, 31.0, 38.0, 45.0, 52.0 and now 60.0 The only reason why you could not use Firefox 49.0 or later versions on Windows is because the CPU you have does not support SSE2. I'm sure there are other reasons, but to me that was enough to keep things that way instead of following what El Capitan permits.James wrote:There was no ESR based on 48.0.
I've got also 1Password 4 that's still working nicely between all my current browsers: if I switch to Quantum, I have to switch to 1P6 or Enpass and lose that compatibility. It's very likely that I switch back to the latest FF ESR when Chromium drops MacOS 10.11 and Waterfox abandon its pre-Quantum core - as it was the reason I switched from FF to WTF. My current main browser is Chromium, my second choice is Waterfox. maff files to be the best and lightest way to store web pages, I continue storing new pages this way - I think I've got years in front of me before changing computer to something that won't support FF52 ESR in some way (even if at some point it might be through a virtual machine). maff files stored everywhere and it's absolutely out of the question for me to spend hours converting them, so the easiest and most reliable way to read them is with FF52. I want to point out why it's still pertinent to use FF52 ESR - together with other browsers or even the most recent version of FF.įirst of all, I've got a whole lotta.
0 kommentar(er)
