Jorpho wrote:Jo22 wrote:I thhought most PCs are now 64Bit, XP reached its end-of-life and the main reason for 32Bit Firefox was support for x86 plugins, like Flash or Silverlight (which they want to get rid of).
And so they'll probably keep supporting 32-bit Firefox until Flash gets stamped out once and for all. That still probably won't happen for a few years yet, I reckon.
I think the same. Don't get me wrong folks, I still like XP or 98SE+KernelEX and Firefox 32Bit is nice to have, but I wished they would spend that energy for a proper 64Bit build :
Web pages have steadily increased in complexity in the last few years (lots of scripting going on behind the scene), thus requiring lots of memory even though
they look kinda bald now (modern sytle)..
I mean, there are still other Firefox forks out there with support for older systems. Like Pale Moon, for example.
Yes, it did drop XP support already, but still has a special Intel Atom and Windows XP build available.
It only requires 256 MB of free RAM, Windows XP SP3/Server 2003 or later and a processor with SSE2 capabilities (what a coincidence!) 😉
And regarding Flash.. I don't know. I've got mixed feelings about it. I mean, I know it is dated and a relic of the past.
But on the other hand, it also offered a consistent interface and looked equal on all computers. Sure, it is bad for Android and smartphones in general
(focus is on the mouse pointer), but it also has been a nice animation tool and good for browser games. Perhaps it will survive as a gaming platform..
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel
//My video channel//