Basilisk and New Moon Ports: Best Options For Vista

[Vistaar]

Since it is no longer fashionable to read a thread before posting in it, page 2 should probably begin by reproducing the link in post #1 where the browser modifications developed by roytam1 and suggested by OP Jody Thornton can be found:

My build of New Moon (temp. name) a.k.a. Pale Moon for XP

Edit: After reaching a length of 199 pages, that thread was finally locked and a new thread was started on October 24, 2019:

My browser builds (part 2) (46 pages at the time of this edit)

MAY 2021 EDIT: After reaching a length of 198 pages, (part 2) was also locked and a third thread was started on April 23, 2021:

My Browser Builds (Part 3)

 

[Vistaar]

...I'm finding that the current build of New Moon v27.9.4 seems to be working with pages that it was previously having slowdowns and trouble rendering before. So I've abandoned the v28 build and returned to New Moon v27.

When Jody posted that back in September 2018, I was not exactly thrilled to hear that roytam1's oldest project (a modification of Pale Moon 27, which was newly unsupported and forked from Firefox 38, which was long unsupported) was also his most satisfactory project for Vista. However, it seems that Jody was not the only one to reach that conclusion. VistaLover of MSFN is perhaps the leading browser expert among the dwindling community of Vista enthusiasts, and highly praised New Moon 27 in this February 24 post. I always figured that Jody's enthusiasm was largely due to wanting an x64 browser for Vista no matter where it came from, but VistaLover is running x86!? Does this mean that about 90 percent of that enormous thread (now 120 pages and growing) could simply be disregarded?

 

[Tatl]

Since it is no longer fashionable to read a thread before posting in it, page 2 should probably begin by reproducing the link in post #1 where the browser modifications developed by roytam1 and suggested by OP Jody Thornton can be found:

My build of New Moon (temp. name) a.k.a. Pale Moon for XP

The problem with "reading the thread" is april/2018. I don't see a problem in asking in january/2019 if a new solution was found.

 

[Vistaar]

The problem with "reading the thread" is april/2018. I don't see a problem in asking in january/2019 if a new solution was found.

That is still the only place where the browsers discussed in this thread can be found. (That MSFN thread is now 133 pages.) There are no new browsers that support Windows Vista. If you want to ask about other browsers, you could always start a thread of your own.

 

[Mister E]

There are no new browsers that support Windows Vista.

To Bad I enjoy using Vista Ultimate x64 and have had some success running Seamonkey 4.90 but it still has issues. But for my needs offline it WORKS GREAT! Just my two cents (well maybe 1 cent) and One can always hope that someone with more knowledge then myself would attempt to create one. Oh and I'm a newbie to the site so hey everyone


Mister E

 

[Vistaar]

To Bad I enjoy using Vista Ultimate x64 and have had some success running Seamonkey 4.90 but it still has issues. But for my needs offline it WORKS GREAT! Just my two cents (well maybe 1 cent) and One can always hope that someone with more knowledge then myself would attempt to create one. Oh and I'm a newbie to the site so hey everyone.

Welcome to Vista Forums Mister E. One of the roytam1 modifications mentioned by OP Jody Thornton in post #18 of this thread is a derivative of SeaMonkey. (Roytam1's browser mods can all be found in an MSFN thread that is now 177 pages and growing.) I believe the last official build of SeaMonkey that could be used on Vista is 2.49.4.

There are no new browsers that support Windows Vista.

Well there are some rather new Chromium forks from China, but OP Jody Thornton's topic in the present thread was always modifications of Firefox forks from roytam1 of Hong Kong.

 

[Mister E]

Thanks for the welcome and info! I installed Serpent and Pale Moon (or is it New Moon) I think Moon is a knock off of Seamonkey. They both are working well right now. I'll wait to pass judgement after using for a while. Used the installer version created by a member which has both browsers on it. Still working on all the 2008 sever update that require man ual install. The system is very fast with the new browsers

 

[Vistaar]

I see you are running Vista x64, which no doubt adds to the appeal of roytam1's mods (x64 browsers that work on Vista being particularly scarce).

Used the installer version created by a member

Did you upload the installer to VirusTotal for analysis? (That's right folks: roytam1 does not make installers: only portable browsers.)

 

[Mister E]

Picked it up off of msfn.org . I feel they are fairly straight forward with all the warnings they have about uploading warez and the likes. Am I misguided by thinking so? This is not my main system so I could fresh install all over if I needed, But since I've installed it on my HP G42-475Dx have not done much else but work with getting it up to par. I really want this for offline work with old programs ( I know I could use W7 for XP stuff) and occasionally surfing, updating, etc... But if it irons out I'll be using it more. This little HP works well with it. I'm a tech junkie what can I say, I love knowledge


Mister E

 

[Vistaar]

Since I seem to be one of the last security freaks who is interested in Vista, here is a link to a VirusTotal analysis of what may or may not be the exact installer that you downloaded. True, most engines detected nothing (including Avast and Malwarebytes, which I use locally); but personally, I would not run any installer that was detected by 9 engines. (Edit: Pardon my haste, but at 2.2 MB it is obviously a stub; the most recent Serpent x64 build is 39.4 MB. I would never consider running that.) Again, roytam1 did not make the installer: only the portable browsers themselves, which are the topic of this thread. If other topics need to be discussed, a new thread could always be started in the appropriate section of the forum.

 

[Mister E]

Thanks for your knowledge and insight... you sure got me pegged as it's the installer I obtained. Been offline reinstalling this system all day. I'll use seamonkey till I install New Moon. And follow the advise of starting a thread to cover other issues (unless one already exist) I run across.

Mister E

 

[Vistaar]

I'll use seamonkey till I install New Moon.

I hesitate to use this thread for such an announcement, but you are the only SeaMonkey user around and version 2.49.5 was just released. In deference to OP's topic, I will cite a roytam1 post and mention again that roytam1 makes x64 browsers that work on Vista and XP.

 

[wither 3]

Just for fun, I tried to install the Windows x64 version on this Vista x64 system. It won't install. Says that Win 7 or later and a processor supporting SSE2 is required. The Windows x86 version does install.

Just wanted to pass this on in case someone encounters the same issue.

 

[Vistaar]

Just for fun, I tried to install the Windows x64 version on this Vista x64 system. It won't install. Says that Win 7 or later and a processor supporting SSE2 is required. The Windows x86 version does install.

Since roytam1 does not make installers and his x64 browser builds do work on Vista, I assume you are writing about SeaMonkey x64, which is a Firefox fork not developed by roytam1. Like Firefox x64 itself, most 64-bit Firefox forks never supported Vista x64. My advice is to read more!

System Requirements, Installation and Uninstallation

Before installing, make sure your computer meets the system requirements. Please note that the new Windows x64 version will only support Windows 7 x64 and up.

My apologies to OP Jody Thornton for not starting a new thread about SeaMonkey.

 

[wither 3]

All I did was go to the link you provided and clicked on the link provided by roytam1. I guess roytam1 has a different link for his creations. I didn't look for them. I've been happy with both Opera and Firefox on Vista.

 

[Vistaar]

I guess roytam1 has a different link for his creations. I didn't look for them. I've been happy with both Opera and Firefox on Vista.

Your guess is correct. Of course the OP of this thread provided a link in post #1. For good measure, I reproduced the link in post #21, and yet again in
post #26. However, I could not recommend that link to you because that thread is now 182 pages long and you are clearly a guru who prefers writing to reading. I guess the last guru running Vista x64 at vistax64.com will continue to be happy with 32-bit browsers such as Opera 36 and Firefox 52. I'm running Vista x86 anyway, and have come to recognize the futility of trying to keep threads from drifting off topic around here.

 

[Jody Thornton]

My apologies to OP Jody Thornton for not starting a new thread about SeaMonkey.

Seems relevant to me. It's all related to Roytam1's work.