Since a few years i left the official Firefox Releases due to significant shortcomings and disrespect to the user... and used this waterfox.
So just have a few questions
Spoil1
Currently use it on different plattforms fore some older software (K8, K10, Ryzen 5, on various laptops with amd and intel), all with on multiboot solutions (different combinations with XP, 7, 10 and some Unix based OSes) on different pcs. WHY? Older unreplaceable Software, which dont run on newer specs, and NOSTALGIA!!!
So plz. dont tell my anything annoying to upgrade my OS or Hardware, i use what i have, so plz just let it uncommented relating unsafety.... Thank YOU. The same thing it is stupid tell a car guy with an obsession to old cars, not to drive his C1 or 356 without seat belts, missing crashworthiness and emission-standard blabla...
So my request going in two directions... First this BrowserWorks/waterfox#3609
and the fact that on the official website still not changed the description of the min -reqs... see:
Image
It is a real disappointment due to reading the specs and just got disappointed after running setup, even with Vx-Kex,
At least it should changed to Win 10 as Min Req then at least you cant argue anymore although and just to ask, extending to older CPU as the mentioned FX?
Now i am using an older K10 (PhenomII X6 and 32 GB RAM, RX580) it is a beast with an RAM-Disk.
It has nearly everything FX also supported: SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, AMD64, NX-Bit, AMD-V;
EXCEPT: SSE4.2, AVX, AES-NI, FMA3, FMA4, XOP
Is SSE4.2 and AVX a essential to run an actual FF-build? Seriously?
Cant tell compiler to avoid those extensions? No compatibility?
Just reading vague basics for example Firefox 141.0.2, OS: (Windows 10 32-bit and 64-bit)
Recommended 1GHz or faster compatible cpu or soc, RAM: 1GB 32bit, 2GB 64bit, 500MB hdd.
And just specific for Win 10 required on instruction sets: NX-Bit, SSE2 and PAE.
If i install an additional Win10 on this System, was it ever tested with an older cpu to run on?
Thanks to your great work!!!
Since a few years i left the official Firefox Releases due to significant shortcomings and disrespect to the user... and used this waterfox.
So just have a few questions
Spoil1
Currently use it on different plattforms fore some older software (K8, K10, Ryzen 5, on various laptops with amd and intel), all with on multiboot solutions (different combinations with XP, 7, 10 and some Unix based OSes) on different pcs. WHY? Older unreplaceable Software, which dont run on newer specs, and NOSTALGIA!!! So plz. dont tell my anything annoying to upgrade my OS or Hardware, i use what i have, so plz just let it uncommented relating unsafety.... Thank YOU. The same thing it is stupid tell a car guy with an obsession to old cars, not to drive his C1 or 356 without seat belts, missing crashworthiness and emission-standard blabla...So my request going in two directions... First this BrowserWorks/waterfox#3609
and the fact that on the official website still not changed the description of the min -reqs... see:
Image
It is a real disappointment due to reading the specs and just got disappointed after running setup, even with Vx-Kex,
At least it should changed to Win 10 as Min Req then at least you cant argue anymore although and just to ask, extending to older CPU as the mentioned FX?
Now i am using an older K10 (PhenomII X6 and 32 GB RAM, RX580) it is a beast with an RAM-Disk.
It has nearly everything FX also supported: SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, AMD64, NX-Bit, AMD-V;
EXCEPT: SSE4.2, AVX, AES-NI, FMA3, FMA4, XOP
Is SSE4.2 and AVX a essential to run an actual FF-build? Seriously?
Cant tell compiler to avoid those extensions? No compatibility?
Just reading vague basics for example Firefox 141.0.2, OS: (Windows 10 32-bit and 64-bit)
Recommended 1GHz or faster compatible cpu or soc, RAM: 1GB 32bit, 2GB 64bit, 500MB hdd.
And just specific for Win 10 required on instruction sets: NX-Bit, SSE2 and PAE.
If i install an additional Win10 on this System, was it ever tested with an older cpu to run on?
Thanks to your great work!!!