It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionThe "what did just break" thread(1649 posts) (1649 posts) 
(1649 posts) 
Pages:
1
25
50
75
100
103
104
105
106
107
110
This is my favourite topic
Posted May 13, 2016
avatar
musteriuz: As I've said - I run Vista. There is no newer IE available for Vista. The only way I get a newer OS is if I get a newer PC and as I've been unemployed for over 2 years there is no expectation for that.

So now it seems I'll have to install either Chrome or Firefox, solely for the purpose of viewing gog. If I can still find a downloadable version of either of those two for Vista, would whichever version I get be able to view and access gog properly? And which one of the 2 is best?

If someone can kindly provide me with good guidance, I'll go for it, get my last few games downloaded and say goodbye to gog for a final time, including accepting that I'll never be able to purchase the nearly 50 games still on my wishlist.
Both browsers are solid, so you can pick whichever one looks better to you. At this point it's just personal preference.

If, however, you want a lot of control over the way the browser looks and functions, I would recommend Vivaldi. It's a new browser that uses Chromium as it's core, but there is enough of a departure from what Google does with Chrome to make a difference. I switched to it a few weeks ago and am happy so far.
Posted May 14, 2016
avatar
musteriuz: As I've said - I run Vista. There is no newer IE available for Vista. The only way I get a newer OS is if I get a newer PC and as I've been unemployed for over 2 years there is no expectation for that.

So now it seems I'll have to install either Chrome or Firefox, solely for the purpose of viewing gog. If I can still find a downloadable version of either of those two for Vista, would whichever version I get be able to view and access gog properly? And which one of the 2 is best?

If someone can kindly provide me with good guidance, I'll go for it, get my last few games downloaded and say goodbye to gog for a final time, including accepting that I'll never be able to purchase the nearly 50 games still on my wishlist.
Believe me - not only for viewing GOG.com purpose - most of websites will work better (supporting new web standards, speed, crashes) on one of these browsers. They are also infinitely more secure in terms of malware etc. than IE9. If I have a fresh Windows installation, I use IE just to download another browser. (although new IE versions are not that bad actually!)

You can just download Firefox here:
https://www.mozilla.org/firefox/new//

I see that Chrome dropped support for Windows Vista at the end of 2015, but I guess you can try to use it.


edit: fixed PL FF link to global
Post edited May 14, 2016 by Johny.
Posted May 14, 2016
avatar
musteriuz: As I've said - I run Vista. There is no newer IE available for Vista. The only way I get a newer OS is if I get a newer PC and as I've been unemployed for over 2 years there is no expectation for that.

So now it seems I'll have to install either Chrome or Firefox, solely for the purpose of viewing gog. If I can still find a downloadable version of either of those two for Vista, would whichever version I get be able to view and access gog properly? And which one of the 2 is best?

If someone can kindly provide me with good guidance, I'll go for it, get my last few games downloaded and say goodbye to gog for a final time, including accepting that I'll never be able to purchase the nearly 50 games still on my wishlist.
avatar
Johny.: Believe me - not only for viewing GOG.com purpose - most of websites will work better (supporting new web standards, speed, crashes) on one of these browsers. They are also infinitely more secure in terms of malware etc. than IE9. If I have a fresh Windows installation, I use IE just to download another browser. (although new IE versions are not that bad actually!)

You can just download Firefox here:
https://www.mozilla.org/pl/firefox/new/

I see that Chrome dropped support for Windows Vista at the end of 2015, but I guess you can try to use it.
Thanks, I might give it a try tomorrow, d.v. In fact, gave it a go and everything seems to be working fine now, thanks.
Post edited May 14, 2016 by musteriuz
Posted May 19, 2016
avatar
goglin: That's right. But JavaScript can be used to detect vulnerabilities in the browser or browser's plugins.

A few weeks ago NYT, BBC, MSN, AOL were affected by malicious ads, injecting code via JS:
http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/malvertising-campaign-in-us-leads-to-angler-exploit-kitbedep/
avatar
Johny.: I'm sure we won't run malicious JS. :) We think we know what we're doing. ;) I understand and appreciate this (theoretical) conversation about security though.
Thank you for your reply. NYT was thinking the same way but got a victim themself by including third-party sources.
I am sure that gog.com doesn't deliver malicious code, but I want to explain why people refrain from enabling scripting on sites other than gog.com.

avatar
Johny.: (snip)
I've enabled "Do not track" in Firefox and didn't had this warning concerning opbeat. In FF private mode GA was blocked, but site worked OK. I'll check more machines/FF versions/smth.
steps to reproduce:
- start Firefox (no addons needed - create a new profile with 'firefox -p' if necessary)
- open the settings menu, switch to the privacy tab, click "Change Block List" and select "Disconnect.me strict protection" (this restarts Firefox)
- start a new private window
- open gog.com
- enjoy :)


Blocking opbeat.com would be a solution for me even if it can't be the intention of DNT that people have to manually search through the blocked scripts to find where their data are sent to and to start reconfiguring their firewall configuration ;-)
Posted May 19, 2016
avatar
goglin: Thank you for your reply. NYT was thinking the same way but got a victim themself by including third-party sources.
I am sure that gog.com doesn't deliver malicious code, but I want to explain why people refrain from enabling scripting on sites other than gog.com.
Good news for you then, (probably at the beginning of next week) we will have this (or similar, with no angular mangling) script embedded on our domain. :)

avatar
Johny.: (snip)
I've enabled "Do not track" in Firefox and didn't had this warning concerning opbeat. In FF private mode GA was blocked, but site worked OK. I'll check more machines/FF versions/smth.
avatar
goglin: steps to reproduce:
- start Firefox (no addons needed - create a new profile with 'firefox -p' if necessary)
- open the settings menu, switch to the privacy tab, click "Change Block List" and select "Disconnect.me strict protection" (this restarts Firefox)
- start a new private window
- open gog.com
- enjoy :)

Blocking opbeat.com would be a solution for me even if it can't be the intention of DNT that people have to manually search through the blocked scripts to find where their data are sent to and to start reconfiguring their firewall configuration ;-)
For me - I see only that analytics.js was blocked due to tracking security. We are detecting that and letting people block GA freely, so site works OK. This problem will disappear as I mentioned.

We're sending only errors to opbeat, so if you encounter any - we'll know about it. You can still block it if you wish.
I guess living with blocked scripts/other things can be hard sometimes. :D I like modern JS and browser possibilities and I let sites to use cookies, localStorage, all the scripts they want - so my experience is full. But that's me. :)
Posted May 19, 2016
avatar
Johny.: I like modern JS and browser possibilities and I let sites to use cookies, localStorage, all the scripts they want - so my experience is full. But that's me. :)
I find it's actually more enjoyable with NoScript because, much more often than not, the site's better without scripts. (eg. gunk that slows page-loading for no reason beyond loading annoying ads or "Hey, first-time visitor! Take a survey about how we're doing when you haven't had a chance to form an opinion yet" overlays.

As for cookies and localStorage, I let the Self-Destructing Cookies addon manage those for me. (It adds a NoScript-like toolbar button which lets you set set site cookie policies with two clicks and adds a new default which causes them to expire X seconds after closing the last tab on the site.)

Much more comfortable than what my younger brothers used to do. (Until I introduced them to Self-Destructing Cookies, they'd set Firefox to always run in private browsing mode. I reserve that for my webdev-testing Chrome since its cache-busting code is frustratingly buggy.)
Post edited May 19, 2016 by ssokolow
Posted May 24, 2016
I'm not as mad about the cloudfront thing as some users here, but I surely don't like that many sites are starting to use external scripts with generic ID numbers everywhere.

avatar
ssokolow: I find it's actually more enjoyable with NoScript because, much more often than not, the site's better without scripts. [..]
As for cookies and localStorage, I let the Self-Destructing Cookies addon manage those for me. [..]
Yeah, NoScript is very useful in general to avoid all the clutter.
For cookies I'm using the "Selective Cookie Delete" addon, instead.
Post edited May 24, 2016 by phaolo
Posted May 24, 2016
Hmmm... could the 2-step verification system be borked right now? I've logged in from my home PC like 10min ago, but no mail has arrived at my inbox. Usually I receive these emails in a matter of a few seconds... Luckily I never close my session from my smartphone and thus I can write this.

PS: it cannot be my email provider as I've just logged in to my Humble account and their verification email has arrived alright.


EDIT: never mind, right after writing this message and posting it, I've received the unruly email message and so I've been able to log in from my desktop.
Post edited May 24, 2016 by muntdefems
Posted June 02, 2016
Did they fix the page number bug for favourite threads? o.O
Posted June 02, 2016
avatar
moonshineshadow: Did they fix the page number bug for favourite threads? o.O
Seems like it? O_o
Posted June 02, 2016
OMG, you're right, I hadn't noticed!
Posted June 02, 2016
avatar
moonshineshadow: Did they fix the page number bug for favourite threads? o.O
It would appear so, though I had to turn off AF to check as it fixes this automatically for a good while now, IIRC.
Posted June 02, 2016
avatar
moonshineshadow: Did they fix the page number bug for favourite threads? o.O
Johny was kind enough to listen to my whining about that particular long-standing bug yesterday evening. This morning he did me a solid and went and fixed it :-)

Let's hear three hoorays for Johny!

Hip-hip!...
Posted June 02, 2016
avatar
moonshineshadow: Did they fix the page number bug for favourite threads? o.O
avatar
Wishbone: Johny was kind enough to listen to my whining about that particular long-standing bug yesterday evening. This morning he did me a solid and went and fixed it :-)

Let's hear three hoorays for Johny!

Hip-hip!...
Could you please, please, whine about us not being able to access forum posts from the first three-and-a-half weeks of January 2015?
Posted June 02, 2016
Hmm. Nice. I'll have to drop that from the next update of the script then.

Thanks Johny! :)
Pages:
1
25
50
75
100
103
104
105
106
107
110
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionThe "what did just break" thread(1649 posts) (1649 posts) 
(1649 posts)