Just Tested Opera 10.50

Henry wrote in
:

thanatoid wrote:


IMO, there is no reason to upgrade a browser if you have
the usual security precautions in place, unless, of
course, you are a victim of the Flash disease and HAVE to
see the results of the latest version. If you are at all
interested the latest Flash not working on some sites, you
can search for a trick someone posted to make the site
think you have the latest while it is in fact the
previous. It works pretty well.

Would you happen to know what the trick is or where to find
it? I couldn't find it on Google.

If you re-load the last year's headers (if that doesn't work,
two years') of this NG, you'll see the thread, there were about
10-20 responses.

This group hasn't had much traffic recently, so it won't be
NEARLY as much of a drag as it sounds. You can use the filter or
search function on the headers for "flash". But like I said, it
doesn't fool ALL the sites.

If you can't do it for some reason, let me know and I'll find it
for you. Fair enough?

Lostgallifreyan wrote in
:

Henry wrote in
:

snip

Would you happen to know what the trick is or where to
find it? I couldn't find it on Google.

snip

I know of one, I mentioned it. Might not be the same idea
though, but try it, it works on a lot of things. USER-AGENT
is the header name to change. Save whatever is there
already. Proxomitron is what I used to use, and I still
keep it hoping to set it up again. (FireFox irked me, I
never felt at home with it so I never used Prox since I
left IE). Opera likely lets you set up headers directly
somehow, but I'm too new to it to know.

I believe Proxomitron is still a current program, and a great
one. I used it on my Win95 machine before I even knew what a
firewall was, and didn't have enough memory to run an AV in RT
(I used F-prot for YEARS, but only scanned what I dl'd after a
session. I never "got' anything.)

I just checked, last version is from 2003 but it is still used
by many people. Careful of all the fake (or whatever)
proxomitron sites Google pulls up - according to Wikipedia,
http://proxomitron.info is /the/ authentic one. There are some
interesting ad-ons on the files page, too.

There is another trick related to tricking Flash, which is
for the installer itself, a registry key:

REGEDIT4

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curr entVersio
n] "VersionNumber"="5.10.2600"
;"VersionNumber"="4.10.2222"

That fakes the OS's identity so Flash 10 can be installed.

I must admit that's clever. So the Flash installer does NOT look
at the browser version? You have to choose WHICH browser you
use, IIRC, and (IIRC) it told me it was incompatible with Opera
10USB. Ergo, the trick I referred to who someone else, not me,
came up with.

From what I've read you still need KernelEx to run it
though. Add that REG file again when you're done, but move
the semicolon to comment out the fake number and restore
the real W98 one.

I would not get into that myself. Sounds like trouble. I /have/
tried KernelEx, some time ago, and I found it pointless,
although I realize it has developed considerably since then. But
I really think it's much easier to just set up a double boot XP
system if you HAVE to use some programs that WILL NOT run on 9x.

thanatoid wrote in
:

I can't remember how I did it (prolly in the about:config or
whatever it's called) but you can set up on/off buttons for
flash, images and javascript, right on the toolbar.


Nice. I'll end up doing that. Franc mentioned JS to control stuff by double-
click if you want to see it. I wonder if Opera also can use Lua... THAT
would be cool.

thanatoid wrote in
:

I find most sites work with "show as Opera". I have that drop
down box on my toolbar too.



Thanks, I'll explore that, though my first base is to see how self-contained
it is, what might be ideally cleaned up or removed or changed in place,
before I start to add stuff. Browsers are (usually) big complex beasts.

thanatoid wrote in
:

Lostgallifreyan wrote in
:

Henry wrote in
:

snip

Would you happen to know what the trick is or where to
find it? I couldn't find it on Google.

snip

I know of one, I mentioned it. Might not be the same idea
though, but try it, it works on a lot of things. USER-AGENT
is the header name to change. Save whatever is there
already. Proxomitron is what I used to use, and I still
keep it hoping to set it up again. (FireFox irked me, I
never felt at home with it so I never used Prox since I
left IE). Opera likely lets you set up headers directly
somehow, but I'm too new to it to know.

I believe Proxomitron is still a current program, and a great
one. I used it on my Win95 machine before I even knew what a
firewall was, and didn't have enough memory to run an AV in RT
(I used F-prot for YEARS, but only scanned what I dl'd after a
session. I never "got' anything.)

I just checked, last version is from 2003 but it is still used
by many people. Careful of all the fake (or whatever)
proxomitron sites Google pulls up - according to Wikipedia,
http://proxomitron.info is /the/ authentic one. There are some
interesting ad-ons on the files page, too.


Naoko v4.5, June edition. That's as much as I can remember right now. It
was the latest official one. Comes with the SSL files as standard too. I
wouldn't touch an unofficial one. Scott Lemmon's was a unique, brilliant and
concentrated vision. I find it hard to beleive that any change there by
anyone (other than in filters for it) would do anything but dilute the
effectiveness of Prox. There are good inclusions of several of its abilities
in other tools though, I guess Opera includes a few already. Bot having to
rely on specific stuff is good though. Any browers can use Prox, and I still
have to find time to look at nfilter for Usenet if I continue with Usenet,
which I likely will, forums are annoying. I've even see 'forums' that are
basically Usenet and expect me to sign up to SEE content, never mind post.
Those morons would no doubt put private toll gates on public roads in
defiance of everyone from anachist to council leader, and then charge us for
the air we breath as we pass through, and demand our identity as we do it
too. This is another reason why I don't do MySpace, etc. Gated communities
are an excellent way to destroy freedom. Anything that comes as easy as they
do should be making their users serious question the real COST, which sadly
they aren't doing.

There is another trick related to tricking Flash, which is
for the installer itself, a registry key:

REGEDIT4

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curr entVersio
n] "VersionNumber"="5.10.2600"
;"VersionNumber"="4.10.2222"

That fakes the OS's identity so Flash 10 can be installed.

I must admit that's clever. So the Flash installer does NOT look
at the browser version? You have to choose WHICH browser you
use, IIRC, and (IIRC) it told me it was incompatible with Opera
10USB. Ergo, the trick I referred to who someone else, not me,
came up with.

From what I've read you still need KernelEx to run it
though. Add that REG file again when you're done, but move
the semicolon to comment out the fake number and restore
the real W98 one.

I would not get into that myself. Sounds like trouble. I /have/
tried KernelEx, some time ago, and I found it pointless,
although I realize it has developed considerably since then. But
I really think it's much easier to just set up a double boot XP
system if you HAVE to use some programs that WILL NOT run on 9x.


There is a tiny extention towards NT systems even in W98, based on NTDLL.DLL
and some other file whose name I forgot. If KernelEx can integrate on the
12MB-installed core along with NUSB and cohabit without instability, then it
might be efficient to make it permanent. I haven't looked at trying this yet
though. (Again, rigorous reduction, the most time consuming part of any of
this work, is a priority for me so I can see what's truly vital.)

I think only a slightly earlier version of the Flash10 installer can be
duped, too. The later one flat out tells me it wants a newer version of
Windows. Haven't worked out how to cheat that yet. Usually they mean it so I
haven't tried hard.

It is amazing what can be duped though... I found a way to use 4
'cryptographic services' files from M$ to dupe DirectX v9C to install. I use
a batch file to shove them in, wait while I install DX the standard way, then
I let the batch file finish, removing the four cryptographics files. I found
it to be a very tidy way to sidestep M$'s determination that we accept their
browser before we are allowed to use DirectX.