7twenty

MX Master
  • Content Count

    4,695
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    79

7twenty last won the day on January 7

7twenty had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,245 Excellent

About 7twenty

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    : Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

32,765 profile views
  1. http://forum.maxthon.com/index.php?/topic/24527-mx6-questions-and-discussions/#comment-129713
  2. Can someone explain how having blockchain tech in a browser makes it more secure? I (think) I understand how it works in relation to a transaction process, but what/how does it offer security in a browser context?
  3. Yes, but that's exactly what I think MX6 should be; Chromium + whatever the dev's think will make MX unique. There's no need to try and build almost everything from the ground up when you have a perfectly viable base kit to start from. BUT the problem is there's not much left to stand out from the crowd. Chrome is Chrome, Edge is pushing privacy and not being Google, Brave is pushing privacy really hard, Vivaldi is all about customisation & user choice, almost all have screenshot tools, PiP is now a standard feature in chromium (albeit not as good as MX or Opera's implementation). What do you do to make people say "hey this is interesting, i might give it a go instead of Chrome/FF/Opera etc.."
  4. Except that the way that MX and Vivaldi and the other "clones" work is different. When i say clones, i mean those browsers that build on Chromium, not those that use CEF, which is apparently what MX uses based on comments here previously. Other browsers seem to use more of the chromium base feature set. I don't completely understand the details behind it but i think it's something like this: CEF basically gives you the very basics of chromium to make a browser (or any other program that requires browsing abilities) just work, including the Blink render engine. Then you need to build out the UI, sync, etc. and whatever other customer facing and behind the scenes elements. Others use Chromium as a base including UI which they modify either slightly or considerably, and all the behind the scenes code such as settings/error pages, behind the scenes goodies etc. So while the MX team is less restricted it's also hamstrung working on things that the chromium base already has. It's also a reason why MS Edge has come along way in the last year as they have a very strong base to work from (and probably a decent sized team), and they only need to modify what they feel is important for their browser. They also scrapped much of the Google related code from chromium, so there is much that can be done to make a Chromium clone a more unique clone without being stuck in the current MX style of development with CEF. If someone could confirm or clarify that description it would be nice.
  5. Depends on how you read it. It says temporarily, so maybe referring to the holiday break? Or could just be a translation issue, as in no active development, so no new features/major updates etc. But doesn't mean that some small bugfixes aren't/can't be worked on. Regardless, MX5 is well past it's prime, updates or not. And MX6 is just vapourware at this stage. Should it happen at some point then users need to see if it is any improvement on what MX5 was, and make the call whether they want to keep using it.
  6. Not happening because why bother wasting time on something that will be obsolete in a few months? Especially given the amount of time it takes them to get it done. Spend 200 man hours on a core update on a product that will be obsolete in a few months. Or spend 20 hrs to fix some bugs and 180 hrs on the new iteration and get it out there sooner rather than later? Seems like a pretty easy decision... The only reason that wouldn't make sense is if MX6 is using MX5 as a base and any updated code for that would then be a part of MX6 anyway. But if they're working on MX6 being anything other than a chrome clone i think they barking up the wrong tree. They just need to make sure that it's unique enough that it stands out from all the other clones... It is, except that it seems the core update will be part of MX6. And how do you know these bugs weren't reported by many users? Don't use this forum as a yardstick to gauge activity of actual browser use. And just because you didn't run into any of those problems doesn't mean they weren't actually a problem.
  7. Yep it does make you cry doesn't it... Seems it's not fixed, the issue is back although doesn't seem to be as repeatable as it used to be. Might have been a one off or something. Given the number of posts of issues of the most recent beta, it seems the core upgrade has caused a lot of issues. Being a user who used to use MX everyday as my only browser, i've now gone to Vivaldi, using MX for various things like logins that i haven't moved over yet. But this bug could well be the one that pushes me right off the edge. It's just too annoying having to close the browser just to make something else work properly, even though that program isn't even at fault.
  8. Not sure what the video will show, but anyways... 7sec Kodi.exe is started using a keyboard combination Video is selected and starts to play on 2nd screen (not shown) 21sec Maxthon.exe restores from being minimised to a window and steals focus NOTHING is pressed or done between 7sec > 21sec If Maxthon.exe isn't running Kodi.exe keeps focus as it should. From the focus detection program shown in the video: 41608:C:\Users\me\Desktop\focus\focus.exe | Mon Dec 17 22:30:14 2018 << FOCUS.exe started 6412:C:\Windows\explorer.exe | Mon Dec 17 22:30:16 2018 54016:C:\Program Files (x86)\Kodi\kodi.exe | Mon Dec 17 22:30:32 2018 << KODI.exe started No foreground application | Mon Dec 17 22:30:46 2018 1920:C:\Maxthon5\Bin\Maxthon.exe | Mon Dec 17 22:30:47 2018 << MAXTHON.exe steals focus!!! 18592:C:\Users\me\AppData\Local\WebLaunchRecorder\Screen Recorder Launcher.exe | Mon Dec 17 22:31:09 2018 1920:C:\Maxthon5\Bin\Maxthon.exe | Mon Dec 17 22:31:12 2018 18592:C:\Users\me\AppData\Local\WebLaunchRecorder\Screen Recorder Launcher.exe | Mon Dec 17 22:31:12 2018 41608:C:\Users\me\Desktop\focus\focus.exe | Mon Dec 17 22:31:48 2018 Recording #1.mp4
  9. been having this issue as well of late. Very annoying!
  10. Neither string highlighted below are in the crowdin translation list. The patterns of favorites display should be Display favorites as... Only display the icon should be Display icon only Due to the way the menu is shown, i'd change the options to Title only, Icon only, Icon and title. No need to repeat display as it doesn't add anything to it.
  11. Yes Nothing, it's just another option for those that don't want to use the built-in Maxthon version.
  12. how interesting, and concerning. there's no reason why you can't unpack the extension and have a look at the code, even better if you've got the dodgy chrome version to compare against. As you said, many MX addons were user created/ported rather than official versions from the dev, so depending on how up to date the uploader kept it, it could still be safe. At this stage probably best not to use it if anyone is at all worried about these revelations.
  13. Being unable to comment has been like that for ages. Was answered by a bug* when i questioned it some time ago. Apparently something to do spam i think, so they disabled comments to counter it. As for does it work? Well depends on what you deem "work" means. It does show and allow you to download the available extensions. In that respect, yes it does work. As for a means of being a place for user feedback - it's now useless, and developer information - it has never been any good for that. While that would be something to hope for, i really, really, really don't think that's happening. Nothing has been done on the site for years. They have no intention of adding any developer info to the site despite the feedback given. They want to be seen as something more than the other browsers, but they can't even offer something as simple as a decent website with a nicely laid structure for developer information. I've said it before, it would take a decent coder 1/2 a day to add what is currently in the SDK documents into a workable, easily navigable, searchable website. But apparently that's not a priority. Instead the extension sits there dormant with almost nothing of note added ...