MX Master
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


 Content Type 



Release Notes

Bug Tracker

Help page

Help page-CN

Release Note5

Rules and recruitment

Posts posted by 7twenty

  1. 4 hours ago, pantantrollo said:

    Yes, I figured your comment was in that direction and it was about those kind of clones

    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.."

    • Like 1

  2. 14 hours ago, pantantrollo said:

    Well, that most browsers have a chromiun core, does not automatically make them clones, everything depends on how they do other implementations, as is maxthon or even vivaldi itself, quite different from the "father".

    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.

  3. 9 hours ago, pantantrollo said:

    didn't we agree that mx5 was paralyzed in favor of the development of mx6?

    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.

    • Like 1

  4. 9 hours ago, Tony said:

    - wheres the core update -

    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...


    9 hours ago, Tony said:

    that has to be the main priority not a few fixes that the bulk of the users have never seen the bugs

    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.

    • Like 4

  5. On 22/02/2019 at 7:00 PM, BugSir006 said:


    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.

  6. 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

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

    9 hours ago, A.S. said:

    Now I hope MX Team just preparing big update for Extensions Center

    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 ...

  9. 4 hours ago, No.1MaxthonFan said:

    Ok, if I have never had a problem with fonts of any kind, why would I go looking for a setting to change something and create a problem? 

    You wouldn't, nor was it ever implied that you should if you didn't have the problem.

    Seems you're the only one making more of this than what there is. There was a problem, a new setting change seems to be related to it, reset it and it's all back to normal.


    3 hours ago, Tony said:

    thats how they seem to work - add something that nobody wants whilst old bugs go on

    While there's some truth to that, i don't think we need to turn this thread into another "they don't listen to us" thread.

  10. On 6/9/2018 at 5:37 PM, Perplexer said:

    Don't people use certificates

    I don't imagine it's an overly common thing to do, at least not in the mainstream. Possibly more so with those in certain fields or those with the desire to add an extra level of security.

    But that's just an assumption.

    I'd say you're using the wrong browser if you want many/any higher level features or options. As a basic browser Maxthon is great, if only for the number of default features available. But when it comes to the more advanced options/features it falls way short of almost every other browser out there.

    It's quite possible it was working previously because it wasn't removed/disabled/broken. But the reason it's not getting fixed is because the feature has been removed/disabled/broken but they're unsure of how/why?? don't know... interesting though,...

  11. 6 hours ago, MaxthonJeff said:

    why chrome has SDK when firefox is already on market?

    Because Chrome has the backing of Google behind it, which has in turn made it the biggest browser in the market. Maxthon isn't, and won't be, the next Chrome.

    Because of that, forcing developers to create content that only a minute number of users will be using isn't viable. Which is why you don't see many of the big addons on the other browsers on Maxthon.

    While it's great that there are Maxthon specific API's, if a dev isn't willing to put the time in to use them it's not really a feature to talk up.

    While not a feature, the Youtube Centre addon for Maxthon never had the icon display correctly. All that was required was to copy the icon files to the correct folder in the addon. But even that was too hard for the dev. So to add other specific API's is a bit of a stretch.

    Maxthon still doesn't have something that will draw users to allow for a more viable addon platform.

    • Like 5

  12. Ummm?? Like... wow.... really?!! Does anybody do any proofreading/doublechecking or ANYTHING when they update strings!!

    Like just wow... i... just can't even...

    Every word processor and most advanced text editors have spellcheck and would pickup that error.

    Spellcheck was added as a system wide feature to Windows since 8 for most fields in programs.

    Every browser includes spellcheck.

    If the program that is used doesn't have it, paste it into the reply box on the forum and have a quick look for errors.. so many options!!

    There is NOT ONE GOOD REASON that things like this keep on getting through.

    what the!!.png

    • Like 1