Need adblocker for mypal browser

[Casey]

On the Mypal page it says that Firefox extensions will work with
Mypal. But I use FF as my main browser, and it already does have
the Adblock extension. Any ideo how I get that Adblock working with
Mypal using Adblock, too?

I cannot believe how many ads are on a site when not using Adblock
Plus.

I should say I use Mypal for certain sites that my older FF version
doesn't work on properly.

[Casey]

I guess I should have put it this way: Since I have Adblocker Plus
already installed and showing up in FF's toolbar, how do I get Mypal
to use it? Or is this even possible?

[Alex]

Casey написал(а):

> On the Mypal page it says that Firefox extensions will work with
> Mypal.

The Mypal page at <https://www.mypal-browser.org/features.html>, last
updated on or before 5 September 2020, says this:

| Supports many Pale Moon extensions as well as "legacy" (pre-Quantum) Firefox extensions.
| You can use popular extensions like Ad Block Plus, NoScript, and many more.

But the Mypal FAQ at <https://github.com/Feodor2/Mypal/wiki/FAQ>, last
updated on 21 February 2021, says this:

| Q Why addons from the addons.mozilla.org do not work?
| A Do not try to install addons from the addons.mozilla.org they wont work. i set my own
| addon page from where you can reach classic addon archive http://myapl.eu3.biz

> But I use FF as my main browser, and it already does have
> the Adblock extension. Any ideo how I get that Adblock working with
> Mypal using Adblock, too?

Installing an extension in Firefox does not install the same extension
in Mypal. You must install the extension separately in Mypal.

If you have the Adblock .xpi file saved somewhere, then follow Mypal's
instructions for installing that .xpi in Mypal.
If not, you may need to download Adblock again for the Mypal browser.

If the extension from addons.mozilla.org does not work in Mypal and you
cannot find it on myapl.eu3.biz, then try an equivalent extension from
addons.palemoon.org

[DaveJohnson@nomail]

On Sat, 15 May 2021 08:14:58 +0300, Alex <alex@example.рф> wrote:

>Casey ???????(?):

The site http://myapl.eu3.biz is gone now. I need an adblocker for
mypal 29.3.0. With earlier versions for some reason I was able to
install adblock-latitude from the pale moon site. Now the site won't
allow me to install it. It shows a message that says "Only on pale
moon". Sometimes an addon can be installed from a file. There doesn't
seem to be a way to get the adblock-latitude file from the site.
.xpi files for adblock plus and ublock origin for firefox won't
install. Feodor who was the developer of mypal is no longer associated
with the program. There was some kind of issue. This may be why the
addon site is kaput.

So now I need an XP browser with an adblocker.

[VanguardLH]

<DaveJohnson@nomail.> wrote:

> Alex <alex@example.рф> wrote:
>
>>Casey:

Pale Moon was forked from pre-Quantum version of Firefox. Quantum
changed extension requirements from using XUL/XPCOM to using Webkit.
So, to get extensions to work in Pale Moon hence My Pal, you have to use
pre-Quantum extensions; i.e., those old versions writting using
XUL/XPCOM.

Doesn't matter what you install in one web browser. It won't be
available in other web browsers. Each one has its own user profile, and
that's where the add-ons are installed. I use uBlock Origin (uBO) as a
blocker in Firefox 95, and before. However, that's the ONLY web browser
where uBO will be available unless I separate install uBO in other web
browsers.

Chevy makes many cars. Just because a radio fits in one Chevy doesn't
mean it will fit in all Chevies, nor does installing a radio in one
Chevy magically make the same radio available in all Chevies.

At https://addons.palemoon.org/extensions/privacy-and-security/, both
the Adblock Latitude and uBO add-ons are listed, but those are for the
legacy (XUL/XPCOM aka pre-Quantum) versions of the add-ons.

Mozilla switched Firefox to their Quantum platform in version 57 which
required using Webkit extensions, and dropped support for the less
secure XUL/XPCOM extensions (which could and have interferred with use
or configuration of other extensions). FF v57 was released Nov 2017. I
remember at one time there was a search switch that let you hunt for
pre-Quantum aka pre-57 aka XUL/XPCOM versions of extensions. Not there
now probably because Mozilla stopped supporting them, and decided not to
even supply them. As I recall, you searched, and one of the filter
options was to list old/unsupported extensions. Not there now.

What extension authors then did was update their extension page at
addons.mozilla.org to add a pointer to the old versions of their
extensions. Not all authors did so. Even those authors that did, they
quit pointing to where were the XUL/XPCOM versions of their extensions,
because they weren't going to support versions older than 4 years. The
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin/?utm_source=addons.mozilla.org
addon page at Mozilla for uBlock Origin does have a "See all versions"
link. It's up to you to find which old version was the last before FF
v57 Quantum. For uBO, looks like v1.32.4 was the last "legacy" version.
Yet, according to https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy,
1.16.4.30 was the last legacy version of uBO. Just to note a circular
discovery path, I went to the Mozilla addons site to find uBO to use its
old version link, trying to see the latest *legacy* version of uBO, but
wasn't sure which old/legacy version to use. I did a search on "ublock
origin legacy" and found the above github URL. I then went to Pale
Moon's addons page, select uBO, and that pointed me to the same github
project (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy/).

MyPal says to use Pale Moon addons, and those are pre-Quantum versions.
Why not use the Pale Moon addons page to find them? I don't see Pale
Moon (https://www.palemoon.org/) suggesting to get legacy extensions
from Mozilla's site (addons.mozilla.org). Pale Moon has its own
extensions page, so you get the correct pre-Quantum versions of them.
The MyPal site says, "Supports many Pale Moon extensions as well as
"legacy" (pre-Quantum) Firefox extensions." MyPal's site does *NOT* say
"Firefox extensions will work with MyPal" as Casey claimed.

At one time you could search addons.mozilla.org for legacy extensions,
but that was removed quite a while ago, so MyPal saying it supports
"legacy Firefox extensions" is technically correct but misleads users
into thinking they can get those legacy extensions from Mozilla's site.
They should add, "Get extensions (aka add-ons) from the Pale Moon web
site". However, considering the dearth of information at
mypal-browser.org, adding the helpful cue would represent a major
overhaul to their documentation. Users are supposed to just know this
stuff.

Just go to Pale Moon's addons page to get the old uBO, or other legacy
extension that works with pre-Quantum Pale Moon from which MyPal was
forked. Use Pale Moon's archive of legacy extensions. Or find the
legacy (XUL/XPCOM) version elsewhere, install at your own risk, and hope
it works with Pale Moon or MyPal.

[Mike Easter]

DaveJohnson@nomail. wrote:
> So now I need an XP browser with an adblocker.

Maybe you should upgrade to a current OS such as one from linux; that
way you can use your existing XP hardware and you can use a modern
browser with an ad blocker.

The capabilities of XP for such as browsing are 'over the hill'. I
still have and use XP and apps for it, but not for browsing. I do all
my browsing (and usenet) w/ linux.

It is not even necessary to install linux to your XP's hdd; you can USB
boot a live linux w/ persistence and not 'complicate' your existing XP
install.

If you are willing to experiment w/ mypal browser, why not experiment w/
linux?

--
Mike Easter

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 00:15:44 -0800, Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid>
wrote:

>If you are willing to experiment w/ mypal browser, why not experiment w/
>linux?

Out of the frying pan...

You can't take it with you. Buy yourself a new bit of kit running
Windows 11.

Smell that coffee. Hmmm... yeah!

Live everyday like you're a cat.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, Pooh Dendum, scouringerer,
jumped up chav, punk ass dole whore troll, no nothing innumerate religious
maniac, lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, professional bully and stalker,
the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any messages from trolls »Q« and 'Arlene' Holder as stinky

[Mike Easter]

p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
> You can't take it with you. Buy yourself a new bit of kit running
> Windows 11.

What would be the point of doing that?

--
Mike Easter

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 01:58:48 -0800, Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid>
wrote:

Hedonism.

Nothing else has any intrinsic value.

Next question?

[Shadow]

On Wed, 08 Dec 2021 20:59:36 -0500, DaveJohnson@nomail. wrote:

>
>So now I need an XP browser with an adblocker.

Have a look here:

<https://rtfreesoft.blogspot.com/search/label/browser>

Latest Palemoon compiled to run on XP.
(was - Newmoon, they changed the name back to Palemoon).
Works as adver.... sorry, no ads. It just works.
HTH
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
Google Fuchsia - 2021

[Sjouke Burry]

On 09.12.21 2:59, DaveJohnson@nomail. wrote:

ff 45.9.0 works fine for XP.

[VanguardLH]

But not for many sites. My aunt's bank won't work with pre-Quantum
versions of Firefox. She has hit many sites that won't work with old
Firefox. Site requirements have continued to grow regarding minimum
features in Firefox. One, for example, is CSS may now compute
brightness rather than used fixed settings, and old versions of FF can't
handle that. Just because FF pre-Quantum "works" on XP doesn't equate
to FF working at sites. The last version of Firefox is 52.9ESR that
supports on XP, so you're using an older version than needed on XP.
That is the latest my aunt can get on your XP, and yet lots of sites
won't accept. Oh, and using about:config tweak or an extension to lie
about the User Agent string the webclient sends to the server won't work
anymore simply because that won't magically embue features that are only
available in later versions required by sites.

The longer you hang onto old versions of web browsers, the more sites
won't support them. The UA string trick won't work, anymore. They
moved forward and can demand features the old web browsers cannot
support. Although MyPal may help, as it did with my aunt, it is from a
fork from Pale Moon which is a fork from pre-Quantum Firefox, so both
Pale Moon and MyPal won't have the later features demanded by some
sites.

As for getting a newer Windows, you can get 10 for free. Just never
validate it. Leave it indefinitely in trial mode. You'll end up with a
watermark on the background, but there's a tweak to get rid of it. Some
tools aren't available, but most users don't use them, and they aren't
critical to using the OS. The trial version of Windows 10 never
expires.

Another suggestion by Easter is to use Linux on a USB stick, and boot
from that. You don't even have to unload Windows XP if you load Linux
in a VM (Virtual Machine). There are free VMMs (Virtual Machine
Managers), like VirtualBox and VMware Player. When you want to browse,
run the VMM on your host OS (Windows XP) and load the VM with the guest
OS (Mint seems close to Windows for new Linux users coming from
Windows), and use a new web browser along with the Webkit versions of
the add-ons.

As I recall, after installing VirtualBox on Windows, you followed by
installing the guest additions package to Virtualbox. That let it
better communicate the hardware from the host OS to the VM running the
guest OS. That was when I was running Windows as guest OSes. You'll
want a pre-6 version of VirtualBox to run on Windows XP. There's a
Virtualbox community (forum) to get help. The last time I used
Virtualbox, it had its own taskbar. So, you loaded Vbox as a startup
program, you'd see a toolbar (atop the Windows taskbar), and to start
programs inside the VM just had you click on the shortcuts in the VBox
toolbar. Made it rather transparent that you were using running those
programs inside a VM.

Instead of running Vbox on Windows XP, and use a newer OS to run a newer
web browser inside a VM, you could switch it around: boot into a newer
OS on which you run Vbox, and run your old XP inside a VM. There are
tools to create a VHD (Virtual Hard Disk) image of your current
partition (OS + apps) that you could load inside a VM. While my
recollection is of using a Vbox tool to create a VHD from your existing
partition(s), Microsoft (via SysInternals they acquired) has their own
Disk2VHD tool to do the same. Vbox and Vmware can load VHDs (.vhd
files) created by other tools. For example, I use Macrium Reflect Home
which can create a .vhd file as an image of my partitions (instead of
into their proprietary .mrimg files), that can be loaded by Vbox or
VMware Player. Once you image your current partition with Windows XP
and apps into a VHD file (I would also suggest saving an MRIMG file if
using Macrium), you could install a new OS onto those partition(s),
install Vbox or VMware Player, and load the .vhd file you created to
have your old Windows XP running inside a VM.

Just because your old horse can longer carry the full load doesn't mean
you can't tow along a young burro to handle part of the load.

[Mike Easter]

VanguardLH wrote:
> Another suggestion by Easter is to use Linux on a USB stick, and boot
> from that. You don't even have to unload Windows XP if you load Linux
> in a VM (Virtual Machine). There are free VMMs (Virtual Machine
> Managers), like VirtualBox and VMware Player. When you want to browse,
> run the VMM on your host OS (Windows XP) and load the VM with the guest
> OS (Mint seems close to Windows for new Linux users coming from
> Windows), and use a new web browser along with the Webkit versions of
> the add-ons.

One disadvantage to the VM approach to running linux on an XP machine
has to do w/ 'old resources' -- many old XP machines were also low on
resources, particularly ram. Running linux (only) live off the USB uses
fewer resources than running XP + VM + linux.

Most modern linux needs more resources than the old linuxes which had
lower resource desktop environments because they were using less
resource tool kits to build the desktop stuff. Things evolve and
resource requirements go up for all the OSes, Wins & linuxes alike.

--
Mike Easter

[VanguardLH]

What about the other approach I mentioned, which was:

Linux + VM + XP

There might still be the problem of not enough system memory (RAM) in
the old hardware; however, could be there are unused slots to add more
RAM, or the existing used slots could have their RAM modules replaced
with larger capacity modules (up to the addressing limit of the mobo).

With the OP's old hardware, first would be to strip away all the startup
programs that are superfluous, or can be started manually when they are
actually needed. Next would be to trim all the garbage off his drives,
including data files that can be stored elsewhere.

No matter what are the suggested replacements for the host or guest OS
in a VM, the first hurdle will be getting the OP to accept using a Linux
OS in the first place. Employing Linux is the first obstacle to a user,
especially for someone still back on Windows XP.

Without any information whatsoever regarding the OP's computer hardware,
any additional load could exceed what the OP's hardware can handle.
Could be the OP's hardware has plenty of RAM. Need more info from the
OP.

The suggestion of using a Linux distro on a bootable CD or USB stick
still runs into the hurdle of getting the OP to accept Linux. In
addition, many users don't want to be multi-booting to switch between
OSes. When they want to use XP, they'd have to reboot out of Linux to
go to XP. When they want to use the newer web browser in Linux, they'd
have to reboot out of XP to go to Linux. The two OSes become very
disjoint. That's why I thought of using a VM that allows concurrent use
of both OSes. Bounce between whicher you want to use at the time
without any reboots. Have disjoint OSes is like having 2 cars: when you
want to switch to the other car, you have to go home to switch.

Casey, the OP, never mentioned any of his hardware: CPU, mobo, RAM, GPU.
All anyone can suggest is based on unknown hardware which could be limp
or robust.


HOWEVER, WE ARE ALL TOO LATE FOR CASEY

Casey has never returned to this discussion since the *SEVEN MONTHS*
since he started it, so his problem was never important to him. Dave
didn't bother to notice the date stamp of Casey's and Alex's post to
realize he was responding to an ancient discussion, and I had not
rebuilt the thread to see Casey's and Alex's posts until now. I doubt
Casey is still awaiting a solution after 7 months; else Casey would look
like this:

https://www.meme-arsenal.com/memes/17b892a2bf7fd0ec1b358e61e622c4ad.jpg

[Mike Easter]

VanguardLH wrote:
> The suggestion of using a Linux distro on a bootable CD or USB stick
> still runs into the hurdle of getting the OP to accept Linux. In
> addition, many users don't want to be multi-booting to switch between
> OSes. When they want to use XP, they'd have to reboot out of Linux to
> go to XP. When they want to use the newer web browser in Linux, they'd
> have to reboot out of XP to go to Linux. The two OSes become very
> disjoint. That's why I thought of using a VM that allows concurrent use
> of both OSes. Bounce between whicher you want to use at the time
> without any reboots. Have disjoint OSes is like having 2 cars: when you
> want to switch to the other car, you have to go home to switch.

Each of us leans our own way when we have choices.

I used to multiboot much more than now; now I almost never do. I have
never leaned toward VMs; I 'always' boot the linux live.

I have a lot of different old hardware, so it is easy for me to leave
old Win installs as is. So, I currently have original OEM install of
XP, refurb Win 7 installs, and an OEM Win 10 laptop. The W10 typically
always boots a live linux off USB w/ persistence because I prefer it
over W10; one Win7 machine gets used in that mode principally for
acquiring linux .iso/s and it is used for the dl w/ qbit torrent, hash
check w/ hashcalc, sig verification w/ Kleopatra which uses gpg4win and
various Win tools for writing .iso to USB. I mainly started using that
Win7 for the linux dl/s because of its storage capability and because I
liked the convenience of the Win tools over what is conventionally done
w/ linux command line for sig checking.

More recently I've started doing all of the above on the same hardware
w/ a live linux w/ persistence namely KDE Neon, also using qbit torrent
and Kleopatra for sig check and the functions of the KDE file manager
for the hash, and I've changed over my USB writing to the Ventoy system
because I like the way it makes multiboot linux USB sticks more reliably
than the Win tool Yumi.

I think there is a purpose for VMs for some people, particularly if they
just have one machine and it has plenty of ram. Occasionally (according
to Jesse Smith who does a lot of reviews, not from my own experience of
never using VMs) a VM doesn't perform as optimally as a live boot or an
installed. His linux reviews always do all 3, live boot, VM, then install.

Some people also like to make vids for reviews of linux and some parts
of the process of booting linux are much easier to obtain w/ the VM than
w/ the live USB.

So, currently I agree w/ your 'negativity' about dual booting. My
arrangement allows me to use 4 machines on 2 keyboards/ mice/ vid w/o
moving, so I can turn or flip from 1 of 4 different OSes w/ ease.



--
Mike Easter

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:22:32 -0800, Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid>
wrote:

>So, currently I agree w/ your 'negativity' about dual booting. My
>arrangement allows me to use 4 machines on 2 keyboards/ mice/ vid w/o
>moving, so I can turn or flip from 1 of 4 different OSes w/ ease.

Are you saying you run 4 machines instead of one which you control all
at the same time from 2 keyboards and mice?

[DaveJohnson@nomail]

Thanks Vanguard.
I tried uBO versions 1.16.4.30, linked from the palemoon extensions
page before I posted my message asking for help. At that time it would
not install. I tried it again just now then a third time because I was
going to share the error message. The third time I tried, it installed
and now it runs. This is very strange but I'm happy. :) Thank you.

[DaveJohnson@nomail]

On Thu, 09 Dec 2021 11:15:17 -0600, be...@invalidated.com wrote:

>On Thu, 09 Dec 2021 17:30:03 +0100, Sjouke Burry
><burrynu...@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
>
>>On 09.12.21 2:59, DaveJohnson@nomail. wrote:

>I'm using XP, too.
>
>FFx 52.9.0 (non ESR) works fine here with Version number 3.11.4 of
>Adblock Plua.

Thank you bert. I was using FF 52..1.2 ESR. The reason I switched to
mypal is that the older FF versions won't play HTML5 mp4 video from
streaming websites. Mypal works with such streams. The latest version
of mypal is newer than FF version 52 and works on more websites than
the older FF.

[Mike Easter]

p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:

> Mike Easter wrote:
>
>> So, currently I agree w/ your 'negativity' about dual booting. My
>> arrangement allows me to use 4 machines on 2 keyboards/ mice/ vid w/o
>> moving, so I can turn or flip from 1 of 4 different OSes w/ ease.
>
> Are you saying you run 4 machines instead of one which you control all
> at the same time from 2 keyboards and mice?
>

I could, but I don't. 4 machines; 2 KVMs.

The most common situation is running 2 machines, either from the same
KVM switch or 'the other' KVM direction. This machine is currently
running a linux w/ Tb as a usenet agent; but 'someone else' who is Win
could 'alternatively' be running a Win Tb. But shortly I'll be using
its browser in a browsing way.

In just a minute, I'll be booting up an ancient 2006 XP machine to do
something w/ its tools, PDFXChange Viewer, irfanView, and its USB
attached printer. It uses an old unsupported Chrome browser, but not
for browsing, just limited to one site. I also use an old MS Works
wordprocessor on it sometimes. I've now started that machine.

When I want to boot one of the live linuxes which is on the Ventoy USB,
I'll turn on the other machine which is on the same KVM as I'm on now.
That machine typically alternatively boots Win7 or a persistent KDE Neon
or a multiboot linuxes Ventoy. These are all desktops and the 2
keyboards and monitors are full-size.

It is unusual for me to have even 3 at a time going, but it is
'possible' to have 5 because I also can put a laptop into the circle.


--
Mike Easter

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 06:16:00 -0800, Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid>
wrote:

Jesus Mike, think of the planet. Nobody does this anymore. One modern
well spec 'd PC will do all of that using half the electricity of just
one of your old gas guzzlers.

I posted a while back tests of power consumption of my new PC vs my 8
year old Windows 7 model. Did you miss that? Have you subscribed to my
channel?

Hell, I dread to think how many seal pups have to die to support some
old geezer running XP. I mean sure a Dusty special will help drive damp
out of your basement but for those of us who live above ground and wish
to remain cool in a warming world this re purposing nonsense is just
that.

A few tips.

There is VMWare and there is the also rans. VMWare hardware support is
the best by a long way like around the moon and back.

KVMs man. One wireless keyboard and mouse is all any cat needs. Free
yourself.

Don't buy Dusty specials. For tin buy premium HP or Dell. Read the spec
real careful like re energy stuff. A lot of money went into IoT and a
lot was learnt about saving power. Yeah, IoT did some good. Indirectly.

and btw Windows is more environmentally friendly than Linux. It's mainly
a driver thing, but also there's the chaotic inherent madness of an
ecosystem where even words such as Free is doubly defined, leaving it
undefined, by people outta their mind.

Give the air con, the fan, and the planet a holiday, bin the tin, and
have a nice day.

This factoid was brought to you by a cat.

[Mike Easter]

p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
> I posted a while back tests of power consumption of my new PC vs my 8
> year old Windows 7 model.

If I wanted to spare electricity, I would just use my RPi 3B running
Raspbian on a Broadcom processor and 1G ram. Idles at under 2W and uses
5W at high cpu load. That doesn't count the monitor mouse kb. Normally
its power supply is turned off and uses 0.

What kind of numbers did you post for your new rig?

--
Mike Easter

[Mike Easter]

Mike Easter wrote:
> p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
>> I posted a while back tests of power consumption of my new PC vs my 8
>> year old Windows 7 model.
>
> If I wanted to spare electricity, I would just use my RPi 3B running
> Raspbian on a Broadcom processor and 1G ram.  Idles at under 2W and uses
> 5W at high cpu load.  That doesn't count the monitor mouse kb.  Normally
> its power supply is turned off and uses 0.
>

If it were going to be my 'everyday' computer, I would rather have an
RPi 4 and 4G ram would be plenty.

Its consumption is more; idle 3.8-4W, depending how many cpu cores are
busy, 1-4, it consumers 4.5-6W.

The Pi's ps is kinda like a USB charger.

--
Mike Easter

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:44:03 -0800, Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid>
wrote:

>p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
>> I posted a while back tests of power consumption of my new PC vs my 8
>> year old Windows 7 model.
>
>If I wanted to spare electricity, I would just use my RPi 3B running
>Raspbian on a Broadcom processor and 1G ram. Idles at under 2W and uses
>5W at high cpu load. That doesn't count the monitor mouse kb. Normally
>its power supply is turned off and uses 0.

I really don't like the Pi. I just don't get it. For hobbyist micro
controller development the Arduino/s are light years ahead and get to
the point. The Pi is also a bit of a 'Maker' toy when it comes to
embedded systems. Linux isn't great for embedded use either. Way to
complex and heavy on resources. Its only virtue is cutting edge ish
driver support which FreeBSD often lacks but otherwise FreeBSD is just
better. A lot better. Stable, consistent, polished.

I have one of the Qualcomm Dragonboards which has a great hardware spec
and runs a Linux or Android OS at a liveable rate but I got bored. The
Linux builds kept crashing and running Android as a desktop entertained
me for about an hour before I felt the need to torture Shit the cat. Way
more entertaining. Squeals like a piggy.

My preferred boards are PC Engines APU. Class. Run at ~13W and stay up
forever.

>What kind of numbers did you post for your new rig?

Message-ID: <40m2de1bsbadh87ej...@4ax.com>