Cent Browser 2.6.5.52(for Windows) Released

[CentBrowser]

I don't want to use port. ver.

Please try reinstalling your Visual C++ Redistributable from here:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download...x?id=48145

[rey]

em.. still no way to install extentions =| "Download interrupted" while trying to install any extention. using portable version.

[CentBrowser]

em.. still no way to install extentions =|  "Download interrupted" while trying to install any extention. using portable version.

Please check your anti-virus and firewall first.

[badablek]

Is this feature so important?
We feel that where to display the extension icons is not a big deal.

for me (at least), It is, more than you think 

I'm using extensions that work in the background (smoothscrollerator, anti-adblock killer, etc.) or that are designed only for one website (like ebay, leboncoin, etc.) and I don't want to see useless icons in the main interface or in the main menu which have to stay cristal clear and show only USEFUL icons because we have sometimes to disable it (adblock) or because we have to see it everytime (downloads)

everything else is useless 99% of the time, then why showing them ? Even hidden, the way that MD works is stupid IMHO

MD was made to make a clean interface, chrome/chromium developers are doing exactly the opposite...and it seems nobody cares. When MD was enforced, I did'nt care because I had the command-line to avoid that lame feature...now we don't even have the choice.

The good way to make a universal and popular web browser, IMHO, can be resumed with one word : CHOICE. Let people CHOOSE to use or not features. CB is great because we can tweak it and enable/disable what we want/don't want (like mouse gestures, for example). Removing this ability will lead to have x forks of chrome/chromium with exactly the same interface and with no "soul"...

Question is : is it hard to keep that feature alive so users can CHOOSE to use or not this interface. I'm not a programmer, but I don't think that this feature, which only tweaks a little bit the interface, represents a lot of source code, am I wrong ?

[jack]

em.. still no way to install extentions =|  "Download interrupted" while trying to install any extention. using portable version.

https://www.centbrowser.com/forum/showth...54#pid6354

[rey]

https://www.centbrowser.com/forum/showth...54#pid6354

thank you! this worked. damn, i though it was about version of Chromium and was waiting for a week till Cent update, thinking that it will solve extention problem 

[CentBrowser]

for me (at least), It is, more than you think 

I'm using extensions that work in the background (smoothscrollerator, anti-adblock killer, etc.) or that are designed only for one website (like ebay, leboncoin, etc.) and I don't want to see useless icons in the main interface or in the main menu which have to stay cristal clear and show only USEFUL icons because we have sometimes to disable it (adblock) or because we have to see it everytime (downloads)

everything else is useless 99% of the time, then why showing them ? Even hidden, the way that MD works is stupid IMHO

MD was made to make a clean interface, chrome/chromium developers are doing exactly the opposite...and it seems nobody cares. When MD was enforced, I did'nt care because I had the command-line to avoid that lame feature...now we don't even have the choice.

The good way to make a universal and popular web browser, IMHO, can be resumed with one word : CHOICE. Let people CHOOSE to use or not features. CB is great because we can tweak it and enable/disable what we want/don't want (like mouse gestures, for example). Removing this ability will lead to have x forks of chrome/chromium with exactly the same interface and with no "soul"...

Question is : is it hard to keep that feature alive so users can CHOOSE to use or not this interface. I'm not a programmer, but I don't think that this feature, which only tweaks a little bit the interface, represents a lot of source code, am I wrong ?

About 50 files were changed in extension_action_redesign removal.
We can add it back, but the obstacle is that Chrome developers are replacing the extension interface chrome.pageAction(which the flag extension_action_redesign relies on) with chrome.browserAction.
So the extension developers will also follow Chrome step and change their extensions.
Once we add it back, it is only useful for old extensions.

[RDS]

About 50 files were changed in extension_action_redesign removal.
We can add it back, but the obstacle is that Chrome developers are replacing the extension interface chrome.pageAction(which the flag extension_action_redesign relies on) with chrome.browserAction.
So the extension developers will also follow Chrome step and change their extensions.
Once we add it back, it is only useful for old extensions.

In the Opera 45 (Chrome 58) everything is fine with the extensions that appear in the address bar.

[Oliver.]

Hello

What about this request https://www.centbrowser.com/forum/showth...62#pid5662

[CentBrowser]

Hello

What about this request https://www.centbrowser.com/forum/showth...62#pid5662

When opening foreground tabs from any sources, our principle is always replacing a new tab priorly.
And there is no option to change this behavior, not only for external links, but for all sources.