Currently Google Chrome portable doesn't run on the Windows ME(millenium) operating system. Can you take out the features of Google Chrome that don't run on Windows ME(millenium) and release a special Google Chrome portable version for the Windows ME(millenium) operating system?
New: streamWriter (Jun 28, 2024), Platform 29.5.3 (Jun 27, 2024)
1,100+ portable packages, 1.1 billion downloads
Please donate today
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
Windows Me will never be supported by Google Chrome. Nor will it be supported by most other modern releases. Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice.org, Pidgin, etc have all dropped support.
We will also be dropping support for all Windows 9x variants shortly as well. Supporting Win9x/Me requires us to not support many languages like Vietnamese, Serbian (Cyrillic), Georgian, Khmer, Pashto, etc. The PortableApps.com Platform, installers, launchers, etc, will all be moving to Unicode.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
What if you integrated KernelEx( https://sourceforge.net/projects/kernelex/ ) into Google Chrome portable for Windows 98/Windows ME users?
KernelEx allows Windows XP software to run on Windows 98/Windows ME. So when a person opens Google Chrome portable on Windows 98/Windows ME it should also open the KernelEx emulator, and once Google Chrome portable is closed, KernelEx should be closed too.
Could you make Google Chrome portable like this?
KernelEx is meant to install at the system level. So you install it on your Win98/Me machine and hope that software that doesn't work on Win9x will work with it installed. Some will. Most will not. From a quick search online, it doesn't seem KernelEx supports Chrome.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Windows ME support will only go down as time goes on.
Also, Microsoft was never fully behind that release.
I've a close friend who worked in the MS Redmond facility at the time, and said that ME was created only to have a product with the word Millennium in the title (it was released around 2000) and it was poorly implemented at best.
Sorry to bash your OS, but that's what I've been told.
Personally, I still prefer XP.
I made this half-pony, half-monkey monster to please you.
Not to knock your story, but I find it hard to believe that Microsoft released a shoddy piece of software just for the sake of naming it something clever.
Windows 98 was still the main Windows OS, despite Redmond's best efforts having been put into Windows NT 4. NT4 had some issues and more importantly wasn't compatible with many games and some other software, was favored by businesses. That was becoming less fact and more stigma as more developers supported the NT kernel, and as we all know 10 years later, Windows 2000 could do most of what Windows 98 could do, but was more secure. Windows ME, as I understood it, was meant to be a cross between Windows 98 and Windows 2000. As such, it was horribly unstable, and Microsoft disavowed it when XP came out.
I wish I had the chart, but when Windows XP came out, Microsoft published a benchmarking chart that showed Windows XP's performance increases over ME and 98. The funny thing was, while it was far beyond ME, it wasn't as far beyond 98. So the chart, while making XP look good, showed that ME was inferior to 98 in every way that they tested. If anyone has this chart laying around somewhere, I'd love a copy of it, because I've looked on Google Images and can't find it, and I'd like more than my memory to back the story.