Yet every browser has its own Widevine plugin? I know where - for example - Firefox's implementation is located. I'm sure I could find out where Chrome's is...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Other Chromium Legacy: Google Chrome for OS X 10.7 – 10.9
- Thread starter Wowfunhappy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- web browsers
- Sort by reaction score
Chrome 116, the latest version of Google on Sierra, High Sierra and Mojave works on all DRM sites. Not the Microsoft version on Chromium 116 (Edge) already banned. Opera's version on Chromium 116 works on all DRM sites (Opera One 102). The Vivaldi browser compatible with 116 (Vivaldi 6.2.3105.54) also works fine on all DRM sites. Each Chromium-based "builder" includes its DRM protection system with binaries and the most careless seems to be Microsoft, which is why its browser has failed. 😁
Firefox and Chrome each download with their own copy of the Widevine binary, but it's the same binary.
I'm actually pretty sure that's not true, all the Chromium-based browsers use Widevine (as does Firefox). If certain streaming sites ban certain Chromium-based browsers but not others, that's probably due to some kind of additional fingerprinting added by the streaming site.
(The exception in all this is Safari which actually does not support Widevine, it supports a Fairplay-based Apple system. The streaming sites support Apple's system in addition to Widevine.)
Umm in modern Safaris yes (10.10 and above) but in older 8 and 9 you had to use the now dead Microsoft plug-in Silverlight. Microsoft Azure uses html5FairPlayHLS for Safari (HLS technology) Fair Play Media. In Safari 6 SilverlightSS (PlayReady) in Safari 8 html5FairPlayHLS (FairPlay). But the Edge browser is very sad.
Ah right, thanks I forgot Microsoft also has their own implementation of Encrypted Media Extensions. And yeah older versions of Safari used Silverlight because they predated Encrypted Media Extensions.
Yes you're right - I just tried Chrome 116 in my High Sierra VM and it streamed ITVX! It didn't 2 weeks ago when I tried, so I'm guessing that Google implemented Widevine in 116 later than in their latest version of Chrome. However, the issue will be (as with Firefox) how long they keep supporting 'old' versions of Chrome.
Google usually lets it run for a few more months until the video platform bans the OS version. I think you're using High Sierra. If you make the effort to upgrade to Mojave, you have another option: Orion. I'm testing it on the platforms and the DRM works without any problems. Orion is updated. The last update is from August 3rd
Attachments
Check this out. Google has filed a lawsuit against Microsoft in the European Union courts over the monopoly of its Azure platform
Google demanda a Microsoft ante CE por presunto monopolio – DW – 25/09/2024
Google acusa a Microsoft de forzar a los clientes a la nube con su monopolio de Windows. La Comisión Europea debería intervenir, exige Google.
With Google recently ending support for 10.15, I can report that Chromium Legacy runs just fine on mac OS Catalina. Even Google Account syncing works.
i dont know if this is my issue or not, but on 10.8 mountain lion, chromium is extremely unstable. it will crash if i try to go to any website.
Weird - v124 runs ok for me in Mavericks, apart from two things: 1. the DRM video issue due to Widevine not being updated, and 2. the 'going blank' of some web pages, especially Facebook, cured by reloading or relaunching if persistent.
Have you tried the usual things, e.g. testing in another user account, clearing cache and preferences file(s)?.
i dont have a seperate chromium install in mountain lion, since mountain lion will corrupt the chromium app if i run it directly there. i have a mavericks system on this computer, so i am just accessing chromium from mavericks in mountain lion. i dont know if mountain lion doesnt work with chromium or smth?
It's supposed to - Legacy was created to work with 10.7 10.8 and 10.9. Have you tried an earlier stable build?.
I finally sent an email to Bluebox in early September and he said he'd like to come back to the project but has been busy.
If he doesn't update it, I'm hopeful Firefox Dynasty will become stable enough to work as an alternative.
Other than that, I don't think there's much anyone can do. However, I strongly discourage pleading for updates on Github, because for basically any open source developer this will have the opposite effect of what you want.
Last edited:
Bummer. I don't feel any sense of entitlement, yet I do think that leaving any number of users in the lurch and simply vanishing without a word of explanation to anyone at Github is morally questionable.
However those of us running Firefox 115.15esr on 10.12 - 10.14 have now gotten a reprieve. Mozilla will continue supporting Firefox esr at least until March 2025, and hopefully longer.
Firefox 115.15 can now be updated to 115.16 with security patches identical to the 128.3esr.
Mozilla extends Firefox 115 support for old Windows and macOS devices - gHacks Tech News
Mozilla is extending support for Firefox ESR 115 on unsupported versions of Windows and macOS until at least March 2025.
www.ghacks.net
Last edited:
I disagree. You didn't pay for it and get a promise of continued support with your purchase. There is no obligation from us developers who work on free projects in our spare time to owe anybody anything. Life happens. Things change. Be happy you got to extend the life of your machine for free due to the kindness of others.
I agree with your disagreement with me. That's why I said at the outset that I feel no sense of entitlement, but perhaps could have expanded on what I meant by that. To put a finer point on this:
Everything you say is correct. Except bluebox, whoever that may be, surely has to understand and must know that there is a devoted user base for this browser, especially since there have been any number of sponsors. To be absolutely clear, I don't mean to say that, because there have been sponsers, that has created any kind of obligation for bluebox to continue development. I only mention sponsors to reinforce the point that bluebox must know that there is a devoted user base.
I'm in no way saying that bluebox has any kind of written or unwritten or implied contractual agreement of any kind with that user base, and has no right to stop development of that browser.
All I am saying is that I find it morally questionable that this developer, who, according to WFH, is still alive, but just very busy, with no longer any time to continue development, has in effect completely vanished without taking the maybe five minutes it might take to leave an announcement of some kind on Github - along the lines of...until at least until further notice, this project is on hold or perhaps may be abandoned. I do thing bluebox does owe that user base at least that. Someone relatively recently asked at Github if this project was dead, and even extremely busy, bluebox might have very briefly replied.
Everything you say is correct. Except bluebox, whoever that may be, surely has to understand and must know that there is a devoted user base for this browser, especially since there have been any number of sponsors. To be absolutely clear, I don't mean to say that, because there have been sponsers, that has created any kind of obligation for bluebox to continue development. I only mention sponsors to reinforce the point that bluebox must know that there is a devoted user base.
I'm in no way saying that bluebox has any kind of written or unwritten or implied contractual agreement of any kind with that user base, and has no right to stop development of that browser.
All I am saying is that I find it morally questionable that this developer, who, according to WFH, is still alive, but just very busy, with no longer any time to continue development, has in effect completely vanished without taking the maybe five minutes it might take to leave an announcement of some kind on Github - along the lines of...until at least until further notice, this project is on hold or perhaps may be abandoned. I do thing bluebox does owe that user base at least that. Someone relatively recently asked at Github if this project was dead, and even extremely busy, bluebox might have very briefly replied.
Last edited:
On my website, I have a copy of Dolphin (the Wii/GC emulator) which I modified to be compatible with OS X Mavericks. I have updated it a few times to merge in changes from the latest version of upstream Dolphin. At the moment, however, my most recent build is more than a year old.
Have I abandoned it? I legitimately don't know! It's possible that next Saturday, I'll wake up, read about a new Dolphin feature I want to have, and decide to spend the day or weekend working on an update. Alternately, I might not get around to it until next summer, or I'll never update it again, ever. I literally do not know any more information about my future plans than you do.
I'm projecting a bit here, but I assume Bluebox operates in a similar way with Chromium Legacy. He didn't wake up one morning and decide to put it on hold; he has been meaning to get back to it, but hasn't, and maybe he never will. What information could he share that would be helpful?
---
If I'm coming across as a little protective of Bluebox, it's because to my knowledge, he has never attempted to publicize Chromium Legacy! The browser has no publicly facing website other than its Github repository, which I found in a random Google search in 2020. At the time, it had zero stars, issues or discussions, and I don't think anyone else knew about it!
I decided to download this mystery browser and try it in a Mountain Lion VM (it didn't work on Mavericks at the time), at which point I realized, holy crap, this thing is the real deal, it actually works, and proceeded to share it with the rest of the world here on MacRumors, Hacker News, and so on.
To my knowledge, Bluebox has never posted outside of Github. He just started making a browser for himself, and then when people started opening Github issues, he did his best to respond. I only have his email address because I sponsored him for a significant amount of money, and he sent an email to thank me for that.
Pretty please, leave him alone. He'll release an update if/when he releases an update.
Have I abandoned it? I legitimately don't know! It's possible that next Saturday, I'll wake up, read about a new Dolphin feature I want to have, and decide to spend the day or weekend working on an update. Alternately, I might not get around to it until next summer, or I'll never update it again, ever. I literally do not know any more information about my future plans than you do.
I'm projecting a bit here, but I assume Bluebox operates in a similar way with Chromium Legacy. He didn't wake up one morning and decide to put it on hold; he has been meaning to get back to it, but hasn't, and maybe he never will. What information could he share that would be helpful?
---
If I'm coming across as a little protective of Bluebox, it's because to my knowledge, he has never attempted to publicize Chromium Legacy! The browser has no publicly facing website other than its Github repository, which I found in a random Google search in 2020. At the time, it had zero stars, issues or discussions, and I don't think anyone else knew about it!
I decided to download this mystery browser and try it in a Mountain Lion VM (it didn't work on Mavericks at the time), at which point I realized, holy crap, this thing is the real deal, it actually works, and proceeded to share it with the rest of the world here on MacRumors, Hacker News, and so on.
To my knowledge, Bluebox has never posted outside of Github. He just started making a browser for himself, and then when people started opening Github issues, he did his best to respond. I only have his email address because I sponsored him for a significant amount of money, and he sent an email to thank me for that.
Pretty please, leave him alone. He'll release an update if/when he releases an update.
Last edited:
>especially since there have been any number of sponsors
fyi bluebox only begrudgingly accepted sponsors, and the fact that accepting sponsorship is easily mentally construed as an obligation (after all in life most transfers of money are exchanges) is why many devs ardently refuse donations (e.g. gorhill)
>morally questionable
fwiw I don't like the term morally questionable here because the harm is effectively zero, so saying the decision (or lack thereof) is an (im)moral one is a dubious claim. Rather, "courteous" is probably the right word. As wfh mentioned, in practical terms his announcing that he has temporarily paused work is not really too actionable for you as end user (especially if the duration is unknown). If there are concerns with security, then the situation is no different from before where there have been periods without updates; each user presumably has their own risk-level they are comfortable with and can have arrangements prepared.
Now as to why the decision was made to remain silent, that's really just speculation but there could be many good reasons. As with the decision to accept donations, announcing as such might indicate some sort of obligation to users. It might also just be that he doesn't view it with such gravitas. There could also be cultural factors at play here, in conjunction with that he seems to prefer anonymity.
I do like the closure of knowing he still exists though, bluebox is a brilliant individual and I've picked up a few things just from reading his commits.
fyi bluebox only begrudgingly accepted sponsors, and the fact that accepting sponsorship is easily mentally construed as an obligation (after all in life most transfers of money are exchanges) is why many devs ardently refuse donations (e.g. gorhill)
>morally questionable
fwiw I don't like the term morally questionable here because the harm is effectively zero, so saying the decision (or lack thereof) is an (im)moral one is a dubious claim. Rather, "courteous" is probably the right word. As wfh mentioned, in practical terms his announcing that he has temporarily paused work is not really too actionable for you as end user (especially if the duration is unknown). If there are concerns with security, then the situation is no different from before where there have been periods without updates; each user presumably has their own risk-level they are comfortable with and can have arrangements prepared.
Now as to why the decision was made to remain silent, that's really just speculation but there could be many good reasons. As with the decision to accept donations, announcing as such might indicate some sort of obligation to users. It might also just be that he doesn't view it with such gravitas. There could also be cultural factors at play here, in conjunction with that he seems to prefer anonymity.
I do like the closure of knowing he still exists though, bluebox is a brilliant individual and I've picked up a few things just from reading his commits.
My only concern is that Legacy was the ONLY browser in Mavericks with updated Widevine, so I could carry on streaming Prime, ITV, and Channel 4 (BBC iPlayer doesn't use Wvn so still works there).
I now stream those in a 10.13 VM with Firefox 115 ESR but once Mozilla stops supporting that next March, I'm f***ed as 10.13 is as high as my iMac will go.