Mozilla to end Firefox support for Windows XP and Vista in June 2018
Mozilla, maker of the Firefox web browser, announced today that Firefox support for Windows XP and Windows Vista will be ended in June 2018.
Mozilla moved Windows XP and Windows Vista users of Firefox to the web browser's ESR channel during the release of Firefox 53. This meant basically that Firefox 52.x was the last stable channel version of Firefox for those operating systems, and that XP and Vista users could not run Firefox 53 on their devices.
Firefox ESR is the Extended Support Release of Firefox. It is designed primarily for organizations who want more time when it comes to browser updates. Instead of having to cope with new releases every six or so weeks, Firefox ESR gets major updates only after eight release cycles. The browser gets security updates however when new Firefox versions get released.
Mozilla promised to support Windows XP and Vista until at least September 2017. The organization planned to analyze the situation then to come up with a final date for ending support for the two operating systems.
Firefox 52.0 ESR was released in March 2017, and the end of life for that particular ESR version is June 2018.
Windows XP and Vista users who use Firefox ESR currently may use that particular version of Firefox until June 26th, 2018. Firefox ESR is then updated to version 59.x, and that version does not support Windows XP or Windows Vista anymore.
Microsoft ended support for the Windows XP operating system on April 8, 2014 and support for Windows Vista on April 11, 2017.
It is possible to still get security updates for XP and Vista, by leveraging updates for XP and Vista based server operating systems that Microsoft still supports.
Mozilla supported XP and Vista longer than other browser makers and Microsoft. Google dropped support for both operating systems back in 2016 for instance, and so did Opera Software and Vivaldi Technologies. Microsoft does not support Internet Explorer on XP or Vista anymore as well.
Pale Moon supports Vista but not XP, SeaMonkey does support XP and Vista.
Netmarketshare sees Windows XP usage at 5.69% of the overall desktop operating system market, Vista at 0.43%; the combined usage share sits around 6% therefore according to the company.
Now You: Still running XP or Vista? What do you plan to do once support runs out?
What will the Luddites do? What will the Luddites do?
Frankly I have no sympathy for any of them. It’s only a matter of time before SeaMonkey won’t work for them anymore. I suppose they’ll do their very best collecting malware and viruses along the way…
Despite the negative comments posted about Mozilla ( you know the ones who got personal with you and Pants in past FF articles) look at the positive side. Mozilla is supporting legacy OS for far longer than other software providers. This is a big plus for FF users.
I agree with you that it is about time for users of XP and Vista to think about the future.
However, I will stay with FF 52 ESR until the problems with Legacy addons conversion to Web Extensions are sorted out.
Just to be clear. I have never denigrated anyone’s choice to use Waterfox, Palemoon, Seamonkey, Vivalidi, or whatever (maybe chrome!). I have not derided any developers, and I wish everyone the best, always have. I snapped ONE TIME at Appster (and not for anything to do with software), and then got “picked on” for 10 days or so by a small horde of commenters even in absentia. This was all cleared up for the betterment of the comments here.
Please do not lump me in with antagonists (to quote trump “on all sides” – heh)
Chillax www. com, Appster :) :kisseykissey:
I agree with you 100% on this one, Gary D. After 16 years, I think Mozilla has had enough of XP, imo…
It’s time the cheapskates move on and update.
Despite the negative comments posted about alternative browsers (you know the ones who got really annoying and repetitive with me and 90% of all other commenters as the corporate shills refused to back off) look at the positive side. Mozilla has been going down far longer than other software providers. This is a big plus for alternative browser users.
I agree with you that it is time for users of Firefox to think about the future.
Nevertheless, I will stay with alternative browsers until the problems with WebExtensions and their pitiful functionality deficits are sorted out (read: until nothing works in alternative browsers anymore).
Sorry, but this is reality. Firefox WebExtension users = Chrome users, basically. I don’t know why they are still sticking to Firefox, at all. Maybe because they like the new logo so much!? Anyway, it’s time for XP and Vista support to be dropped, yet the same way it is actually time to drop Firefox altogether. There is no reason for this product to exist anymore, let’s face it.
If somebody feels this is trolling/whining, feel free to come up with some actual reason why anyone should use Firefox 57* instead of Chrome…
Waterfox users who are also Firefox haters are ingrates. Waterfox exists because of Firefox, to the point that without even searching I found 2 Mozilla employees among Waterfox’s biggest contributors.
@ Appster said:
Sorry, but this is reality. Firefox WebExtension users = Chrome users, basically. I don’t know why they are still sticking to Firefox, at all. Maybe because they like the new logo so much!?
That is inaccurate Appster and you know it. Firefox is still way more customizable tan Chrome (just less than it used to be). And you can use prefs that control how it renders, differently than Blink. You should stop spreading generalizations and misinformation.
Tweakers are simply not a market big enough to bother with any longer. In radio and TV, no one caters to 55+ any longer. Yes they watch TV and listen to the radio, but advertisers don’t want them. Similarly, Mozilla doesn’t see tweakers and power users as they once did. They want the Chrome users they lost.
Right or wrong – that’s their aim
@ Appster: (as I said before)
You seem to be of the mindset that back in 2004, Firefox was targeted towards expert users, and I never recalled that at all. It was just marketed as a better alternative to Internet Explorer. Add-ons were just one the ways to add extensibility to the browser. The power user was all there was, that’s all.
But now they find performance to be the key target, and they find that the add-ons architecture is holding them back, and can we not agree that they have lost market share to Google? If I were a stakeholder in the browser’s success, would I not want to try to claw that back?
>Mozilla has been going down far longer than other software providers. This is a big plus for alternative browser users.
Spoken like a Chrome user. Congrats. Congrats.
>I agree with you that it is time for users of Firefox to think about the future.
I believe he was speaking about XP and Vista users only, but feel free to distort what he said.
>Sorry, but this is reality. Firefox WebExtension users = Chrome users, basically. I don’t know why they are still sticking to Firefox, at all.
Because it’s not Google and Google is a huge monopoly. Chrome is the new IE.
You only look at the big picture when it suits you.
>There is no reason for this product to exist anymore, let’s face it.
And who are you to declare it dead? Who appointed you to do this? Simply because YOU don’t like it and are on some silly crusade, everybody else is supposed to give up on it?
>If somebody feels this is trolling/whining, feel free to come up with some actual reason why anyone should use Firefox 57* instead of Chrome…
That’s been discussed around here ad nauseam. You just refuse to listen, that’s all.
@www.com, Jody Thornton:
You can keep giving Firefox 57+ way more credit than it actually deserves… all you like. This doesn’t change the fact that WebExtensions are extremely diminished forms of what used to be our add-ons. CTR and TMP and similarly complex add-ons aren’t possible anymore. Why? Because the weak ass APIs that Mozilla provides are not up for the challenge. Ask the specific authors for more info on this. Firefox 57+ is pretty Chrome-like in its abilities, much more than any prior version of Firefox. It’s a pity that Mozilla doesn’t care about customization anymore, which used to be a big selling point (but of course not the only one like Jody Thornton believes I implied…). Guys, in all seriousness, if you are OK with Chrome-like, weak ass WebExtensions that’s entirely OK with me. Yet I don’t understand the aggressiveness with which you attack to actual power users. It’s us who Mozilla developers turn their collective backs to, not you simple users. Nothing will be lost to you, so why are you even commenting? Why do you feel the need to defend a downgraded browser? That makes zero sense, guys.
And to ‘www.com specifically… Yep, downgrading to Chrome-like capabilities, including Chrome’s very extension system, is totally going to break Google’s dominance. I see where you are coming from…
@Appster. I’m not attacking you, but Firefox is not Chrome-like. You’re equating Chrome to mean “dumbed down for the masses”, and that just isn’t an accurate portrayal of Firefox. However, the mobile-friendly audience is more attractive to Mozilla now. That’s all I’m saying.
Back awhile ago, I was trying to demonstrate how a tablet or phone could likely do the work of a desktop in many aspects. Look through your responses as to how set in your ways of thinking are. Yes, I also prefer a desktop, but I’ve been amazed at what many people can accomplish on a mobile OS.
This relates because those mobile-friendly users want a desktop browser that fits in to that mold (let’s face it – modern users only resort to desktops when they have to, or at work). Mozilla wants that market.
“It’s time the cheapskates move on and update.”
Is not about money but simply put XP is faster in older hardware computers.
Instead of your incessant bickering with ww.com, why can’t you have the decency to respond to any of my several posts that I’ve asked you to respond to, for several months now.
@Jody Thornton: Which of the comments of yours to you want me to answer to? If it is the Desktop vs. Mobile one, then there is no easy answer. I think it’s pretty clear that mobile is becoming more preeminent as we speak, but it is not up to the task yet and will likely never be up to the task when it comes to extremely powerful processing, as this would likely require bigger devices. Likewise it will never work for scenarios in which a bigger monitor would be required, unless the developers of mobile OSes come up with a concept similar to Microsoft’s continuity, but much more refined and stable. Also it will never work for very special/complex input methods, e.g. math formulas.
As for the CSS tweaks you’ve shown me to be possible with Firefox 57 I must say that I am not too impressed. And I’ve already told you time and again that my needs far exceed the recreation of the interface. None of the CSS tweaks can mimic Tab Mix Plus functionality, for example. Likewise a real download window can’t be replicated this way. So thanks for showing me, some of them were quite useful, but the situation is still far from perfect and is in no way satisfying yet.
Is there anything else you want to know? I am not in the right mood for being forced to answer to posts for which I see no real point in an answer.
As for ‘www.com, if you can get him to stop his annoyances I would be all too happy. His constant provocations are as annoying as they are pointless.
Sure, despite all the reasons, let them go to hell, right? Wrong, sort of.
Let’s explore the possibilities:
Those running XP could be old people that can’t afford a new machine and still need some software that can’t work on Linux. For Vista people I agree, if they can run Vista, they can run 7 too. Sure Windows 8 and 10 are pure garbage and staying with Windows 7 makes the most sense, but using Vista, I can’t justify that in any way. You can even get a pirated ISO of 7 Ultimate and use an activator to get a permanent lifetime licence, so there’s no excuse.
I can’t imagine anyone between 15 and 40 that willingly uses XP at home because of some beliefs, it just doesn’t make any sense. I miss XP, but all the OS limitations make it unusable nowadays – you can’t have more than 3.9GB RAM, you can’t have up-to-date software, you might have trouble finding drivers for your new hardware, so that’s that.
>I can’t imagine anyone between 15 and 40 that willingly uses XP at home because of some beliefs, it just doesn’t make any sense.
Oh I can. Go to reddit and see. I believe there are still XP forums over there. They’re probably whining about this latest move from Mozilla as we speak…
I live in the UK. The list below shows who is still using XP:
ATMs and some back office operations.
At the moment, all NHS hospitals use XP.
3. National and Local Government:
Front and back office operations
4. Police, Fire and Ambulance:
Front and back office operations
The reason XP is so prevalent is that most of the above use legacy software and either can not afford to replace it or can not find good new alternatioves. They all have expensive extended support agreements with Microsoft. Probably, this is why MS has released Security updates well after XP was removed from official support.
Also, the cost of replacing a few million PCs, Operating Systems and new software does not bear thinking about.
> I can’t imagine anyone between 15 and 40 that willingly uses XP at home because of some beliefs,
Being a member on many Tech/computer forums I’ve seen plenty guy’s (40+ – 50+ yo) on the tinfoil hat/paranoid spectrum who claim that XP is the last MS OS that doesn’t “phone home” and with proper hardening and sandboxing can be as secure as Windows 7, 8 & 10.
@Weilan: “but using Vista, I can’t justify that in any way.”
The government at my location is still using Win Vista today. They “upgraded” from Win XP to the failed Win Vista in 2011 — after WIn 7 was already out for more than 1 year (released: 2009 Q4).
As for why Win Vista was chosen over WIn 7 … I suppose anything can justified at a place where corruption is reportedly very low. (How it really works: Corruption by TPTB was legalized long ago, hence there is low/ no corruption.)
Nevertheless, I was told that many of the staff of the (government-linked) IT vendor responsible for managing the government IT infrastructure resigned in despair &/or protest just before the mass “upgrade” to Win Vista.
@Weilan ”I canâ€™t imagine anyone between 15 and 40 that willingly uses XP at home because of some beliefs, it just doesnâ€™t make any sense.”
32 yo I’m very happy with XP I don’t want crappy tablet-mobile device based OS on my PC. (my hardware can support any kind of Windows )
Nice and Informative post you have shared.
Hi Martin. I think the following part could be improved:
> Instead of having to cope with new releases every six weeks, Firefox ESR gets major updates only after eight release cycles. The browser gets security updates however when new Firefox versions get released.
– Firefox does not have a six weeks release schedule. Firefox 54 was released 8 weeks after Firefox 53, Firefox 55 was released 8 weeks after Firefox 54, Firefox 56 was released 7 weeks after Firefox 55, Firefox 57 will be released 7 weeks after Firefox 56 and Firefox 58 will be released 9 weeks after Firefox 57. The next release which will be released 6 weeks after the previous release will be Firefox 64 in November 2018.
– “major updates only after eight release cycles” => seven, not eight.
I know that Mozilla has a flexible schedule, I change this to make it clearer. You can stay eight cycles on ESR. Thanks!
Thanks for fixing.
Regarding the ESR cycles I am still confused about the eight. :) There is a new major release on the ESR channel after seven mainstream major releases, but you can stay nine mainstream major releases long on one ESR major release. ;)
I discount the first as you need to update to it either way, so, you get eight additional releases once you updated to a new ESR release.
Actually Opera still supports Win XP. Even though you can’t install the newer versions, Opera 36 works on XP and receives security updates.
They still support it with security updates?
The Next Update Came Almost 4 Months After The Support Was Dropped.
I Think They Only Release Updates When The Situation Is Extra Serious.
Anyway, No Updates In The Last 14 Months Or So.
You Can Check Their FTP Archives To Confirm What I Am Saying.
Regarding FF, I Am Not Using Version 52ESR Because It Broke Compatibility With Some Prior Extension(s) I Love – So, For Me, The Last XP Compatible Version Is 51.0.1.
I Do Not Care If Browsers Drop XP Support Or Not, CHROME Did It, OPERA Did It, And They Are Both Still Highly Usable.
Just For All The Many Trolls Out There, And For Your Information, I Refuse To Use Any Computer For Financial Transactions, Whatever The OS, Period.
XPOCALYPSE FOREVER !
Well, they haven’t said that they’ve dropped support for XP, and if you open their website from a Windows XP machine it gives you the correct version to download, although the other comment is correct, it hasn’t received security updates in a while.
List of Web Browsers Working with XP 2017
@Martin Brinkman – “They still support it with security updates?” – Google Opera for Windows XP has gotten one security update since they announced that they’ll still support it, doesn’t sound like support to me, MAYBE it’ll see one more security update.
Read this short article Martin and see if you can find a Lie… – https://blogs.opera.com/desktop/2016/08/security-update-windows-xp-vista-users/
“Windows XP and Vista users who use Firefox ESR currently may use that particular version of Firefox until June 26th, 2018. Firefox ESR is then updated to version 59.x, and that version does not support Windows XP or Windows Vista anymore.” – So Mozilla is gonna push one final update that renders the browser unusable? if that’s the case they instead should just issue a warning every time the browser is launched, kind of like Chrome does.
OK, I’ll bite.
Comments on this article show why:
– We now have junk like W10
– Almost all browsers are now Google Chrome clones
Oh wait … I forgot about Edge (“blech!”).
These days updating is like playing Russian Roulette with a 6 shot revolver loaded with 5 bullets.
To You who don’t let people make their own choice for what operatingsystem they run, probably for compatibility reasons, stop comment ! We live in a, somewhat, free world today. What people do they often do for a reason.
There’s more than the 32-bit XP, there is also a 64-bit version that handles modern computers quite well, as long as there are drivers for it.
In my family we are using XP and XP x64 due to that not even Vista could run some of our most important software, not even in compatibility mode…
We also refuse to install 8.1 and 10 Malware Edition on any of our computers. If we need future support for Mozilla we can install Linux as a secondary operatingsystem….
So stop whine about us how stay with the working old operatingsystems instead of using the buggy junk You seem to use.
Windows 8 is not malware. Get past the Start Screen debacle. Disable it with Classic Shell and get a start menu back. It’s a nicer OS than Windows 7. You can disable ALL of that Metro stuff. Just try it.
Actually, Windows is Microsoft’s property. Under the EULA and copyright laws, they could make you stop using it if they wanted to. Again – it’s THEIR property.
It’s nice to know that there are people who partake of this forum who are more advanced than some others, and who can
put the Luddites among us in their proper place.
I’m quite happy with my new PaleMoon 27.5 fork for XP and as far as being a luddite, well I don’t feel insecure about my PC, my OS or any other part of my life.
If you need to feel superior because you use a specific brand or product or feel the need to identify with a large group then go for it.
Seamonkey support will stop as of version 2.49 and since A. Kalla has no outlet for his versions, Seamonkey is effectively dead at the moment. Too bad as it’s my browser of choice but life moves on for all of us.
“Still running XP or Vista? What do you plan to do once support runs out?”
On a sobering note, I came across comments elsewhere that indicate that there is a significant number of users still running Win 2000. I suppose the only browsers supporting Win 2000 are Netscape & old versions of Internet Explorer (maybe v6 & v7) ?
As for alternative OSes … would recent versions of Firefox & other browsers work on ReactOS, supposedly a Win OS clone ? The latest version (v0.4.6) was recently released on 30 Aug 2017: https://www.ghacks.net/2012/02/12/reactos-the-windows-xp-alternative
Or perhaps one can try the Linux-based Zorin OS Core/ Lite, whose target audience are apparently Win XP/ Vista/ 7 users. In particular, the Lite distro is suitable for users with older hardware: https://zorinos.com/help/system-requirements
Personally, I’m running Win 7 on an oldish (2010) laptop, & will continue doing so for the forseeable future until some crucial hardware (eg. motherboard) dies.
Since I don’t care for Win 10’s GUI, telemetry & diminished user choice, hopefully, there would be a larger range of viable choices when the time comes to replace a dead laptop. Either Linux-based OS becomes less frustrating to use — or WIn OS miraculously gets better ?
XP is the best, other OS can’t operate without the internet.
Yes they can! I can run Windows 8 offline just as much as XP. Stop spreading false information like that!
Even if Firefox itself is no longer receiving patches, does the built-in Safe Browsing blacklists still receive updates from Google?
The same could be asked of unsupported Internet Explorer 7, 8, 9, 10. Is the built-in SmartScreen filter getting updates?
If the answer is no, and you don’t use any other site filtering like UBlock Origin, you’re really vulnerable.
One workaround is to set your DNS to servers that filter for threat sites, such as the Norton DNS from Symantec.
For those who fear Norton, it doesn’t install any software.