Pale Moon 27.6.0 is out

The developers of the Pale Moon web browser have released version 27.6.0 to the public. The new version of Pale Moon is a major development update according to the release notes.

You can run a manual check for updates in the browser with a click on Pale Moon > Help > About Pale Moon > Check for Updates. You can then download and install the update using the internal update mechanism.

Downloads are also provided on the official project website. Simply run the installer to update any installation of Pale Moon on the target system. There is also a portable version for users who don't want to install the browser.

Pale Moon 27.6.0

pale moon 27.6

The new version of Pale Moon is a development and security release. Windows Vista and Windows 7 users may notice that (some) fonts may look different after the update to Pale Moon 27.6.0. This is caused by the dropping of support for Direct2D 1.0 to prevent font rendering issues in the browser.

Windows 7 users may install the Platform Update for Windows 7 to re-enable support for Direct2D.

Pale Moon does not support WebExtensions. Users of the browser who tried to install WebExtensions in the past received "extension is corrupt" errors. The browser displays a notification now that is easier to understand.

pale moon webextensions

It reads "This add-on could not be installed because Pale Moon does not support WebExtensions". This makes it clearer to users, and avoid situations that leave users puzzled when extensions install fine in Firefox but are not installed in Pale Moon due to corruption.

Read also:  Pale Moon profile backup tool

Proxy users find a new option in the connection options. The new "use proxy to perform DNS queries (SOCKS v5 only)" option might come in handy as it may prevent DNS leaks.

Other changes of importance in Pale Moon 27.6.0 are the use of the new automatic update infrastructure, Brotli HTTP support, updates to various libraries used by the browser, and lots of behind-the-scenes improvements and fixes.

Changes were made to security and privacy related functionality. The developers removed "stale entries" from the HSTS preload list, and added an option to clear site connectivity data when deleting the browsing history.

Pale Moon 27.6.1

Pale Moon 27.6.1 was released on November 15, 2017. It is a small bug fix release that addersses the following issues:

  • Fixed new window regressions.
  • Fixed "rare" HTTP/2 hangups.
  • Updated CitiBank and Netflix override.
  • Fixed an input element focus issue within handlers.
  • Aligned XHR with the current spec to allow "withCredentials".

You can check out the full release notes here.

Summary
Article Name
Pale Moon 27.6.0 is out
Description
The developers of the Pale Moon web browser have released version 27.6.0 to the public, a major development update according to the release notes.
Author
Publisher
Ghacks Technology News
Logo
Advertisement
Please share this article

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedinmail


Filed under:


Responses to Pale Moon 27.6.0 is out

  1. Jody Thornton November 9, 2017 at 12:45 pm #

    How severe are the font issues on Vista or Windows 7 (pre-platform update?). I would assume most users have the Windows 7 Platform update.

    No issues here on windows 8.

  2. Appster November 9, 2017 at 1:23 pm #

    I never got why the Pale Moon team didn't go along with Australis in the first place. I dislike Australis as well, yett CTR should really fix most annoyances. Them stubbornly clinging to the Firefox 28 interface leads to their users having to install aged add-on versions. This is a no go for me, personally.

    • Jody Thornton November 9, 2017 at 1:31 pm #

      And it doesn't help much when users on the Pale Moon Forum cite issues with the platform update. Then when they ask Moonchild if there is another workaround, he says, "Install the platform update".

      So Appster, if Quantum isn't going to be your cup of tea, what are you running (or switching to?). Waterfox?

      • satrow November 9, 2017 at 2:36 pm #

        If you check the platform update page, you'll see it's on the '3rd' revision:http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2670838.

        Yet the original page got into double figures within ~15 months of the original release (same kb#) example: December 16, 2013 - Revision: 9.0 > https://web.archive.org/web/20131224030226/http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2670838

        Put simply, it's changed enormously since the original release.

        I installed the pre -release version (dated Nov. 2012, installed early Dec.) and only hit font/display issues after the 2nd 'official' release, I tried several other iterations during the first 15 months but without success. It was only after a new drive and fresh install (W7x64) that it worked for me without issue, so I promptly tested it on my alt. machine, still crap; wipe/reinstall fixed that one as well.

        A lot can change in five years ;)

      • Appster November 10, 2017 at 4:41 pm #

        @Jody Thornton: Waterfox for the Firefox add-ons I need, yes. Also Vivaldi, for testing purposes as of now.

  3. Anon November 9, 2017 at 4:07 pm #

    Going by the release notes there's not a whole lot of security fixes. Either fantastic code or you'd expect to see more.

  4. A different Martin November 9, 2017 at 4:26 pm #

    I'm running Windows 7 SP1 (with the "Windows Platform Update," which I gather is KB2670838) and Linux Mint 18.2 Cinnamon in VirtualBox. I didn't have any issues updating to Pale Moon 27.6.0 in either platform (in Linux Mint, using the Pale Moon for Linux Installer, aka pminstaller), and, granting that it's still early days, I haven't noticed any new problems running the new version so far. I continue to run into a slowly growing number of sites or pages that just don't seem to work in Pale Moon, but that's what I have the Open With Google Chrome extension for. I know nothing about website design, so I don't know if these sites and pages aren't working because Pale Moon is an "archaic, obsolete browser that's not keeping up with evolving standards and protocols," as some detractors like to portray it, or if it's because of self-serving "embrace, extend, extinguish" practices by Google, like this alleged instance:

    'How Chrome Broke the Web' - Slashdot
    https://tech.slashdot.org/story/17/11/08/1135240/how-chrome-broke-the-web
    (The Chrome team "broke the web" to make Chrome perform better, according to Nikita Prokopov, a software engineer.)

    But Pale Moon is still my favorite browser, and I rarely have to load tabs in Chrome more than a couple/few times a day.

    • Jed November 9, 2017 at 6:51 pm #

      Almost certain it's the first reason of Palemoon being or rapidly becoming an archaic and obsolete web browser. I certainly don't run into sites not working properly in Firefox at all, especially not with v57 and v58. I for one am enjoying the Quantum redesign with the Photon interface. It feels very modern and lovely to use. I rarely, if ever run into site issues.

    • George November 9, 2017 at 7:42 pm #

      I'd suggest you use the "Open With" extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/open-with/
      This way you can try other browsers too. There's this one as well: https://addons.palemoon.org/addon/openwithieedge/

      It's quite interesting finding out these so-called "Pale Moon issues" are also present in Firefox, IE etc. Of course, Chrome usually "plays it fine" which is quite revealing on what is going on with the Web these days.

      It's incredible there are still people coming to moan about Pale Moon on every update. Enjoy your Chrome, its clones or whatever and try to make sensible arguments if you feel the need to speak. "Archaic, obsolete" etc. are misinformed or malicious opinions, not arguments.

      • A different Martin November 10, 2017 at 12:18 am #

        @ George:

        Thanks for the extension suggestions. For Chrome, the second one actually works better for me than Open With Google Chrome did, since its toolbar button doesn't disappear between sessions and it requires one fewer click. (Well ... in Windows at least, since it bills itself as a Windows-only extension.) However, the browsers I'm most interested in adding as fallbacks are Firefox ESR (x86) and mainstream Firefox (x64). I have to specify different profiles for those two browsers (because pre-55 and 55+ profiles are incompatible and will get corrupted if loaded into the wrong version of the browser) and I have to use the -no-remote switch to be able to use both at the same time. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a way to add switches to the extension's "Location" paths and have them stick. Maybe I'll bring it up on Pale Moon's extension forum...

      • Jody Thornton November 10, 2017 at 2:06 am #

        @George:

        All opinions are welcome. This isn't (or at least shouldn't be) an "I love Pale Moon" forum. If anyone's want to commend it or slag Pale Moon, they should be free to do so. That's not moaning. If one has a strategy, interest in seeing Moonchild's crew succeed or fail there should be freedom to express it - either way.

        No one has a problem bashing Mozilla. Even I'm not not a fan of them, but I like where Firefox is going with Quantum.

        Hey, what attracted me to Ghacks was that when I started learning that Moonchild was arrogant and pompous, i saw responses here that echoed that sentiment. However, I still like Pale Moon.

        The world is not just black or white.

    • George November 10, 2017 at 3:15 pm #

      @Jody Thornton, and here we go again. No one is being censored obviously, since you and others keep making gloomy, voodoo previsions on the future of Pale Moon based on thin air, and no one is stopping you. You also say that "this isn't (or at least shouldn't be) an "I love Pale Moon" forum" which is particularly truth-twisting, since all Pale Moon-related articles here are filled with comments such as yours, and certainly not of the "I love Pale Moon so much" type. And you are doing it yet again: "what attracted me to Ghacks was that when I started learning that Moonchild was arrogant and pompous...".

      If you fail to understand how vile it is to keep bashing someone that cannot reply to you, and then go on to transfer your personal feelings onto a software product's qualities, then there's not much that I or anyone else can offer you in a constructive way. If you have issues with Moonchild (and you most clearly do), this isn't the place to discuss them because frankly nobody cares. Software talk is more than welcome, personally I'm done replying to non-software/tech comments like yours and spamming Ghacks with childish nonsense.

      • Jody Thornton November 10, 2017 at 3:59 pm #

        @George:

        Do you perhaps ever wonder why Pale Moon threads attract the negativity you're complaining about? If I don't like something, I go and publicly discuss in hopes of support. I do that with products I don't like, services I don't like, and now with a team I found despicable and close-minded. So be done with reading or responding to my comments if you wish.

        I love Pale Moon (though I am concerned for it's future), but anytime someone complains about the team - hey, I'm there. You call me childish? Go back and look how he treated people there with good, solid ideas. They would articulate them beautifully, but Moonchild and all his followers would chase them away with their pitchforks.

        That is childish.

      • www.com November 11, 2017 at 11:32 am #

        @George, the censorship in their forums have been going on for years. Nobody can possibly look at it objectively anymore. Not when the luddite cult cuts you off with things like "It's moonchild's project so your issue is irrelevant"

        I used the portable version for testing purposes a couple of years back due to all the hype I was reading about how great this browser was with it's classic look and no Australis anywhere to be found. If I found it to my satisfaction, I would have installed it natively on my C: drive and quite possibly used it as my main browser.

        And then when I found websites poorly rendered and went to the forums to report it, I was immediately met with hostility so I promptly deleted it. I don't need that kind of 'support'. One doesn't get over a hostile reception like that easily.

        And I can see their clannish behavior hasn't changed since then.

      • George November 11, 2017 at 12:04 pm #

        @www.com I must be hallucinating then because if I take a quick look at that forum on any given time (anyone can do it) I mostly see issues/questions from new users that are being replied almost instantly by either friendly members or the developers themselves. You can hardly get that kind of support with other browsers.

        What is blatantly clear here is that www. com, Jody Thornton and perhaps a few more are abusing gHacks to keep protesting about having being ...molested at the Pale Moon forum. It'd be interesting to hear Martin's opinion because this has become a pattern. I'd say grow up but you still keep crying on every chance you get, and your ego is beyond repair.

        To everyone else: take a look at that support community and judge with your own eyes. Examples from right now:

        https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=17310 (answered in 10 minutes)
        https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=17300 (answered immediately, with input from the arrogant developer that hurt you sensitive guys so much)
        https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=17302 (similar)

        This list could go on forever. Sure, you could focus on the occasional brisk reply and whine about it on other websites in an effort to undermine a browser that tries to provide a positive experience against the likes of Google, but anyone can verify the quality of support over there.

        So, farewell to you too and sorry if I was too arrogant and hurt your feelings once again. I thought this was about software, not holding each other's hands and pure slander.

      • Jody Thornton November 11, 2017 at 1:58 pm #

        @ George

        I think it's about the software community, and I think it's perfectly OK to speak about the the atmosphere at the Pale Moon forum. After all, the product is just as much a result of the team that produces it.

        Your cherry picking just the right threads to further your narrative is no different than what we're doing. You're here spouting the greatness of the Pale Moon browser and team, no different than we're criticizing it. Fair is fair.

        He doesn't say it in this article, but many times Martin ends an article with "So what are your thoughts on "such" and "such"."? So I'll feel free to express my thoughts until Martin says I can't.

      • George November 11, 2017 at 2:39 pm #

        @ Jody Thornton falsifying facts is a bad habit and has grown on you. When and where did I ever "spout the greatness of the Pale Moon browser and team"? More slander. I'd ask for proof but not one of your strong points. Can't even remember the last time I discussed about Pale Moon at all (the actual browser), since I'm only wasting time with arbitrary accuses of "arrogance" and "toxicity".

        I didn't "cherry pick just the right threads to further my narrative" (more Jody Thornton slander) but as I said, I opened the current first page of the support, and selected in less than a minute three very recent, verifiable by date random threads (how many example would be ok, 50, 100?) and invited anyone to do so and verify on their own the amount of measurable... toxicity.

        Ιnstead, you are picking your personal experiences alone (and unfortunately, I do remember in my head your incessant ramblings and spamming on the PM forum, no different than what you are doing here by repeating yourself over and over), and because you didn't get what you want after innumerable attempts -as if anyone has unlimited time to waste-, you are slandering here on gHacks (wouldn't be surprised if you and the pals do it elsewhere, too). You keep speaking of arrogance, yet fail to substantiate anything (the definition of slander of the worst kind).

        Freedom of speech is one thing, truth-twisting and slander is another - and quite shameful.

      • Jody Thornton November 11, 2017 at 3:08 pm #

        @George:

        Sure you cherry picked comments that suited you're narrative. If you didn't, you would have picked topics from RichVideo and SunGlasses that offered good suggestions for a path for Pale Moon's future, and yet all of Moonchild's supporters trashed them, and offered nothing but "we don't care" or senseless responses like that. So don't dare say I'm falsifying facts there George. Or even worse, don't dare say I'm "slandering" you. I might be suggesting that you're cherry picking, but trying to make out like I'm seriously accusing you of something is now getting dangerous if you ask me.

        If you cannot see Moonchild's arrogance towards people, you sir are blind (wait I won't say that since it's "untrue" - thank heavens I caught myself)

        There are no facts I've falsified. In fact, I've only gave opinions. Anyway, you're starting to tire me so I'll stop responding to you. You go look for those RichVideo and SunGlasses threads I was talking about. They're there for you to find if you want that "proof" you're looking for from me.

      • George November 11, 2017 at 3:31 pm #

        @ Jody Thornton so let me get this straight: let's say I choose what constitutes the 3% of general forum discussion and the derailed threads you mention (which would really require "cherry-picking" just to find them), instead of the rest 97% (support discussion) that is the most representative and interests the vast majority, instead of a bunch of massively ego-hurt children.

        If a developer that has the mammoth task of creating, maintaining and updating a FREE web browser does not indulge into specific requests/suggestions by users (who have ZERO participation in aforesaid development), suddenly becomes arrogant? These users being of course (surprise, surprise) Jody Thornton and a few others - always the same 3-4 people.

        And if someone tells you -politely at first, more aggressively after innumerable attempts to reason- to use another browser if you don't like the features and direction of this particular FREE one, or to create your own browser if you obviously hold your "good suggestions" in such high regard, it becomes toxic?

        Yes, you are shamelessly slandering and I personally hope you won't be allowed to continue to do so because you are polluting the conversation and taking advantage of others' hospitality.

      • Appster November 11, 2017 at 3:48 pm #

        @George: I can only agree with Jody Thornton, Richard Allen, and (god forbid) 'www.com in this particular case: The Pale Moon forum is truly a toxic place. You will be greeted with fanboy-like hatred and a "We (the cult) know better than you"-mentality. This will become apparent the very moment you criticize the browser in any meaningful way. Moonchild will treat this almost like a personal insult and not as - like it should be - constructive criticism. You can do that in the most polite way imaginable, it will fall on deaf ears there anyway. The most toxic forum member is MoonMatt Tobin (an epithet well-earned), who clearly has striking personality issues. Oddly enough, he won't accept it when you address him with "Matt" only. Instead, he expects his users to act as subordinates and to address him with "Captain" or "The New Tobin Paradigm". And no, that is not at all a joke.

        I refuse to take these people seriously, likewise I can't understand your defense of them. They are self-righteous and arrogant, and their usual reaction to criticism is "Go away and use another browser!", which probably explains Pale Moon's 0.00000001% market share after 7 damn years of existence.

        Anyway, before you come around with your usual "this is not a technical discussion" stereotype sentence once again, let me tell you that I am not exactly fond of a May 2015 (Gecko 38 release) browser with a March 2014 (Firefox 28 release) interface, preventing any modern add-ons from even being installed (due to them only working on Australis these days). Their web standard support is pathetic, as is expected considering how old the code is. I don't see any point in this project, especially since Classic Theme Restorer is there to fix most Australis annoyances if you really take issue with the interface. Pale Moon's privacy options can be recreated via about:config over the course of a single hour. So, what's the damn point?

        I don't even think gHacks should promote this aged joke browser, at all. We should really concentrate on more modern browsers.

      • A different Martin November 11, 2017 at 4:29 pm #

        @ Appster:

        "I don't see any point in this project, especially since Classic Theme Restorer is there to fix most Australis annoyances if you really take issue with the interface."

        Classic Theme Restorer and most other Firefox extensions will stop working in the latest version of central/mainstream Firefox a few days from now (14 or 15 November 2017) and -- unless the WebExtensions platform is radically expanded and extension developers beaver away to take advantage of that hypothetically expanded feature support -- they will stop working in the latest version of Firefox ESR around seven and a half months from now (~3 July 2018). Why don't we suspend the argument between Pale Moon "fanbois" and Pale Moon "haters" at least until after Firefox 57 "Quantum" has been released and we have seen the fallout from that?

      • George November 11, 2017 at 4:31 pm #

        @Appster, I'm not playing the game of insulting other people's personalities just because they don't fit my idea of pleasantness or because they don't accept my demands. It's an indecent thing to do. I'm also not "defending" or "cheering" for anyone in particular, just trying to have a meaningful discussion which seems clearly not possible here.

        So, you join forces in throwing the words 'old' and 'modern' around, but yet again without explaining exactly what do they mean, or why the one is preferable to the other. Word-throwing and PR talk does not equal argumentation, quite the contrary: it makes you look weak and in defense of a poor, deliberately abstract idea.

        You then go on and say: "their web standard support is pathetic" but of course you too forget to say which are those web standards that are not supported at all, or that are "pathetically supported". More word-throwing. So Appster, please name those web standards so everyone can understand if you have something meaningful to say, or if you just keep up with the usual slandering.

        Waiting for those web standards not supported by Pale Moon that ruin your modern experience.

      • Appster November 11, 2017 at 6:20 pm #

        @A different Martin: You don't need to tell me this, I am fully aware of the situation. However, I don't see how this could possibly change my stance towards Pale Moon? It's still a Gecko 38-based aged browser, whatever happens to Firefox in the meantime. I will say that I grant them a bit more credit for their recent Basilisk project (based on Gecko 52), although this will also fall behind inevitably. Furthermore I don't exactly "hate" Pale Moon... They actually are in my good graces when compared to Firefox and its recent Cliqz incident. However, I find projects like Waterfox which use newer code much more preferable.

        @George: The guys I was talking about are objectively unpleasant, at times even despicable when it comes to their treatment of critics. That's a sentiment quite a few people share around here. Moonchild has a long, long list of people he banned from his forum because of prior disagreement with him. Usually he also adds a snarky goodbye sentence when he throws them out, from what I have heard.
        By the way, some demands that users dared to utter were quite reasonable, e.g. a multiprocess mode and some damn audio indicators on the tabs. Any other browser offers those functionalities these days.

        Well, Pale Moon's technological state dates back to early 2015, which indeed is old in terms of browsers. The web is moving forward with incredible speed, more advanced VR being one of the most recent developments. George, you have said that I was not being concrete enough... And that's true. It's because I expect a minimum of logic and independent thinking from others. So, when I say that Pale Moon is lacks modern web standard support, I expect you to go to the HTML5 test site and verify what I am saying yourself. I have no obligation to serve everything on a silver platter to you, especially when verifying what was said here would cost you a mere two clicks. Anyway, here are some things Pale Moon is lacking:

        - H.265 support, MPEG-4 ASP support, Dolby Digital/Dolby Digital Plus support, DRM support (in times of streaming... haha, great!), HTML imports, Shadow DOM, Custom elements, WebGL 2, web payments, readable streams, writable streams, Drag & Drop attributes, basically all Peer to Peer standards, Audio track selection, Video track selection, Interactive Elements, Text-level semantic elements, Speech Recognition, Speech synthesis, Dynamic Adaptive Streaming, HTTP Live Streaming, WebVR, ECMAScript 6 modules and classes, ECMAScript7 Async and Await...

        The list goes on. Some things which are missing are pretty embarrassing, especially those related ECMAScript and media support. You see, I was super-concrete now, albeit I know that you have most likely zero idea what those words exactly mean.

        Again, their Gecko 38-level web standard support is PATHETIC. They score a piss poor 380 points, whereas current Chrome and Waterfox solidly score over 500. Those are bad, bad results.

        Hence: Aged joke browser.

      • George November 11, 2017 at 7:03 pm #

        @ Appster, so your quality assessment is based on online HTML5 tests? Oh dear... If you knew what you were talking about, you would know that many of these results/test have reduced scores become Pale Moon does not support them by design. You know... on purpose.

        DRM? Really? After "7 damn years of existence" (your words) and you argue on something that is in Pale Moon's DNA (no DRM, ever - not going to happen BY DESIGN). Sure, you can disagree (even after 7 damn years...) but claiming it's a bad browser because it doesn't support DRM (and the scores will obviously be lower) is ridiculous at best. I hope you weren't also somehow hurt in the past too, in the vicious PM forum...

        Same story with advanced audio/video support. Dolby Digital Plus? H.265 and MPEG-4 ASP? Seriously? Are you for real or just copy/pasting online test results? Are these the modern standards everyone is seeking? If I ever require those I will go to my video player, not my browser. Never in my browsing life years have I ever encountered a website that refused to work because of... Dolby Digital Plus lack of support. Has anyone? I'm really curious to know of this modern Web that currently requires H265 and Dolby Digital Plus. Examples, please, or are online test websites your only examples? Perhaps some hard-core gaming websites? I can only think of those and if DRM is required, Pale Moon will never do it BY DESIGN. Of course, you will get offended and it's "arrogant" when anyone in their right mind logically tells you to look for a browser that supports this stuff, instead of endlessly whining.

        As for the rest, again, I have never encountered compatibility issues caused by entries in your online test copy/paste job. In real life, the browser works fine and believe me, I'm losing no sleep over the "piss-poor 380 score". Feel free to enjoy your 500 score, or whatever. By the way, your precious tests usually do not take into account protection from currently known online vulnerabilities, where PM fares better than mainstream browsers.

        I thought this might be a serious conversation but we are down to who's got the bigger score...

      • Appster November 11, 2017 at 7:31 pm #

        @George: Your howling to the moon becomes ever more pathetic. Yes, I was using the HTML5 test site, what else do you expect? In fact, it delivers pretty accurate results, and even if it should miss one or two points, this wouldn't save Pale Moon's pathetic score.

        DRM has become an official web standard, which was to expected in times of streaming to some degree. It is mainly those streaming sites it is needed for. It's a bad sign that Pale Moon doesn't support it, purely out of ideological reasons. Your "by design" bullshit basically translates to "the devs don't want it", which is no good reason, it all. It only shows off their ignorance towards recent developments.
        I never understood what Pale Moon users gain from a missing DRM module. Do you feel better when you can't use sites like Netflix? Do you feel like you've shown them now with your 0.00000001% market share browser? The stance of the Pale Moon team won't hurt those companies utilizing DRM, it will only hurt the Pale Moon project. Acknowledging this fact would require some self-reflection, of which Moonchild in his arrogance possesses none.
        Demanding DRM in times of streaming services (which require it) is reasonable and has nothing to do with "whining".

        > Of course, you will get offended and it's "arrogant" when anyone in their right mind logically tells you to look for a browser that supports this stuff, instead of endlessly whining.

        Yep, "go use another browser!"... That's the spirit, man! That's how Pale Moon will gain market share!
        And you wonder why this browser and its cult get ridiculed so often...

        H265 for example is a standard Apple already supports in macOS High Sierra and which Microsoft plans to support in the near future. That's no alien shit, man. It certainly was in 2015, the year Pale Moon's technological base comes from. Likewise those sound formats are establishing themselves as standard...

        Actually, I didn't perform a copy and paste job. This is just a selection of the most embarrassing points when it comes to Pale Moon's standard support. The list is actually much, much longer.
        I find it amusing that you are resorting to ad hominem stuff and whining about the testing method now, instead of acknowledging how bad Pale Moon's standard support truly is. The lack of WebGL 2 and the missing ECMAScript features alone pretty much shows how bad the situation over there is.

        You know, a one man shop can not compete with huge teams at huge corporations, and you should accept this fact. But wait... How can I expect such a thing from you? Moonchild himself claims that he is fullly independent from Mozilla, that's probably why he had to rebase from Gecko 24 to Gecko 38 and now has to rebase from Gecko 38 to Gecko 52, massively taking advantage of Mozilla code on both occasions. Not so independent after all, haha.

        What now, cult member?

      • George November 12, 2017 at 2:33 pm #

        @Appster, so you are back at insults. For all your noise and blabbering, you still incredibly fail to provide real-life examples (called "Websites") to prove any of your empty claims about how bad PM is. Your supposed arguments against a small, non-mainstream browser are: DRM, Netflix pay-per-view streaming, Virtual Reality Headsets (!), Dolby Digital Plus, some Apple/Microsoft unrelated mumblings, lower test scores and version numbers. Zero Web, zero substance, 100% bitterness. Why hate so much a browser you don't use anyway? Answer follows below.

        Quote: "Your "by design" bullshit basically translates to "the devs don't want it", which is no good reason, it all. It only shows off their ignorance towards recent developments.

        OMG Appster? The Pale Moon devs are behind the choices behind... Pale Moon? It's not the Russians? Here is finally revealed what this is all about: it should be you and Jody Thornton the ones to make these non-ignorant decisions! Everyone else is an arrogant ignorant.

        I underestimated how seriously affected you guys are for being banned and self-ridiculed at the PM forum, just because you didn't get what you want. It's sad, really. Grown-up, thinking men (?) turned into regular trolls, just because they didn't have their toy.

        Let me know if you ever grow up, solve your anger and inferiority issues and leave the kindergarten - I'll be safely browsing the Web with Pale Moon or whatever browser I see fit. Meanwhile, make sure to wear that VR Headset and enable Dolby Digital 7.1 audio for your Google searches. We don't want your test scores to drop below 500.

      • Appster November 12, 2017 at 3:30 pm #

        @George: Wow, still not finished howling to the moon? It becomes ever more apparent that you are kind of a fanboy defending its (albeit aged) baby. I'll go through your masterpiece one by one:

        > so you are back at insults.

        Not really, man. The Pale Moon devs aren't the nicest people on earth though, and that's widely known. My assessment of them is shared by many who had the "pleasure" to get in contact with them and their cult.

        > For all your noise and blabbering, you still incredibly fail to provide real-life examples (called "Websites") to prove any of your empty claims about how bad PM is.

        Well, I don't use that joke browser on a regular basis, so how am I supposed to provide real life experiences? Anyway, for what it's worth, a browser rendering sites correctly is not the one and only argument. Others include regular security updates and timely patching, which Pale Moon fails to do. Also, since IE11 is still around, you would be hard-pressed to find any site that completely fails to load in Pale Moon, as sites also have to support way older IE11 still. Anyway, what do you expect exactly? Pale Moon has massive Netflix problems and shows Facebook issues on a frequent basis, if you want proof for that, use the search functionality of your lovely Pale Moon forum.

        > Your supposed arguments against a small, non-mainstream browser are: DRM, Netflix pay-per-view streaming,

        Well, streaming is a thing today. Just because you don't use it or fully agree with it doesn't mean it's irrelevant. You should distinguish your personal preferences from general trends, everything else would be ridiculous.

        > Virtual Reality Headsets (!),

        That was not my main argument against Pale Moon. Needless to say, Pale Moon lacks support for it still.

        > Dolby Digital Plus,

        Yeah, and?

        > some Apple/Microsoft unrelated mumblings,

        Those "mumblings" were by no means unrelated. H.265 is an upcoming standard Pale Moon isn't supporting, which is pretty embarrassing. That's no future shit, it's present day technology.

        > lower test scores

        You should reread how those came to pass.

        > and version numbers.

        Which reflect a specific state of development, yeah. And this state is old, very old.

        > Zero Web, zero substance, 100% bitterness.

        Pale Moon doesn't tend to make me bitter... It rather amuses me.

        > Why hate so much a browser you don't use anyway? Answer follows below.

        I don't hate it, I just don't take it seriously. That's a big difference. It doesn't even qualify for hate. I strongly dislike Chrome, but good old Pale Moon normally is not even on my radar.

        > OMG Appster? The Pale Moon devs are behind the choices behind... Pale Moon?

        Yeah, and that's why it still has 0.00000001% market share. They refuse to acknowledge current trends.

        > Here is finally revealed what this is all about: it should be you and Jody Thornton the ones to make these non-ignorant decisions! Everyone else is an arrogant ignorant.

        Wait, where do you see the connection between the Pale Moon devs clearly being ignorants and me and/or Jody taking over? Seems like a pretty odd construct on your part. Nevertheless, I don't want to have anything to do with this joke browser or its toxic forum. That's for sure.

        > I underestimated how seriously affected you guys are for being banned and self-ridiculed at the PM forum, just because you didn't get what you want. It's sad, really.

        Again: I do not have anything to do with their forum and never will. Don't know about Jody. I did notice it's pretty toxic, that's all. MoonMatt and Moonchild are not my cup of tea.

        > Grown-up, thinking men (?) turned into regular trolls, just because they didn't have their toy.

        Well, at least we are not promoting an aged joke browser like madmen. Whether that's trolling or normal reasoning is up to the reader I guess. You seem to be far more irrational, promoting a May 2015 browser for everyday use. Do you have any idea how much has changed between Gecko 38 (sorry, I mean "Goanna" of course) and current Gecko 56?

        > Let me know if you ever grow up, solve your anger and inferiority issues and leave the kindergarten - I'll be safely browsing the Web with Pale Moon or whatever browser I see fit.

        If anybody has inferiority issues it's the moon cult. Why should I have any inferiority complex towards a browser with piss poor standard support? Every modern browser would be beating it easily. So, what's the matter? You seem pretty pissed that somebody brings up the actual age of the tech behind Pale Moon, as the cult members normally tend to pretend it's modern... It's clearly not.

        > Meanwhile, make sure to wear that VR Headset and enable Dolby Digital 7.1 audio for your Google searches.

        Funny how you always bring up WebVR and Dolby Digital, just because they are the somewhat most outlandish points on the list. Do you think that lacking support in this department makes Pale Moon any better? Just out of curiosity: Why are you never talking about ECMAScript 6/7 and WebGL 2? Would that embarrass you too much?

        > We don't want your test scores to drop below 500.

        Oh, I fear Pale Moon will never even reach 500 at the current pace of development. The one man show still struggles to reach 400. Without substantial Mozilla assistance he would still be struggling with 200 I guess.

        Summary: Your fanboyish ways are creeping through more and more. It's blatantly obvious. I don't see any point in discussing this any further with some random, clearly deluded fanboy who believes that digging into stone age add-ons and not having any modern web standard of the past two years in the browser is a totally great experience. Thank you, but no thanks.

      • Jody Thornton November 12, 2017 at 4:45 pm #

        Oh @George - just a suggestion about websites not working. I thought I'd get out of my sandbox (after all I am in kindergarten you know), just long enough to let you know.

        Dailymotion has experienced issues - big ones too. Videos won't play. Apparently there's a convoluted method that forces Dailymotion to use Flash, but it doesn't fix the issue universally. I've followed the instructions to a "T". Several of us have had no success.

        As for anger issues, only YOU became angry when I made negative statements regarding the Pale Moon crew. As I said before, if I dislike a restaurant, TV show, radio announcer, movie, whatever .... I complain and MAKE SURE that the issues are known by as many people as I can spread the message to. That's called smart. It may irritate you, but that's your prerogative. As for developers limiting actions "by design" - isn't controlling what you can uses and not use Pale Moon for, well doesn't that fly in the face of positioning statements like "Your Browser - Your Way"? How does that represent the "freedom" I hear touted about on that forum?

        Back to class - I'm in kindergarten right? I think it's nap time.

      • George November 12, 2017 at 5:47 pm #

        You guys think I'm irritated when you make comments about Moonchild, Pale Moon or whatever. Let me be clear: I'm not defending anyone and couldn't care less. Feel free to gossip as usual and criticize all you want. Just trying to make the point of how utterly pathetic it is to insult people -whoever they are- behind their backs for personal reasons but go ahead and keep doing it. I'm not your guardian and I'm perfectly fine with it! Common decency isn't but hey, who cares.

        Appster claims I'm irritated when he calls Pale Moon old and obsolete (fantastic proof, as usual). Again, apart from displaying your ignorance about the terms "old-new-modern-obsolete" you should have known by now that again, I couldn't care less and MUCH PREFER older and perfectly working stuff, than newer, half-baked broken stuff that I do not need or use. In your infinite wisdom, you forgot that most of that newer Gecko/Firefox code you seem to worship, is mostly about Australis/WebExtensions/DRM etc., thus stuff not required or wanted by PM anyway. So, keep yelling "old, archaic, obsolete!", they are lovely words and I enjoy hearing them.

        Jody Thornton, finally! All this girlish gossip for months (or is it years?) and you finally posted a single, credible Pale Moon issue. Bravo! It's Dailymotion then. I hardly ever visit it so can't confirm but I'm not debating you. Let's say Pale Moon has issues with that website. Do you seriously believe that is enough to condemn an entire browser project? You know, the Web is a complex beast. You would need a lot more than that to bring Pale Moon, OR ANY BROWSER down credibly.

        Are you saying that other browsers do not have issues with specific websites? The Firefox/Chrome/Edge support forums are blank? Empty? Problem-free?

        Of course Pale Moon will have the OCCASIONAL website issues, mostly because of its non-mainstream status. As other browsers will have OCCASIONAL issues, mostly because of the half-baked features Appster adores. I wouldn't dare condemn Firefox or any browser just for that but hey: let that Moonchild/Pale Moon rage that burns inside you free, and keep your usual gossip going. Your argumentation is blatantly poor and revealing of your ignorance and intentions.

      • George November 12, 2017 at 6:30 pm #

        @Jody Thornton quote: "As for developers limiting actions "by design" - isn't controlling what you can uses and not use Pale Moon for, well doesn't that fly in the face of positioning statements like "Your Browser - Your Way"? How does that represent the "freedom" I hear touted about on that forum?"

        This is downright hilarious! You keep transforming unwanted, unneeded features by BOTH users and developers, to "limiting actions", "freedom loss" and tyranny! Heck, they even do polls for the browser's direction every now and then.

        You conveniently omit to mention that it was basically JUST YOU and a few others that wanted these massive, browser identity-changing features (DRM again, wasn't it?), an extremely small minority! No one else that uses that browser wants them! Grow up already!

      • Jody Thornton November 12, 2017 at 6:31 pm #

        @ Georgie-Porgie

        I wasn't saying that Dailymotion is the be all and end all of sites. It was just an example of one that's problematic with Pale Moon. I hardly use the site either, but I have bumped into the problem recently. But you seem to think we're trying to come back at you with "gotchas" and "comebacks". And you seem to be the one hurling insults at us with terms like pathetic and calling us kindergarten students.

        But yes, I really do loathe fanboy behaviour. It's the most disingenuous was to act. So yes, I take every opportunity to criticize it. By the way, I sense by your comment of "girlish gossip" that you thought I was female. Well not the case, but anyway.

      • George November 12, 2017 at 6:52 pm #

        @Jody Thornton quote: "As I said before, if I dislike a restaurant, TV show, radio announcer, movie, whatever .... I complain and MAKE SURE that the issues are known by as many people as I can spread the message to. That's called smart. It may irritate you, but that's your prerogative"

        You are basically admitting you are on a slander mission (it is more than obvious anyway). That's not smart, it's slander. You are one of those guys who had a bad experience at a restaurant and wastes his time to bad-mouth it. Not because they spit in your food (which would justify your actions) but because they didn't bring the food you like (they never bring that specific food to anyone but that's irrelevant to you: your ego is more important).

        Try to understand that this does not irritate me at all: it makes me sad because it is poor human behaviour.

      • Jody Thornton November 12, 2017 at 7:14 pm #

        No George, it is akin to spitting in your food. I said before - I like the browser. But I don't like how some users are treated. So I'm not bitching about the product, just the "service". That's not poor behaviour. That would be like criticizing everyone coming out about Spacey, Winestein, and Cosby. They continue to spread the word. That's called open communication.

        And you engage in piss-poor self-righteous behaviour George because you sling around the word "slander" which implies I'm speaking non-truths. You are incorrect. At least three others have corroborated my statements here (some of those who don't always agree with me on things, which actually lends some credibility). So stop your tit for tat style responses. I've made my point, and while you disagree, that doesn't make what I'm saying wrong.

        For someone who isn't irritated or bothered by my viewpoints, you seem to keep responding.

      • Appster November 12, 2017 at 7:22 pm #

        @George: I think you are resorting to insults and the like (which is indeed poor human behavior). And that just because we criticized a team that is widely known as very difficult (mildly put) created an overaged browser? Really?

        Also, Jody is totally within his rights when he criticizes the team. After all, product support is part of the experience. The forum board belongs to the product support category. So, if you are greeted by toxic fanboys there, why not point it out? Because it would insult Georgie-Porgie (Haha, nice one, Jody!)???

        > Appster claims I'm irritated when he calls Pale Moon old and obsolete (fantastic proof, as usual).

        Well, any person who is not a totally deluded fanboy should be irritated by that. Especially since - contrary to your claims here - I have provided concisive proof in the form of concrete missing web standards. You just refuse to accept this proof, which further confirms your perceived mentality.

        > Again, apart from displaying your ignorance about the terms "old-new-modern-obsolete" you should have known by now that again, I couldn't care less and MUCH PREFER older and perfectly working stuff, than newer, half-baked broken stuff that I do not need or use.

        So, why don't you use Windows 2000 or XP instead of 7/8/10, then? After all, it's tried and tested, some would even say solid. Everything that came after was pure shit, barely usable. How could people even work with newer systems? Must be beyond you. Same goes for browser of course.

        I know you are living behind the moon (pun intended), but it should be most obvious even to you that e.g. e10s has been a massive stability improvement. Due to Pale Moon's antiquated single process nature, a crashing tab will take down the entire browser. Veeeeery stable, haha.

        > In your infinite wisdom, you forgot that most of that newer Gecko/Firefox code you seem to worship, is mostly about Australis/WebExtensions/DRM etc., thus stuff not required or wanted by PM anyway.

        I can assure you this is false. Have a look at the actual commits and you'll notice that far more than Australis/WebExtensions/DRM has happened in the meantime. By the way, Australis was introduced as early as Firefox 29, Moonchild just chose to remove it for whatever reason, thus complicating or even preventing the installation of newer XUL/XPCOM add-ons.

        > So, keep yelling "old, archaic, obsolete!", they are lovely words and I enjoy hearing them.

        If you weren't a completely deluded fanboy you wouldn't enjoy it as much.

        > Are you saying that other browsers do not have issues with specific websites? The Firefox/Chrome/Edge support forums are blank? Empty? Problem-free?

        I'd say the probability of giant companies fixing problems with major sites in an appropriate time span is higher than with the one man show. Oh, I forgot: Sometimes Moonchild is pulling patches from the Mozilla code tree in order to fix issues. Thought he was fully independent!?!?!

        > Of course Pale Moon will have the OCCASIONAL website issues, mostly because of its non-mainstream status.

        Poor excuse. Pale Moon's standard support is just bad.

        > As other browsers will have OCCASIONAL issues, mostly because of the half-baked features Appster adores.

        Yeah, a browser passing the QA of a major company of course has to be far more unstable than the product of the one man show. I see where you are coming from.

        > I wouldn't dare condemn Firefox or any browser just for that but hey: let that Moonchild/Pale Moon rage that burns inside you free, and keep your usual gossip going. Your argumentation is blatantly poor and revealing of your ignorance and intentions.

        What intentions should we have for Pale Moon? Pointing out that the browser is behind the times of course has to be part of an evil master plan, haha. Anyway, have a look at your own argumentation. I have shown you the missing standards, what have you done up until now to counter that? Asking if a specific website isn't working, as if we would know all websites out there. :D :D :D

        Time for my nap. The kindergarten pedagogue has just called me back, haha.

      • George November 12, 2017 at 8:36 pm #

        @Jody Thornton quote: "For someone who isn't irritated or bothered by my viewpoints, you seem to keep responding."

        If someone decides to respond to your absurd comments, it might be helpful to think it is not because "they are irritated" or because "you are right". You keep evading the Pale Moon forum question which is what motivates you.

        Quote: "You are incorrect. At least three others have corroborated my statements here (some of those who don't always agree with me on things, which actually lends some credibility). So stop your tit for tat style responses. I've made my point, and while you disagree, that doesn't make what I'm saying wrong."

        1. I disagree with you = it does not make what you say wrong
        2. Three guys here agree with you = it makes what you say correct
        3. The whole Pale Moon forum (a bit more than 3 guys) disagrees with you = irrelevant/ignored/arrogant/toxic/cult

        Makes perfect sense and no ego involved, at all.

      • www.com November 13, 2017 at 8:36 am #

        @Appster and @George, why can you fellow luddites be friends? After all, you both have so much in common. In fact, I find it difficult to tell you both apart.

        -lol

      • George November 13, 2017 at 2:52 pm #

        @Jody Thornton, Appster etc. let's finally reveal what's going on here.

        The true story of why Jody Thornton, (an ex-Pale Moon forum member himself, but I guess it wasn't toxic back then) keeps smearing the Pale Moon forum starts here: https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14011&start=40#p103621

        Everyone can read and form their own opinion on arrogance and toxicity.

        Verba volant, scripta manent. Smearing is easy, the sad, naked truth is a bit more difficult to handle.

      • Jody Thornton November 13, 2017 at 4:29 pm #

        @George:

        Uh OK.... and so?
        (my you're so bitter). Again at the time, I don't apologize for my stance on things. Moreover, you've linked to a page where it also displays how the other fanboys stand in unison with the Moon-Matt team, blindly with responses like "Well we don't use such and such a feature ... so it's unimportant". So thank you Georgie-Porgie. I appreciate you doing all of the leg-work for me. You've shown both sides without me having to.

        As an aside, what is this naked truth you speak of George? Anyway, I had taken a day away from here to go live life and do things. I'm perfectly willing to be civil and drop this matter, if you will. You just seem interested in getting the last word in and it's becoming fatiguing.

      • Appster November 13, 2017 at 4:41 pm #

        @George: Funny thing is, you try to prove that somebody is smearing the moon gods by smearing that particular someone. Has that ever occurred to you? Also, I don't see anything scandalous in Jody Thornton's texts as provided in your link. Whereas MoonMatt... Yeah, you probably know the story yourself. I bet you are one of the first when it comes to make life uncomfortable for critics at the Pale Moon board. Unsurprising.

        > (...) but I guess it wasn't toxic back then

        Slight correction: It ALWAYS was toxic. Being toxic is one of its main attributes, not least because of certain character flaws of MoonMatt and Moonchild. But you know that, don't you?

        Please do us all a favor and stop your relentless howling to the moon, thank you.

      • Sayan November 13, 2017 at 4:50 pm #

        Yes, Pale Moon has a bad webstandard support. It lacks a majority of ES6 and majority/all of ES7 script features. But Appster, there are people who do not care for that because if we run into issues we start up our secondary browser and are happy again.

        For you Pale Moon is outdated, but there are people around (me included) for which the existing support is good enough. And we use the browser for ideology reasons - I will never use something with Australis or the Edge UI clone Firefox 57 - I rather would switch constantly around between my 2 browsers - and i still would feel happy.

        Btw. Congratulations to step up becoming @wwwcom version 2.0 - A job well done!

        You guys feel free to use your latest Google technology/Google standards infested browser with all your shiny and blink blink lights, people like me do not accept or want that.

        And DRM is cancer. Only a blind Google/music/movie industry follower would support a standard which can and will destroy all free resources in the web over time.

        F*ck DRM, Google and their fangirl Mozilla!

      • George November 13, 2017 at 7:27 pm #

        @Jody Thornton, so nothing. Only trying to put the whole story out, not just your version of it. And that's the public stuff only, not whatever happened behind the scenes or whatever more you did to get yourself banned. It seems you have a habit of insulting people, getting banned on forums then victimizing yourself and feeling proud about it. Criticize Pale Moon or any software all you want, if I ever debate you on that it will be on software-talk terms only. Throw mud at an entire community, users and developers, behind their backs, and I'll strive to get to the bottom of it and provide all possible information. I have nothing against you personally, even liked some of your -usually huge- posts on that forum. Obviously, I have a negative opinion on your actions but I'm decent enough to not insult you in public and/or behind your back. No bitterness, no "last word syndrome", just an allergy to smearing.

        @Appster quote: "Funny thing is, you try to prove that somebody is smearing the moon gods by smearing that particular someone. Has that ever occurred to you?"

        Appster, grab a dictionary on smearing. I posted a link to Jody Thornton's own, public posts. He even said he still stands by them, it's not messages he retracted or asked to be hidden/deleted. What you are suggesting here is that Jody Thornton is smearing himself, so please... stay out of stuff you do not understand.

      • Jody Thornton November 13, 2017 at 10:07 pm #

        Hmmmmm @George:

        I see that I said Moonchild needs to kowtow to Netflix, not the other way around. I'm not so sure what you're exposing. But.... Okay whatever.

        I don't know what other forums you mean to mention about me getting into hot water with. MozillaZine maybe? But other Pale Moon people get the shaft there, so.... not sure what you mean.

        I see, after I was offering to be cordial with you, you just decided to keep on with your grumpiness. And besides, you say I insult everyone, but really, you don't know me all George. You seem to have quite an angry streak, especially when to begin with, I was never even addressing you.

  5. Richard Allen November 9, 2017 at 7:17 pm #

    First I have to say that I'm a long time user of PM and FF. Started using FF the day v3 was released, about a year later PM was released and not long after that PM became my default browser until about v26.5 when I started experiencing video playback issues. Since then I've been using FF as my primary. As far as I can tell video playback issues have now been resolved.

    Starting a few releases back, maybe v27, I started seeing worse scrolling performance while at "https://feedly.com". As far as I can see, Feedly presents the hardest and biggest challenge of any website that I visit, as far as smooth scrolling is concerned. PM does better than any Chromium browser when on Feedly, but FF, Nightly and Waterfox are significantly and obviously better than PM, on Feedly. I say that because I like to slowly scroll the page while reading the header of each card and I get 400-500+ feeds on weekdays so for me it's kind of a big deal. I've been using an acceleration factor of 8, acceleration start of 3, smoothscroll wheel duration of 400 and 600 which is what I use in the other browsers. I see no improvement in Safe Mode or with a clean install. Smooth scrolling is fine on every website except for Feedly, as far as I can see. Just thought I would throw that out there because I think that Feedly is probably the worst case scenario, for testing purposes, for any browser.

    Running Win7 Pro x64, platform update installed, Core i5 @ 3.2-3.4GHz, Sandisk Extreme Pro SSD, GTX 750 Ti SC.
    https://s33.postimg.org/vh0ixj3jz/Pale_Moon.png

    • Richard Allen November 9, 2017 at 10:23 pm #

      Just to clarify "Smooth scrolling is fine on every website except for Feedly" is not entirely accurate. Smooth scrolling is "Okay" on every website except for Feedly, it's better than Chromium browsers but not quite as good as FF, Nightly and Waterfox. It's just that the difference on Feedly is obvious.

  6. James T. November 9, 2017 at 7:25 pm #

    Trouble in paradise...

    https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=17239

    • George November 9, 2017 at 8:07 pm #

      Enlighten us, please... some new, non-existent "Pale Moon issue" I guess?

      • James T. November 9, 2017 at 8:20 pm #

        @George
        earlier Adnausem had an issue with Palemoon
        just a little warning if you try to address it on PM forums

      • George November 9, 2017 at 8:33 pm #

        @James T. About AdNauseam, there was no "issue", Pale Moon purposively blocked it (while still allowing an exception) for specific, documented reasons. So... exactly what are you trying to say? Enlighten us, preferably without random, unrelated factoids that are supposed to be "issues".

        It'll also be very interesting to know how are all these factoids related to the 27.6.0 update this article is about...

      • Jody Thornton November 10, 2017 at 2:16 am #

        Let me guess! Did AdNauseam arguments get someone banned? I see the thread was locked

      • www.com November 11, 2017 at 11:37 am #

        I see towards the end of that discussion that it's "all Mozilla's fault". The usual passing of the buck.

        Everybody else has it wrong! The internet needs to cater to Pale Moon, not the other way around.

    • Anonymous November 9, 2017 at 8:53 pm #

      Sure their forum is not "Paradise" (censored etc), but on Mozillazine they check your user agent, if you are using Pale Moon you can't even try.

      • anon November 9, 2017 at 8:57 pm #

        If you look at how some of the pale moon users acted on there it's hardly surprising.

      • Anonymous November 9, 2017 at 9:36 pm #

        On Ghacks users you're talking are doing the same even worse. as far as I know they are not censored, banned, or even insulted like on Mozillazine.

  7. anon November 9, 2017 at 11:48 pm #

    The pm forum seems as bad as mozillazine, neither are pleasant places a lot of the time so I tend to steer clear of both.

    • Jody Thornton November 10, 2017 at 2:20 am #

      I have to say that. Initially, PM forums seemed like a rescue from the toxic MozillaZine forums. Frank Lion, malliz and Loud Noise were amongst the worst. Pale Moon by contrast seemed like a breath of fresh air. Until ...... you dared disagree with Moonchild, or else you'd find Matt Tobin would be a blow hard to everyone, and Moonchild seemed to prop him up.

      That's when I realized Pale Moon and MozillaZine were equally toxic places. Now I'll slag the Pale Moon team ANY chance I get. A lot of good voices have been muzzled there.

      • www.com November 11, 2017 at 11:41 am #

        >Frank Lion, malliz and Loud Noise were amongst the worst.

        Yeah, those toxic 'individuals' bring back memories. Hostile, arrogant people. I only go there now when I have an occasional Thunderbird issue.

        The reddit Firefox forum is a good place to talk. XUL advocates missing DownloadThemAll won't get much sympathy there, though.

      • Appster November 11, 2017 at 1:42 pm #

        @www.com: You seem to be a good fit for the fanboy temple of worship otherwise known as the Firefox subreddit, pal.

        I have to agree that MozillaZine and the Pale Moon board are pretty toxic, though.

      • www.com November 12, 2017 at 4:01 am #

        >@www.com: You seem to be a good fit for the fanboy temple of worship otherwise known as the Firefox subreddit, pal.

        So says the number#1 XUL advocate missing his DownloadThemAll. Next time you go to pornhub, you'll have to do it manually. -lol

        Keep up the George debate, son. You doin' good.

    • Ron November 10, 2017 at 3:48 am #

      I've been on Pale Moon's forum for years and I've never seen what you're talking about.

      • Jody Thornton November 10, 2017 at 4:42 am #

        @Ron

        Perhaps you may be more agreeable with everything Moonchild says and never wish to challenge anything, so your experience fares better. Hey there were good experiences on the forum, but many more than me have witnessed what I'm talking about, whn it comes to not only Moonchild's arrogance, but also the overly defensive fanboyish behaviour.
        .

  8. George November 9, 2017 at 11:51 pm #

    Oh a new enemy has been discovered, the Pale Moon forum (:P). We've all become sensitive politicians I guess...

    • Jody Thornton November 10, 2017 at 2:21 am #

      Oh George, if you're really a fair person, you'd know better than to deny how toxic the PM forum has become.

      • Richard Allen November 10, 2017 at 12:51 pm #

        I for one have to agree with what you've been saying. I've been a registered user over at the forum forever but seldom log in because I've seen what you've described. It has always seemed like the flavor of the week was 'condescending' with a little sprinkling of 'ridicule'. The apple didn't fall far from the mozillaZine tree. Which is why any comments I make, positive or negative, are usually done here.

        Until this last year my PM 'browser' experience had Always been positive. But right now, I seriously doubt that PM will ever become my primary browser again, there are better choices. Ram usage, startup time, and page load times are all great but the little annoyances keep getting in the way this last year.

        Like PM updates breaking addons that will never get updates. And like scrolling performance, if I wanted okay and somewhat mediocre smooth scrolling, compared to FF, I could just join the herd and pick a chromium browser to use. After so many years of PM being my primary, even thinking that is surprising. The diehards will say good riddance and that's fine, things change. At one time I was a big enough of a fanboy that I even contributed and I wish Moonchild the best of luck but the reality is for years it's been a niche product and that will never change. All of the fanboys and all the haters will continue to let their freak flag fly whenever Martin has a Pale Moon article, in the future I should just sit back and get a bowl of popcorn when that happens. ;)

      • George November 10, 2017 at 2:44 pm #

        @Jody Thornton, toxic you say? I guess word meanings can be freely manipulated. That forum runs fine, new users appear, some are leaving, life goes on but you are still unable to separate your personal experiences from reality. Your opinions are respected, but trying to transform them into global truths ("a toxic forum", quite a mighty assertion towards everyone that peacefully participates there with no issues) is another matter. If you really insist on imputing/smearing an entire forum as "toxic" you really need to provide very hard evidence. Saying "it's toxic" and waving your fairness proves nothing and tediously repeating your personal experiences on every PM article isn't helping your arguments' credibility either. But I guess this will go on forever... and trying to connect all of that unnecessary, childish drama with the merits/demerits of a software product is really something.

      • Jody Thornton November 10, 2017 at 3:52 pm #

        @George:

        Look above at Richard's comments. He's discussed it articulately, and he's saying the same damn thing I'm saying. And if you listen to words you use like "smear" - you can hear your defensiveness. You're feeling upset about what I'm saying, doesn't make it "wrong". You just sound defensive, as if you're protecting your house or tent. Moonchild is an arrogant person. Most anyone with objectivity can hear it. And his minions stick up for him without checking facts or listening.

        And sorry, bringing awareness to my viewpoint is not "childish". I'm free to say it; and I will.

      • George November 10, 2017 at 4:32 pm #

        @ Jody Thornton fine, Moonchild is an arrogant person and I'm one of his defensive, upset minions. Makes sense. Hopefully, we'll see more software-related discussions but somehow I doubt it.

      • Appster November 10, 2017 at 4:39 pm #

        @George: You may find it software-related when I say that Pale Moon uses an aged engine version (Gecko 38) at its core... Likewise, its Firefox 28-ish interface disqualifies it from running modern add-on versions, even of XUL/XPCOM ones which would require Australis. Thus, I view their all new Basilisk project as an admittance of their prior failure.

      • George November 10, 2017 at 5:12 pm #

        @Appster sure, that is a software-related comment and not about developer personality profiles. Complex software (browsers included and obviously not just PM) use software libraries/components/dll's/drivers etc. that can date way back Gecko 38's time. It's the end result/package that counts and not some random version number, partially used at some part of the software, arbitrarily chosen by you without any proof of problematic operation other than a version number that you dislike, because a higher number exists. Substance doesn't matter, it's all about the version number. If we follow your reasoning, then any software using pre-2017 components is obsolete, which would make ALL software and hardware on the planet obsolete.

        It's a known fact the PM uses modified and updated Firefox components as well as self-coded components, it's not a copy/paste hack job from "ancient" Firefox versions as you imply. This too, has been discussed to death and has been on the PM FAQ for ages yet, here we are discussing it once again.

        The rest of your comment unfortunately degrades into biased personal opinion: "Firefox 28-ish interface disqualifies it from running modern add-on versions". You make zero sense. What the heck is a "Firefox 28-ish interface"? Is that really a thing? And please explain what are "modern add-on versions" and why they are preferable to "non-modern add-on versions", whatever these may be? That interface is fully customizable to anyone's liking, which is hardly the case with the "modernism" you are promoting. You don't like the interface? You want one ready-made for you? Fine. Does that automatically "unqualify" the interface from anything? Oh no.

        As for your in-advance speculations about "Basilisk", "admittance of failure" etc. I'll just leave it at that, since we're back again into pure speculation/wishful thinking area. The developers have already pointed out that this new browser and PM will proceed in their separate ways (PM still does if you haven't noticed, and no one but you has declared failure), but I guess you know better than the developers themselves. Yet somehow, in their efforts to create good browsers (not an arduous task as forum commenting of course) they are the arrogant ones.

  9. Jody Thornton November 10, 2017 at 4:44 pm #

    @Appster. Hey we agree :) - ...lol. But yes, I'm concerned that after all all of the effort to avoid Australis, users will have it foisted upon them when Basilisk become de facto standard, and if you analyze forum comments, I don't think users have connected the dots yet. Their concerned about the "platform" vs "the engine" that Moonchild is attempting to explain.

    • Appster November 10, 2017 at 5:02 pm #

      @Jody Thornton:

      I think Moonchild said something along the lines of "Pale Moon and Basilisk will share the same platform code (of which the engine is a part), but will have different application code (interface)...". So Pale Moon will eventually have the same technical features (equivalent of Firefox 52, mostly), except interface.

      However, I wouldn't be surprised if Basilisk just replaced Pale Moon at some point. Via Basilisk + CTR one could probably recreate the Pale Moon interface anyway.

      So yeah, seems like the users haven't understood what is going on just yet.

  10. A different Martin November 10, 2017 at 6:14 pm #

    As with most product-specific forums, I only visit Pale Moon's forums when I have a question, run into a problem, or want to report a bug or file a feature request. I try to be concise, on-topic, and civil. I haven't run into the hostility or toxicity mentioned here, but that might be because I'm not a coder or IT professional and don't (can't) argue technical points. I don't think anyone has ever been rude to me there. Once, someone on the forum even provided custom code to make the Download Status Bar extension continue working after one of Pale Moon's version updates. That was quite helpful. [Download Status Bar has since been supplanted in Pale Moon by Download Manager (S3).]

    I like Pale Moon's "old" interface. I can put most* of my many extension toolbar buttons exactly where I want them, and have a moderate number of pinned tabs, and, with the Compact Moon theme, still have a reasonable amount of page display space and tab bar space on my awful 16:9-ratio 15.6" laptop monitor. [*There are still a couple/few recalcitrant buttons that either stay stubbornly anchored to the status bar or that disappear between sessions and have to be repinned at each browser start or restart.]

    Also, I like my extensions and rely on many of them pretty heavily. To the extent possible, I run the same set of extensions (identical, equivalent, or similar) in Pale Moon, Firefox ESR, and current Firefox. When I look through my extensions listing in current Firefox and see that 80% of the ones that haven't already been disabled as incompatible are flagged as Legacy and will stop working a week from now, that's a Firefox problem for me. I'm enthusiastic about the benefits of sandboxing and multi-process support, and I'm willing to wait and see how much lost functionality eventually finds its way back into the Firefox ecosystem, whether natively or through WebExtensions, but without that functionality I couldn't see myself being entirely happy with Firefox as my primary browser.

  11. Sadaji November 13, 2017 at 7:17 pm #

    As usual this is the place where all the rabid Google tech trend supporters and Mozilla fanboy's appear and complain how outdated or insecure Pale Moon actuall is :D

    May it be paradise bird @www.com who was most likely pawned from the PM board after getting angry that his pet bricks have not been delivered - the one who spawned from the Moogle hell or Appster - Caesar Flickerman - the wannabe Plutarch Heavensbee of President Snoowglezilla - who is a rabid supporter of locked features and Google trends :D Also not to forget the random Mockingjay's which rear their ugly heads and spout out their dislike. Shame over you, Katniss Everdeen would not spend even one of her arrows for any of you :P

    Back to being serious:

    Point is - if you do not have the skills for implementing ECMA-script features or no one around who can do it for you, this is still NO reason to trash a project. In that case it's use may be limited but it is still good enough for a certain amount of people. I for example came directly to Pale Moon after using Firefox 24 for over one year - i still would use these days Firefox 24 - if not Pale Moon would be around which gets at least a certain amount of bug and security fixes.

    Sure, it has issues with all modern web pages which require for example latest ecma-script drafts or standards and pages like Twitch work for example not good at all anymore with Pale moon, but i personally do not care. I neither use Google services nor do i use DRM or the MSE specification.

    There are many people around who still use their Atari, Amiga or C64 machines even today - and they do also not care if they are "outdated, insecure or outmatched" - they use these machines for their own reasons and no one has a right to deny or condemn their choice! Why should that be different when using a browser?

    In the case of all the one's who do not get it - we do not need the newest Lego bricks or else, play with them if you want, but we prefer to say thanks but no!

    Also Appster, Waterfox is too a dead-end - sooner or later you will lose all your features there - all what classic theme restorer does deliver if you still do not get it!

    Basically a fork developer has only a handful of choices...

    1) No one has all the knowledge, so even if you are missing "essential" one like implementing ecma-script or HTML5 features - you can either do your best and hope that someone is around who is still willing to use a limited product.

    2) Or you make it like most likely Waterfox or Seamonkey.. Keep their stuff as long as possible and in the end give in and follow Mozilla.

    3) Or like Cyberfox... Give up!

    4) Granted, there would also be the chance to recreate your browser interface with the help of QT and using QTWebengine (Chromium fork) and have both features and modern web-standards.

    Anyway... As Moonchild for his own reasons picks number one... I see no issue with that. Perhaps it does not work for you "paradise birds" out there, but there is a good number of people who are ok with this.

    And all of you Mockingjay's from Panem's dirt: Who in the hell are you to deny that right from us in using something like that!

  12. Jody Thornton November 17, 2017 at 4:02 pm #

    Now you just gotta know this is going to make for some lively discussion:
    https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=17388

Leave a Reply