Pale Moon 28.5.0 is out - gHacks Tech News

Pale Moon 28.5.0 is out

A new version of the Pale Moon web browser, Pale Moon 28.5.0, has been released on April 30, 2019. The new version is a major development and bugfix update according to the release notes.

Pale Moon 28.5.0 is already available on the official website; interested users may download a portable version or installer to run it on supported systems.

Pale Moon supports automatic updates; just select Pale Moon > Help > About Pale Moon to run a check for updates. The updater will install the new version automatically on the system.

The development team changed the About page of the browser in the new version. The redesigned about page does not check for updates anymore; you find the option to do so under Pale Moon > Help > Check for Updates.

Pale Moon 28.5.0

pale moon 28.5.0

The new release, even though it is labeled as a major development update, is mostly a bugfix release. The developers addressed a crash issue with frames, another crash caused by improperly formatted SVG files, an issue with asynchronous or deferred scripts that prevented page loads from completing, and an issue that changed the custom New Tab Page URL occasionally.

The removal of unused or unneeded components continued in Pale Moon 28.5.0 as well. The team removed all Firefox Accounts code, the Windows Maintenance Service, e10 code from widgets, removed code and leftovers for certain unsupported operating systems such as OS/2 or SunOS, and removed crashreporter toolkit files and exception handler hooks.

As far as improvements go, there is a new Loop control for HTML5 video, improved DOS heuristics for basic HTTP auth, and improved handling of proxie and pseudo-VPN extension connections.

Updated site-specific user agent overrides for sites should improve compatibility with certain sites, and some libraries and files have been updated.

Pale Moon 28.5.0 is available for Windows (officially) and Linux (maintained by third-parties). A Mac version is on its way but not released yet. You can download the Windows version from the official website.

Now You: Have you tried Pale Moon recently?

Summary
Pale Moon 28.5.0 is out
Article Name
Pale Moon 28.5.0 is out
Description
A new version of the Pale Moon web browser, Pale Moon 28.5.0, has been released on April 30, 2019. The new version is a major development and bugfix update according to the release notes.
Author
Publisher
Ghacks Technology News
Logo
Advertisement

We need your help

Advertising revenue is falling fast across the Internet, and independently-run sites like Ghacks are hit hardest by it. The advertising model in its current form is coming to an end, and we have to find other ways to continue operating this site.

We are committed to keeping our content free and independent, which means no paywalls, no sponsored posts, no annoying ad formats or subscription fees.

If you like our content, and would like to help, please consider making a contribution:


Previous Post: «
Next Post: »

Comments

  1. TelV said on May 1, 2019 at 11:52 am

    Well, I suppose it’s appropriate that I use Pale Moon to display the results of the Cloudflare test. Before doing so this time I switched the DNS server to DNS Watch since it supports DNSSEC. I’m also running Tunsafe at the moment. Here’s a pix of the results: http://imgbox.com/ehU3tzOM

    Regarding general browsing in Pale Moon, the ghacks site doesn’t display properly with the grey Summary box shown as a tall column containing just a single word per sentence. The rest of the site has this squashed appearance as well. I have the default font configured to be Arial size 10 so that might be the problem. I’ll have to experiment with it a bit to see if I can the site to display normally.

  2. Iron Heart said on May 1, 2019 at 12:37 pm

    Am I the only one who doesn’t get the purpose of this browser? What good is it to stick to an older rendering engine forever? The Pale Moon team can’t keep up with the Mozilla team anyway (Gecko development also costs aprrox. $200 million per year), having to rebase their browser every now and then.

    It is incredibly frustrating that Firefox gets infested with more and more telemetry, shield studies, crap like Pocket being omnipresent etc. What I really want is a Firefox browseer with all of this removed, basically a purified Firefox which otherwise remains close to mainstream Firefox. I don’t care about the Firefox 28 interface or legacy add-ons, especially if that means sticking to an older rendering engine.

    I think there is greater demand for a “clean Firefox” as opposed to just “old Firefox”. Who agrees with this? Share your opinion.

  3. Ascrod said on May 1, 2019 at 1:06 pm

    Regarding the Cloudflare test, I think Secure DNS and DNSSEC are dependent on your DNS settings rather than just the browser. Pale Moon does support TLS 1.3 and does not support ESNI, so those tests look accurate.

    As far as the gHacks site, it looks normal for me, including the summary box. If I change my font to Arial 10 it looks exactly as you describe, so I think the issue is with your font settings.

  4. Malte said on May 1, 2019 at 1:08 pm

    Pale Moon is a bad hack of Firefox with outdated code, not recommended for people who wish to have some degree of security. The Pale Moon apologists are nearly as bad as scientology and the flat earth society.

    1. New Tobin Paradigm said on May 1, 2019 at 2:01 pm

      Please identify the code points that are old and insecure so that we can fix them.

      1. dmacleo said on May 1, 2019 at 10:38 pm

        popcorn time.

    2. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 2:52 pm

      I rather stay with Pale Moon before i would use Firefox – where today the biggest part of it’s remaining user-base – … to borrow from myself from some time earlier:

      “Consists of self-proclaimed “liberals” or how they also call themselves also from time to time – “progressives” – which constantly try to enforce their double-headed-morality!

      They mock power users and the die-hard-Firefox-fan-base is allowed to write against every single browser project out there and gets away with mocking feature enthusiasts, while the Pale Moon guys and/or general Firefox/Mozilla critics are… buhuuu – always the devil, which has to be driven out with a burning stick made out of superior “gender-ideology certified code of conduct” – while at the same time this does not apply to the other party!”

      Also, @Malte i have so far not hit one security incident with Pale Moon – No drive-by infection or malicious code caused crashes or computer take-overs :-D

      What unites you and all the other die-hard-Firefox-fans is always the same… you love to throw around the buzz-words “security – mobile – simplicity – bloat – DRM – sandbox” around to support your lost cause.

      ‘Nough said towards this.

  5. Malte said on May 1, 2019 at 1:11 pm

    You have two choices: Waterfox or Librefox. Both rely on the new Firefox code without the telemetry stuff.

    1. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 3:37 pm

      @malte and both are generic browsers with no relevant amount of customization anymore. Well – Waterfox as soon as they switch to the next ESR revision.

      Simplicity, minimalism is no god-like concept. Instead, generic simple-ware is as boring as it can be. And i appreciate it that Pale Moon or Otter-Browser… or even Vivaldi, Qutebrowser and Falkon (even if they are Chromium based) are around to show this arrogance their middle-finger. And the only REAL problem for which you can blame Pale Moon, is that it falls behind in web-standards. But that is something which it’s users have to live with and for which they have to find work-arounds for.

      Go on and ask in the Pale Moon board how much had to suffer because of it’s “not-up-to-date-security because of using older code which still gets the relevant applying security patches which are applicable” – and like it or not: The real issue why people get viruses or drive-by-downloads or their computer gets taken over by someone is because that kind of people have to be blamed for their own clueless browsing behaviour. The most critical security issue is not the browser which a person is using but the person itself!

      What you and all the others deliver is the typical blablabla without substance. As expected from Mozilla’s liberal/progressive follower-base which share Mozilla’s dislike for everything which is not generic, boring, simple AND unique – and god behave! Even worse if the opponent shares a non-left attitude!

  6. Matt A. Tobin said on May 1, 2019 at 1:26 pm

    Didn’t take long did it?

  7. Iron Heart said on May 1, 2019 at 1:28 pm

    Librefox is currently inactive due to trademark issues (they were using the Firefox logo). Waterfox is fine, but still based on FF56 with security patches added to it. Once they introduce a version based on a newer Firefox code, I’ll reconsider them.

    Currently no joy.

  8. Alex said on May 1, 2019 at 1:35 pm

    So, if Iron Heart does not care for some features (fully customisable interface, useful & powerful add-ons) they become purposeless for the rest of the world. Nice theory.

    You complain about the “older rendering engine”.

    Does it work? It does.
    Is it actively developed? It is, so there goes the “old” argument, which was weak to begin with.
    Will it work “forever”? No, but newsflash: nothing does and nothing will. Since when web browsers pose existential questions?

    You admire the “$200 million per year which no one can keep up with”, yet dislike this luxurious Firefox and desire a “pure” Firefox.

    Sounds a lot like you either don’t know what you want, or you don’t know what you are talking about.

  9. Jody Thornton said on May 1, 2019 at 1:40 pm

    @Iron Heart:

    Yes I do agree for the large part. It perhaps seems this is where Firefox v68 is going. I really love the Quantum interface. In fact, if I had to run Pale Moon, I’d use their new Photonic theme, which makes Pale Moon look just like Quantum. But it’s more than that. Quantum is visibly more responsive, if not faster.

    Now if I end up disliking the new Firefox ESR v68, Pale Moon might once again be in the running, if on;y for the new Photonic skin. But my bet is on Waterfox.

  10. Borgy said on May 1, 2019 at 1:49 pm

    It is called about:config people!

  11. Kubrick said on May 1, 2019 at 2:20 pm

    @iron heart.
    And am i the only one who does not see the purpose of your reply.?
    Different people like different things and this is no different in the software world.I use palemoon because i can still use the complete themes which were totally blitzed in the new firefox.Not everyone has your exquisite mindset and share the same bizarre ideology that new and shiny is always better..For example an older mercedes car is a whole lot better than a new one,people like what they are familiar with.

    Maybe a visit to the palemoon forum would be beneficial to you and others who pronounce palemoon as a “hack” or other adjectives.

    Have a good day.!

  12. Alex said on May 1, 2019 at 2:28 pm

    I doubt those two browsers fit the bill for the Mozilla/Google big corporation $$$ admirers. I see for example Librefox is currently at v.2.1/Firefox v64.0.0/Dec 2018 so surely this must be “old/ancient/bad code”, right?

  13. Max said on May 1, 2019 at 2:38 pm

    @Iron Heat – Blink, as used by Chromium-based browers is 2013 fork of WebCore, based on KHTML released in 2000, so maybe you’d class that as a older rendering engine too?

    Maybe what matters is that the rendering engine is still developed and updated to incorporate appropriate web standards – which all of the few remaining rendering engines do. Of course they each have different views on what’s appropriate to include, as you can test at html5test.com

    Whether Pale Moon can keep up indefinitely may depend on how many volunteers value a commercially-independent rendering engine and are prepared to contribute code. But for now, they’re not doing a bad job of providing the kind of clean browser you seem to want.

  14. birmingham said on May 1, 2019 at 2:51 pm

    I’ve switched to Pale Moon since years and I’ve seen no major problems or annoyances. After updating to 28.5.0 I had to re-adjust my Theme, nothing else so far. Crashes or sluggishness with previous PM versions on some sites have been reduced remarkably.
    I have no demand for an “old Firefox”, except I’m sometimes still using Firefox 52 ESR as third browser, and I have no greater demand for a “clean Firefox”, just because it will not happen anymore and as you clearly wrote “it is incredibly frustrating that Firefox gets infested with more…” – that, partly, answers the question about the purpose of Pale Moon.

  15. birmingham said on May 1, 2019 at 2:53 pm

    You forgot to mention we also believe in a hollow moon projection, which seems “nearly” contradictory, but doesn’t matter in reply to flat BS.

  16. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 3:06 pm

    @Iron Heart Go and use Waterfox – Honestly – that is so typical… Spoken earlier about buzz-words or related terms… Here we have 2 in a row – “security/outdated and simple/minimalist” – Why every browser has to adopt a simple/mainstream features based concept which excludes room for experimental and creative features like extended customization?

    There are enough Firefox forks out there who support your needs for a “simple and up-to-date browser” – No matter how much you scream or jump angry around – If you think you can get Pale Moon down with over and over repeating the same old crap – then i fear the only success you have is – to create another career opportunity for yourself – professional entertainer :-D

    There are people around who care for features most. Nothing against such an opinion. No matter how much you dislike it, you have to accept that this opinion AND that the need for it is around. For that people who use Vivaldi, Otter-Browser or Pale Moon it is not in the tiniest bit important if you do “don’t get the purpose of this/their browser”

    Also, many of the actual flaws/security incidents which are of interest for recent Firefox/Chrome are not applicable for Pale Moon, as that specific code is missing. And do you actually think, hackers or malware creators work mostly for exploiting small-sized projects? Again wrong, they target recent mainstream browsers. That is more like the way it is!

  17. NEMO47 said on May 1, 2019 at 3:12 pm

    Great browser, i use daily since a few years, Honest and Clean. Thanks Moonchild and the Pale Moon team for both arch supports.

  18. birmingham said on May 1, 2019 at 4:07 pm

    Just for information – my above comments were directed @ Iron Heart’s question and Malte’s odd theories, but the REPLY button didn’t work for some reason.

  19. sunnytimes said on May 1, 2019 at 4:15 pm

    i agree with Iron Heart .. i would totally use a stripped down firefox if it was just new . keep up with mozilla and make small changes as necessary.

  20. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 4:22 pm

    @New Tobin Paradigm

    The only thing which Pale Moon REALLY needs – are guys who have the knowledge to bring the rendering engine to the latest standards – because – as much as i love the UI – you make no progress in web-standards implementation, like for example the issue with broken the GOG gaming page or pages where you can not scroll down after a certain degree because the button for “more content” can not be pressed at all.

    Point is, none of your community members can jump in for this, so i suggest you find someone who can. There are for sure some frustrated ex-Firefox developers around which would love to help you in doing so, you guys only have to find them and point them to Pale Moon.

    You also tried to ask add-on authors to deliver for Pale Moon, so it would make sense to start a campaign towards people who have a certain knowledge of standards implementation too. Expecting that your community can learn that kind of tasks or succeed in this is – it has to be said – 1000% unrealistically and will NOT work out.

    And if you guys alone also are unable to do so – which is showing to a certain degree, then it is about time to find some guys who CAN!

  21. Iron Heart said on May 1, 2019 at 4:36 pm

    @Lord Lestat

    > Spoken earlier about buzz-words or related terms…

    Pale Moon currently contains great unmaintained code portions, e.g. the Add-on SDK for jetpack extensions. It being outdated is not a buzz-word, haha.

    > Why every browser has to adopt a simple/mainstream features based concept which excludes room for experimental and creative features like extended customization?

    I don’t take issue with their concept. I am just saying that they are not able to keep up in terms of web standard support. Gecko development costs roughly $200 million per year… The Pale Moon team takes that code and frankenstein their own UI on top of it. However, 95%++ of the code of the rendering engine itself come straight from Mozilla and were just copied by them when they forked the browser. Pale Moon is not independent, and Gecko development (in reality) costs far more than Manchild and lapdog can possibly imagine.

    > No matter how much you scream or jump angry around

    LOL, there are things that make me scream and jump around angrily, but Pale Moon is certainly not one of them. I find a project that is fully dependent on Mozilla code, yet claims to be independent, rather amusing.

    [removed, personal attack]

    > Also, many of the actual flaws/security incidents which are of interest for recent Firefox/Chrome are not applicable for Pale Moon, as that specific code is missing.

    Let’s turn this argument upside down, shall we? Pale Moon also contains code that Mozilla no longer maintains. The difference is that Mozilla has a dedicated team of security specialists fixing security-relevant issues in Firefox all the time, while the Pale Moon devs have many other things to do besides that. I think I trust those guys with a dedicated team of security experts more than I trust the hobbyists.

    > And do you actually think, hackers or malware creators work mostly for exploiting small-sized projects? Again wrong, they target recent mainstream browsers. That is more like the way it is!

    I hope you realize that this is dumb. Pale Moon is usually vulnerable as well, whenever an exploit targets Firefox. Pale Moon then has to port the fixes from Mozilla (fully independent browser, my ass), which usually happens some time later. Totally secure.

    Editor: removed parts of the comment because it included personal attacks. Please refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you.

  22. Iron Heart said on May 1, 2019 at 4:45 pm

    @Lord Lestat

    > And the only REAL problem for which you can blame Pale Moon, is that it falls behind in web-standards. But that is something which it’s users have to live with and for which they have to find work-arounds for.

    So you admit that Pale Moon is not up to date? Noted.

    > The most critical security issue is not the browser which a person is using but the person itself!

    This is untrue and gets old. The user has to contribute his or her share to security, but that doesn’t mean insecure software is acceptable.

    > Mozilla’s liberal/progressive follower-base
    > Even worse if the opponent shares a non-left attitude!
    > “Consists of self-proclaimed “liberals” or how they also call themselves also from time to time – “progressives” – which constantly try to enforce their double-headed-morality!
    > “gender-ideology certified code of conduct”

    Don’t you think this is the wrong side to spread your far-right propaganda? Also, calm down. Firefox is a browser, it is made to display websites. You can open any website you want with it. It’s not a political tool, and Mozilla isn’t a political party. We totally get it, you hate the political left with a passion. You have expressed that opinion in numerous comments before already. We don’t care, and most of what you say is, frankly, bullshit.

  23. Iron Heart said on May 1, 2019 at 4:51 pm

    @Alex

    > So, if Iron Heart does not care for some features (fully customisable interface, useful & powerful add-ons) they become purposeless for the rest of the world. Nice theory.

    Pale Moon is not useless because of its features. It’s useless because it sticks with an outdated rendering engine forever. It using an old rendering engine is objectively true.

    > Does it work? It does.

    Questionable at best.

    > Is it actively developed? It is,

    You call cloning Mozilla code, frankenstein their own interface on it, and then adding some lipstick on the pig “maintained”? Oh, come on. 95%++ of its code comes directly from Mozilla.

    > so there goes the “old” argument, which was weak to begin with.

    Yeah, don’t think so.

    > You admire the “$200 million per year which no one can keep up with”, yet dislike this luxurious Firefox and desire a “pure” Firefox.
    > Sounds a lot like you either don’t know what you want, or you don’t know what you are talking about.

    Firefox is fine, I only dislike minimal parts of it, notably Pocket, ads, telemetry. I am fine with the rest, and most of Mozilla’s development budget goes into the rendering engine Gecko, i.e. it’s money well spent. Remove the bullshit and the rest will be just fine.

  24. Iron Heart said on May 1, 2019 at 4:55 pm

    @Max

    > Blink, as used by Chromium-based browers is 2013 fork of WebCore, based on KHTML released in 2000, so maybe you’d class that as a older rendering engine too?

    Bullshit straw man argument. Blink is maintained by a huge corporation, and an extremely high amount of code changes within it every month. Current day Blink has as much to do with KHTML as you have with Australopithecus afarensis.

    > Maybe what matters is that the rendering engine is still developed and updated to incorporate appropriate web standards

    And here Pale Moon does fail.

    > But for now, they’re not doing a bad job of providing the kind of clean browser you seem to want.

    Pale Moon is outdated. they are basically, for lack of a better word, “maintaining” an old Gecko engine of which 95% came straight out of Mozilla anyway.

  25. John Fenderson said on May 1, 2019 at 5:09 pm

    @Iron Heart: “I think there is greater demand for a “clean Firefox” as opposed to just “old Firefox”. Who agrees with this?”

    I have no idea about what there is or is not a greater demand for. I only know my own needs.

    I use Waterfox, not Pale Moon, but I think this applies equally well to all pre-Quantum forks. A “clean” version of the modern Firefox would not be sufficient to get me to switch to it, for the simple reason that Waterfox serves my needs far better overall. The modern Firefox does have some nice improvements, but they don’t make up for the loss of functionality to me.

    My needs may not be the same as most user’s needs (Mozilla constantly makes clear that they’re not), though.

  26. John Fenderson said on May 1, 2019 at 5:12 pm

    @Iron Heart: “Once they introduce a version based on a newer Firefox code, I’ll reconsider them.”

    And that’s the point when I’ll stop considering upgrading Waterfox (unless they manage to keep what makes it good for me).

    Different strokes and all that.

  27. Jody Thornton said on May 1, 2019 at 5:15 pm

    @Iron Heart:

    On a previous replay, I meant to say I think this is where “Waterfox” is heading (regarding a modern yet streamlined Firefox Quantum). I hope that made sense.

  28. user17843 said on May 1, 2019 at 5:16 pm

    @Lord-Lestat

    I agree. Honestly I am very surprised about how the myth exists that software is inherently unsafe. This is not the case. I don’t think there is proof of even a single large security incident involving browser layer security itself beyond user behavior.

    Because there are two kinds of attacks:

    – targeted attacks
    – non-targeted attacks

    The first is irrelevant for the majority of users, and mostly involve regime oppression targeting individual dissidents, etc.. Those are special cases that do not matter for everyday security.

    When it comes to non-targeted attacks, they are mostly started by hacker groups that want to get either money or information, and the only way to make those attacks financially feasible is to target a vulnerability that is being shared by the majority of users.

    One such vulnerability is the windows OS, which incentivizes to manipulate naive and non-tech-savvy people into support scams, etc.

    There is basically no existing practical vulnerability that doesn’t involve a layer of convincing a human to do something dumb, i.e. download a file, etc.

    Additionally, with the web being so decentral, there is simply no way an attacker can get in between most users and a website fast enough.

    The only way to do this is via centralized ad-networks, which is why it is so important to block ads. Even in that case the holes are fixed so quickly, that this attack vector is also highly theoretical.

    Due to the growing complexity of modern software, one can probably argue that each update introduces additional security holes.

    The extensions I use in my up-to-date browsers are probably a way larger risk then any browser bug could ever be.

  29. New Tobin Paradigm said on May 1, 2019 at 5:52 pm

    @Iron Heart Which web standards are not being adopted or not being kept in date?

    As for Jetpack, it has to stay exactly where it is for extension compatibility. Though, I personally have called for its complete removal in the past and in my Applications I don’t include it. It really only matters to Phoenix-based Browsers. It has nothing to do with the rest of the platform codebase and deff isn’t related to web standards so it is a non-issue.

  30. VioletMoon said on May 1, 2019 at 5:53 pm

    Try Cliqz–made in Germany and now supports add-ons from Firefox. Great browser–privacy, speed, agility, etc. PaleMoon–sad project prone to the evolutionary forces of Nature. It’s basically extinct.

  31. @NewTobinParadigm@ said on May 1, 2019 at 5:58 pm

    Matt, why don’t you use your time more productive instead of arguing wih random trolls and haters, say , use this time to create a real XUL_XPCOM fork of uBlock Origin for example and ditch that poorly coded ABP old fork you’ve made and you’ve left abandoned now called ABPrime?

    One hypothetical bird told me that gorhill will call it quits soon about the Legacy uBlock Origin, I know you hate the guy with passion but think about us first, Pale moon fans.

    PS: Alternatively you can use your time to do more podcasts like this one http://personal.mattatobin.com/files/I%20can't%20even%20type%20for%20the%20stupidity%20of%20waterfox.mp3

  32. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 6:00 pm

    @Iron Heart

    >Don’t you think this is the wrong side to spread your far-right propaganda?

    I am actually sitting in the middle-ground. Anyway – Mozilla is a highly left leaning organization – and so are a big part of their new preferred vocal user-base. And compared to the old vocal users which Mozilla has driven away that one lacks in every single aspect possible. And how much more honorable you left guys are, show your comment content more than clearly. If this is how Mozilla’s new users are, then i am happy i am not supporting such a lost cause anymore.

    The Conservative movement shows as a whole as a lot of more morality, understanding, respect AND compassion compared to the radical part of Mozilla’s most dedicated users today are able to show towards others with different opinion. Also, i have no problems with the left side of the political spectrum – if it acts reasonable. But there are quite some people who have neither the moral- or intellectual competence for me to be seen as serious.

    I will give you some credit… You are either the new Appster or www@com – congratulations!

    And… Welcome to the club!

    >So you admit that Pale Moon is not up to date? Noted.

    While it is true that they have no experts for implementing complex upcoming web-standards, just install a secondary browser – No issue, no problem. And not everyone wants or needs all the shiny gadget pages which pop-up these days. So, for the majority of Pale Moon’s users the browser works nice and will work nice – for the amount of pages they view. For the rest… see secondary browser.

    >The user has to contribute his or her share to security, but that doesn’t mean insecure software is acceptable.

    Are you some dictator that you can demand what people use or not use? As said… Not one single incident since i am using Pale Moon – and oh wonder… no on-and-on-going complaints in general from others concerning this topic. Also, if a user is constantly visiting the most dubious pages, then even with Firefox or Chrome in use stuff is able to happen.

    >But Lordy, I thought you already occupy that role around here? Why should I join you?

    Because that is what most remaining users from Mozilla can do best. Attacking everything which just strives a bit away from Mozilla in whatever for a kind of way. And they are not even making the attempt to hide the fact that they are clueless, intolerant and rude on purpose

    >Pale Moon currently contains great unmaintained code portions, e.g. the Add-on SDK for jetpack extensions. It being outdated is not a buzz-word

    Show some malicious add-ons which are for Pale Moon available which put users into danger. Again, a clear non-issue.

    >I hope you realize that this is dumb. Pale Moon is usually vulnerable as well, whenever an exploit targets Firefox

    And when it is applicable it is fixed by Moonchild – when patches are available for access. So do the makers of Vivaldi, Otter-Browser, Falkon, Brave or others. Also, not EVERYTHING which is found as security flaw of Firefox affects Pale Moon.

    >Let’s turn this argument upside down, shall we?

    Show all the complaints about people who have been damaged by security holes, malicious web-pages and add-ons with Pale Moon in use.

    The only thing you CAN deliver is that web-standards are missing and that pages can not properly being views. Issues for which the majority of Pale Moon users does not care, as they either use a secondary browser for such pages or are not viewing modern pages at all.

    [removed. no personal attacks please]

    Editor: some parts of the comment edited because of personal attacks. Please refrain from this type of behavior in the future.

  33. crambie said on May 1, 2019 at 6:26 pm

    Why is it that every time there’s an article on pale moon the same few bitch and whine about the same things. How about next time if you’ve nothing new to say shut up or go whine some where else.

  34. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 6:28 pm

    @Iron Heart

    What is also essential to correctly categorize my so-called complaints about left/liberal/progressive – as it also affects Mozilla:

    Why do you think Mozilla is losing users or Liberal/Progressive/Socialist political movements are losing steam? Because.. of the same intolerant class of people who refuse/accept/tolerate other opinions – to which you belong and which are part of Mozilla’s community/part of such political movements.

    It is NOT right-wing to make such a logical comparison, as it is a given fact which can not be denied or ignored.

    Classic users of Mozilla see what for kind of users Mozilla is collecting these days, how they react these days towards others, they have seen that Mozilla is deprecating customization for that class of intolerant users for which only their needs are of relevance – and they move on.

    Isn’t it telling that Mozilla is deprecating everything unique for Chrome users? Which side of the political spectrum populates Google or their users?

    It is not only the maker/the political movement which is driving people away. It is also the audience of mentioned movements/developers.

  35. Anonymous said on May 1, 2019 at 6:38 pm

    @Lord-Lestat
    Mozilla is pushing for corporate control, corporate censorship and corporate surveillance because they’re a fake non-profit that’s corrupted by the surveillance capitalists they’re in business with. I don’t see that as socially progressive.

  36. Alex said on May 1, 2019 at 6:42 pm

    “Outdated”, “old”, “forever”, “frankenstein”, “cloning” etc.

    All words clearly indicating someone with zero idea about OSS (let alone software development!).

  37. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 7:35 pm

    @VioletMoon in other words… a simple rebuild made by a company which created trouble for Mozilla as it was not received well by a lot of their users. One of Mozilla’s many public relations disasters – hardly can be something of which one can be proud of.

    Has the same worth like the rebuild of Brave/Chromium by the Gab/Dissenter team… Just another generic and boring product for the masses which has not one single truly creative redeeming feature/value!

    So much towards this topic!

  38. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 7:58 pm

    @Alex they forgot also to scream code-stealing/code ripping ;-)

    And i wonder what has happened to the self-proclaimed moral-superior radical liberals/progressives/socialists who dismiss everything which fits not into their small world-view as “fascist” or “racist” or worse.

    Anyway – as soon as you have your proud and honorable Lenin-followers enter the building, general quality makes an u-turn towards one ore more steps worse – which can be seen again and again also this time! :-D

  39. Lord-Lestat said on May 1, 2019 at 8:20 pm

    @user17843 Not a myth but a fact is that a lot of the screamers (Funny B-movie btw. – Peter Weller kicks so much ass) – while constantly praying their Mozilla-doctrines from being not secure towards stealing code – do that for one single reason:

    They did not get what they demanded from Moonchild. And for this the developer became the boogieman.

    Yeah, i understand, it is such a terrible crime to not getting delivered what having asked for…

    – No webextensions
    – no simple rebuild
    – no minimalism
    – no DRM
    – no sandbox fake security (nothing beats a REAL sandbox)

    And instead of walking away and accept the decision these guys complained and complained until sanctions have to be taken into place, and an enemy is born!

    I guess that small inferior rhyme brings it to the core:

    Screamer, Screamer – sh*t hits the fan – what awaits is perma-ban. Being banned is very bad, from now on we are perma-mad :-D

  40. Lowrider said on May 1, 2019 at 8:37 pm

    I really like PaleMoon and never had any issues,it also is the only browser I could find where I can specify a proxy every one else follow OS

  41. New Tobin Paradigm said on May 1, 2019 at 8:52 pm

    I am still waiting for someone to identify the web standards that UXP (not just Pale Moon) doesn’t support that we can focus on implementing as well as the relevant old code we can improve and the security issues we can fix.

    Thus far, no one has identified any.

    I can only conclude there aren’t any of consequence or those making claims hate the fact we exist so much that they merely only want to continue claiming things.

    There is another conclusion though and Alex here has identified it. The people making claims don’t have any idea what they are talking about.

    I mean if they exist surely they can be pointed out beyond lol jetpack. The Unified XUL Platform is totally up on github so give us some line numbers or open an issue.

    1. dmacleo said on May 1, 2019 at 10:44 pm

      There is another conclusion though and Alex here has identified it. The people making claims don’t have any idea what they are talking about.
      *********************************************************
      actually THIS is part of the problem people have with this browser.
      replies like this.
      pure arrogance.
      you are the reason I stopped browsing the pm forums even though I use it.
      so…look at the man in the mirror before mouthing off.

      its also why I stopped providing multiple mirrors for the browser.

  42. dmacleo said on May 1, 2019 at 10:41 pm

    I use waterfox and palemoon, usually waterfox but pm is a good backup when needed.
    use what works for you.
    ignore other people diatribes.

  43. ULBoom said on May 1, 2019 at 10:50 pm

    Try ESR, it’s better than the release channel version, pretty clean, no containers, etc.

  44. GOPMGO said on May 1, 2019 at 10:54 pm

    Say YES to PM.

  45. ULBoom said on May 1, 2019 at 11:19 pm

    It’s a browser, there are lots of browsers, you may use whichever you please. They’re all free, if you don’t like a particular one, so what?

    I’m still waiting for a private, well performing browser that doesn’t have to be disassembled to do what I want and would gladly pay for it. Who can do that?

    This should be reviewed:
    https://www.logicalfallacies.info/

    Go outside, get some fresh air.

  46. Stan said on May 1, 2019 at 11:42 pm

    With ‘evangelists’ like this who needs non believers spreading “utter garbage” ?

  47. Jack said on May 2, 2019 at 1:19 am

    For people who say that Pale Moon is outdated, I think they look more at the UI itself than they do the code anyway. People who actually read the code wouldn’t think poorly of the browser. Trivial arguments based on ignorance and misrepresentation of facts.

  48. Iron Heart said on May 2, 2019 at 6:35 am

    @Jack

    Pale Moon’s code reveals that it uses a hardly maintained Gecko 52 rendering engine. You are ignorant and you do misrepresent facts. Check the code out – Gecko 52.

  49. Iron Heart said on May 2, 2019 at 7:33 am

    @Lord Lestat

    > I am actually sitting in the middle-ground.

    Based on what you write around here, you are far-right. Anyone can claim to be moderate, but your words are giving you away.

    > Mozilla is a highly left leaning organization – and so are a big part of their new preferred vocal user-base.

    And? The browser they produce isn’t political, why should I (or anyone else for that matter) give a fuck about the political opinion of the people behind it?

    > And compared to the old vocal users which Mozilla has driven away that one lacks in every single aspect possible.

    A very “moderate” and “middle-ground” thing to say, claiming that a certain group of people “lacks in every single aspect possible”.

    > The Conservative movement shows as a whole as a lot of more morality, understanding, respect AND compassion compared to the radical part of Mozilla’s most dedicated users today are able to show towards others with different opinion.

    There is a difference between hating someone and not taking someone seriously. The latter is true for Pale Moon whenever it’s discussed at Mozilla site. I know that this angers you, but there is no hatred. At most, there is amusement. Without Mozilla code, Pale Moon wouldn’t even exist. I’d be surprised if even 5% of the actual Pale Moon code base comes from the Pale Moon developers themselves.

    > While it is true that they have no experts for implementing complex upcoming web-standards, just install a secondary browser – No issue, no problem.

    Great solution. Instead of fixing your shit, recommending a secondary browser which actually gets stuff done. LOL.

    > Are you some dictator that you can demand what people use or not use?

    Hinting at the fact that Pale Moon is outdated. =/= Dictating what people should use. Typical for extremists… dealing within extremes. Congratulations, “moderate” Lordy.

    > Also, if a user is constantly visiting the most dubious pages, then even with Firefox or Chrome in use stuff is able to happen.

    There are also attacks coming from forged but real-looking E-Mails, or attacks from real-looking but fake sites (phishing) etc. etc. Sometimes a “dubious” site is not required at all. Broaden your world view.

    [removed, please no personal attacks]

    > And they are not even making the attempt to hide the fact that they are clueless, intolerant and rude on purpose

    While you are not? All the things you mentioned also apply to you, you just fail to notice it.

    > Show some malicious add-ons which are for Pale Moon available which put users into danger. Again, a clear non-issue.

    There were numerous malicious Firefox add-ons in the past that Pale Moon users also had installed. Who are you kidding? If you want a specific example, “Web of Trust”.

    [removed, please no personal attacks]

    > Show all the complaints about people who have been damaged by security holes, malicious web-pages and add-ons with Pale Moon in use.

    Fewer complaints pop up with Pale Moon, because:

    – its users are more tech-literate most of the time, so they often mitigate security flaws
    – they often run adblockers or script blockers
    – almost nobody actually uses the browser (look at its market share)

    But still, Lordy expects me to show that Pale Moon users describe the same total amount of security issues as the millions and millions of Firefox users worldwide. This doesn’t add up in the first place. Much smaller, more tech-literate user base = less complaints by default. Less complaints don’t mean that the browser is secure, though. It contains many code portions Mozilla has abandoned.

    > All in one, in retrospect… as said.. guys like you only deliver their stupid drivel which can’t be taken serious at all.

    Again, very “moderate” of you, Lordy. At least I tell people the truth about an outdated browser as opposed to making them use it for purely ideological reasons.

    > And like it or not, Pale Moon stays around as long as it exists. And your utter garbage you guys are spreading will not change anything of this fact.

    Why should I care whether or not an extremely minor browser project survives? I just pointed out that it uses an outdated rendering engine which is hardly maintained. Nothing more to add.

    > Why do you think Mozilla is losing users or Liberal/Progressive/Socialist political movements are losing steam? Because.. of the same intolerant class of people who refuse/accept/tolerate other opinions – to which you belong and which are part of Mozilla’s community/part of such political movements.

    Mozilla is using users due to Chrome being advertised left and right. It doesn’t have anything to do with politics. Get a grip, you freak. Most people don’t even know the specific people who created Firefox, and even if they knew about their political opinions, I think hardly anyone would care. The browser itself is not a political tool.

    Also, I am intolerant? Look in the mirror, man.

    > It is NOT right-wing to make such a logical comparison, as it is a given fact which can not be denied or ignored.

    I deny it. Again, most people don’t know about the political opinions of the people behind Firefox, and if they knew, most wouldn’t care one bit. So this comparison of yours is far from logical, it is ideological bullshit.

    [removed, please no personal attacks]

    > Which side of the political spectrum populates Google or their users?

    Going by the market share of the Google Search engine (90%+), all political opinions imaginable, I’d wager. You seem to be obsessed with equating everything and everyone to politics, even if the products they create are non-political and are used by millions of people worldwide who have vastly different political opinions. You should really get your head examined, this ain’t reasonable.

    [removed, please no personal attacks]

    > It is a certain level of divine class, elegance, eloquence with the usual refreshing amount of Deadpan Snarkerism with yet a little bit of a sadistic sarcastic side.

    How about dealing with facts rather than spreading ideology, like you do? Also, you lack all of the qualities you mentioned, ironically.

    [removed, please no personal attacks]

    > And i wonder what has happened to the self-proclaimed moral-superior radical liberals/progressives/socialists who dismiss everything which fits not into their small world-view as “fascist” or “racist” or worse.

    Seeing how everyone left of the far-right is seen as a “socialist” by you, I’d say those people are all over the place, which explains your anger issues. And yes, not being racist or sexist, judging people by their achievements rather than by superficial criteria, is indeed morally superior. But that’s besides the point.

    [removed]

    Editor: some answers had to be removed because they included personal attacks. Please refrain from doing so in the future and we all get along well.