What you need to know about add-ons in Waterfox 68
Waterfox 68 will be the next major release of the web browser that is based on Firefox code; it will replace the current branch, Waterfox 56, eventually after its release. The developer of Waterfox, Alex Kontos, plans to support the Waterfox 56 branch for some time after the release.
The upcoming Waterfox release launches with add-on system changes that will render older legacy extensions unusable but part of them can be updated so that they run in Waterfox 68.
Waterfox 68 is based heavily on Firefox 68 which means that it is a big jump feature jump from version 56. Mozilla will release the next ESR version of Firefox on July 9th, 2019, and that version will be Firefox 68.0 ESR.
Firefox versions newer than version 57 don't support legacy extensions anymore and Kontos had to find a way to keep legacy extensions supported in Waterfox as support for these is one of the features of the browser that sets it apart from Firefox.
The Thunderbird team is in the same boat and the development team went to work to make sure that legacy extensions, overlay extensions and bootstrap extensions, are still supported in the email client. Kontos was able to use that code -- Thunderbird and Firefox share some code as well -- and integrate it into the upcoming Waterfox browser.
Waterfox 68 and Extension Support
Legacy extensions may require changes so that they can be used in Waterfox 68:
- All extensions need to be updated to reflect changes made to the add-on system in Firefox's engine. Kontos lists using HTML code instead of XUL, and renaming or replacing API calls.
- Overlay extensions need to "engage the new overlay loader" next to that. It is used to apply XUL code to the user interface.
Some popular extensions have been ported already. The list includes DownThemAll, S3 Download, Greasemonkey, Private Tab, Save File To, or Stylish.
Most Waterfox users probably cannot modify extensions to make them compatible with the Waterfox 68 release. Popular add-ons may be ported by volunteers or Kontos himself but there is the chance that less popular ones may not.
It seems that other types of legacy extensions won't be supported anymore. It is unclear how many are affected.
An Alpha version of Waterfox 68 will be released in the near future. As a Waterfox user, you may want to test your extensions in the coming Alpha version to find out which work fine and which may need updating (or cannot be used anymore).
New Tobin Paradigm thinks that Waterfox Jumped the Shark, and here you can hear his reasoning, if you can call this incoherent rambling as such.
http://personal.mattatobin.com/files/I%20can%27t%20even%20type%20for%20the%20stupidity%20of%20waterfox.mp3
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?p=165278#p165278
The recording I did was recorded as an initial reaction in the context of my IRC channel and to its users initially. One can realize it was a spur of the moment thing and while I agree it is somewhat incoherent it wasn’t meant to be much else. As the filename suggested, I couldn’t even type my reaction so I recorded it instead. I posted a link to the forums for historical significance.
However, I have now removed the file so that my server won’t be endlessly hit by users of ghacks. The forum post will have to suffice for reiteration of relevant content from the recording.
There seems to be a lot of manipulations of things I have said in that thread; I am only going to reply to an especially egregious statement as it is rather defaming:
> Should I remind that he even tried to paywall extensions that would run on Waterfox exclusively, but were existing legacy extensions?
That is not true at all. What I mentioned was giving the developers the options to monetise their own add-ons if they wished to do so as a way to earn money. i.e. similar to purchasing an app on the App Store. That was all, and it was meant as a way to attract developers to developing for the platform.
Also a paywall in the way mentioned in that thread makes no logical sense – users would just find another source for add-ons to install them.
Not quite sure I understand the vitriol for myself or Waterfox in there, at the end of the day I’m trying to make the web a better place (apologies for the cliché) and I’d like to do it the way I envision (with the guidance of what users have been asking for).
@Alex Kontos: “Not quite sure I understand the vitriol for myself or Waterfox in there”
I think it’s probably pure tribalism. The Pale Moon forums tend to be generally hostile in the first place, and I’m guessing that they view anything that isn’t Pale Moon as a threat. Much like fans of the modern Firefox tend to view any Firefox forks.
Nice projection there. I am against false statements and what prompted this initially was the declaration that “Waterfox is the ONLY customization browser and here is why” crap.
@New Tobin Paradigm
Are you responding to me? I can’t be projecting, as I don’t have a dog in this fight (I’m not in any of the “tribes”). My comment wasn’t specifically aimed at you, either, but it was a comment about the tone of the Pale Moon forums themselves.
No @John – he’s making it towards Alex. I think Tobin is making Alex sound worse than he ought to though. I think Alex is just trying to do that best that he can.
@Jody Thornton:
That makes more sense. Thanks!
thanks, Alex 💜
~jamie
This post seems like some sort of karmic counterbalance or poetic justice after the bad moment of Firefox’s users.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Kobdb37Cwc
Well… It seems that the day is getting better in the afternoon and my old add-ons will be safe a littler longer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72PkUgZ651k
The code to run old extensions already exists within old Firefox. What this news tells us is that Waterfox development isn’t dedicated enough to maintain a forked version of Firefox that includes new features from Mozilla and preserves the old ones. This is a lot of work but it isn’t impossible and several official versions of Firefox have done it – usually developer versions in the transition periods. This solution is insufficient, and it’s the kick I needed to move to Vivaldi. I’ve updated extensions several times already – hundred of hours gone – always because someone with OCD is on a power trip at Mozilla and they want all the APIs to look the same. It’s always *our* time that’s required, and for no legitimate reason. The browser vendors aren’t grateful for us volunteering, they see us an an exploitable source of free labour. I’m getting out of Mozillaland for good.
Is this what Alex’s “new browser” is, or is there something impressive coming? Either way Firefox is obviously about to die as it’s got Linux Syndrome – a condition where lots of people with similar goals insist on running their own projects independently due to blind idealism and personality disorders. They could pool their efforts around their common goals to make something great, but they won’t because they all want to be in charge and they all think they know best.
Well the idea is to keep the ability to customise the browser fully, and that checkbox has been ticked. Then there’s more privacy focused aspects of the browser – while keeping a good standard of ‘Quality of Life’, which the checkbox is ticked as well.
Not sure why it’s seen as a bad thing. v56 remains and keeps its security patches and the likes, and v68 brings all the hard work Mozilla have done as well as the ability to customise to your hearts content. Developers get a stable API until the next ESR, where API changes will be documented and ample time given to update. Seems to strike a balance of what people have been requesting.
Because Photon’s evolved CustomizableUI is less customizable than ever. Your one-shot mods to overlay and bootstrap extensions won’t be possible by the NEXT esr. It’s a bate and switch is what it is.
You had the chance with your 56/mod to become fully independent and you threw it away, just gonna revert back to type and be celebrated for your GRAND VISION and SUPREME INGENUITY because *gasp* you compiled Firefox in your bedroom at age 16 in 2011.
While we collectively are considered scum by everyone because we want a different future from “Mozilla’s Hard Work”.
This is why I am disappointed in you.
Tobin: It’s a bate and switch is what it is.
It’s BAIT and switch is what it is. My God, man! Who do you think you are–the President?
@New Tobin Paradigm
I will word this as friendly as possible, as otherwise the gHacks censors would come for me:
Pale Moon is unusable and unmaintainable. It’s unusable because it doesn’t support WebExtensions, and almost all popular add-ons which are still being developed are WebExtensions. No support for them, no deal. A browser without certain extensions is trash, and is also exchangeable for any other web browser – they all do render websites, after all.
It’s unmaintainable because Gecko development costs roughly $200 million a year with a dedicated team at Mozilla working on the engine. You leech off Mozilla’s code, that’s the reason you exist as a project in the first place. 95%+ of the Goanna engine comes directly from Mozilla. Once the Firefox code base grows to be so different that you can no longer backport code portions easily, you will be screwed.
I prefer Waterfox’s approach, essentially cleaning up Firefox and following Mozilla development, thereby avoiding the threat of being or becoming unmaintainable, like you are already or will be in the near future.
As far as your insults go… Stop it. It sheds a certain light on you, and trust me, you want to avoid that light. [Editor: removed] This is not meant as a personal insult, this is just how I see your behavior. Waterfox is a fine browser, it just works, and contrary to Pale Moon, it actually has extensions. Your behavior damages your own reputation and that of the Pale Moon project (what is left of said reputation), so if that was your goal… Congratulations, well done.
@Martin Brinkmann and whoever else is involved with gHacks:
I dislike your recent tendency to censor stuff immensely. Granted, you want this blog to be an enjoyable experience for everyone, maintaining a certain degree of respectability. I totally get this. That being said, this blog isn’t written for children, adults are commenting down here, even if they sometimes don’t behave as such. ;)
Adults are generally expected to be able to take a certain amount of criticism, even insults, without any wailing and bawling. If a person is not able to withstand this, maybe said person should avoid using the Internet altogether. Close the lid of the notebook, disconnect WiFi, never access the WWW again. That’s my recommendation for those people.
There is no need to censor every instance of bitching or people having a conflict around here. If it gets a little rough, so be it. We all experience it in real life, why should the Internet be any different. Of course there are certain borders that shouldn’t be crossed as defined by human dignity, e.g. somebody being insulted for his / her origins or his / her sexuality.
But me asserting that certain people do troll around here (as per the definition of trolling) is certainly not a good reason to censor me or comparable cases where this has happened. I mean, this certainly isn’t enough to ban speech. It’s not even an insult, being of the impression that someone trolls around here is still an opinion, if you ask me.
gHacks is your property, you can basically do whatever you want around here. I am just saying that censorship of this kind is unnecessary, overprotective, and in some cases unacceptable. I don’t support this at all.
PS: Maybe you shouldn’t call yourself “editors” while censoring stuff. The adequate word is “censor”, as per the definition of censorship. Please be upfront about it, there is no need for euphemisms. Oops, I hope this gets through…
@Iron Heart: “I dislike your recent tendency to censor stuff immensely.”
(I’m saying this without knowing what, exactly, gHacks censored)
I understand your point of view on this, but as a general point I tend to disagree. But this is a very thorny issue that has been the subject of debate for nearly as long as the internet has been open to the public and reasonable people can easily differ about it.
The issue is this: if left unmoderated, online fora have a tendency to degenerate to the point that they become useless. The most consistently useful fora where true debate and intelligent discussions happen are ones that engage in fairly ruthless (but even-handed) moderation.
As you say, we are all grownups and can handle being treated poorly — but if that behavior is allowed to continue without restraint, the forum itself becomes poisoned and the very people that make it a good thing wander away. In the end, the tendency is that the forum just become people shouting at and insulting each other. At that point, no actual discussion remains viable.
So, I support Martin’s efforts here. From what I’ve seen in the comments on this article, it doesn’t appear that he was picking favorites or trying to tilt the balance of the discussion towards or away from any particular point of view. He is just doing the minimum necessary to make sure the comment section remains useful. Far from being against freedom of speech, I view this effort (again, if done fairly and to the minimum extent possible) as protective of that.
@Iron Heart
There is a difference between censorship and necessary moderating tasks to be done when someone has their anger issues against certain topics not under control.
Also, you say you do not like “censorship” – yet you would be of the first to deny for example Pale Moon the right to be anywhere mentioned or articles being written about it.
I call that a clear case of hypocrisy.
@Iron Heart – completely with you on this. Recently, I made comments mocking Tobin’s recording. So what? He’s a big boy, and can take it just fine. We should be free to whine and bitch all we want. Hey, even though I completely disagree with Lordy Lestat’s political tripe – he should be FULLY ABLE to make those comments.
@Iron heart
I rather would use an unusable and non-maintainable browser which does have no DRM and no WebExtensions – before i would use a browser which inserts more and more Google technology. WebExtension-technology is the total opposite of freedom and creativity delivering and/or enabling technology. It excludes customization capabilities and only caters to one class of users.. the one who do not value anything more than simplicity and speed.
The people who use Pale Moon are not interested in WebExensions and are happy with that they have. And it is their right to use something like that! Just because that is not part of your little world-view gives you no justification and no juridication to condemn the browser and the developers and demand their obliteration.
After all, nobody is forcing anyone to use Pale Moon – unlike Google which is trying to enforce both users and developers to use their Chromium project – or Mozilla – of which their fanboy-brigade attacks every other single browser project out of desperation.
@John Ambridge
> There is a difference between censorship and necessary moderating tasks to be done when someone has their anger issues against certain topics not under control.
I know a person from the Pale Moon forum who has serious anger issues. Due to gHacks censorship, I can’t mention the name of that person, regular visitors will know whom I mean.
> Also, you say you do not like “censorship†– yet you would be of the first to deny for example Pale Moon the right to be anywhere mentioned or articles being written about it.
Empty assumption on your part. In principle, one can say anything within freedom of speech, even if it’s promoting outdated software. I am questioning why gHacks as a privately owned blog gives this outdated browser such a huge platform, but that’s Martin Brinkmann’s decision, after all, not mine.
> I call that a clear case of hypocrisy.
I don’t really care what you call it.
> no DRM
…which means no streaming services.
> no WebExtensions
…which means no add-ons. Pale Moon can’t even run current versions of uBlock Origin, that’s fairly bad.
> WebExtension-technology is the total opposite of freedom and creativity delivering and/or enabling technology.
Or so you say. Many add-ons out there disprove this nonsense that you’ve taken right out of the Pale Moon forums.
> The people who use Pale Moon are not interested in WebExensions and are happy with that they have.
Good for them. I for one need maintained versions of uBlock Origin and other important add-ons.
> And it is their right to use something like that!
That wasn’t even disputed by me, you are making this up.
> Just because that is not part of your little world-view gives you no justification and no juridication to condemn the browser and the developers and demand their obliteration.
So me stating that they are based on an outdated code base, which is objectively true, is the same thing as me wanting to “obliterate” them… Don’t think so, dude. I do question the usefulness of the browser, and I do question gHacks’ reasoning behind giving an outdated browser such a big platform, but I do not deny their right to exist. Many things which I deem to be pointless also exist around me, I have no problem with them either.
> After all, nobody is forcing anyone to use Pale Moon – unlike Google which is trying to enforce both users and developers to use their Chromium project – or Mozilla – of which their fanboy-brigade attacks every other single browser project out of desperation.
So if Google forces everyone to use Chromium, then why do Firefox or Safari even exist? And I really don’t think Mozilla gains anything from attacking a minuscule browser project like Pale Moon. That’s another incident of exaggerated self-importance, if you really think Mozilla cares one bit whether or not a hobby project based on their own (in Pale Moon’s case: outdated) code exists.
@Iron Heart
> WebExtension-technology is the total opposite of freedom and creativity delivering and/or enabling technology.
>Or so you say. Many add-ons out there disprove this nonsense that you’ve taken right out of the Pale Moon forums.
Not at all. You can not create add-ons anymore which modify the browser UI like it was possible without the help of add-ons between Firefox versions 20-28 or with the help of CTR between 29-56!
With WebExtensions only limited add-ons can be created which only can modify limited parts of the program. Part of the freedom which Firefox offered was to make the browser “truly yours” – with incredible UI customization options which are now no longer possible.
That i would not exactly call creative or fully freedom-enabling. Actually, if we look at it from a different angle… even Chrome offers now more customization compared to Firefox with an additional more powerful creation tool as what Mozilla has adopted Google-code wise.
You want to know what it is? The ability to create web-apps!
Example of such an app which can modify the browsing experience to such an extent what is not possible with the from Mozilla implemented limited WebExtensions code?
Vivaldi! – I guess at that point we can stop talking, as you have no clue at all.
@John Ambridge
It is you who has no clue. With userChrome.css, one can achieve the same or better results in Firefox as compared to Vivaldi. Add-ons like Tree Style Tab, which heavily modifies how tabs operate, exist as a WebExtensions.
I also don’t think UI manipulation is more important than web content manipulation, which WebExtensions are fully capable of, but that’s besides the point.
And if the price for using XUL extensions is not being able to use updated versions of uBock Origin, HTTPS Everywhere, Decentraleyes etc., then: No, thank you. Not being able to use any of those add-ons is the price you have to pay when you use Pale Moon.
I wonder why you didn’t mention THAT in your Pale Moon advertisement.
@Iron Heart
1) This is no Pale Moon advertisement – I only mentioned that i rather would use something obsolete before i would use something with WebExtension Google technology – my normal daily browser which i use is Otter from Emdek – but not the QT-Webengine variant and instead the variant with the revitalized QT-Webkit.
As i support minor browser projects, their meaning they have in comparison towards these days generic speed/simplicity/design-only development attitude AND their right to exist seen in that regard, i just have been thinking to refuse to let your spite- and hateful attitude stand left alone.
Which includes also responses to others who show spiteful and hateful attitudes towards customization and features.
2) You forget to mention that Mozilla has an evaluation process running which can lead to the removal of userchrome – and who knows Mozilla will know that they have a crusade against everything which is not Chrome-similar and which offers choice. And there is no guarantee that for example Waterfox would be able to keep such a removed feature, as it’s complexity is a whole of a different beast.
3) Even with userchrome – you can not restore the full UI customization capability of the unrestricted Firefox versions up to 28.
So no, you are clueless – even with CTR in use or the native 20-28 Firefox versions before Australis you have been able to do more UI manipulation as compared to Firefox 57+ with userchrome
4) The add-ons one thinks they are essential varies from user to user. Just because you and others may think they are essential, for dozens of others they are not. Just ask all the people who do not install add-ons at all and who used/still use for example something like IE 11. Or the people who use Falkon/Otter-Browser.
The existence or non-existence of certain add-ons has no meaning for the importance or non-importance of a product.
What IS important is choice and variation – No matter in which form – no matter if one offers more capability and one less – but that also has no meaning about the importance, as that varies from user to user! Bleak and nonsense argumentation you made.
All-in all – All your arguments and all your replies show an incredible level of highest animosity against choice and variations – including a personal motivated bias against them. Do not try to deny that, it is clearly visible for everyone who can read.
There is actually no difference between these day’s rabid Firefox die-hard users who support Mozilla’s anti-feature crusade and your opinion – no matter if you… as you say… use Waterfox.
From someone who also uses a smaller project one would expect a more relaxed and open attitude towards this general topic. Which you do not at all provide.
Case closed!
>So if Google forces everyone to use Chromium, then why do Firefox or Safari even exist?
Please do not play dumb!
Forcing… in being anti-competitive, manipulative… Microsoft… Opera… Advertising in installers and for example in Firefox search results. Force is not always requiring direct pushes or forceful interaction from the offending party.
>I know a person from the Pale Moon forum who has serious anger issues. Due to gHacks censorship, I can’t mention the name of that person, regular visitors will know whom I mean.
First we had browser-wiki-leaks – and now we have user-wiki-leaks? Now that! That is a full whole new world of low-level standard!
It is one thing in facing opponents in person and a totally different approach of being hidden inside safe-space-heaven of a technology-blog where you can hide in pseudo-anonymity against possible exposure in whatever for a way possible! If this is the way generation social-networking handles their issues today, then it is no wonder to see the whole level of downward spiral we had to experience since the 2000’s!
Even more passive-aggressive cyber-bullying/mobbing… I am less and less impressed seen from your obvious lacking of morality/general standards which you show again and again, the more you reply!
If this – in combination with your constant repeating arguments of certain missing add-ons and outdated – is your quality-content in discussions… then i rather would say that you should find yourself a new hobby – and stop violating TOS/AUP/morality-code the way you seem to love to do.
You have disqualified yourself more than enough already.
@John Ambridge
> This is no Pale Moon advertisement
Obviously not.
> I only mentioned that i rather would use something obsolete before i would use something with WebExtension Google technology
Good luck with that. Being left behind while the web continues to evolve certainly sounds like a great long term plan.
> AND their right to exist seen in that regard,
You always say that I question their right to exist. I don’t do that. I don’t care about them, I question the usefulness of the browser, but Pale Moon can exist even if it isn’t very useful to me. Me questioning their right to exist never happened and is just hyperbole on your part.
> i just have been thinking to refuse to let your spite- and hateful attitude stand left alone.
And yet my style of writing is still more civil than some stuff happening at the Pale Moon forum, so if I am “spiteful” and “hateful”, I dare not ask what they are. Or maybe those assertions are just hyperbole on your part once again?
> Which includes also responses to others who show spiteful and hateful attitudes towards customization and features.
More hyperbole… It gets old.
> So no, you are clueless – even with CTR in use or the native 20-28 Firefox versions before Australis you have been able to do more UI manipulation as compared to Firefox 57+ with userchrome
You seem to expect that Mozilla keeps every single option ever introduced to Firefox forever. Maybe you should realize that software development is always in flux, and some of the browser weren’t worth the development time to be reimplemented because far too few people used it. Can’t really disagree with Mozilla here. They need to create an efficient browser and can’t cater to everyone. Nobody can.
> The add-ons one thinks they are essential varies from user to user. Just because you and others may think they are essential, for dozens of others they are not.
uBlock Origin is absolutely unnecessary considering the omnipresent ads these days. Totally see your point. Wait, the current version of uBlock Origin is not available for Pale Moon? Well…
> The existence or non-existence of certain add-ons has no meaning for the importance or non-importance of a product.
We are talking about browsers here. Browsers stand and fall with their add-ons. So, no.
> What IS important is choice and variation (…) Bleak and nonsense argumentation you made.
So me saying that Pale Moon using an outdated rendering engine, which is objectively true, is the same as me being against choice and variation. Did I miss anything, or is that just more hyperbole yet again?
> All-in all – All your arguments and all your replies show an incredible level of highest animosity against choice and variations
No, it’s you pretending that I am against choice so that you appear in a better light. Pale Moon has a right to exist – me saying that it isn’t very useful and that it is outdated is called criticism and isn’t in any way related to me being against choice. Of course anyone can choose to use any software, even if that software is outdated (in my opinion). What has one to do with the other?
> including a personal motivated bias against them. Do not try to deny that, it is clearly visible for everyone who can read.
Guilty. You got me. I happen to dislike that they troll under articles like this one. But that has nothing to do with their product being outdated, has it? Did I miss something?
> Firefox die-hard users who support Mozilla’s anti-feature crusade and your opinion
You seem to have a strong personal motivated bias against Mozilla. Do not try to deny it, it is clearly visible for everyone who can read. Maybe you were banned from their forums even? It certainly seems like you were…
> Forcing… in being anti-competitive, manipulative… Microsoft… Opera… Advertising in installers and for example in Firefox search results. Force is not always requiring direct pushes or forceful interaction from the offending party.
So you are criticizing Google’s methods… You are free to do so, yet alternatives do still exist. So those methods don’t seem to be that effective after all. And then again, Google has no control over Edge or Opera. Both could just fork Blink any day they see fit if they dislike Google’s direction.
> First we had browser-wiki-leaks – and now we have user-wiki-leaks? Now that! That is a full whole new world of low-level standard!
Saying that a certain member of the Pale Moon forum trolls around here is not exactly news, and certainly not a secret. Me wanting to keep a certain civility around here leads to me criticizing this unnecessary trolling here and now. You want to forbid me to point out when I dislike someone’s behavior? Are Pale Mooners untouchable or something?
> It is one thing in facing opponents in person and a totally different approach of being hidden inside safe-space-heaven of a technology-blog where you can hide in pseudo-anonymity against possible exposure in whatever for a way possible!
Rest assured, the troll(s) I am taking about are avid readers of gHacks, so if they wanted to reply to me, they already would have. Besides, at least you can comment on gHacks without creating an account before, unlike the Pale Moon forums, where they also happen to talk about what is said here on gHacks. Talk about double standards…
> If this is the way generation social-networking handles their issues today, then it is no wonder to see the whole level of downward spiral we had to experience since the 2000’s!
Again, absolutely unbiased. Besides, since the 2000s there was a huge wave of technological innovation, absolutely a downward spiral. And should you talk about society, thereby turning our discussion into political talk, then I can only say that your own attitude towards other human beings can be considered part of the downward spiral you happen to criticize.
> Even more passive-aggressive cyber-bullying/mobbing… I am less and less impressed seen from your obvious lacking of morality/general standards which you show again and again, the more you reply!
Me pointing out that somebody trolls around here is a case of cyber-mobbing? If anything, it contributes to putting a dent in those people’s plan to turn this site into a community of trolls. Also, it is my right to criticize the behavior of people in the fashion I do, as I do not even insult them. I want their destructive attitude to stay in the Pale Moon forum, where it is frequently lived out and therefore belongs.
> If this – in combination with your constant repeating arguments of certain missing add-ons and outdated – is your quality-content in discussions
Well, Pale Moon is outdated and has no add-ons. Those two reasons are big enough for me (and a great many other people) to not even consider it. That I have to repeat those reasons is a result of you relentlessly making fuss about it.
> then i rather would say that you should find yourself a new hobby – and stop violating TOS/AUP/morality-code the way you seem to love to do.
Criticizing Pale Moon by saying it’s outdated is amoral, stating that its creators troll down here (a well-known fact) is amoral, and should result in me leaving. Noted.
> You have disqualified yourself more than enough already.
You have disqualified by virtue of you applying hyperbole to everything I’ve said, and by then proceeding to attack me on a personal level (“lack of moral”). If anyone has disqualified himself / herself here, it would have to be you.
@Iron Heart
> Obviously not.
Actually it is you who constantly throw Pale Moon into this topic and then you expect one not to reply to this? You have any logic issues?
The main topic was about the attitude of some people against features/alternatives/choice
> And yet my style of writing is still more civil than some stuff happening at the Pale Moon forum
So much towards the topic of being narcissistic. If this really would not be the case you would not have been censored.
> uBlock Origin is absolutely unnecessary considering the omnipresent ads these days.
There are always alternatives around, so no, it is not necessary
> We are talking about browsers here. Browsers stand and fall with their add-ons. So, no.
Hmm.. Otter still around… Qutebrowser, Falkon, Pale Moon still around.. i do not see this going to be changed in the near future. So, biased argumentation from you, nothing more.
Just because a browser is very minor and has few or no add-ons – does not mean it ceases to exist. There are more than enough people around who do not want or need add-ons.
>You seem to have a strong personal motivated bias against Mozilla
I am a fan of Mozilla’s past – like so many other people would agree in that too. Mozilla has made a big step downwards since they allied with Google and got tricked/manipulated/used by Google
Which ended in them trying to emulate Google Chrome to a certain degree.. which ends with Mozilla importing more and more Google code into the browser. A company which would honor being unique and different would act in a different way.
Seen from that point of view Mozilla can no longer be seen as serious. A company who is unable to shield itself against from bad outside influence – and even partly embraces this outside influence… well…
>Google has no control over
No direct control… but they can mess things seriously up for all the one’s who use Chromium related code – also alternatives… An alternative is something which offers an unique different approach – and is not necessarily mainstream.
And seen from the Chromium based browsers, only Vivaldi and browsers based on QT-Webengine would fit that category. The rest offers just more of the (mainstream) same.
>Rest assured, the troll(s)
You are not really different, just because you – say at least – you use Waterfox, does not make you a non-troll. Always clean up at your own door first before using words over which you have not full control.
>Saying that a certain member of the Pale Moon forum trolls around here is not exactly news
That applies in an even or larger percentage towards Mozilla/anti-features trolls. Again, only use arguments over which you have perfect control!
And if you throw around your censored comments on a board, what do you expect? To get a free-pass to roam around? Here is no anarchy, so i guess the Pale Moon board is also no place where anarchy reigns.
>Besides, since the 2000s there was a huge wave of technological innovation
Which only was able because of the past – which still had more users which have been more creative, compassionate, dedicated and more generous and polite – as compared to today’s generation. You really love to use phrases over which you lose total control.
>Me pointing out that somebody trolls around here is a case of cyber-mobbing?
Only if the one who complains is to the same extent a troll and loves to bullying others. Which you are.
>Well, Pale Moon is outdated and has no add-ons. Those two reasons are big enough for me
So much towards (non-existing) quality content discussion-wise.
>and should result in me leaving
Now you are making things up – To explain it in a way even you understand… You should review and correct your writing style a bit – in a more friendlier polite and less rude way.
And the only one who was rude and not polite – in our discussion so far – has been you.
>If anyone has disqualified himself / herself here, it would have to be you.
Says the one who loves to call others trolls, loves name-calling and is intentionally rude and mean – i fear i have to give this ball back to you.
“Actually it is you who constantly throw Pale Moon into this topic”
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiightt! The OP “The Duke of Bronx” wasn’t a set up for the ‘Tobin’ pest to respond ?
Likely the same person(s)
The topic was hijacked by the PM Troll Army from the gitgo.
@John Ambridge !! How many user names does Mr Obvious have?
They are certainly doing a good job of polluting other sites with the same toxicity present at their Collective Hive.
It needs to STOP.
@Iron Heart:
Can you name some good WebExtensions that do things legacy extensions didn’t do, or that do a better job? I’m asking ingenuously, not sarcastically. I no longer spend a lot of time scouring AMO trying to find adequate replacements for legacy extensions I “can’t live without” (like Tab Mix Plus and DownThemAll), so I’m not up on the very latest developments and am relying on what others are saying about the glacial pace of WebExtensions API expansion.
and theres that arrogance I mentioned earlier.
I went from TB’s of bandwidth monthly to zero for palemoon cause of you.
thanks for saving me money.
Thanks for the heads-up. I’ll check to see if my extensions still work with the alpha. If not, then I’ll stay with the old version and start investigating what better solutions may be out there.
I did such a search when Firefox dropped legacy extension support in the first place and pretty much came up with Waterfox or Pale Moon. I don’t think much has changed since then, but it’s worth a look.
Apparently, only Basilisk and Pale Moon from now on.
@Anonymous
Pale Moon and Basilisk are both worthless to me. The extremely popular extensions, including many I need daily, are WebExtensions and thus only available for Firefox. Waterfox also supports WebExtensions, so I can use it while I can’t use Pale Moon or Basilisk. Easy as that.
Be sure that this is the case for a great many people.
@John Fenderson
The Waterfox 56 branch will continue to be maintained with security patches:
https://old.reddit.com/r/waterfox/comments/bjzyxm/i_dont_know_that_much_about_porting_addons_to/emg5gg4/
@Iron Heart: “The Waterfox 56 branch will continue to be maintained with security patches”
That’s interesting, thanks. It’s good to see some level of commitment, although his assertion was fairly soft. It will be enough to give me time to plan my escape.
My “plan b” is simply to continue to use my current version of Waterfox for the indefinite future.
> Thanks for the heads-up. I’ll check to see if my extensions still work with the alpha. If not, then I’ll stay with the old version and start investigating what better solutions may be out there.
v56 will still be maintained if v68 isn’t for you.
@Alex Kontos:
That’s good to hear, thanks Alex. I can’t imagine that maintaining two distinct versions is something that you can maintain indefinitely, though. Although, if you can, then I’ll sing your praises far and wide!
@John Ferguson,
There’s a Wiki on the subject illustrated with screenshots over on Github which should be useful when experimenting with the Alpha version: https://github.com/MrAlex94/Waterfox/wiki
@the duke of bronx.
Can you actually refute matts posts in that thread.You post 2 links and then what?.Is it to provoke some form of rebuttal or have you intelligent arguments against his claims?
Just call me out, I guess.
I don’t follow Waterfox development closely, but what I *have* read up to now always suggested to me that the days of legacy-extension support in Waterfox were numbered — a result of the project’s decision to hew closely to ongoing Firefox development instead of forking away more dramatically and maintaining a bona fide legacy-extension framework, as Pale Moon has done. I’m not going to venture a guess as to which project will prove to be more viable — maybe both, appealing to different types of users? — let alone get involved in personal sniping, but for now I’m enjoying Pale Moon’s commitment to continue supporting powerful, legacy-style extensions indefinitely. I guess we’ll see how many legacy extensions Waterfox ends up managing to successfully shim or jury-rig to work on a Firefox Quantum base, and how well those workarounds continue to work as Waterfox’s Firefox base continues to evolve. (From what I read, the expansion of WebExtensions APIs has been extraordinarily slow, so I’m not expecting much in the way of useful Firefox Quantum extensions over the coming years.)
The shims and jury-rigging isn’t meant as a long term solution. It is a one shot. Given Mozilla’s aggressive code removal of anything that was based on core and classical Mozilla technology.. It may be as soon as the next ESR.
They have almost completely eliminated XBL and much of XUL its self already ahead of ESR68. They are focusing on XPCOM and Mozilla-specific JS features as well.
I can’t see there being much left by the next ESR but experience tells me there will be some but I don’t expect there to be enough to run non-webextensions.
> The shims and jury-rigging isn’t meant as a long term solution. It is a one shot. Given Mozilla’s aggressive code removal of anything that was based on core and classical Mozilla technology.. It may be as soon as the next ESR.
When it comes down to it, legacy extensions utilise the same APIs used by the browser internally (XPCOM). Those will always be around, so I don’t see why this method is classed as dead-end? Waterfox allows the use of XPCOM, and will continue to do so. Those that rather not update the extensions or can’t find updated ones are free to stay on v56 as that will be maintained.
> I don’t follow Waterfox development closely, but what I *have* read up to now always suggested to me that the days of legacy-extension support in Waterfox were numbered
They aren’t, they just need to be updated. That’s about it. Extensions in Waterfox 68 can still interface XPCOM. A lot of users have been asking for this, and here it is.
@Alex Kontos:
Hi! You wrote:
“[Legacy extensions’ days] aren’t [numbered], [the extensions] just need to be updated.”
Does that mean that legacy-extension developers need to be willing to continue developing their extensions for Waterfox specifically? We saw a *massive* drop in legacy-extension development when Firefox killed legacy support, even while Waterfox continued to support most Firefox-specific extensions *out the box*. This doesn’t strike me as very different from the situation Pale Moon is facing, except that more work *may* soon be required of legacy developers to keep their extensions going in Waterfox than in Pale Moon. And I still don’t understand how the more powerful legacy extensions will be able to work when the APIs in the Firefox core used by Waterfox no longer provide access to the functions they require. How long can you continue to maintain Waterfox 56?
I suspect that Waterfox and Pale Moon will soon cater to two different classes of users: Waterfox, to people who basically like Firefox Quantum but who want more user control and privacy out of the box and who don’t care about the greater functionality offered by legacy extensions, and Pale Moon, to people who *also* value user control and privacy but strongly prefer pre-Australis Firefox’s fully customizable UI and legacy-extension support. Even though I fall into the latter group, I’m rooting for both projects to succeed. Both groups need an out-of-the-box alternative to a present-day Firefox that has strayed pretty far from its original vision. (Let’s be realistic: 99% of users aren’t going to review, customize, apply, and continually update the comprehensive Firefox user.js script developed and maintained by Miss Pants … First of Her Name, Mother of Foxes, Breaker of Telemetry, Warden of the Web, Protectress of the Realms of Users, etc. ;-)
My god man, do you have any clue what is actually happening in Mountain View? They want it dead, all of it.. XUL, XBL, XPCOM, anything C++.. All of it.
[Editor: please no personal attacks]
Mozilla has been on this quest for years now and this is the first time I have seen anyone deny it is even happening.. Most people just consider it fantastic and attack us for not embracing it.
I never thought I would have the best example of “Jumping the Shark” beyond what I initially posted but WOW.
[Editor: please no personal attacks]
Tobin: I haven’t seen falsehoods like this since the last time I turned into CNN.
My God man! This explains SO MUCH, about you and about Pale Moon. [Edited: please no personal attacks]
Thanks for making it clear Matt! I swore off Pale Moon so many years ago I can’t remember, but this ensures that I wouldn’t touch it if it were the last browser on earth and I will now inform others of the ugly truth about it’s creators!
Older and — dare I say it? — wiser and more politic guy here. (Or maybe I’m just more worn out, with less time left on the horizon.)
This would be a much more productive exchange if *everyone* took a breath, bit their tongue, refrained from flaming and escalating, and stuck to the issues. There are some fundamental differences between Waterfox and Pale Moon that seem worth discussing. Everything else is an unpleasant and largely pointless distraction.
I guess what I’m saying is, “Don’t make me come back there! I will *stop* this car and come back and *separate* you!” ;-)
Good advice dude.. We should all take a break, collect our thoughts, and reconvene on the next related news post.
That would be the ticket!
Matt A. Tobin said: “We should all take a break, collect our thoughts,…â€
What a hypocritical riot! Just like yer orange hero. First starting the inflammatory shite by attacking CNN, then saying we should all “take a break, collect our thoughtsâ€! Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. It’s like someone saying an investigation is total BS, then saying that based on that total BS investigation that they are totally cleared. Sorry–can’t have it both ways.
Instead of deliberately provoking/insulting and then giving holier-than-thou advice to others, please follow your own advice and don’t start shite in the first place!
P.S. Is it Ashby? 41? Crownsville?
https://www.howtogeek.com/335712/update-why-you-shouldnt-use-waterfox-pale-moon-or-basilisk/ – Feb 22, 2018
I see no future for Waterfox and Palemoon. Similarly for desktop Linux. If they don’t change and cater to the average users or masses, they will forever be stuck in a niche and minuscule market.
Remember, the Google-sponsored Chromium Project was also open-source with contributions from Google’s own Linux developers and other Linux developers. Google was able to use the project to bring her proprietary Chrome browser, a Chromium-fork, to greater heights, mainly by catering to what the average web-surfers or masses want.
……. Similarly for the other Google-sponsored Android Open Source Project.
Personally, I do not use these Firefox-forks mainly because they do not support DRM in DRM-protected streaming websites like Netflix, VoD and Pay-per-View = they do not support the copyright of web-content creators.
……. DRM-protection in DVD/BluRay discs and players/drives which disables mass-copying/burning by computer users is a different and separate issue.
Kinda missing the point. Waterfox, and Palemoon both are products for the masses as they are forks of Firefox. Remember Chrome itself is a fork product. The reason Waterfox, and Palemoon aren‘t used as much is the same reason Firefox isn’t used as much when compared to Chrome and that is the brand. Keep in mind I’m thinking like the average user, ignoring security aspects of forks. Chrome does shady things, checks your history, yet its still widely used because of the brand Google. Think about it this way, Firefox and Chrome are very similar in usability, and performance therefore both cater to the masses but if one is taking your info and the other is trying to be as transparent as possible down the road one of them will be the logical choice to everyone. IE was once catering to the masses and Chrome took that spotlight, because IE’s flaws gave Chrome a chance to grow. Back when IE was big, Microsoft the brand was much more dominating than Google and yet Google came out on top. Eventually the privacy stuff will be a significant issue to people that Chrome and their data aggregation methods will most likely be passing the spotlight to Firefox.
@AnorKnee Merce
Rather arrogant opinion – of someone who thinks they have the right to classify all other needs other than their own as insignificant or inferior. Simplicity/minimalism/speed AND design only is a boring concept. Neither Chrome or Firefox or Opera empower users these days, with the limited amount of options you can not advance, create or revolutionize.
During the Amiga/C64/Atari days people valued choice, options and features. They loved to play, explore, create, break existing limitations – They tried to be creative instead of only being consumers without any special needs/interests. People have not been arrogant or selfish and accepted other opinions as valuable. I appreciate all browsers who try to be different, who try to be unique and deliver also different AND unique features and show that way the mainstream the well-deserved middle-finger.
No matter if Seamonkey, Pale Moon, Waterfox classic, Vivaldi, Otter-Browser, Slimjet or all the other projects around which give users option and choice instead of generic look and generic features without value.
@AnorKnee Merce
What complete nonsense.It is called choice and if the masses aka “sheep” want to follow the crowd then that’s their problem,but not everyone wants to use mainstream or have the latest new shiny gadgets because a lot of people simply do not want or need them.
I use firefox and palemoon as my browsers on a linux system too and computing is hassle free.
You have a rather narrow-minded and selfish vision of computing in general.
@ Kubrick
Rather a sheep than a goat.
Rather, it is Palemoon who has a narrow-minded and selfish vision of not catering to the average masses or web-surfers in general.
Rather, Palemoon is complete nonsense.
According to netmarketshare numbers for April 2019:
Chrome = 65.64%
Firefox . = 10.23%
IE ………. = 8.44%
Edge …. = 5.53%
.
Palemoon = 0.00x% = is not a lot of people, comparatively.
@AnorKnee Merce So if 65% of the population decided to jump off a cliff without a parachute because it’s cool, would you follow suit? Market share does not equate to an objectively better or worse product.
@AnorKnee Merce
“Palemoon = 0.00x% = is not a lot of people, comparatively.”
So I have to install Chrome because it has 65.64%?
Who knows what the future will bring, but first of all you have to say thanks to all those developers that offer you many alternatives for a browser, obviously including Firefox’s team.
Secondly I didn’t choose Waterfox after FX-52ESR based on % and honestly I really have to commit myself looking for a security challenge during usual surfing.
@AnorKnee Merce: “Rather, it is Palemoon who has a narrow-minded and selfish vision of not catering to the average masses or web-surfers in general.”
The average masses and general web-surfers are well-catered to by the mainstream browsers, including Firefox.
There’s nothing wrong with browsers that can address the needs of relatively niche audiences. Such browsers (and other software) are incredibly important. Just because a product doesn’t appeal to a large percentage of the population doesn’t mean the product isn’t valuable.
If I had to choose between post-Quantum Firefox and the other major browsers, I’d use the web a whole lot less than I do.
And that has what exactly to do with quality of the software in question?
“Rather, it is Palemoon who has a narrow-minded and selfish vision of not catering to the average masses or web-surfers in general.”
Who says it’s supposed to? Pale Moon admits it’s not for everybody. Apparently you don’t understand that’s not illegal.
Forget sheep. Try sheeple.
“Palemoon = 0.00x% = is not a lot of people, comparatively.”
pfff
Those numbers are totally gameable, and have been since the days of IE pretending to hold onto their lead years after they had really lost it.
Isn’t Chrome installed by default on smartphones? That could be a significant reason for its market share. Besides, I doubt Palemoon cares that much about its popularity. If they did, they would just become another chrome or FF, no? I’m happy that it stays as it is for people like me (so-called power users but should really be “users that expect quality from their software” or “users that don’t like being exploited”).
I used to use Waterfox and liked it okay but I haven’t been able to get it to work for a few years now. I just tried again today, twice, and it failed both times. As soon as I install the latest version and open it and put something in the URL bar and press enter nothing happens. If I click the arrow, then it works. Then when I try to open another site it never loads, the circle just keeps spinning forever. I did a clean install, this happened, I did a complete uninstall and a second clean install and the same problem happens again. I gave up the second time and uninstalled it. I’m mystified because it must be working for some people, and I have five other different browsers on here and all work fine.
@Anonymous – The exact same thing happened to me when I first installed Waterfox. It happened because I imported data from my Firefox profile, which seems not to work properly. You will need to open Waterfox’s profile manager (run “waterfox -p”) and create a fresh profile.
@nosamu: Thanks for replying! Now I know it’s not only me. And you’re right: I did import data from my Firefox profile.
Thanks for the tip!
@John Fenderson: Thanks for the subreddit suggestion. I hadn’t thought of that.
I don’t need Waterfox now, but I may at some point in the future…
@Anonymous:
That’s interesting. Waterfox has never given me trouble. You might ask about it on the Waterfox subreddit. Someone there might be able to help.
I switched from Firefox to Waterfox because there are essential extensions (at least for me) that aren’t ported to the new format of even don’t work with the new system (e.g. TabMixPlus or Colorfiul tabs).
No reason to stay with Waterfox! I will return to the original or, even better, use Chrome.
The Waterfox 56 branch will continue to be maintained with security patches:
https://old.reddit.com/r/waterfox/comments/bjzyxm/i_dont_know_that_much_about_porting_addons_to/emg5gg4/
Also, even if Waterfox were to be updates to version 68, why would you return to Firefox? Mozilla does some questionable things within Firefox, e.g. rolling out shield studies (like Cliqz, which happened to transmit your entire browsing history to a third party), Waterfox gets rid of all of this.
@Iron Heart
Now that offers room for an interesting note!
So Waterfox 56 gets security patches? – Same way like Pale Moon is maintained with security patches. You know, both… Waterfox 56 branch and Pale Moon have in common that not all Mozilla patches can be added as both browsers do not use the latest Mozilla code-additions.
So, if you think that Pale Moon is obsolete/disgusting and the browser and it’s makers should vanish as a whole – then the double-standard you are driving in relation with Waterfox 56 is more than telling – and most likely you belong to the same category of people who did not get what they asked for from Moonchild and therefor having personal issues with both the makers AND the browser – people who hide their personal dislike behind aggressive criticism – which is nothing less than a form of cyber-mobbing/bullying!
Which makes your anti-Pale Moon comments rather biased – compared to people who deliver a real non-biased opinion towards the Pale Moon project – no matter if they like or do not like the browser for whatever for unique but honest and reasonable reasons.
@John Ambridge
> So Waterfox 56 gets security patches? – Same way like Pale Moon is maintained with security patches. You know, both… Waterfox 56 branch and Pale Moon have in common that not all Mozilla patches can be added as both browsers do not use the latest Mozilla code-additions.
I was just stating that Waterfox 56 will be maintained without explicitly advertising that as a good thing, let alone a thing I would use. I’ll switch to their Waterfox 68 branch the moment it gets its first stable release. I am currently using Firefox ESR.
> So, if you think that Pale Moon is obsolete/disgusting and the browser and it’s makers should vanish as a whole – then the double-standard you are driving in relation with Waterfox 56 is more than telling
Except for the fact that the Waterfox developer will switch to a Firefox 68 base soon, whereas Pale Moon sticks to an outdated code base. Where do you see the double standard here? Waterfox will continue to evolve, while Pale Moon is being left behind in the dust. That’s the difference I’ve been talking about the entire time.
> and most likely you belong to the same category of people who did not get what they asked for from Moonchild and therefor having personal issues with both the makers AND the browser
This line of thought seems to stem from some form of excessive narcissism and exaggerated self-importance. To be clear: I don’t know Moonchild nor have I ever been in contact with him. I don’t care what his goals for his outdated browser are, nor do I want to contribute to its development. I dislike him because he and his minions are very spiteful towards users of other browsers, and happen to troll beneath articles related to alternatives – like this one.
> people who hide their personal dislike behind aggressive criticism
So stating that the browser is outdated is “personal dislike” and “aggressive criticism”? Don’t think so, dude. If I dislike those guys, it’s because they are trolling around here, their outdated product notwithstanding.
> which is nothing less than a form of cyber-mobbing/bullying!
So basically the same thing that’s going on within the Pale Moon forums? Some very embarrassing and venomous conversations in this forum have already been posted here.
@Iron Heart Never have been knowing there is a browser-wiki-leaks around, how impressive… not!
Also, it is rather telling that for any neutral argumentation you can only provide more spite and hate – hide it behind fake-civility – double-standards expose themselves to everyone who can read and is not fully dense.
Just a small reminder… Mozilla had many more grave issued public relations disasters compared to Pale Moon or any other minor browser project. Mozilla is compared towards the Pale Moon project a much more bigger offender – who – for example – stood up against their origin group of users who valued choice/options/customization – beside many other incidents.
In fact your argumentation as a whole is fully in line with today’s social-network-generation – for which respect and compassion is clearly not-existing in their vocabulary.
The Amiga/C64/Atari generation had so much more of that to offer. And they had no biased animosity against choice and alternatives like generation social-networking.
And i rather suspect that you have been also registered and then banned from the Pale Moon board despite your answers. As it is pretty simple to count 1+1 together – as the argumentation from you and others who had to “endure” the same – are showing pretty much 1:1 equality.
@John Ambridge
> Also, it is rather telling that for any neutral argumentation you can only provide more spite and hate
“Today’s social-network-generation” – Clearly, double standards expose themselves to everyone who can read and is not completely dense. Accusing me of insulting anyone yet still insult others. Good job, John Ambridge. You are hiding behind fake civility, because… Just say it, you mean SJWs. There is no need to hide it from me.
> Just a small reminder… Mozilla had many more grave issued public relations disasters compared to Pale Moon or any other minor browser project.
Yes, because big organizations differ in their decision making from hobby projects. You can’t make everyone happy, and a big organization gets more flak and backlash than a small and somewhat obscure group of people. Besides, Pale Moon blocked Ad Nauseam.
> Mozilla is compared towards the Pale Moon project a much more bigger offender – who – for example – stood up against their origin group of users who valued choice/options/customization – beside many other incidents.
Shifting the direction of a product is not exactly an “offense”, not least because everyone was free to fork it, if Mozilla’s changes were indeed so strongly “disliked”. Going by your logic, Microsoft would have “offended” Office 2003 users by releasing Office 2007, just because it had a different UI. That’s what happened to Firefox, a UI change.
> In fact your argumentation as a whole is fully in line with today’s social-network-generation – for which respect and compassion is clearly not-existing in their vocabulary.
I see you are free of any kind of prejudice, let alone spite.
> The Amiga/C64/Atari generation had so much more of that to offer. And they had no biased animosity against choice and alternatives like generation social-networking.
But you do realize that current systems are far more complex than Amiga / C64 / Atari, don’t you? Which means some sort of creativity of “generation social-networking” had to be involved in order to reach that level of progress.
> And i rather suspect that you have been also registered and then banned from the Pale Moon board despite your answers. As it is pretty simple to count 1+1 together – as the argumentation from you and others who had to “endure†the same – are showing pretty much 1:1 equality.
Very serious narcissism right there… “Our browser is so amazing that everybody has to care about it. It’s simply impossible not to care about it, and if somebody criticizes it, it has to be a disgruntled fan or something.” It doesn’t get any better, are you even listening to yourself? Should I indeed harbor any dislike for that hobby project, it would be because its esteemed developers happen to have enough free time to troll under articles like this one, which deals with competitor projects.
> “Today’s social-network-generation†– Clearly, double standards expose themselves to everyone who can read and is not completely dense. Accusing me of insulting anyone yet still insult others.
Insulting? Actually it is true. Compared to the behavior of people in the past – the general attitude today has gone more rough/aggressive/violating/rude – as you and some others are the perfect example for it.
Why “Social networking” ? Because that is the best way to describe the bullying generation today. The fact that YOU even get the idea of mentioning something like “SJW” says a lot about your way of thinking or your questionable attitude/morality.
That is not insulting, that is truth. If you can not swallow it, then it is your problem and yours alone.
> Shifting the direction of a product is not exactly an “offense…
Apologetic random talk of a choice/alternatives/features hater and simplicity supporter.
>Yes, because big organizations differ in their decision making from…
Also here nothing new. Mozilla apologist talk – Mozilla white-washing… Mozilla is the hero, Mozilla is the only good. Sorry, but that is not the case. Mozilla is equal as evil as compared to Google these days. And they have been already since quite some years,
>Very serious narcissism right there
I don’t think so. You do sound similar like all the others before. You are no exception in that – so, this conclusion is natural. Feel free to provide evidence that this is not the case.
Also there is a difference between reasonable peaceful critic and aggressive rambling. No offense, but you fall clearly in the latter category.
> No reason to stay with Waterfox! I will return to the original or, even better, use Chrome.
v56 will still be maintained but the extremely popular add-ons you’ve mentioned will definitely be ported, if not by the devs then I’ll do it myself or pay out bounties :-)
If you port TabMix Plus, I will donate. You can set up the bounty now. I can’t live without multiple rows of tabs.
@Anonymous:
I use Tab Mix Plus in Pale Moon and noticed that it was updated not too terribly long ago — a few months maybe? The “Display Opened Tabs List” toolbar button now works: the list actually populates (and the “Sorted Tabs” toggle between left-to-right and alphanumeric order works, too).
I switch between single-row and multiple-row, depending on how many pinned tabs I’m running, so I guess I can’t live without multiple rows of tabs, either.
@AnorKnee Merce
You missed my point entirely.Tossing percentages into the ring is meaningless and pointless.
So chrome has a higher percentage than others,is that supposed to impress me.?.Whats the top selling car in the world,?.would i want one.perhaps not.
“palemoon is nonsense.”.What an empty utterance with no useful information as to why.Sod being a member of the average masses.I dont play follow my leader like some angelic pied piper of hamelin,i make my own choices and stand apart from crowds.
When I first tried waterfox, say 7 years ago, I guess, it was sold as a 64 bit version of firefox with speed being its virtue; FF was definitely slow at that point. Then FF introduced 64 bit versions and began to perform better over time
As I recall, WF development slowed until FF decided to go to web extensions and WF began to be sold as a more private version of FF with the old xul extension base.
Now with Waterfox adopting web extensions, when xul extensions are no longer supported, how will it differ from FF or ESR with lots of privacy config mods?
Legacy extensions can be ported to it. As you said, better privacy config. Might remove Pocket and telemetry at the code level instead of just flipping a pref.
The reason why I use Waterfox is that I have some serious trust issues with Mozilla, because they pull stunts like this:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/firefox-tests-cliqz-engine-which-slurps-user-browsing-data/
I view Waterfox as the “clean Firefox”, if you will.
> Now with Waterfox adopting web extensions, when xul extensions are no longer supported, how will it differ from FF or ESR with lots of privacy config mods?
Waterfox is still going to support XPCOM interfacing and XUL has essentially been replaced by custom elements, which are also supported in extensions for Waterfox.
So the end has come..
Fork or old does not mean inferior. Waterfox has saved me from the recent Firefox extensions ban fiasco, this is why Waterfox is superior to Firefox.
It’s safe to use old browsers as long as you don’t open questionable sites. Just open your questionable sites on other newer browsers. Different browsers for different needs.
@Anonymous.
That is very odd because waterfox depends on firefox code to even exist so your comment is rather redundant wouldn’t you say.?
@Kubrick
?
Which is the redundant part? Did you misread my comment somewhere?
It’s just like LibreOffice to OpenOffice. LibreOffice fork now is superior compared to the original.
> So the end has come..
It’s a new beginning! Legacy extensions just need to be updated to interface their updated XPCOM counterparts. v56 is also not going anywhere.
@Alex Kontos
Who’s going to update them? Regular user can’t update them and from what I read only popular extensions will get updated?
unMHT is essential to me because there’s no other way to open/save MHT in Fire(Water)fox after Quantum disaster.
@Anonymous:
You can save and open MHTs (as well as MAFFs) with Pale Moon, if you install the MozArchiver extension:
https://addons.palemoon.org/addon/mozarchiver/
(You should disable or remove conflicting MAFF/MHT-related extensions like unMHT beforehand. You may also have to manually associate the .maff and .mht file types with Pale Moon after installing MozArchiver — I no longer remember. I think I left MHT associated with Internet Explorer 11 on my system and later “turned off” Internet Explorer, so I had to manually associate MHT with Pale Moon after that.)
For confirmation (and fun and nostalgia), I just did an Everything search for MHT files on my system and opened the oldest one I found, Steve Gibson’s “Shields Up” page from back in April 2000. I probably saved it from Internet Explorer 5, and in Pale Moon it looked just like the original page I remember from 19 years ago (when I’m pretty sure I still had dial-up Internet, which took some of the fond nostalgia out of it ;-).
@Peterc
Hi Peterc. I have tried diffrerent browsers(except Pale Moon) to open my MHT files, and just like you said they look best on Firefox/Palemoon.
Thanks for the suggestion but I’ve tried Palemoon before and was having trouble with opening several sites so I don’t use it anymore.
It’s sad that MHT is never standarized. Because the old ‘Save Page as’ always break the page, MHT is the only format to keep web pages that are not exists anymore.
@Anonymous:
For a while, I was forced to load recalcitrant sites in other browsers a couple/few times a day, but with the past couple of Pale Moon releases, that’s gone down to more like a few times a week, with no significant change in my browsing habits. I’m just an ordinary user with no special technical knowledge, so I don’t know for sure whether recent changes in Pale Moon might account for the improvement. It just seems likely to me. Also, with the exception of Netflix, which I have to load in Chome anyway, I don’t regularly visit sites with DRM-protected video. Someone who does, like AnorKnee Merce, would have a much more frustrating experience with Pale Moon than I do.
@Peterc
DRM was not my problem because I don’t use Netflix or other DRM sites. At the moment I don’t have any problem Waterfox but I will try using it again someday if Waterfox decided to go to the dark path.
Thanks for sharing your experience :)
Im using tete09’s rebuilt firefox with no telemetry and what not, based on the latest version and runs pretty stable,fast and good without worrying about Mozilla Spywares.
Waterfox is rip, its gonna be just another firefox clone with no difference besides name.
tete009 builds are Firefox clones, foxclone.
tete009 isnt trying to hide his “rebuilt” firefox in other name so……
whilst waterfox……
@Anonymous
As if I cared about the name… Besides, tete009 might be infringing Mozilla’s protected trademark rights, while Waterfox certainly doesn’t.
Also, what exactly is Waterfox “hiding”? You can read everything you need to know about it on their own website and on Wikipedia. We have very different defintions of “hiding something”, it seems.
First Alpha release now available: https://github.com/MrAlex94/Waterfox/releases/tag/68.0a1
theres a fact that i used 52ESR all this time before trying waterfox, which its still a good alternative sure i lose 32bits support… anyways firefox quantum its still my default browser after addons debacle its fresh to look back to previous firefox, it reminds me how many things was lost and what things we gained. i really hope they keep 56, moving to 68 its gonna fragment the userbase again and we will repeat the same dilema, but then it seems inevitable.
“add-on system changes that will render older legacy extensions unusable”
They will not be “unusable”, they will be DELETED, PERMANENTLY ERASED from hard drive with no way recover them!
This is BS, disable them, but never delete anything without user’s consent!
I’m very happy to announce that your concerns are not valid. Perhaps they were when the article was written, but as of June, ’19, at least, I’ve had none of the issues you describe. After speaking with several colleagues who also use Waterfox, they have confirmed that they haven’t been affected by the “big jump” from Failurefox 56-based Waterfox to the 68-based base. We have had few if any issues getting our add-ons to work fine or with almost no issues, whether they are XUL-based (i.e., actual REAL extensions) or the fake, “synthetic” add-ons based on shmoogle’s sorry excuse for an API “WebExtensions”–which obviously *aren’t* actual extensions (at least as the word is defined in standard modern English).
I mean they don’t let you customize Failurefox in any real sense of the word. They merely provide less-intellectual suckers—er, users—with an emulated *feeling* of being able to extend or customize their browser. Failurefox has basically become like a little brother who idolizes, looks up to and wants to BE his/her older brother “Firefox”. But like some misleading big brothers, Firefox has become Failurefox. It’s like a big brother who joins a gang and influences his little brother to become a gang banger. It might *seem* glamorous and “new” or “exciting”, but it’s really just heading down a BAD path.
But I totally digressed. Forgive the outburst. But being one of the original Firefox users from before the Internet was even heard of by most people in the world, I’ve seen it go from being a bastion of Openness and FOSS ideals, setting an example for the other browsers, to a poor wannabe of a browser that has fallen in love with Google’s disgusting philosophy, “Open” pretense and other bad habits. The point is, even without WebExtensions or Failurefox, Waterfox and the few people who still know what Open and “Firefox” really mean are doing just fine, with a few *minor* hiccoughs.
Still, I completely understand the author’s fears as to Waterfox’s ability to handle the crap Google’s pushing as software these days. Rhetoric aside, I simply wanted to alleviate others’ concerns and let people know it IS ok and WILL work. In most cases, an extension can be used in Waterfox with no changes, and if any are needed, even the layman can affect the one or two little alterations needed.
Thanks for the article and your concerns. I am happy to say they are unnecessary now, but when you wrote this article they weren’t, of course. :)
Where is the continually-promised (by Alex) return of the “Ask Me Every Time” cookie privacy option that incentivized me to download Waterfox in the first place?
Firefox abandoned it, Pale Moon and most recently Waterfox.
Don’t want it? Don’t use it? Why spoil it for the rest of us.
There’s nothing else like it,. despite suggestions to the contrary.