Waterfox G5 will be based on Firefox ESR 102; users will be upgraded from G4 automatically
Alex Kontos, the developer of Waterfox, has announced that the browser is being migrated to Firefox ESR 102. The current version of the popular application, Waterfox G4, is based on Firefox ESR 91.
According to the Firefox Release Calendar, Mozilla will release Firefox ESR 102 on June 27th, 2022, i.e. today. For reference, the Extended Support Release for Firefox 91, was rolled out August 9, 2021. The last version of ESR 91 will be available on August 22, after which ESR 102 will be the only version that will be maintained by the organization.
Waterfox G5 will be delivered as an auto-update
The next version will be called Waterfox G5. The developer also mentioned that existing installations of the browser will be upgraded from G4 to G5 automatically when the update becomes available.
Users who prefer to remain on the old version will need to change an option to avoid the auto-update. Go to the Settings page's General Section, scroll down to Waterfox updates, and select the option that says "Check for updates but let you choose to install them".
Optionally, you may choose to disable automatic updates completely by switching to the following options: "Never check for updates." This is not recommended as you may not get security updates for the browser.
There is no word yet as to when Waterfox G5 will be released. Hopefully, we will see a beta version of the upcoming version soon.
What does this mean for Waterfox G4?
All remaining updates for Waterfox G4 will focus on security fixes and critical bug fixes only. In other words, no new features will be added to G4. This sounds similar to how Waterfox Classic, which was introduced as a separate branch last year, is being maintained.
Waterfox G4.1.3.1 update
Waterfox was updated to version G4.1.3.1 a few days ago for Windows, macOS and Linux. It fixes an issue that was introduced in G4.1.3 (also released last week). A bug related to BootstrapLoader was preventing the installation of legacy add-ons such as TabMixPlus, this has been resolved. The latest build also includes some fixes for the stability, functionality and the security of the browser.
Waterfox Sync sign-in error
There seems to be a bug with Waterfox, I noticed that I couldn't sign in to my Firefox Sync account on my Mac. The login form gets stuck on "working", after entering the username and clicking the continue button.
When I tried to sign in through the browser on my Windows machine in the previous build, it failed to work too. So, this problem is clearly not related to the update. Perhaps something has changed in the way how Mozilla's server handles the authentication process. A few users have reported about a similar issue, and the developer has said that he will investigate the problem, and provide a fix for it.
Some users have claimed they had issues with the auto-update failing to patch the program to G4.1.3.1, and that they had to update to the new version manually. I can't confirm this, as the auto-updater worked for me.
Will you switch to Waterfox G5 or stick with G4 as long as possible?
You wrote:
All remaining updates for Waterfox G4 will focus on security fixes and critical bug fixes only. In other words, no new features will be added to G4. This sounds similar to how Waterfox Classic, which was introduced as a separate branch last year, is being maintained.
It appears that once G5 has been standardized, that G4 updates will stop. Here’s what Alex Kontos says on Reddit:
Carrying on security fixes for a release such as G4 just isn’t feasible, sadly. It’s hard enough with Classic, and the expectation there is that websites are broken and security exploits are possible. There isn’t the same expectation for G4.
doesn’t work anyway, not worth the trouble, won’t install, no instructions on Waterfox site, BS!
Honestly what is the point of using Waterfox over normal Firefox ?
Nothing, except being able to use insecure XUL because dinosaurs and adaption, and to support an advertising company, which you can do with Brave anyway
what are you smoking there brother, share .. must some really good stuff
“Firefox is outdated even today […] has only been multiprocess since 2017”
This about sums up your logic
@Peacock365
Firefox was not developed with a modern architecture in mind and the outflows of this are visible, for example the lack of leak-free site isolation. It leaks left and right because Firefox can’t really do away with several shared resources that should be compartmentalized – it’s still very much outdated.
* [Editor: removed, stay polite please]
@Peacock365
I see my response to your trolling has motivated you to further trolling under legit questions. Here is the problem with your highly idiotic argument, though: Firefox is outdated even today, it is not meeting current security standards, has only been multiprocess since 2017 (while Chromium has been multiprocess since 2008, lmao), still doesn’t have leak-free process isolation (and none whatsoever on Android) and internally still uses XUL for the UI (though you just bashed it, ’cause you know literally nothing)… The legacy extensions were the only reason to use the browser and kept it afloat as far as its enthusiasts were concerned. Now it’s a very poor copy of Chromium and does nothing better than its main competitor, hence why it’s sitting at 3% market share today.
See you at 0% market share in a few years.
PS:
> and to support an advertising company
Firefox is literally funded by Google, the biggest ad company in the world LMAO. You know nothing Jon Peacock.
“Now it’s a very poor copy of Chromium and does nothing better than its main competitor, hence why it’s sitting at 3% market share today.
See you at 0% market share in a few years”
Look at this? is this not provocative? Why is this guy even f-ing allowed to write comments on this website?
@Ehh
None of what I said was factually wrong. You want to shut down my speech but not the speech of @Peacock365 who was provocative from the very start (before I even said anything). Why is that? You share his opinion but you don’t share mine, that’s why.
Very transparent attempt of silencing views opposed to yours.
This is a travesty, I will continue to use my insecure outdated Classic until the day I die, so I can use my legacy XUL extensions
This article is not even about WF Classic, genius.
When G4 came out there were a lot of bugs that cropped up. I would advise anyone using G4 to block the update until the issues are worked out. Also backup your profile in case something goes wrong. That way you can restore the old profile and use the old version. Otherwise if something goes wrong you might lose all your customization.
Isn’t Waterfox owned by an AD agency, System1?
@Zinc
Yeah, and this has led to the inclusion of the StartPage search engine as default, which is also owned by System1. That was the effect of the takeover.
Firefox is literally fully dependent on Google, the biggest ad company in the world, but only Waterfox’s relation to an ad company is problematic ’cause reasons, i.e. hypocrisy.
&Zinc, do you mean https://system1group.com/ or https://system1.com/ ?
Or maybe somebody else?
Paul(us), the 2nd one.
big difference between striking a search deal with multiple search engines, same as Safari does, and being owned by an actual advertising company
you are insinuating that google has some say in how Mozilla’s business is done, with zero proof, as usual – just full of hot air because… man baby tantrums?
@Gerard
Hey Gerard, care to explain why Firefox explicitly excluded Google’s tracking parameters from their recently introduced parameter stripping? Shouldn’t they be the first ones blocked due to how ubiquitous they are?
Also, their tracking protection in “Standard” mode does not block any tracking scripts including the omnipresent Google Analytics, you need to switch it to “Strict” manually in the privacy(TM) browser in order to block any Google tracking.
> big difference between striking a search deal with multiple search engines, same as Safari does, and being owned by an actual advertising company
This glosses over the fact that 80%+ of Mozilla’s income come from Google. Whatever they get from other search engines is peanuts. Apple is not dependent on Google in such a way. Considering that Mozilla is more or less dependent on one benefactor, calling them a Google subdivision in all but name is not entirely wrong.
Correct.
https://www.ghacks.net/2020/02/14/waterfox-web-browser-sold-to-system1/