How the Browser's Relation to Firefox is Presented

[CharmCityCrab]

I have noticed that many users seem to expect that Firefox forks will hue fairly close to mainline Firefox and support as many or more extensions that are designed and maintained with Firefox in mind, as Firefox does. This is kind of a strange expectation, but one can see where users get it from- some forks, which barely qualify as forks because they tend to incorporate a lot of changes from Firefox every time Firefox does an update, do what those users seem to expect- Cyberfox (Which is either defunct or soon will be- I remember that they announced an end date) and Waterfox are two examples.

Since Pale Moon does it's own thing and thus increasingly requires that extension makers maintain their add-ons specifically for Pale Moon, I wonder if it would make sense for Pale Moon to differentiate the way it presents it's core brand from Firefox even further. Perhaps not mentioning Firefox on the official website documentation, FAQs, release notes, press release type announcements, etc., except to the extent that might be legally required to comply with license terms, or required for comprehensibility, might be worth consideration. The less Pale Moon is considered as being related to Firefox, the less users will likely anticipate it being just like Waterfox, etc. and think that it should support either all the old XUL extensions, or the new web extensions format. You'd get less "Why won't this random Firefox extension work with Pale Moon?" threads and more "Is there a Pale Moon extension that does [whatever]?" or "Is there a Pale Moon equivalent or similar to [name of Firefox or Chrome extension here]?"

It might make life easier just to present Pale Moon as it's own browser and to downplay it's relationship to Firefox as much as possible, other than perhaps on documentation intended specifically for add-on/extension developers, where it might be emphasized to show them how simple creating and maintaining a Pale Moon version of their Firefox extension could be.

I do think the distinction is clear on the website and in other places already, but it is not getting through to some users, so maybe the time has come to just drop references to Firefox and Mozilla as much as possible to see if that can be driven home to a greater number of users.

I don't know if this is practical or would help in reality. It was just a thought I wanted to throw out there, which the decision makers can evaluate for themselves and decide to implement or not to implement. I have no real preference on this matter.

[gepus]

The less Pale Moon is considered as being related to Firefox, the less users will likely anticipate it being just like Waterfox, etc. and think that it should support either all the old XUL extensions, or the new web extensions format. You'd get less "Why won't this random Firefox extension work with Pale Moon?" threads and more "Is there a Pale Moon extension that does [whatever]?" or "Is there a Pale Moon equivalent or similar to [name of Firefox or Chrome extension here]?"

- Many users (including myself) switched to Pale Moon because it has support for legacy extensions.
- Many Firefox legacy extensions you won't find on https://addons.palemoon.org/ do work with Pale Moon.
- Average users don't have time for reading FAQs or for searching the forum before asking a question and have also little understanding for how things work.
Hence wrong expectations and stupid/nerving questions are inevitable whatever one might try to do.
Looking at it from a positive perspective - the more new stupid questions, the more new users.

[New Tobin Paradigm]

If we disable the Dual-GUID system that allows Firefox targeted extensions to install pretty much without question.. There will be hundreds of threads and more importantly.. They will kill us.. String us up at the nearest tree or burn us at the stake.

Indeed there is enough completely real and venomous hate just under the surface from years of abuse as Firefox users that notable Pale Moon contributors could face serious physical harm or campaigns of harrassment and other nasty consequences because they can't get to Mozilla but they can get to us if we SEEM to be acting like Mozilla.

No way in hell. Firefox extensions will remain on an as-is basis nothing for or against it shall be done.

[Moonchild]

In addition to the above: how do you think most new Pale Moon users find the browser? What do you think they search for? Would that not include "Firefox" as a keyword? How would they find us if we make an active effort to avoid that as a keyword instead of promoting it?

[CharmCityCrab]

Indeed there is enough completely real and venomous hate just under the surface from years of abuse as Firefox users that notable Pale Moon contributors could face serious physical harm or campaigns of harrassment and other nasty consequences because they can't get to Mozilla but they can get to us if we SEEM to be acting like Mozilla.

That's really scary. I'm sorry that you guys have to deal with that crap. It's sad that anyone would threaten or commit actual violence over the direction of an Internet browser- especially given that there are so many options in that sphere (i.e. Many different browsers are available to choose between- including at least 2 or 3 based on the new XUL platform code that Pale Moon's application code is paired with) and that you have open-source code that they could legally and constructively fork to create a browser more to their liking (or use donations or other positive incentives to try to make such a project happen) rather than harass you guys over a direction that they don't like (Not that violence would ever be acceptable even if there were no alternatives and the code were proprietary).

I honestly had no idea.

Of course your safety should come first.

And I do see your point about potential peaceful push back to a change in Pale Moon's positioning upsetting users who may complain peacefully and stop using the browser. One does kind of wonder what the long-term goal is for those users, though- certainly eventually just the continued development of the Internet, operating systems, and webpage content will prevent Pale Moon from continuing to utilize add-ons who's development has already stopped if they are not forked and specifically further developed for Pale Moon as just a natural long-run evolution, I would think. I say that without knowing any of the technical details. It just seems logical on a surface level to me as a non-technically minded person.

I wasn't really meaning to suggest that something be changed to force incompatibilities with old Firefox add-ons that users can try at their own risk without support to use with Pale Moon, though. I was just thinking from an advertising perspective. One could advertise Pale Moon without reference to Firefox without removing any compatibilities that may currently exist- users who utilize it now could continue to, and could share their knowledge with new users, it just wouldn't be something advertised on the non-forum portions of the website.

[CharmCityCrab]

In addition to the above: how do you think most new Pale Moon users find the browser? What do you think they search for? Would that not include "Firefox" as a keyword? How would they find us if we make an active effort to avoid that as a keyword instead of promoting it?

That's another good point that I hadn't thought of. I suppose the goal would be that eventually they would simply be searching for "Pale Moon" or "web browsers", but that might imply an unrealistic level of growth to where Pale Moon would become a household name or spread by word of mouth (i.e. People saying "Do a search for Pale Moon and give it a try") to where a majority of potential users are people directly searching for the product the way they do Firefox, Chrome, and some of the other large browsers. The SEO power of using the Firefox name wasn't something that had even crossed my mind- I guess given what Tobin said and what you said, you guys can consider my suggestion withdrawn. I clearly hadn't thought it through to the extent that you guys have, and you both raised a lot of points I hadn't considered or wasn't aware of.

At this point, I am now wondering if there might be some value in going the other way and working additional browser names into descriptions ("More choices than Firefox! Faster than Chrome! Edgier than Edge!") for SEO purposes.

It looks like you guys have thought through all the angles and have this aspect of things well in hand.

I assume the equation might change if you suddenly found yourselves with, say, the same marketshare as Firefox or something of that nature. But that is obviously not the sort of thing that will suddenly happen overnight.

[fillerup]

Indeed there is enough completely real and venomous hate just under the surface from years of abuse as Firefox users that notable Pale Moon contributors could face serious physical harm or campaigns of harrassment and other nasty consequences because they can't get to Mozilla but they can get to us if we SEEM to be acting like Mozilla.

now i know why whenever you guys make a slightly unpopular decision, legions of accounts with less than 5 posts come out the woodwork to protest

[New Tobin Paradigm]

It is really sad actially that it happens if we change a pixel like really one pixel gets changed and everyone grabs the pitchforks and torches.

As you have noted this really does happen. Due to this any visual and behaveral change to Pale Moon is not only weighed and debated for general usefulness but also goes through how users will react.

Normally, to some frustration, my self playing the part of the userbase throwing every legit or otherwise complaint about such a change at the wall to see what sticks.. THEN we see how much has stuck and decide if it is really worth the trouble such change would cause.

A number of times this has hampered benefical change and sometimes something out of left field will come up and smack us in the face causing reversion.

The entire thing is draining and soul destroying and it takes a while to recover from the process. It also causes resentment from us. We all try to not let it affect us but, at least for me, it does seem to build up and then I explode on some rampage on the forums for a little while.

For me, in particular as of year or two, I have been going in and out of self imposed bans and posting limitations over this kind of nonsense. Mainly because I do not have a tendency to hold things back or to be deceptive about how I feel about anything at any particular time. Complete unfiltered honesty is not often beneficial for me.. but I guess it beats doing what others do i suppose.