"Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
"Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
For me "Pale Moon" is currently the best web browser - light and beautiful. But it's a bit slower and lumbering than "Mozilla Firefox", which is currently more convenient for fast and stable browsing (although it's not perfect, too). Also "Pale Moon" sometimes crashes and closes out of nothing. I'm sure that "Pale Moon" will get better and better and I remain loyal fan of it.
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
I think this topic belongs in General Discussion.
Anyway, reason for choice is choice.
And for me, Pale Moon DOES NOT crash. Okay, one or two times in last one year when I was browsing heavily, but you know - software sucks! I use linux and have not installed many addons; that may be a factor.
Anyway, reason for choice is choice.
And for me, Pale Moon DOES NOT crash. Okay, one or two times in last one year when I was browsing heavily, but you know - software sucks! I use linux and have not installed many addons; that may be a factor.
-
- Apollo supporter
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 2018-03-06, 18:57
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Pale Moon on Windows Vista (32bit system) is reasonably fast while Mozilla Firefox the current ESR, and Comodo Ice Dragon version 52 are becoming way way too slow. So far in three days, no "crashing" of Pale Moon. Both Mozilla and Comodo are not giving support for use on Windows Vista while Moonchild of Pale Moon still is giving support. I even set Pale Moon as the default web browser for the Vista computer of mine.
- Night Wing
- Knows the dark side
- Posts: 5151
- Joined: 2011-10-03, 10:19
- Location: Piney Woods of Southeast Texas, USA
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
For what it is worth, 64 bit linux Pale Moon running in 64 bit linux Mint 18.3 (Sylvia) Xfce and 32 bit windows Pale Moon running in 64 bit Windows 7, SP1 do not crash for me. In fact I can't remember, where I surf the internet, if Pale Moon has ever crashed on me since I've been using it.
The only addons I use in both of my Pale Moon's are Adblock Latitude 4.0.1 and an old version of NoSquint (2.1.9.1). But somewhere down the road I'm going to have to give up NoSquint (2.1.9.1).
The only addons I use in both of my Pale Moon's are Adblock Latitude 4.0.1 and an old version of NoSquint (2.1.9.1). But somewhere down the road I'm going to have to give up NoSquint (2.1.9.1).
Linux Mint 21.3 (Virginia) Xfce w/ Linux Pale Moon, Linux Waterfox, Linux SeaLion, Linux Firefox
MX Linux 23.2 (Libretto) Xfce w/ Linux Pale Moon, Linux Waterfox, Linux SeaLion, Linux Firefox
Linux Debian 12.5 (Bookworm) Xfce w/ Linux Pale Moon, Linux Waterfox, Linux SeaLion, Linux Firefox
MX Linux 23.2 (Libretto) Xfce w/ Linux Pale Moon, Linux Waterfox, Linux SeaLion, Linux Firefox
Linux Debian 12.5 (Bookworm) Xfce w/ Linux Pale Moon, Linux Waterfox, Linux SeaLion, Linux Firefox
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Quite simple why i have chosen Pale Moon - Firefox got more and more static and less customizable while Pale Moon kept what made Firefox once really unique.
Also, Pale Moon almost never has crashed here so far, runs most of the time stable and without problems and that since years
Also, Pale Moon almost never has crashed here so far, runs most of the time stable and without problems and that since years
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
You're right. There are some moments, when I want to diversify the browsing with "Mozilla Firefox", but after a while I return to the best browser on the Web - "Pale Moon" (which keeps the interface of "Firefox" from its golden times). Although all of you haven't had any crashes, I have such ones, but rarely. And even with them, I still prefer "Pale Moon" for my first choice and as a default browser.Sajadi wrote:Quite simple why i have chosen Pale Moon - Firefox got more and more static and less customizable while Pale Moon kept what made Firefox once really unique.
Last edited by newbie3 on 2018-03-09, 16:43, edited 2 times in total.
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Another amazing thing about Pale Moon is the quality of the releases. Serious bugs in new releases are very rare, or maybe even non existing.
This means that the new releases have been properly testet before the release.
Many other software vendors could learn a lot here, especially M$.
This means that the new releases have been properly testet before the release.
Many other software vendors could learn a lot here, especially M$.
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
I have 117 extensions installed and enabled. Pale Moon doesn't crash on my Windows 10 system, although it occasionally hangs on graphics or videos if left on such a site for too long.
-
- Lunatic
- Posts: 400
- Joined: 2015-06-22, 19:48
- Location: USA (North Springfield, Vermont)
- Contact:
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
That sounds just like my experiences with Midori, LOL.newbie3 wrote: Also "Pale Moon" sometimes crashes and closes out of nothing.
- back2themoon
- Moon Magic practitioner
- Posts: 2374
- Joined: 2012-08-19, 20:32
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Firefox tends to crash far more often than Pale Moon. Perhaps you should investigate what's causing the crashes, perhaps some extension.newbie3 wrote:Also "Pale Moon" sometimes crashes and closes out of nothing.
Safe Mode / clean profile info: Help/Restart in Safe Mode
Information to include when asking for support - How to apply user agent overrides
How to auto-fill passwords
Windows 10 Pro x64
Information to include when asking for support - How to apply user agent overrides
How to auto-fill passwords
Windows 10 Pro x64
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Welcome to the forum newbie3. I agree.newbie3 wrote:... - light and beautiful.
I've seen some browsing crashes with PM 24/25 on heavily scripted and/or RAM-hungry sites (only 3.75 GB here, potientially...). But that's gone.
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Thank you for the feedback, guys.
The extensions, which I use are two e-mail notifiers, Forecastfox and Bookmark Current Tab Set. Probably the reason for the crashes is in one of them, as you say. But I use the same add-ons on "Mozilla Firefox" and there I don't have crashes. The crashes of "Pale Moon" happens from time to time, relatively rarely.
The big problem, in my opinion, is that the loading of heavy web sites takes more time (or at least I can't scroll down the page at the same time) with "Pale Moon" than with "Mozilla Firefox". That makes the last one more convenient for fast browsing (also the option to select immediately the address from the suggestions (while typing) add to the speed, "Pale Moon" have the same option, but it's different).
The extensions, which I use are two e-mail notifiers, Forecastfox and Bookmark Current Tab Set. Probably the reason for the crashes is in one of them, as you say. But I use the same add-ons on "Mozilla Firefox" and there I don't have crashes. The crashes of "Pale Moon" happens from time to time, relatively rarely.
The big problem, in my opinion, is that the loading of heavy web sites takes more time (or at least I can't scroll down the page at the same time) with "Pale Moon" than with "Mozilla Firefox". That makes the last one more convenient for fast browsing (also the option to select immediately the address from the suggestions (while typing) add to the speed, "Pale Moon" have the same option, but it's different).
- billmcct
- Keeps coming back
- Posts: 955
- Joined: 2012-09-04, 15:19
- Location: Costa Rica & Union City Georgia USA
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Those addons wont crash PM. I have only had one crash in 7 years of using PM and that was last week. I have 118 addons installed also.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The difference between the Impossible and the Possible lies in a man's Determination.
Tommy Lasorda
The difference between the Impossible and the Possible lies in a man's Determination.
Tommy Lasorda
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Yesterday I just installed "Chromium" (based on "Google Chrome"; my sister uses the last one and we share the same device) and I feel reborned. It's a real pleasure to browse with it - light, silent (i.e. low CPU and memory usage) and very, very fast. Now I understand why nearly 60% of all Internet users prefer "Google Chrome" for their surfing through the WWW. I feel addicted to it and now it's my first choice for browser, "Pale Moon" is second (and as a default browser). Still I can't watch most of the videos which I like (except on YouTube), but despite that, I like "Chromium" very much. I hope that "Pale Moon" will surprise me after some major updates. I still think that it's the best and the most functional browser on the Web, but there is much work to be done, so to say that surfing with it is the same and even bigger pleasure, than with "Chromium" (especially on heavy web sites).
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
i think this is simply due to using a new Chromium installation. you will get a similar experience by creating and using a new Pale Moon profilenewbie3 wrote:Yesterday I just installed "Chromium" (based on "Google Chrome"; my sister uses the last one and we share the same device) and I feel reborned. It's a real pleasure to browse with it - light, silent (i.e. low CPU and memory usage) and very, very fast. Now I understand why nearly 60% of all Internet users prefer "Google Chrome" for their surfing through the WWW. I feel addicted to it and now it's my first choice for browser, "Pale Moon" is second (and as a default browser). Still I can't watch most of the videos which I like (except on YouTube), but despite that, I like "Chromium" very much. I hope that "Pale Moon" will surprise me after some major updates. I still think that it's the best and the most functional browser on the Web, but there is much work to be done, so to say that surfing with it is the same and even bigger pleasure, than with "Chromium" (especially on heavy web sites).
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Chromium has a radically different concept - it is minimalist and simple - That is not the basic concept of Pale Moon - of course you can remove items so it looks similar to Chrome.newbie3 wrote:Yesterday I just installed "Chromium" (based on "Google Chrome"; my sister uses the last one and we share the same device) and I feel reborned. It's a real pleasure to browse with it - light, silent (i.e. low CPU and memory usage) and very, very fast. Now I understand why nearly 60% of all Internet users prefer "Google Chrome" for their surfing through the WWW. I feel addicted to it and now it's my first choice for browser, "Pale Moon" is second (and as a default browser). Still I can't watch most of the videos which I like (except on YouTube), but despite that, I like "Chromium" very much. I hope that "Pale Moon" will surprise me after some major updates. I still think that it's the best and the most functional browser on the Web, but there is much work to be done, so to say that surfing with it is the same and even bigger pleasure, than with "Chromium" (especially on heavy web sites).
Mozilla is trying so hard to be like Chrome as they want to absorb all Chrome users.
Also, Chromium has a more heavy memory usage... Load tons of tabs into Pale Moon and then into Chromium. You will find out that Chromium eats much more memory and you can not open the same number of tabs without running out of memory.
Last edited by Sajadi on 2018-03-18, 11:09, edited 1 time in total.
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Thank you for the replies, guys.
I use a new profile on "Pale Moon" (after having some troubles with some scripts before that), but there is a small time lag when I browse through heavy web sites (up to 7-8 seconds, until I can scroll down the page; there is no such a thing on "Chromium"). It annoys me the most. Everything else is fine - "Pale Moon" gives me everything I need from a high quality browser. I think that when "Pale Moon" become a little faster, I would not switch to another browser. That's what impress me the most - the speed of browsing.
I use a new profile on "Pale Moon" (after having some troubles with some scripts before that), but there is a small time lag when I browse through heavy web sites (up to 7-8 seconds, until I can scroll down the page; there is no such a thing on "Chromium"). It annoys me the most. Everything else is fine - "Pale Moon" gives me everything I need from a high quality browser. I think that when "Pale Moon" become a little faster, I would not switch to another browser. That's what impress me the most - the speed of browsing.
Last edited by newbie3 on 2018-03-18, 12:27, edited 2 times in total.
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Pale Moon is pretty fast here on my Laptop with an SSD - If you really care for speed most and everything else comes second for you - a bare-bone minimalist browser like Google Chrome is what you want to use.newbie3 wrote:Thank you for the replies, guys.
I use a new profile on "Pale Moon" (after having some troubles with some scripts before that), but there is a small time lag when I browse through heavy web sites (up to 7-8 seconds, until I can scroll down the page). It annoys me the most. Everything else is fine - "Pale Moon" gives me everything I need from a high quality browser. I think that when "Pale Moon" become a little faster, I would not switch to another browser. That's what impress me the most - the speed of browsing.
As said, Pale Moon is meant more to be a feature rich browser, Chromium/Chromium based browsers or the fake Firefox of today are meant for more performance - even if that speed gain is in many cases a placebo only.
Last edited by Sajadi on 2018-03-18, 12:28, edited 2 times in total.
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
To be honest, I find the new Firefox very fast as well. For me though, customisability and the UI are most important. I'll happily take a small drop in speed to have a more pleasant UI that I can customise to my liking. I'm just not a huge fan of Chrome's UI, and Firefox still suffers from a noticeable drop in customisability compared to Pale Moon (ie, the "hamburger" menu that cannot be moved, tabs-on-top only, no status bar, etc).newbie3 wrote:Yesterday I just installed "Chromium" (based on "Google Chrome"; my sister uses the last one and we share the same device) and I feel reborned. It's a real pleasure to browse with it - light, silent (i.e. low CPU and memory usage) and very, very fast.
I do have Firefox and Chrome installed for the odd site that doesn't play nice with Pale Moon, but I do 99.9% of my browsing with Pale Moon still.
Re: "Pale Moon" vs. "Mozilla Firefox" - reasons for choice in the present time.
Firefox in terms of UI customisation is the same as chrome now.No complete themes anymore plus i understand the quantum has problems with cookie extensions,
Pale moon is still the best browser for total makeovers.
Pale moon is still the best browser for total makeovers.
Last edited by Moonraker on 2018-03-18, 18:40, edited 1 time in total.
user of multiple puppy linuxes..upup,fossapup.scpup,xenialpup.....
Pale moon 29.4.1
Pale moon 29.4.1