"Privacy Preserving" feature that sends even more data to advertisers

[Shadow]

Maybe I should make a Firefox rebuild with all this crap removed.

You've dangled the carrot. Could it be ready by April 2025?

I should make mention that R3dfox are already kind of doing this but they seem a bit amateur.

I think only one person started that fork because they got mad at Librewolf deciding to leave out the 7 and 8 crowd. Get the feeling that they're learning and winging it on the go and might be out of their depth. Commend them for giving it a go though.

And then there was Luminafox, which I've just discovered, re-branded to Snowfox. They might have some connection with the other fork but seem to be their own separate thing. Can't really form much of an opinion on this one.

It's intriguing why they haven't decided to form one cohesive unit. They're aware of each other. Would think they've probably discussed it.

[Moonchild]

It's intriguing why they haven't decided to form one cohesive unit. They're aware of each other. Would think they've probably discussed it.

It seems to be the M.O. of just about everyone in the space. I ran into the same issue offering proper collaboration with Waterfox and Seamonkey and was steadfastly rejected. Seems all of the smaller projects want their own unique take on the same goals and aren't cooperating. I guess it's the same reason 80,000 Linux distros exist.

As for the fork... I'd have to see what Mozilla has done since FF 115 to remove support for Windows 7 and 8 to see if it's feasible to use a later version or not.

[back2themoon]

My suggestion would be: don't waste any precious time on a Firefox fork, unless it's sort of used like a vehicle/medium to bring in more users and attention to Pale Moon!

With the constant changes Mozilla keeps pushing, I assume it will require time and attention.

[suzyne]

My suggestion would be: don't waste any precious time on a Firefox fork

Tend to agree. Among several other issues, until pics start appearing on my Instagram and Bluesky feeds without clever (but hacky and might fail at anytime) workarounds the idea of putting effort into yet another browser based on Firefox seems misguided.

[Nuck-TH]

Just +1 to above, because i already stated my stance a while ago and don't want to repeat myself.

[Moonchild]

*shrug* There just doesn't seem to be a good solution to the dilemma as long as major players keep shitting the bed.
I'd just like to give people on Win 7 and 8 an option after March 2025 that "just works" and the way things are going with Pale Moon perpetually playing catch-up to Chrome's constant draft churn that web devs are drooling over to use the moment they "canIuse" it, I was thinking a low-effort Firefox rebuild that doesn't make the user the product would be an idea. But if y'all think it's a bad idea then I'll just leave it.

[suzyne]

low-effort Firefox rebuild

If a low-effort project is possible, then why not try? Actually, even if it doesn't turn out that way, but it will bring joy or satisfaction, then that is reason enough to move forward with an idea.

[Galaxy]

I'd just like to give people on Win 7 and 8 an option after March 2025

You may have even more time to make a decision. Per https://whattrainisitnow.com/release/?version=esr, Mozilla will re-evaluate their EOL decision for ESR 115 in early 2025. The relevant information is quoted below:

We decided to extend support for ESR 115 only on Windows 7-8.1 and macOS 10.12-10.14 up to March 2025.
We will re-evaluate this decision in early 2025 and announce any updates on ESR 115's end-of-life then.

Something else to consider would be if someone discovers a vulnerability in Windows 7/8 that would make it extremely dangerous to access the internet. Maybe not likely, but a possibility nonetheless.

[frostknight]

Such thinking comes across as totally defeatist, and irrationally surrendering to what the data collection companies want.

I suppose your right. My point was more that, microsoft has tentacles in so many different places that I think you can only improve security for the most part.

It might be possible to make privacy better too and yes advertisers want people to give up.

More than anything I was trying to say windows 10 and newer is a train wreck for privacy. Each windows version before it had way less tentacles due to the forced upgrades and remote disabling hardware anti features in addition to the usual backdoors.

[frostknight]

I was thinking a low-effort Firefox rebuild that doesn't make the user the product would be an idea. But if y'all think it's a bad idea then I'll just leave it.

I don't think its worth your time either, besides, it would likely take too much resources to accomplish even with librewolf, mullvad or mercury are doing.

Or for that matter, betterfox.

If people expect something that just works, those are closer to better options in my opinion.

Especially betterfox

[Michaell]

Is there a web page that summarizes what Firefox forks or rebuilds are available for Windows? Or a download site that offers any more than the most popular forks? Librewolf is OK for me; I keep my browsers locked down (can't stand any naked browser). But if Moonchild does an unlocked Firefox without the spying/tracking stuff, I could probably replace Firefox ESR with his version (but still use ublock Origin at least).

[suzyne]

Is there a web page that summarizes what Firefox forks or rebuilds are available for Windows?

I have no idea how complete the table is, but this page is an interesting resource. I guess all the ones that say Gecko in the Engine column are based on recent Firefox?

https://github.com/nerdyslacker/desktop-web-browsers

[moonbat]

Wikipedia has a better organized table, split up by active and discontinued as well.

[Moonchild]

Off-topic:

remote disabling hardware anti features in addition to the usual backdoors.

If you're going to make damning statements like that, then I'd like to know what you're basing this on.
Can you give an example of either? because I have been using Windows 10 for a long time now and I'm not aware of anything that "remotely allows hardware to be disabled" and even less of any backdoors which would be a major issue, especially for any professional or enterprise user of the O.S.

[Shadow]

If MC is with the idea to do a low effort fork, why is nearly everyone here telling him don't bother? Let him make up his own mind.

You're probably all worried he'll start to enjoy tinkering with it and spend more time on it than PM.

Bottom line is that there are fellow humans that want to use Win 7 and 8 for whatever reasoning. Those aware will be looking for another browser. Realistic chances are they might see using PM as being a downgrade. There is very clearly a sizable enough audience, hence why Firefox kept the 115 ESR around into early 2025. They saw the numbers, not lets just keep it around because it makes us look good.

There will be people who'll be grateful as heck for this fork and isn't that what it's all about. It's another donation avenue as well.

[Night Wing]

If MC is with the idea to do a low effort fork, why is nearly everyone here telling him don't bother? Let him make up his own mind.

You're probably all worried he'll start to enjoy tinkering with it and spend more time on it than PM.

Bottom line is that there are fellow humans that want to use Win 7 and 8 for whatever reasoning.

I'm am going to throw my two cents in this post.

I think your comments above is a bad idea in my opinion.

Right now Moonchild makes and maintains versions of Pale Moon which work with Windows 7, 8, 10 and 11. That is four operating systems. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this, but Moonchild does not maintain linux Pale Moon. Linux Pale Moon is maintained by Trava90 (Travis) and Travis has been doing this for (I think) the last five (or more) years.

If Travis would suddenly announce he will no longer maintain linux Pale Moon, Moonchild would have to maintain that as well. This would be five versions of Pale Moon. Moonchild does not have unlimited time. I think he would try to find another maintainer for linux Pale Moon as soon as possible because of the time constraints affecting him.

Also, Windows 7 reached EOL (end of life) in January of 2020. Come this January of 2025, that will be five years. Windows 7 will and would be missed greatly. That is a given. And some sites will eventually drop support for Windows 7. Speaking of Windows 8, dropping support for Windows 8 is no great loss in my opinion.

Lastly, if Moonchild makes a bare bones version of Pale Moon to support end of life Windows 7, then he will eventually have the same problem he has/had with Windows XP users who were "vocally adamant" on here, he should provide support for a version of Pale Moon for Windows XP. Then that would be six operating systems, but that would drop down to five operating systems if Travis would still maintain linux Pale Moon.

Either way you look at it if you were in Moonchild's shoes; his plate, time wise, is "full". Do not forget he is personally on this site with his posts too, to help people with Pale Moon. This also takes up his limited and valuable time.

[back2themoon]

If MC is with the idea to do a low effort fork, why is nearly everyone here telling him don't bother? Let him make up his own mind.

No one is messing with MC's mind. They are called opinions. MC can and will do whatever he prefers.

Bottom line is that there are fellow humans that want to use Win 7 and 8 for whatever reasoning... ...There will be people who'll be grateful as heck for this fork and isn't that what it's all about. It's another donation avenue as well.

Nothing against those fellow humans. It is clear though that many of us here are worried about the time MC will have to dedicate to this fork. It's not like he's often posting about how much free time the Pale Moon project leaves him with - quite the contrary.

However, your final donation comment is quite valid, and one I didn't consider. I guess it's up to MC to balance all this.

I can only imagine the legions of trolls triumphantly declaring the defeated PM being finally abandoned by switching back to FF, but those are unimportant - the usual folklore.

[back2themoon]

I will add something else, which I think I've said elsewhere some time ago. I did use LibreWolf instead of Firefox as a secondary browser for some time.

At some point however, websites started to notice it was not Firefox but something else, and I started having compatibility issues not too dissimilar to the Pale Moon ones. I quickly switched back to Firefox as my secondary (and Edge for rare occasions...). No need for an extra fight against the Web.

I assume MC's hypothetical fork will be pure Firefox minus the crap. If it can still "masquerade" as pure Firefox then it'd be perfect as a secondary choice. My previous LibreWolf experience indicates there's a chance that "MoonFox" (or whatever), with its own ID/user agent etc. or even just different feature set, may still hit compatibility issues.

I could be all wrong here, of course.

[Night Wing]

I will add something else, which I think I've said elsewhere some time ago. I did use LibreWolf instead of Firefox as a secondary browser for some time.

At some point however, websites started to notice it was not Firefox but something else, and I started having compatibility issues not too dissimilar to the Pale Moon ones.

I used linux LibreWolf for a very short time and like you, I began to experience problems with it. I stopped using LibreWolf because Hotmail does not render correctly with it. If someone has a Hotmail email account, since Hotmail is owned by Microsoft; if one is using LibreWolf, Microsoft gives you something named "Hotmail Lite" instead. This version of Hotmail is absolutely "useless".

This is why I have linux Waterfox as my backup browser to linux Pale Moon. If both Pale Moon and Waterfox have the same problem with a site I normally visit on an everyday internet session, my third browser is linux Firefox, which automatically comes with the linux distros of Mint, MX Linux, Debian and usually solves the problem.

[Ron_S]

I'm still all for the idea even after weighing up the other views here.
MC originally put his hand up to do this so if he doesn't see it is an issue time wise then why should we?
I'm sure if things got too much for him it's pretty easy to prioritise and let it go for a while or indefinitely.

I'll admit I was checking back here more often than I normally would since this thread popped up waiting for Palefox to show up.

At the end of the day I'm grateful for whatever he does, hats off to MC...