Code: Select all
https://www.howtogeek.com/335712/update-why-you-shouldnt-use-waterfox-pale-moon-or-basilisk/
Code: Select all
https://www.howtogeek.com/335712/update-why-you-shouldnt-use-waterfox-pale-moon-or-basilisk/
Actually, I think this is exactly why it's important. We have the best of Firefox, without a huge cooperation looking over our shoulders while browsing. Just like it used to be years ago.[...] your browser is just too important to be left to a small community of enthusiasts.
Faster, and more modern? These are opinions at best, not facts. You will notice the use of "old add-on's" here.We like Firefox Quantum, which is faster and more modern than previous releases of Firefox. If you want to keep using your old add-ons that no longer work in Firefox Quantum, we recommend Mozilla’s Firefox Extended Support Release (ESR) instead.
Hopeful?? So the only thing they admittedly "took some heat on" is Looking Glass? Yes I'm sure they are simply ignoring all the otherBut, after taking some deserved public heat, they’ve made policy changes and we’re hopeful they’ll do better in the future.
Wait a minute, some of those "business decisions" are the very reason folks are leaving FF in droves. And where are they going? To the small communities of enthusiasts that still care about the folks that they claim to build for. And why are they leaving? Because the "Big Projects" don't give a rats ass about their people anymore. Oh wait, don't you get it. It's all about better security right? More about that in a minute.Even if you don’t completely trust some of Mozilla’s business decisions, your browser is just too important to be left to a small community of enthusiasts. We think it’s best to go with a big project with a large number of developers that receives a lot of attention to security.
Wait a minute, So even though they are saying you should stick with FF ESR and we all know that once that ends it's the end of the road for anythingToday, Waterfox is based on Firefox ESR. It advertises support for traditional XUL Firefox extensions and NPAPI plug-ins like Java and Silverlight. These are both features of Firefox ESR, so you don’t need to switch to Waterfox to get them. After Firefox ESR reaches end of Life, “a “new” browser will be developed to follow the ethos of Waterfox of customisation and choice”.
OMG Nine whole days. What will the world come to?That means Waterfox users waited nine days for a security patches from a minor release, compared to if they were just using Firefox. We don’t think it’s a good idea to wait that long.
Did you get that "very outdated part"? IF not then perhaps we needed to use a larger font to make our point.Pale Moon Is Based on Very Outdated Firefox Code
Just in case you still weren't sure how old PM is we just wanted to make sure we added a few more clues for you.Pale Moon is based on older Firefox code. The current version of Pale Moon is based on Firefox 38 ESR, which was originally released in 2015. The prior release was based on Firefox 24 ESR, which was released in 2013. The project uses an older Firefox interface created before the Australis theme, and still supports XUL add-ons.
Did you forget how old and outdated PM is yet? Well let us help you. Oh and it does not support DRM. Hmmm, and why does it not support DRM?While Waterfox is based on code that’s currently supported by Mozilla, Pale Moon is based on much older code. It won’t have the new web features or performance improvements of modern versions of Firefox, nor does it support watching certain kinds of video with DRM.
At this point you might get the idea of how much a old hunched back senior citizen PM is but just in case you still don't quite get it.More importantly, basing a browser onsuch old code makes security patches harder. Pale Moon’s developer tries to keep up with Firefox security patches, but he’s maintaining old code that Mozilla has abandoned. Mozilla reportedly has over a thousand employees, while Pale Moon has one primary developer, trying to maintain a huge amount of code that’s becomingincreasingly outdated. The older code also omits features that help make modern browsers so secure, like the multi-process sandboxing features that have finally arrived in Firefox Quantum.
Old, Old, OLD, OUTDATED!!! Hmmm, perhaps there is a valid reason the developer disagrees with benchmarks? But we won't talk about that.Besides, Pale Moon tends to perform worse on browser benchmarks compared tomodern browsers, which isn’t surprising given its age. The developer disagrees with browser benchmarking, but it’s not surprising a browser based on four year old code might be slower than a modern one.
Were going to show you how much more in a minute.Basilisk Is a More Modern, But More Unstable Pale Moon
So, don't forget that PM is old, first and foremost. But this new thing, Basilisk is it called? First, just to make sure you get it. It's been gutted of all of our prize stuff that makes time travel possible but it's also real slow too. Oh, and don't look behind the curtain to see that Basilisk is actually being based off of that same version we mentioned earlier that you should be using because it's better. Oh, and it's faster and newer and will actually make your coffee taste better too.Basilisk is a new browser from the creator of Pale Moon. While Pale Moon is based on Firefox 38 ESR, Basilisk is based on newer Firefox code. The developer is working on the “Unified XUL Platform (UXP)”, which is a fork of Mozilla’s code without the new Servo and Rust code that makes Firefox Quantum so fast. It also doesn’t enable any multi-process features.
Oh yea, since we probably need to throw this in just to keep the lawyers away, but remember, it's unstable, Unstable, UNSTABLE!!!A future version of Pale Moon will be based on this code, but right now the developer considers Basilisk an unstable development platform.
Were not going to mention what that disagreement was. See here, we will show you just how great FF really is and how we are theThis fits Pale Moon’s kind of weird history. The first major version of Pale Moon was based on Firefox 24 ESR, due to a disagreement about where Firefox was headed. But the developer eventually had to switch to Firefox 38 ESR to get more modern features. Now, the developer is doing the same thing again, basing this new version largely on the pre-Quantum Firefox code. We don’t see the point of resisting new features only to make a major leap to them every few years anyway. Just stick with a browser that’s continually updated, like Firefox.
So listen, don't just take our word for it, get it from the Big guy himself. See, even he admits that he is a bat shit crazy old man that can't keep up, and his stuff isAs for why you shouldn’t use this browser, aside from the same security and usability concerns inherent with Pale Moon, even the developer says it’s “development software” that should be considered beta.
So see, now do you get it. You would be as bat shit crazy as the guy who thought he could do better than us if you decide to actually use his stuff.These aren’t the only Firefox-based browsers out there, but they are the most popular—and most others will likely come with similar issues. It’s best to stick with a browser that has a big team behind it so security problems can be caught, fixed, and patched as fast as possible.
And all around FF fanboy.Chris Hoffman is a technology writer and all-around computer geek.
I've always wondered how many of these "thousands" work on actual Firefox code, and how many of these are busy with marketing and drafting completely browser-unrelated "policies".Thehandyman1957 wrote:Oh, and did you know that FF is CONTINUALLY UPDATED by THOUSANDS?
Firefox never attained 25 %, not even when Firefox peaked between 2008-2010. After Firefox 4 in 2010 user base became smaller.TwoTankAmin wrote:Fact #1: Firefox originally "built a better mousetrap" and the result was they approached a 50% market share.
And if a company stops listening to their users, they leave the sinking ship - and all whats left are now all the Mozilla apologists - and quite some of them are now crawling into that howtogeek article and spread their uninformed venom over all the evil, evil forks out there which try to refuse to be like Google and ChromeNew Tobin Paradigm wrote:Firefox once had almost 50% usership back in the day.
Even I, who am by no means a computer guru, could see a decline in quality starting with version 4. Version 3.6 was the best they had.mr tribute wrote:
After Firefox 4 in 2010 user base became smaller.
I think that was the transitional period from the netscape navigator to firefox early period.Users were perhaps more curious than anything by this new and exciting browser and there was a download frenzy.New Tobin Paradigm wrote:Firefox once had almost 50% usership back in the day.