Can we freely discuss the new Palemoon direction?

[chreid]

I'm totally gutted and feel that Moonchild and Tobin et al couldn't have done more to educate the behemoths.
You are NOT fighting a losing battle. You are just decent and idealistic.
So where are we now with config adjustments and all that extension work?
I actually feel a big sick just thinking about it
Goodness knows how you devs feel.

[megaman]

Faster startup and faster performance every 2 - 5 updates. A man can dream.

The direction is going in the right path, just some quirks here or there with websites not getting along with the browser.

[mikeysc]

I'm totally gutted and feel that Moonchild and Tobin et al couldn't have done more to educate the behemoths.
You are NOT fighting a losing battle. You are just decent and idealistic.
So where are we now with config adjustments and all that extension work?
I actually feel a big sick just thinking about it
Goodness knows how you devs feel.

No need to feel bad; it's the right decision not because of technical considerations but because of how people are. I fought the UA battle back in the 90s and already knew what to expect. Just like because a pyramid is wider at the base than near the top, user interfaces usually end up with default configuration settings best suited to the masses of less knowledgeable users and the fewer power users have to do the tweaking to get things to suit them. I don't particularly like it, but I know to expect it. Although web site owners/administrators could have avoided this particular issue, they never did, not way back when or now.

The change in the default UA string setting has no real impact on tech savvy users who can simply switch it back if they want. Extension developers (and PM ext tweakers) won't be affected much at all because the UA mostly affects web site access and page rendering functions which are handled mostly by the core browser engine. The extensions that do affect page content mostly do so only once it is retrieved, which is after it passes the sniff test.

So, overall, we all should benefit from less noise being made about this issue. We can hopefully get back to productive topics.

[Moonchild]

You are NOT fighting a losing battle. You are just decent and idealistic.
So where are we now with config adjustments and all that extension work?

Honestly, if I look at it, UA sniffing has become worse since I evaluated it the last time - and I don't understand why this is the case, with all these CSS/HTML5 website designs, you'd think people know how to use CSS @supports and checking capabilities through JS and the likes instead of relying on assumptions about specific browsers from the UA string. They can even use Open Source or Public Domain code that has been written already to do it properly...

Being decent and taking a stand, unfortunately, does nothing for users who don't want "unhelpfulsite.com" to break and who don't know how (or can't be bothered) to use the workarounds and/or contact the correct party to blame.

Where are we now with config changes? Very close to where we were: the only change here is a default setting for browser identification towards websites, an addition of a checkbox to easily switch between "Firefox Compatibility" mode and "Normal Pale Moon" mode, and the fortuitous stumbling on the cause of the non-working devtools bug with having compatmode off that has now been fixed as well.

The extension work has not been influenced by this, and the GUID change remains in effect (please don't ask to revert it, it will not be done).

[chreid]

You are NOT fighting a losing battle. You are just decent and idealistic.
So where are we now with config adjustments and all that extension work?

Honestly, if I look at it, UA sniffing has become worse since I evaluated it the last time - and I don't understand why this is the case, with all these CSS/HTML5 website designs, you'd think people know how to use CSS @supports and checking capabilities through JS and the likes instead of relying on assumptions about specific browsers from the UA string. They can even use Open Source or Public Domain code that has been written already to do it properly...

Being decent and taking a stand, unfortunately, does nothing for users who don't want "unhelpfulsite.com" to break and who don't know how (or can't be bothered) to use the workarounds and/or contact the correct party to blame.

Where are we now with config changes? Very close to where we were: the only change here is a default setting for browser identification towards websites, an addition of a checkbox to easily switch between "Firefox Compatibility" mode and "Normal Pale Moon" mode, and the fortuitous stumbling on the cause of the non-working devtools bug with having compatmode off that has now been fixed as well.

The extension work has not been influenced by this, and the GUID change remains in effect (please don't ask to revert it, it will not be done).

Thank you.
My Bank [Building Society actually] doesn't seem to mind messing up their "lovely" interface, typically optimized for tablets , with the ugly "not approved" warning! I am arguing with them about this. And one click in config and the warning's gone of course. Very secure...

[back2themoon]

Great job everyone, especially Moonchild and Tobin of course. I really hope most users will use the "Pale Moon mode" and keep contacting problematic websites (and router firmware developers? wtf...) until they properly do what they are supposed to.

[Trinoc]

Great job everyone, especially Moonchild and Tobin of course. I really hope most users will use the "Pale Moon mode" and keep contacting problematic websites (and router firmware developers? wtf...) until they properly do what they are supposed to.

With the estimated number of pages on the web hovering around 40-45 billion, I wish you luck in contacting everyone and persuading them to support Palemoon.

The only way Palemoon is going to get that sort of support is if it manages to bag a significant percentage of browser users. And the only way it is going to get a significant percentage of users is if it is compatible with the vast majority of existing web pages. Like it or not, it is the small guy who has to be compatible with the big guys (or the crowd), not the other way around.

Does anyone remember what percentage of browser users Firefox had before web sites started taking it seriously (even allowing for the fact it was evolved from Netscape which pre-dated even Internet Explorer)? Remember the times when a lot of banks refused to allow access their services online unless you used IE?

[Moonchild]

Great job everyone, especially Moonchild and Tobin of course. I really hope most users will use the "Pale Moon mode" and keep contacting problematic websites (and router firmware developers? wtf...) until they properly do what they are supposed to.

With the estimated number of pages on the web hovering around 40-45 billion, I wish you luck in contacting everyone and persuading them to support Palemoon.

You know, that's just making an argument for the sake of argument. There's no reason to try and undermine motivation by throwing large numbers our way. We are well aware of the number of websites out there. We are also well aware of the relatively small percentage of those websites we are talking about here, but that are unfortunately having a number in the "most visited" range and "often-used services" (of large companies whose business is Internet and who should know better! I'm looking at you, Google and Apple).

You're making the exaggerated argument that "all websites broke" (implying we need to contact all website owners); please see my specific thread about that. Please don't do this; it just makes for hot air.

Also, it shouldn't even be our job to persuade them to support Pale Moon. They should realize themselves and be persuaded by users on the 'net as a whole, not even related to any particular browser, that they are using some really, really poor techniques that rather belong in the 1990s than in 2014.

[Trinoc]

OK, I hope you're right. I look forward to seeing a long thread in this forum listing the web sites that have been persuaded to support Palemoon. I think I saw in another thread the answer that Google had already given. Let us hope other sites are more accommodating.

[Night Wing]

[With the estimated number of pages on the web hovering around 40-45 billion, I wish you luck in contacting everyone and persuading them to support Palemoon.t

I think you're being a little too pessimistic. Lets look on the bright side. Take me for an example. I have around 453 bookmarks. Each bookmark has multiple pages. So being quite conservative, lets say I have 1000 pages. All of these pages are rendering properly in 25.0.1 except in my case, just 3 sites and those are Google, Google Images, and Google Maps . The User Agent Overrider add-on fixed these sites for me in (25.0.1). When 25.0.2 is released, this version will cure the Google ills and I can uninstall this add-on. Conversely, I surf all over the internet and I don't bookmark everyplace I visit either. And I haven't had any problems surfing the internet with (25.0.1).

Now, when it comes to browsers, lets take a look at the "Big 4" as I like to call it. The Big 4 is basically Internet Explorer (since it comes with Windows), Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox and Apple Safari.

http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-m ... pcustomb=0

Desktop market share according to Net Market share, as of this typing, makes IE king of the hill with around 58%. Next comes Google Chrome with 21% followed by Mozilla Firefox at 14% and Apple Safari at 5%.

Now lets play "devil's advocate".

Firefox desktop market reached it's peak market share at a little over 23% sometime in 2010. Since Chrome was released, Chrome has been eating Firefox's "lunch" desktop market share wise. In November of 2013, Firefox was at 18% and now it's at 14%. That's a 4% market share loss in almost 1 year's time. And the main beneficiary of Firefox's desktop market share decline has been Chrome.

If Firefox keeps losing desktop market share at this pace, then by November of 2017, Firefox will have a desktop market share of 2% thereby making it a "niche browser". I don't think this downward pace will continue since the board of directors will eventually "clean house" of Mozilla's present management and replace them with new management which will abandon what the present management at Mozilla is doing which is causing this decline in market share to Google Chrome.

I didn't mention Safari because it's Apple. Apple is a hardware manufacturer which makes phones, tablets, computers, etc....so Safari is basically "safe" and it really doesn't have to worry about desktop market share for computers.

So one can speculate that by November of 2017 , it's going to be the "Big 2" by then and that'll be IE and Chrome. I don't think the world wide web will only be accessible by IE and Chrome and no other browser.

[SteveGus]

Any time the browser itself steps between me and what I'm doing, it's broken. I need unchanging, stable reliability from a web browser more than I need updates. Telling me the internet's a scary place just isn't persuasive any more. Whatever dangers lurk for the users of a months-old version are remote and speculative, while the problems letting the updates run are immediate and obvious. I suppose I can go back to an extended maintenance last good version of Firefox, from the time before they decided to take Javascript control within the browser itself out of your hands.

But I don't need to be handed extra chores by browser programmers who decide to change the way the browser works and impose those changes automatically and without explanations before they're allowed to happen. I'm not really all that interested in the details of web browsers. I shouldn't feel the need to monitor the developers to be aware of whatever unwelcome surprises they're planning in future versions. This is why I'm no longer using Firefox, after all. All I want is for the browser to do its job and get out of the way.

[ashdav]

Reply to Night Wing
A very depressing post but I think you're absolutely right.
Mozilla seems to be committing death by a thousand cuts.
But what's wrong with a niche browser? Isn't that why we're here?

[Night Wing]

Reply to Night Wing
A very depressing post but I think you're absolutely right.
Mozilla seems to be committing death by a thousand cuts.
But what's wrong with a niche browser? Isn't that why we're here?

That was my point. There is nothing wrong with a niche browser. Pale Moon is a niche browser, but down the road a few years from now Firefox may become a niche browser market share wise because of Chrome and join Pale Moon as a niche browser.

A few years back, I used another niche browser named, SeaMonkey, as my default browser. Then I switched to Firefox and then I switched to Pale Moon. Browser wise, I use a browser I like and it doesn't concern me if the browser is a niche or big mainstream.

[cooperb21]

Reply to Night Wing
A very depressing post but I think you're absolutely right.
Mozilla seems to be committing death by a thousand cuts.
But what's wrong with a niche browser? Isn't that why we're here?

That was my point. There is nothing wrong with a niche browser. Pale Moon is a niche browser, but down the road a few years from now Firefox may become a niche browser market share wise because of Chrome and join Pale Moon as a niche browser.

A few years back, I used another niche browser named, SeaMonkey, as my default browser. Then I switched to Firefox and then I switched to Pale Moon. Browser wise, I use a browser I like and it doesn't concern me if the browser is a niche or big mainstream.

Firefox still holds around 1/4 of browser usage or just under that not really niche or close to it Opera only has like 1% or around 2% so its a nice niche browser. Palemoon would be even below that as even less than niche.

[Sajadi]

You can see it also from that point of view... The smaller a project is, the less Google is interested in crushing it

[Night Wing]

Firefox still holds around 1/4 of browser usage or just under that not really niche or close to it Opera only has like 1% or around 2% so its a nice niche browser. Palemoon would be even below that as even less than niche.

But, Pale Moon may grow it's desktop market share since it didn't go the Australis way like Firefox did. In other words, Pale Moon didn't try to "be like Google Chrome in looks". The management at Mozilla decided to go with Australis for Firefox and since Australis was released on May 29th, Firefox's desktop market share decline has been accelerating. Coincidence? I don't think so. It would be interesting if "speculation wise", Pale Moon and Firefox wouldn't be that far apart in desktop market share 4 years down the road.

Could it happen? Maybe. Time will tell.

[bawldiggle]

Firefox still holds around 1/4 of browser usage or just under that not really niche or close to it Opera only has like 1% or around 2% so its a nice niche browser.

That's not what http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1&qpcustomb=0 indicates !
- where did you get your stats ?

[Trippynet]

It depends where you look to be honest.

On the other hand, netmarketshare shows that Firefox declined from 18.5% to 16.8% (a 1.7% drop) between November 2013 and May 2014 (7 months), but then declined from 16.8% to 14.1% (a 2.7% drop) between May and September (5 months). So the acceleration of decline since Australis is certainly reflected by those stats.

[Supernova]

• Added a "Firefox compatibility mode" selection in Options -> Advanced.
• This mode is enabled by default (reluctantly so), because too many websites (including some very big players who, themselves, promote an Open Web...)

The very big players who promote open things only do that for public relations, or to promote that they shouldn't be restricted.
If antritust laws were applied, Google would no longer exist.

[back2themoon]

I've already disabled the Firefox Compatibilty mode and will keep contacting any websites that might cause trouble. Only had to do this on 2 occasions and they were hardly websites I couldn't live without (one of them works almost flawlessly, the other doesn't work at all).