After ruining changelogs, Mozilla's creative writers are

>>56092064
>just like us
they mean the SJW nu-males don't they?

>>56092127
Kind of sad to see mozilla got overrun with sjws.

It used to be such a great project but now is bloated with useless shit. Still one of the best browsers in the market tough.

>>56092990
it is forcing me use esr tho, when the next esr is released with all the shit I wonder what should I do

>>56092064
Sad. Anyone remember when Firefox was great?

>>56093462
Pale Moon.

Even if it's run by a furry, he's not an SJW and is open to logical suggestions.

>>56093488
Will check out. Is it meme like everyone says?

>>56093506
It's not 'better' or 'faster' as some people hype about.

It's basically just Firefox 24 with security updates and occasional JS and rendering engine updates so it still improves in speed.

There is No Australis, so be prepared for that if you're using a build with Australis now.

Slowly, the extension compatibility is eroding, due to both changes in Pale Moon and Firefox.

>>56093572
No JS allowed on my network. Checking it out now. Thanks, senpai.

>>56093488
That's what I did. Only problem here is that it will become incompatible with most plugins soon because that goddamn furry sure it won't matter and people will just whip up a whole new plugin economy around his niche browser.

fucking hell

>>56093600
The alternative is to not even bother with Pale Moon at all.

The extensions aren't breaking because of a choice, they are breaking because Firefox is moving away, in some areas rapidly, from what was standard in Firefox 24.
Any extension dealing with the UI is now Australis based for example, which changes how it hooks into the old chrome.

>>56093488
I have it, but one of the japanese addons I use isn't supported, also it has some problems with facebook videos (I have to use it for university)

>>56093600
>>56093647

wasn't firefox itself advancing in direction to break it's own addons, like noscript and downthemall

>>56092990
FF is long, long overdue to get forked. Firefox was born when Netscape was forked into the Phoenix project. Netscape was seen as riddled with bloat and feature creep.

The sad thing is today's FF is way more bloated than Netscape was back in the day.

Bitch and moan all you like like you fucking sexist/racist losers.
Mozilla is doing a great thing for diversity by hiring women and letting these strong independent women be empowered and have their work put out there for the world to see.

Is there a Tampermonkey / Greasemonkey alternative for Pale Moon?

>>56093699
>The sad thing is today's FF is way more bloated than Netscape was back in the day.
No it isn't.

Call me when Firefox SHIPS with an Email client, a Usenet client, a WYSIWYG HTML editor, A Calendar, A video conferencing client, etc, etc.
All extra bloat for a web browser.

Firefox might be bad, but nothing is Netscape Communicator levels of bad.

>>56093756
an old version of greasemonkey works

>>56093756
https://github.com/janekptacijarabaci/greasemonkey/releases

This one is pretty up to date.
Might have some breakage going on but I've never experienced anything so far and I use some heavy scripts.

>>56092064
>encryption
>fighting forces of evil

They've got this wrong. Only "forces of evil" (read: pedos, criminals and terrorists) use encryption.

>>56093719
>work put out there for the world to see.
Yeah now everyone can easily see that women are more useless than originally thought :^)

>>56093879
nothing to hide right? I bet you use windows 10

>>56094012
Yes, of course I do. Why wouldn't I? It's a great OS, and microsoft gave it away for free!

>>56093486
No.

>>56093488
I've been hearing about vivaldi but haven't got around to test it.

I did try pale moon some time ago and it felt weird.

File: areweslimyet.png (179KB, 1403x806px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1403x806px

Anyone remember when Firefox was slim?

>>56094170
I remember opening Firebird 0.3 on a 98-PC updated to XP in class. "Holy shit this is fast"

>>56094170
You should probably read those question mark bubbles.

>>56093769
That's true, I was thinking about the browser itself though.