is there a browser that doesn't use resources as intensively

itunes

qtbrowser

>>61228672
do not use palemoon on android use the unstable or stable channel instead on the desktop.
Palemoon on android has not had any updates ever since last year in august because moonchild does not have the time to deal with it too.

>>61228672
>using a closed fork of a libre browser
>any year
kys

i am use in parrot OWASP Mantra

>>61228756
>using a closed fork of a libre browser
it's not closed and cannot be closed
https://github.com/MoonchildProductions/Pale-Moon

>>61228756
? Pale Moon is FOSS Mozzila Public License ..
Palemoon is not so leigthweight.
I used Midori and Qtbrowser on shit hardware.
But don't forget, shit hardware is shit, don't expect magical power increase on modern website.
The best is probably to block every script and ads while browsing.
Brave is perfect for doing it out of the box.

>>61228684
kek
>>61228721
isn't it discontinued? what about extension support? I said pale moon mainly because it runs firefox extensions.
>>61228756
it's not closed for fuck's sake
>>61228753
I am looking for a browser for an old laptop.
>>61228788
so is brave lighter on the CPU and RAM than pale moon?
the hardware is not ancient, it's a core 2 duo

>>61228672
Check your firewall traffic when you run pale moon. The dev is a literal furry that uses your PC to farm cryptocurrency

>>61228828
No brave isn't lighter
Maybe in fact but no such a big deal, but out of the box, brave will probably give you a better experience than palemoon (where you have to install addons to have a correct browsing).
May I ask what OS you will use ?

>>61228672
QupZilla, works well for most things. You'll have to cut video content though.

Opera. yes, it works on older hardware. Use damn small linux, or puppy linux (NOT the ubuntu-based one).

>>61228828
Palemoon wont do for really old (WinXP) machines.

At that point you need KMeleon (use the ver76RC2 found in the forums)

>>61228899
> not the ubuntu-based one
Why? Both Lubuntu and Xubuntu work very well on old systems. Standard Ubuntu also works well on my 6 years-old laptop.

>>61228953
Because tard poeple think that ubuntu is shit only because it aim to be simple to use.

File: images (4).jpg (16KB, 340x340px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 340x340px

>>61228828
>the hardware is not ancient
>it's a core 2 duo

You make me laugh, anon.

>>61228953
They do, but the back-end is heavy. Straight debian with a very minimal desktop interface is best if you only use a web browser. Fluxbox even.

Netrunner

>>61228672
Although I would defend Pale Moon, Netrunner should be the go-to browser once it's complete
t. Pale Moon user of 1 year

>>61228858
Lubuntu most likely.
>>61228965
it runs windows 10 if needed. so yeah, not really ancient.
also, not my main machine.

>>61228672
nnetrunner

>>61228965
Summer