Does anyone use any of these forked Firefox browsers? With Firefox

>>61661521
Palemoon user here, it isn't really a fork at this point, just compatible with Firefox

File: About - SeaMonkey.png (106KB, 1353x1061px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1353x1061px

>>61661521
I like SeaMonkey (:

>>61662372
palemoon in indeed only based on firefox at this moment, they are completely seperated otherwise. they can run side by side without any problem.

Another for based Pale Moon here. Dev is an autistic furfag, but he writes some solid code and listens to the community.

>>61661521
>no e10s
my only problem with this shit

>>61661521
Waterfox

File: Screenshot_2017-07-31_20-52-52.png (106KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1024x768px

>>61661521
ALL OF THE DAY BRO

>>61661521
i use palemoon 32-bit to play adobe shockwave application its the last browser I know that is able to run that thing properly without bugs

used to have palemoon as main browser but chrome is just faster and smoother

I started using pale moon recently. It uses way less resources than firefox and it looks good when you install a theme + some addons

I wish someone would make a webkit/Blink and Gecko hybrid browser. Webkit/Blink for the speed and Gecko for the customizability.

Pale Moon is actually pretty good, sadly it is not as fast as the well known alternatives, specially with bloated JS pages such as cuckbook, but it if you can live with the slighty slower load times because of Gecko, you'll be fine. Otherwise, just stick to Waterfox project that is pretty much the same as firefox, but optimized and not all the botnet enabled by default.

Tried out Pale Moon and it's pretty good. Wish there more addon compatibility though.
Anyone know how Icecat compares to it?

Pale Moon
Waterfox
SeaMonkey

Been using Palemoon for years and the only things that are buggy are websites you don't want to be on anyway.

>>61664498
>using normiebook

also waterfox doesn't seem to be compatible with the firefox 2 theme

>>61661521
I use Pale Moon. It's basically Firefox from when Firefox was still good, except it still gets security updates.

i've used cyberfox for months by now and i'm perfectly happy with it, it runs shit fine and isn't as ram hungry as firefox tends to be
i'd recommend it if it wasn't dead

>>61666021

It"s dead?

File: poop.png (498KB, 1680x1280px) Image search: [Google]

498KB, 1680x1280px

>>61661521
I have been using Palememe since Firefox version 29.
No one seems to care much about it on the web, though. They all cry about it being outdated, but the truth is those people aren't using technology to gauge that.

>>61668373
Works fine for me.

>>61668740
What works fine for you and why are you telling me?

>>61663590
shit looks stupid
i bet youre stupid
stupid

I've used them in the past. They're all broken in one way or another, most examples of which are totally insignificant. Try them out.

File: 2017-07-31-221616_1920x1080_scrot.png (425KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 1920x1080px

>>61668976
Just saying it works fine for me despite what others have to say

C H R O M I U M
H
R
O
M
I
U
M

>>61668816
>Vivaldi just now has gotten stable enough to use
>Still has more market share than palememe
feels good

>>61669117
I still don't know exactly what you are talking about, but my comment never alluded to Palememe not working. The large corporations try to pressure people into using either Chrome/Chromium, Firefox, or Microsoft's offering.

It probably has something to do with the DRM those browsers include.

>>61668816
>tfw other
>tfw superior to all the plebs
Feels good

File: 1501029684567.gif (140KB, 379x440px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 379x440px

I'd like to use PaleMoon, but there a few things I'm worried about, and it would be nice if a PaleMoon user could fill me in on some things.

Is it necessary to harden PaleMoon like Firefox through such means as a custom user.js and prefs? Is there an equivalent to gHacks' user.js for Firefox?

Are there any equivalents for extensions such as Keysnail and No Resource URI Leak? Or does Palemoon implemented these features natively?

>>61663616
Just get the standalone projector from Adobe, it's on their site.

>>61663556
this. love it

>>61661521
Pale Moon is practically the only option.

Waterfox is a one-man show. They've announced intentions to support XUL/XPCOM, but they're not going to be able to maintain that.

>>61670319
The issue with Waterfox isn't the fact that it's maintained by one person. If you sincerely think that Waterfox is a worthwhile project besides the fact that it's maintained by one person, you are incredibly stupid.

Literally the only difference between Waterfox and Firefox is that it's compiled differently and is slightly "optimized" for amd64. And, for the record, those "optimizations" have literally no discernible improvement over Waterfox's progenitor. If anything, Waterfox performs noticeably worse relative to Firefox.[1][2]

But that's beyond the point. To even say that Waterfox is at all comparable to forks such as Palemoon is just a blatantly ignorant assertion. In no way does the Waterfox dev seek to deviate from the primary direction that Firefox is headed. All he wants to do is autistically optimize Firefox in negligible ways for a negligible audience with negligible benefits. And at no point in time has Waterfox ever done anything to suggest that he wants to do anything otherwise.

I don't care for the direction that PaleMoon is going. That isn't to say I resent them. Free software (minus trademarks) is free software, and whatever the devs want to do in their free time is their prerogative. It would be incredibly juvenile to judge a product on the personal life of its developers. If you don't like it just fork it.

But PaleMoon's audience is clear. Their direction is crystal. PaleMoon is for users who want the australis theme and want to modify their browsers a la classic Firefox. Nothing wrong with that.

The longer people like you who don't know what they're talking about spew out bullshit, the longer it's going to take for us to have an informed debate about the merit of web browsers based on the problems they solve.

1. http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/windows-and-office/review-firefoxs-unofficial-64-bit-variant-waterfox/
2. https://www.kaputniks.org/web-browser-benchmarks-firefox-chrome/

>>61661521
>fucking my whole setup up
you just need to change a value in about:config to allow legacy addons, it will work until 2018

>>61671320
>And at no point in time has Waterfox ever done anything to suggest that he wants to do anything otherwise.

Yes he has, read
https://www.reddit.com/r/waterfox/comments/5ysn9e/proposal_please_turn_waterfox_56_into_an_esr_and/deut7uq/

>In parallel to that, I was planning to go and try and get funding to create a startup using Waterfox's name to keep XUL/XPCOM alive and modernise it, essentially forking Firefox from its last usable XUL/XPCOM version and creating a new browser based on all that. Get some hard core software engineers/programmers on board and try and follow in Mozilla's ethos that has sort of been my guide as a programmer. I'd imagine following a similar release cycle that Firefox 1-3.6 had rather than the current RR cycle. It would of course not be developed with Rust in mind, which I imagine Firefox will become completely developed in but rather C++ as the core language. Who knows, with that we might even be able to create an embeddable version of the fork and bring some competition to the domination WebKit has in that market.

>>61671343
but, anon, that's not a permanent solution

>>61671381
Yet he's done none of that, yet. "Planning" isn't the same of doing.

Furthermore, he literally says in the same quote that it's his intention to keep his project closely aligned with Firefox's roadmap.

>>61662495
>name fagging
>uses seamonkey

I'm sorry to inform you of this but you're incurably retarded.

>>61671320
>PaleMoon is for users who want the australis theme and want to modify their browsers a la classic Firefox.
You meant people who don't want australis, right?

File: Screenshot_2017-08-01_02-19-34.png (207KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 1280x800px

Palemoon here.

>>61663341
Probably because they're unstable as fuck.
[spoiler]Were last time I used regular Firefox at least[/spoiler]

>>61671504
Has /g/ always not allowed spoilers?
Guess all the boards I browse are melding into one as to what works and what doesn't.

>>61671393
you'll worry in 2018

a permanent solution is to use ESR

Cyberfox here.
Switched when retards from mozilla fucked up all my addons with one of the updates.
Tested all popular forks. Cyberfox was the best.
Transferred original firefox profile very easily and my addons started working again.

>>61671504
>>61671486
Go back to /v/, you fucking retard.

>>61671538
Never been on /v/
I'm sorry that you think that's the only board that has spoilers

File: kik.png (245KB, 320x319px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 320x319px

>2017
>using Male Poon

How is Waterfox doing?
Will they fuck everything up?

File: 1492396216746.png (191KB, 419x398px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 419x398px

>>61671603
>[current year]
>botnet
>3dpd

What about Icecat?
How's development on that?

>>61671510
>>61671504
Why in the hell would you need to implement spoilers on a fucking technology board, you stupid crossboarder

>>61671834
>>61671604
Why don't you actually do some research instead of bumping this shitty thread begging to be spoonfed?

You would know that neither Iceweasel nor Waterfox are forks that are even different enough from Firefox to be acknowledged.

>>61671866
Why would you not?
No real reason not to.

>>61671907
>No real reason not to.
To stop morons like you from abusing spoilers.

>>61671923
Can you stop replying to this retard already?

>>61671923
Don't get so mad, buddy

I use Palemoon with Chromium as backup. I tried switching to Chromium full-time, but it is waaay too locked down as far as what addons are allowed to do, so I'm back on Palemoon.

>>61671528
Dead.

>>61662372
>>61662647
>>61663616
>>61664562
>>61668373
>>61669385
>>61669483
>>61671320
>>61671488
>>61672088
>Palemoon
There's a space between you illiterate fucks.

>>61672374
Moon Child plz go.

>>61672429
MoonChild*

>>61661521
I use palemoon at work because firefox updates kept fucking with vimperator.

It's fairly decent, does pretty much everything you want it to do

File: poop.png (695KB, 1680x1280px) Image search: [Google]

695KB, 1680x1280px

>>61661521
I switched to the unstabel Palememe, but I didn't like the icon so I changed it.
>no 64bit version.

>>61671320
>I don't care for the direction that PaleMoon is going.
What did they mean by this?

Icecat > waterfox > brave > firefox

Netrunner master race.

>>61672748
>Netrunner
>stupid phone posters

I wonder what the next Firefox fork is gonna be. No doubt some autist is gonna fork FF56 once FF57 arrives.

>>61672493
I meant that I would rather use a browser whose team puts an emphasis on security rather than customization. And I don't mean all those stupid fucking Chromium forks that we all know are bullshit.

>>61672088
>Using two browsers
Who created this meme? Why not just create two profiles?

If you have to supplement a browser with another browser, than it's not a good browser.

>>61673028
Well, in theory, pretty much everyone has 2 (now 3) browsers. Internet Explorer (and Edge) plus whatever browser you download through Edge.

And no, you can't uninstall them because it's baked into the system. It would be like deleting system64.

>>61673028
>Using two OSes
Who created this meme? Why not just create two accounts?
If you have to supplement an OS with another OS, than it's not a good OS.

File: file.png (132KB, 1037x965px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1037x965px

>>61661521
Sea-thefucking-Monkey, boi

File: justin.trudeau.cucked.jpg (112KB, 640x810px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 640x810px

>not using nightly
>not taking advantage of the speed and security improvements

>willing to move to another browser and start from scratch
>excuse is you dont have legacy support

>you wouldnt have legacy support on new system

you sound like a idiot op

>>61673003
http://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes.shtml
This seems security minded to me...

>>61673112
That's a good point. Why dualboot when virtualization is relatively effective? Especially with gpu passthrough. Install Windows on a separate HDD and boot that through a vm.

>>61673125
Isn't that just Firefox.

>>61673110
What is a package manager

>>61673181
it's Netscape, basically

File: 1499108562375.png (281KB, 371x532px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 371x532px

Let me end the thread for good
https://www.m64.info/index.php/seamonkey-64-bit-download

File: file.png (22KB, 1355x265px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 1355x265px

>>61673181
>>61673209

>>61673200
The Majority of the usage will be the web browser, which is just Firefox.

>>61673209
No thanks.

>>61673214
>wikipedia
haha
https://www.seamonkey-project.org/about

File: 1348635013249.jpg (21KB, 283x300px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 283x300px

>security improvements
Can you stop this meme.
All this security shit in change logs is bullshit. 99.9% of the times, these issues can not allow remote access.
And if someone is really going to exploit you, he will use 0day anyway.

>>61673251
>just Firefox.
I think you don't understand the difference between the two
this is based on the Firefox current engine, but the inteface offers all the options of Firefox when it was not cucked to dead by the mobile craze

why don't you just test the shit, and stop complaining? it is like you forgot it is free, and installs in 1 minute

>>61661521
I use this and so far it's working perfectly.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/lawlietfox/

>>61671457
wait why do we hate seamonkey now? i was thinking of switching once firefox goes down

>>61662495
Tried it and it's surprisingly fast for some reason.
It also dies whenever you load a page with a lot of content compared to Firefox though.

>>61672914
They should be doing this sooner than later so they can at least get their name out there for other devs.

>>61673143
>using a beta build when caring about security