If I wanted a Firefox that was faster but could only use Chrome

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 6
Thread images: 1

Anonymous
2017-08-13 03:11:05 Post No. 61883591
[Report] Image search: [Google]

File: 1468973823727.jpg (408KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 800x800px

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:11:05 Post No. 61883591 [Report]

If I wanted a Firefox that was faster but could only use Chrome addons, why wouldn't I use a Chrom* fork? Give me one reason.

If you can't, you're admitting that FF57 is redundant and self defeating.

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:12:12 Post No.61883609
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:12:12 Post No.61883609 [Report]

>>61883591
They're turning the frogs gay

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:15:00 Post No.61883645
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:15:00 Post No.61883645 [Report]

>>61883591
because the end user is a dum dum and we must make the browser safe at all costs

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:17:04 Post No.61883682
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:17:04 Post No.61883682 [Report]

>>61883645
Still running FireFux 37.0.2 on XP here

>with silverlight and java AND flash extensions enabled.

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:17:45 Post No.61883688
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-08-13 03:17:45 Post No.61883688 [Report]

>>61883609
Nice meme, friend.

>>61883645
That's exactly what Firefox has stood against for the last decade. We all know of course what changed.

Anonymous 2017-08-13 05:02:46 Post No.61885053
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-08-13 05:02:46 Post No.61885053 [Report]

>>61883682
>silverlight
whoa