I'm using the Windows version of PM instead of Firefox. I'm really digging it so far. I've been using it for my Linux machine for a while.
>what do you think
>I'm really digging it
why does this reek of shill?
>>61894249
t. furry
>>61894289
lol well i didn't mean to sound like a shill but it seems good.
memory usage seems higher though
also, not a fan of the blue/white contrast of the menus but can overlook
im just looking to see if there is any glaring reason why I shouldn't be using in
not as fast nor reliable as fanboys are meming it right now
>>61894349
As far as I can tell everyone is meming brave
How is it different from Waterfox?
>>61894249
Proprietary custom build from furfag with zero credibility, its botnet.
>>61894568
It's not proprietary at all. It's completely open source. The credibility of it stems from, well, being around for many years. And the commits that are regularly made.
>furfag
Irrelevant.
>>61894580
You forgot to mention that Brave doesnt support extensions.
>>61894568
Who cares if the guy is a furry. Hes probably just an autist who has never had luck with females of his own species and so he turns to fantasy.
>>61894568
>proprietary
nope
>custom build
nope, it's a full-blown fork now, even gecko was forked off into goanna
>furfag
he doesn't bring that into the browser itself, hell, even the logo is animal-free, unlike firefox itself, it's even LESS furry than firefox
>>61894249
Currently using it on a shit box with 4gb ram because chrome hogs ram like no one's business. So far it's decent, I wouldn't say it's exceptional but it's functional enough.
As for furry creator, I didn't know until someone on /g/ mentioned it, and that's perfectly fine by my book because he doesn't shove it in my face.
>>61894462
waterfox is 64 bit FF with privacy tweaks
pale moon was forked off FF a long time ago
trying to figure out how to get greasemonkey for it, need those so I can use oneechan and 4chanx
>>61894462
Waterfox is Firefox with some tweaks.
Pale Meme is pre-Australis Firefox, which was rendered pointless by the creation of Classic Theme Restorer.
I've heard that Waterfox will keep support for XUL extensions when Firefox drops support for them in November, but I can't verify those rumors.
looks like it was made during the win xp days.
it looks awful.
>>61895676
you could use the australis or materlal themes if you like
https://addons.palemoon.org/themes/
>>61895650
https://github.com/janekptacijarabaci/greasemonkey/releases
>>61894249
I switched to it when I got wind of all the SJW propaganda shit Mozilla is doing as of late.
Couldn't give it a proper review yet, but first impressions lead me to believe it's no different from using regular old Firefox.
It won't be successful, it's difficult to fork a browser. They're def won't be able to add the new features while at the same time keeping the compatibility with legacy addons.
Just never upgrade your FF install once it hits FF 56.
>tfw we're heading to a chrome based only internet.
>>61894580
>qtbrowser review
KEK fagot I can't believe you recommend using VimFX, you know nothing. That webextention only does like 10% of what vimperator does because the webextention api.
>>61894249
much slower than 57 and looks like shit. what's even the point
>>61894580
>brave
that joke of a browser won't be around for much longer. not even the morons who crowdfunded this poor-mans-chrome-knockoff, are likely to use it as their main browser.
>>61894568
(You)