Jump to content
MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. ×

Palemoon drama has gotten bad


Wunderbar98
 Share

Recommended Posts

well isnt that most expecting when you open source something ? :P
i always found it funny that ppl who develop program but open source them, expect Humans to be like little good dwarfs :S

 

Edited by vinifera
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I recently ditched Firefox because it quit running without additional runtimes that I'm not going to install on my system and it is heavy and buggy , I am now a 360 user . The best browser so far. It just runs ! It doesn't want a couple of gigs of redist packages (bloatware). I absolutely don't care if all firefox browsers , including this one , will cease to exist . They had their chance . Now start to downvote me.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are only two browsers left, without much choice. The other one requires way too much memory. I stopped using Chromium (Opium fork) when I found that it needed encryption from the system, and was useless on WinXP. Does the Chinese browser have its own certificate module, and does away with the multi-process mode?

I refer to all Mozilla forks collectively as "Firefox", because there aren't many obvious differenve between Roytam's Basilisk and a recent stock Firefox, or New Moon vs Firefox 20x. PM developers act surprisingly protective about their brand, when nobody is aware of it outside of enthusiast circles.

There aren't any downvote options on this server.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, j7n said:

encryption from the system

It's widely used now . For example , Opera creates your "customer" profile (heavily encrypted) to sell data to google and yandex. Just look at the opera profile files, starting from version 78 , all heavily encrypted ! Also , if you change something , it will revert the changes back ! The  Chinese browser have its own certificate module, but not all certs are in it , you will still have to update some of them (manually add to your Vista or XP cert store) . It works very well with the multi-process mode. No downvote > Cool !

Yep , I agree , Firefox is mostly for nurds. If I see a profile pic. with anime , I think the person almostly certainly uses firefox and watches Star Wars.

Ask Dixel , if you want to know more about the encryption used in modern browsers. He had hacked and disabled many things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, yesterday I had to install Firefox as MSFN became completely unreadable in all other browsers on my Android 8 phone. So I'm glad Mozilla still exists.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 10/9/2021 at 4:33 AM, D.Draker said:

I am now a 360 user . The best browser so far. It just runs ! It doesn't want a couple of gigs of redist packages (bloatware).

Chrome and the likes have this so called bloatware statically linked in executable, which is wasteful. Having 5 programs running with statically linked runtime means there are 5 copies of runtime in the memory instead of 1, which would be the case with 5 programs with dynamically linked runtime.

Last time I checked, Firefox was dynamically linked, but bundles runtime libraries in its folder (user convenience...), which negates memory savings of dynamic linking, but getting it to use system installed libraries isn't much of a fuss either way.

On 10/11/2021 at 9:31 PM, D.Draker said:

Yep , I agree , Firefox is mostly for nurds.

Says more about you than anyone else, really.

People that still use it have their reasons, one of my reasons is font rendering. It uses system ClearType parameters rather than hardcoded ones. Per-monitor font rendering settings might still be an issue, haven't checked Firefox in a while, but Pale Moon only renders using primary monitor's parameters regardless of the window position.

On 10/11/2021 at 11:22 AM, j7n said:

I refer to all Mozilla forks collectively as "Firefox", because there aren't many obvious differenve between Roytam's Basilisk and a recent stock Firefox, or New Moon vs Firefox 20x.

Recent stock Firefox handles most of the crap Chromium does (at least the important stuff, some web APIs are intentionally omitted), site compatibility is getting progressively worse with forks. Some will blame it on web devs for using newer features, others on the incompetence of the people working on the forks. Guess it depends on who you ask. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/6/2021 at 5:25 PM, Dixel said:

I do not know anyone who uses FF. Are they that good to get so much attention from MSFN users ?

Just read the thread and realized no one answered your question!

Firefox was the last major browser to drop Windows XP support. By that time, the last official versions of IE and Chrome for XP were hopelessly outdated, so FF 52.9ESR became the default choice of WinXP users for Web browsing.

Then, Moonchild Productions forked a very recent version of FF, 52.6ESR, for their Basilisk browser, and used its UXP engine for the next version of their Pale Moon browser (28).

MCP disabled Windows XP support in their forks, but @feodor2 and @roytam1 were able to build XP-compatible versions of both of MCP's browsers. With these, XP users were able to continue browsing the modern Web. For several more years, those browsers were indeed the best choice for Windows XP.

Unfortunately, Google is playing "Monopoly" these days, developing new Web "standards" almost daily, that are first supported by new versions of their Chrome browser. Even Micro$oft (no stranger to the game of Monopoly itself) has jumped on the Chrome bandwagon, abandoning both IE and their original Edge browser in favor of a Chromium-based version of Edge. Firefox is the only major browser still using a different engine, but even it looks and feels a lot like a clone of Chrome these days.

So today, the UXP-based browsers are starting to show their age. These days, the browser best able to handle the modern Web for Windows XP users is probably 360EE, an XP-compatible Chromium browser developed in China. But the XP-compatible forks of MCP's browsers are still popular, especially with those still trying to resist assimilation into the Goog ;)

Apologies for the number of USA-based pop-culture references....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, UCyborg said:

Firefox handles most of the crap Chromium does (at least the important stuff, some web APIs are intentionally omitted)[;] site compatibility is getting progressively worse with forks. Some will blame it on web devs for using newer features....

I think it depends on the "web dev" in question, what newer feature(s) they're using, and why.

If a newer feature adds useful functionality, you can't blame devs for using it! But many of Micro$oft and Google's own sites seem to use as many "new features" as they can cram into a Web page, yet it doesn't make their Web pages better, AFAICS - just less compatible. So I think it's reasonable to infer they're mainly trying to force the use of Chrome/ChrEdge/modern FF and kill off any forks based on older versions. The name of the game is "Monopoly," and Google is clearly winning. As to why M$ is cooperating, here's one possible reason:

Given the recent kerfuffle, I'm sure MCP would do the same thing if they had Google's market dominance.

Edited by Mathwiz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last few weeks have definitely been interesting. I've been using Iron version 70 since October 2018, since after 70 Chromium took out the flag to disable the horrible new UI (Iron is just Chrome with the privacy stuff taken out, otherwise basically identical).

Surprisingly, it's had a pretty good run. I've seen "Your browser is not supported" in a lot sites for years now, but it really hasn't been until the past couple weeks that suddenly things have been falling apart everywhere. PDF previews on some sites no longer work, some sites no longer render at all, some JavaScript crashes the page and I see tons of errors in the F12 console... it's like something's really changed that's caused sites to suddenly become incompatible with anything that's not a blazing new Chrome or Firefox in the past few weeks.

To make matters worse, Internet Explorer is outright blocked by half of things, even beyond user agent sniffing, and some things don't even work in Pale Moon, so that means that there are some things that I have *ZERO* working browsers to handle. In the past year, I've gone from 3 choices to having none in many cases. Welcome to the age of "If our site doesn't work in something that's not the latest Chrome or Firefox, we don't give a crap". I can resonate with the dystopian Internet stuff the Archive project is talking about... this is what that looks like - removal of browser choice, first and forefront. It's like they all got together last week and said "gee, let's break the web for anyone using an old browser, on purpose". Seriously, what's wrong with web devs these days? I'm sure their commit was something like "Remove support for non-standard browsers", or something like that, they literally wiped it all out in one fell swoop. And of course, none of these vendors give a quack.

And it's not on OS thing. It doesn't work on Windows 7, and I tried on Windows 10 and it doesn't work there either. It's about the browser, obviously, not OS.

And maybe I wouldn't be making a big deal out of it if Chromium had kept that one flag in... want to make the vomit UI the default? Fine. But don't force it on everyone. I jumped off the ship at that point. I refuse to use anything newer than Chromium 70. I do so at work and I can hardly stand it. It literally makes the entire computer *feel* slower, even...

 

Okay, so serious questions now.

Ironically, it does seem that New Moon 28 is now the most "standards compliant" browser on my computer (Windows 7).

I'm still debating whether or not to jump ship from Chromium entirely.

Is there any fork or project that has managed to restore the old UI options? I found one thing out there that has it but it seems that some of these alternate programs are all sourced from China... not really sure how I feel about that.

 

I've been using Iron 70 for more than 3 years now, it had a good run, but I can tell that it's days are limited now and sooner or later, I need to make New Moon my primary browser or find something else. Any ideas?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, InterLinked said:

To make matters worse, Internet Explorer is outright blocked by half of things, even beyond user agent sniffing, and

Irony is that sites used to block other than Internet Exploiter from accessing sites. Many sites relied on Internet exploiter broken standards like msjava and mshtml to render.

4 hours ago, InterLinked said:

I'm still debating whether or not to jump ship from Chromium entirely.

 

For me Chromium and Internet exploiter are same evil just with different logo. Internet exploiter recommend  everyone use broken MSHTML, Google recommends everyone use Chromium exclusive HTML5. Internet Exploiter had OLE embedded controls aka ActiveX also known as infectiveX for it HDD formatting capabilities, google pushes webassembly that is basically operating system running inside browser and can do lot of nasty stuff.

 

Sure someone will pull "but it is cross platform now" argument. It is cross platform evil, but it does not work on every platform. I got plenty of machines that cannot run it for hardware or software configuration reasons. And remember back in day same people defended InfectiveX and MSHTML to be real standard and others just could not follow good standards and how internet exploiter was super secure and much later they admitted how horrible ie was for usability and reliability standpoint.

Now they just got other thing to blindly defend until new evil comes in and they admit Chromium, webassembly and HTML5 were huge mistakes.

4 hours ago, InterLinked said:

I need to make New Moon my primary browser or find something else. Any ideas?

i would recommend pick browser that purpose is to download documents over internet and render them onto your screen, not be gaming or Alternate reality or other trash platform. Modified Mypal with nMatrix, Noscript, decentraliseye, firefox 2 theme, is my choice. It does not not have Webrtc at all unlike Chromium (another vurneability made on purpose), it allows disable Webassembly totally, supports java and flash if need them (off unless I allow). I block javascript on most sites. If site does not render on Goanna engine it means I am not welcome to the site and I should look alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, InterLinked said:

I've been using Iron version 70 since October 2018, since after 70 Chromium took out the flag to disable the horrible new UI (Iron is just Chrome with the privacy stuff taken out, otherwise basically identical).

Please be cautious.

used to think the same but the more deeper you dig you will see that Iron (and Slimjet) has THREE TIMES (two times for Slimjet) the telemetry that Chrome has!

You may be interested in reading this  --  https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/iron.html

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mr.Scienceman2000 said:

I block javascript on most sites. If site does not render on Goanna engine it means I am not welcome to the site and I should look alternative.

Bingo!  It really is that simple!

I hear way too many folks "complain" that blocking javascript doesn't work for them because it kills too many websites and is too much of a "nuisance" to block.

If a website refuses to function to at least a tiny shred of usability with NoScript, uMatrix, Stylus, and Tampermonkey all doing their thing, then the default course of action is not to disable them, the default course of action is to find a different website offering the same exact content but without all of the d@mn shenanigans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ArcticFoxie said:

Please be cautious.

used to think the same but the more deeper you dig you will see that Iron (and Slimjet) has THREE TIMES (two times for Slimjet) the telemetry that Chrome has!

You may be interested in reading this  --  https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/iron.html

Hmm, interesting.

Is that just based on the points in the article?

I used Bing anyways because a) Microsoft pays you to and b) I like it and prefer it to Google. I actually find myself reeling if I'm accidentally on Google and head back over to Bing.

But, I do use Bing directly, not the built in default search provider.

 

I don't use the Iron start pages either, I just have it open the new tab page.

 

Since those are the 2 main points on there, does it really still stand?

Granted, I haven't measured in Wireshark, but my problem with Iron at this point is that it too blindly follows upstream Chromium, so in Iron >= 71, the old UI flag is also gone. So I think I'm going to be quitting Iron for good sooner or later, even if I don't necessarily want to.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ArcticFoxie said:

Bingo!  It really is that simple!

I hear way too many folks "complain" that blocking javascript doesn't work for them because it kills too many websites and is too much of a "nuisance" to block.

If a website refuses to function to at least a tiny shred of usability with NoScript, uMatrix, Stylus, and Tampermonkey all doing their thing, then the default course of action is not to disable them, the default course of action is to find a different website offering the same exact content but without all of the d@mn shenanigans.

Here's a fun bit of trivia: if you disable JavaScript on the New York Times website, you can read all of their content for free.

I still fathom how stupid they are, that they'd choose to paywell their content in an *additive* way, like "hey, if you enable these features in your browser, we will block you from seeing our stuff..." Okay...? Like, I could just, uh, not do that then? Suits me!

I think a few other sites are like this too, but most have more brains than NYT.

In general, things are a lot faster w/o JS. As a web developer (tech jack of all trades, really), I use very minimal JS on my pages, most have none at all whatsoever. Yes, this means sometimes making a new HTTP request but I think it's better to have the server to do the work than the client. It's a lot faster and there are few sites that are speedier than my own, I've found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, InterLinked said:

Here's a fun bit of trivia: if you disable JavaScript on the New York Times website, you can read all of their content for free.

I still fathom how stupid they are, that they'd choose to paywell their content in an *additive* way, like "hey, if you enable these features in your browser, we will block you from seeing our stuff..." Okay...? Like, I could just, uh, not do that then? Suits me!

I think a few other sites are like this too, but most have more brains than NYT.

In general, things are a lot faster w/o JS. As a web developer (tech jack of all trades, really), I use very minimal JS on my pages, most have none at all whatsoever. Yes, this means sometimes making a new HTTP request but I think it's better to have the server to do the work than the client. It's a lot faster and there are few sites that are speedier than my own, I've found.

Bit of sad story from online news and js. One local newspaper used to have site that allowed access everything with js disabled, had rss feeds and all other cool things. Then one day in earlier of 2021 I saw ad from their new beta site on newspaper and decided try it. It was horrible. It needed 4 addresses worth js (most were some cloud provider) to even render article and even then part of it was broken.

I sent feedback from new site using form (located on bloated MS cloud) that site did not work without javascript at all unlike previous site and explained why need for non js site would be required. I said for security I cannot allow that many domains of javascript and they should consider safety of customers/readers before implementing js enforcement and they should rework site.

Guess what? My reguest was totally ignored and two days later they pulled that horrible beta site to replace main one. They also killed all RSS feeds. I contacted them I wanted RSS back, if not public even as paid customer only and guess what? Went to deaf ears again. All of articles are paywalled now and no way view properly with my configuration.

Few days forward they launched huge advertising campaign on our town to attract young hippy bleeding edge kids. Advertising pics had person with cell phone or tablet and said download mobile spyware I mean app that was basically electron wrapped website.

Then something strange happened and I started save amount of newspaper subscription per month, I no longer recieved newspaper and changed to alternatives.

I was not only who got mad about that and stopped paying from newspaper likely. They did show middle finger to all loyal customers and decided please hippies instead.

Replacing old customer base with new one that is easier cash grab with data mining, milking out from multiple subscribtions and other seems to be trend on companies in 2010 onwards

Edited by Mr.Scienceman2000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...