Palemoon drama has gotten bad

[Sampei.Nihira]

1 hour ago, InterLinked said:

This is becoming more frustrating every day.

Up until a few weeks ago, I had pretty much no compatibility issues in either Iron 70 or New Moon.

Now, a lot of things don't work in any of the 3 browsers I have: Internet Explorer, Iron 70, and New Moon 28.

I was very displeased this morning to find that Wordpress.com is among these sites now. When you click "Log in", you just see the Wordpress logo. IN ALL THREE BROWSERS!

Of course, it works in a modern version of Chrome, but WTF? This is not "web accessibility" or "standards compliant". Why is it that I suddenly see dozens of JS errors in the F12 console now? Why keep reinventing the wheel to break existing browsers while adding literally nothing? This used to work, this is nothing more or less than a regression.

I'm a web developer, of course, so I don't need wordpress.com, I only keep it for one site that is mostly links and easier to just add a quick link that way, and I don't have a domain for it so the free .wordpress.com was fine. But now that I cannot edit this site anymore, looks like Wordpress has left me no choice but do the site on my own and jump ship from Wordpress.

Is there any way that this might NOT have been an intentional regression? I can't see why not, but it seems puzzling that all of a sudden lots of sites are suddenly having compatibility issues in the past few weeks.

You are absolutely right.

[Dixel]

On 10/31/2021 at 2:11 AM, Mathwiz said:

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 By that time, the last official versions of IE and Chrome for XP were hopelessly outdated, so FF 52.9ESR became the default choice of WinXP users for Web browsing.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....

Thank you for your opinion ! Firefox has tons of telemetry , but promotes itself as a "privacy oriented browser" , it's just dirty , don't you think so ? Google says : we shall fingerprint the hell outta you , it's honest , at least . BTW , why would you apologize to a guy from a friendly NATO country ? I love American culture , I mean American-American , not the woke commie "culture". I watch American TV shows and whatnot. Do not forget who had founded your country . Your culture is our (Dutch) culture . New Amsterdam .

[NotHereToPlayGames]

The one I really get a kick out of is SRWare Iron.  Also promotes itself as "privacy oriented".  FALSE ADVERTISING.  They only remove "half" of Google Telemetry but REPLACE IT with SRWare Telemetry.  Telemetry is Telemetry.  We don't want any of it!  I think Iridium is probably the best as far as little to no telemetry (though I personally have very little experience with Iridium as I do love my XP and Iridium does require Win7 or higher).

[XPerceniol]

Yeah, I recall in the beginning Iron got a bad rap for being scareware. Sure, they were right, but, as you say, they replaced it with their own Telemetry. I gave up on Iron and Vivaldi.

Edited November 8, 2021 by XPerceniol

[Dixel]

3 hours ago, ArcticFoxie said:

The one I really get a kick out of is SRWare Iron.  Also promotes itself as "privacy oriented".  FALSE ADVERTISING.  They only remove "half" of Google Telemetry but REPLACE IT with SRWare Telemetry.  Telemetry is Telemetry.  We don't want any of it!  I think Iridium is probably the best as far as little to no telemetry (though I personally have very little experience with Iridium as I do love my XP and Iridium does require Win7 or higher).

About SRWare , yes and no . On one hand , I agree with you , on the other  [from my experience with Iron] it works better with my starter and it is much easier to disable fingerprinting with it ! About it's telemetry , yes , but can be disabled also , like in the 360. So it's not that bad . I'd say 50/50. Such discussion is OT here , would you care to create a new topic where we ( @Mr.Scienceman2000 , @ArcticFoxie and @Dixel) shall bash the hell outta the commie Firefox ?  I'm glad we're on the same page , at least about this , lol.

[Mr.Scienceman2000]

1 hour ago, Dixel said:

Thank you for your opinion ! Firefox has tons of telemetry , but promotes itself as a "privacy oriented browser" , it's just dirty , don't you think so ? Google says : we shall fingerprint the hell outta you , it's honest ,

well remember that mozilla says they respect user freedom but mozilla also said this

Quote

Security Over Choice

When deciding whether to block an add-on from running in Firefox, we ask whether the risk is so great that it outweighs the user’s choice to install the software, the utility it provides, as well as the developer’s freedom to distribute and control their software. If we encounter a situation where we cannot make a clear-cut decision, we will err on the side of security to protect the user.

https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/add-ons-blocking-process/ so they admit "protecting" is more important than allowing user have freedom.

 

1 hour ago, Dixel said:

Such discussion is OT here , would you care to create a new topic where we ( @Mr.Scienceman2000 , @ArcticFoxie and @Dixel) shall bash the hell outta the commie Firefox ?  I'm glad we're on the same page , at least about this , lol.

that was just slightly scratching surface from mozilla issues and agree belongs to it own thread

[Sampei.Nihira]

The browser is a critical component of the security configuration.
As I've written many times I consider security as a primary objective compared to privacy.
If we take Pale Moon that lacks the Google Safe Browsing feature present instead in Firefox, it is good practice to integrate this lack.
Choosing protective DNS.
Enabling in UBO the anti-malware + anti-phishing lists.

Who instead uses Firefox 94.x especially in a Windows OS must work on the privacy side (as well as at the OS level) that as you have all pointed out is lacking by default.

Edited November 8, 2021 by Sampei.Nihira

[Mr.Scienceman2000]

23 minutes ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

The browser is a critical component of the security configuration.
As I've written many times I consider security as a primary objective compared to privacy.
If we take Pale Moon that lacks the Google Safe Browsing feature present instead in Firefox, it is good practice to integrate this lack.
Choosing protective DNS.
Enabling in UBO the anti-malware + anti-phishing lists.

Who instead uses Firefox 94.x especially in a Windows OS must work on the privacy side (as well as at the OS level) that as you have all pointed out is lacking by default.

Forced protections like automatic updates without ability to opt out, blocking addons, safebrowsing are false security/privacy features. I do not want browser treat me like baby and recist what I can do with it. If I want will load all possible adware and spyware plugins and only visit phishing sites I should be allowed do so. It is not browser vendor problem if user that stupid.

For me privacy and security are hand to hand. If privacy is lost so is security. Lets say you enable feature than pings to company all the time to protect you from "bad sites" (sure they wont harm you with that data) and company gets breached and all of your browsing data with IP address and mac address they have collected is leaked there goes security....

I wish browsers would be as recistive limiting developers from doing whatever they want with browser. That would actually help for security. "Hey lets make program language that allow web browser do stuff without user consect since I can see zero abuse risk on that". Most of web browser security issues are self caused by adding stuff that DOES NOT BELONG to be web browser.

For me problem on those protections is someone else decides what is safe and what is not safe for me and caused biased opinions many times. For example Palememe blocks Noscript because Moonchildish devs got mad to noscript devs for no good reason. And reason to be blocked is it breaks sites. It sure breaks sites but that is because sites got too much js and noscript like name suggest is script blocker

Edited November 8, 2021 by Mr.Scienceman2000

[Sampei.Nihira]

54 minutes ago, Mr.Scienceman2000 said:

Forced protections like automatic updates without ability to opt out, blocking addons, safebrowsing are false security/privacy features. I do not want browser treat me like baby and recist what I can do with it. If I want will load all possible adware and spyware plugins and only visit phishing sites I should be allowed do so. It is not browser vendor problem if user that stupid.

For me privacy and security are hand to hand. If privacy is lost so is security. Lets say you enable feature than pings to company all the time to protect you from "bad sites" (sure they wont harm you with that data) and company gets breached and all of your browsing data with IP address and mac address they have collected is leaked there goes security....

I wish browsers would be as recistive limiting developers from doing whatever they want with browser. That would actually help for security. "Hey lets make program language that allow web browser do stuff without user consect since I can see zero abuse risk on that". Most of web browser security issues are self caused by adding stuff that DOES NOT BELONG to be web browser.

For me problem on those protections is someone else decides what is safe and what is not safe for me and caused biased opinions many times. For example Palememe blocks Noscript because Moonchildish devs got mad to noscript devs for no good reason. And reason to be blocked is it breaks sites. It sure breaks sites but that is because sites got too much js and noscript like name suggest is script blocker

Sometimes it happens,but most of the time it doesn't.
I'm going to open a new thread to highlight just this aspect but in modern versions of browsers.
I invite you to participate and maybe do some testing yourself.

[Dixel]

10 hours ago, Mr.Scienceman2000 said:

that was just slightly scratching surface from mozilla issues and agree belongs to it own thread

So please create a new topic , I think you know much more about Firefox and it's forks than most .

[XPerceniol]

7 hours ago, Mr.Scienceman2000 said:

...and all of your browsing data with IP address and mac address they have collected is leaked there goes security....

Yikes ... they can get your mac address??

[Mathwiz]

I agree privacy is an issue with all these browsers. But it's a moot point if you can't browse the Web at all because of "Googlisms!"

Even the Wayback Machine (web.archive.org) now fails to render properly in Serpent! Of course it's fine in ChrEdge....

My best recommendation for privacy is probably to start with one of @ArcticFoxie's "unGoogled" versions of 360EE. Yes, it's a Chinese browser, and China is renowned for spying on their citizenry, but the folks here have worked hard to remove all the telemetry they could find, and China couldn't care less about us Westerners anyhow....

[XPerceniol]

Having thus far stuck loyal to (both) Serpent 52 and (My heavily/extremely tweaked to death) FF52.9.1; pages that loaded fine last month are changing and youtube is just awful now with both. Honestly, for me, new moon is worse and hangs with not responding.

I agree - I actually feel more "Private" and secure with @ArcticFoxie 's 'ungoogled' 360EE now. I've found V12 [12.0.1247_rebuild_9] to perform very well overall and I think the folks here that have worked and contributed to it have made it what it is. Sorry, I forget names and don't want to leave anybody out.

Edited November 8, 2021 by XPerceniol

[InterLinked]

2 hours ago, XPerceniol said:

Having thus far stuck loyal to (both) Serpent 52 and (My heavily/extremely tweaked to death) FF52.9.1; pages that loaded fine last month are changing and youtube is just awful now with both. Honestly, for me, new moon is worse and hangs with not responding.

I agree - I actually feel more "Private" and secure with @ArcticFoxie 's 'ungoogled' 360EE now. I've found V12 [12.0.1247_rebuild_9] to perform very well overall and I think the folks here that have worked and contributed to it have made it what it is. Sorry, I forget names and don't want to leave anybody out.

Well, I sure am hearing a lot about this 360 EE program now... it seems to come most recommended by multiple parties.

Which Chromium is this using, the latest one?

My guess is it suffers from the same problems as Iron > 70. The old interface is gone, so it makes the user want to vomit.

Philosophically, I'm not too into the whole Chromium vs. Mozilla vs. Trident vs. whatever browser wars, I just want something that's efficient, that works, and looks reasonable... I guess NOT being Chinese spyware is also a plus, though! Iron 70 has been these things in the past, but is on its way out the door as I speak.

I had always planned to move to New Moon when this happened, but this is sadly not viable it seems.

Serpent it sounds like is not faring much better.

What is 360 EE really bringing to the table?

[NotHereToPlayGames]

54 minutes ago, InterLinked said:

Philosophically, I'm not too into the whole Chromium vs. Mozilla vs. Trident vs. whatever browser wars, I just want something that's efficient, that works, and looks reasonable...

Bingo!  We are in the same exact boat!

I have no "loyalty" to ANY web browser - I just want something that WORKS and doesn't have a GUI that looks like it was designed as part of a high school project for extra credit because the student was failing the course otherwise.

Selecting a browser has ALWAYS been about PERSONAL PREFERENCE in my view.  They ALL have PROS.  They ALL have CONS.

Anyone that tells you differently is BIASED, whether they will admit that bias or not is often a different story.

It's only been within the last four years or so where MAJOR differences came into play.

Learning how to change settings that weren't part of the GUI has always been a matter of "learning curve" on how to use Chrome's "flags" or Firefox's "about:config".

So in my view it has been DURING the past four years where "brand loyalty" basically became more of a FAMILIARITY ISSUE than anything - some of us learned "flags", some of us learned "about:config", but very few of us truly learned BOTH.

The last YEAR of the past FOUR has been particularly "interesting".