Pale Moon Browser

[TheSchaft]

I've been playing with it for a day or so and like it so far - good speed. I installed the "NoSquint" add-on (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2592) so I could make the pages a tad larger on my 23" monitor.

 

[Snowdog]

firefox2010: "I tested this browser on peacekeeper and found that it's only faster than firefox about 10%"

"ONLY 10%" ?

is that not a good improvement ?

On peacekeeper 10% is meaningless. Actually I was benchmarking a 100%+ difference between firefox and Chrome and I could detect no speed difference in actual use.

If you really need faster you need Opera or Chrome Dev/Beta. But unless your systems is very slow, or you run on extremely intensive pages, I would just use what you like best.

I use FF 3.6.3 as my main browser. It isn't the fastest but it is highly configurable and has the best extensions and speed differences are undetectable in normal usage.

 

[firefox2010]

firefox2010: "I tested this browser on peacekeeper and found that it's only faster than firefox about 10%"

"ONLY 10%" ?

is that not a good improvement ?

No, the actual figure is only about 7-8% compared to advertised figure 25%. It does browse a bit faster than ff 3.6.3 however I need to completely uninstalled the FF in order to use it, otherwise it doesn't work properly. The main concern with this browser is the security feature, perhaps someone with a better knowledge could share with us how secure is this browser compared to FF.

 

[firefox2010]

firefox2010: "I tested this browser on peacekeeper and found that it's only faster than firefox about 10%"

"ONLY 10%" ?

is that not a good improvement ?

On peacekeeper 10% is meaningless. Actually I was benchmarking a 100%+ difference between firefox and Chrome and I could detect no speed difference in actual use.

If you really need faster you need Opera or Chrome Dev/Beta. But unless your systems is very slow, or you run on extremely intensive pages, I would just use what you like best.

I use FF 3.6.3 as my main browser. It isn't the fastest but it is highly configurable and has the best extensions and speed differences are undetectable in normal usage.

Yes, I agree. I just wish one day FF could catch up with Opera and Chrome in speed.

 

[hackerman1]

hi !

Snowdog: "On peacekeeper 10% is meaningless...."

is it ?

"...If you really need faster you need Opera or Chrome Dev/Beta."

i didn´t say that i NEED more speed, i said it feels faster & is ~7% faster on peacekeeper.
yes, Opera is faster but it doesn´t have the add-ons that FF has, which therefore makes it a little bit primitive.

if "TabMix-Plus" had worked with FF 3.7a i would have used it, so i´m waiting for an update to "TabMix-Plus"...
one other very important add-on for me is "NoScript" which is already working on 3.7a.

firefox2010:
"The main concern with this browser is the security feature, perhaps someone with a better knowledge could share with us how secure is this browser compared to FF."

well, this thread was created by Corrine...

 

[Corrine]

firefox2010:
"The main concern with this browser is the security feature, perhaps someone with a better knowledge could share with us how secure is this browser compared to FF."

well, this thread was created by Corrine...

Let's look at what I quoted from the technical info in the original post on the features disabled by design in Pale Moon:

* ActiveX and ActiveX scripting. ActiveX is specific to Microsoft's Internet Explorer, and is not natively supported by (any) Firefox builds. There are some extensions that enable ActiveX components and scripts to run in Firefox on Windows, which will, therefore, not run in Pale Moon. This is a security consideration more than a speed consideration. [Bold added]

Definitely a plus for Pale Moon, unless the add-ons that use ActiveX are important to you. Add-block Plus and NoScript work seamlessly with Pale Moon.

* Parental controls. Pale Moon aims to be a fast browser for general use, not a "secured family browser". The design impact of parental controls as introduced in Firefox 3.0 and later is significant, and has had serious implications for building the browser. As such, parental controls have been disabled.

This would reduce security if Firefox parental controls extensions are used on a family computer. See Parental controls - MozillaZine Knowledge Base

* A few miscellaneous things like the crashreporter and automatic updater, since they require server-side components that are not in place at palemoon.org. You will have to check manually if you have the latest version and update accordingly.

My only security related concern here is that without the automatic updater, people who are not aware of updates would run out-of-date software.

 

[hybridfan]

I love testing out new browsers, will give this a whirl tonight. Thanks Corrine

 

[firefox2010]

Thanks Corrine for your information about Pale Moon's security. A plus aside the speed improvement for this browser is that it actually fix the problem with Firefox's cache on youtube's video so that you don't need to re-downloading the video you just watched.

 

[hackerman1]

about PM´s security, that´s also my interpretation of what Corrine posted in the first post, PM is more secure then FF.
ActiveX can be VERY dangerous...

"... problem with Firefox's cache on youtube's video..."
what problem is that ?

 

[rev1775]

:shock: Perhaps a dumb question but, I just installed this not 10 minutes ago and I am wondering just where and under what name is this installed? It doesn't add a folder to programs nor does it show up in my programs and features section? Am I missing the boat here as to uninstalling it at some point if I choose?

 

[firefox2010]

"... problem with Firefox's cache on youtube's video..."

what problem is that ?

You can't playback youtube video without re-downloading it even if you've fully loaded it.... Do you know how to fix this issue for firefox 3.63?

 

[Phone Man]

:shock: Perhaps a dumb question but, I just installed this not 10 minutes ago and I am wondering just where and under what name is this installed? It doesn't add a folder to programs nor does it show up in my programs and features section? Am I missing the boat here as to uninstalling it at some point if I choose?

Did you use the Install version or the Zip version? The Zip version just unzips the .exe and then you can make a shortcut.

Jim

 

[rev1775]

I made the shortcut on the desktop... though using the zip version I find that I can not delete the folder else the shortcut doesn't work... I was refering to being able to uninstall it if I want as it doesn't appear in the programs and features nor in the programs folder with a uninstall option...

 

[Phone Man]

I made the shortcut on the desktop... though using the zip version I find that I can not delete the folder else the shortcut doesn't work... I was refering to being able to uninstall it if I want as it doesn't appear in the programs and features nor in the programs folder with a uninstall option...

If you used the Zip version it does not install anything. It unpacks the program into the Pale Moon folder and the shortcut points to the .exe file and executes it to open the browser. To uninstall just delete the shortcut and the Pale Moon folder.

Jim

 

[rev1775]

Aaah okies... That makes sense......... thanks...........

 

[tux]

It does, by the way, not really matter if you use Pale Moon, Blazing Fast, tete, or pigfoot builds of Firefox. All of them use similar compiler settings, and you'll probably get the same results on your machine.
(However I prefer pigfoot builds because of their better artwork. *g*)

I don't really understand why the Mozilla people don't provide optimized builds themselves; but that's the advantage of the open source model. May it live long and prosper.

 

[Snowdog]

I don't really understand why the Mozilla people don't provide optimized builds themselves; but that's the advantage of the open source model. May it live long and prosper.

Because some of these are also leaving things out in their optimizations, and the overall a 5%-10% performance difference on a web browser completely doesn't matter.

A typical page might take 2 seconds to download, and 33 ms to render, a 10% faster browser isn't going to touch the 2 seconds to download, just the 33 ms to render.

So now it takes 2 seconds (download) and 30 ms to render. It just doesn't matter.

Heck I recorded almost 800% difference between Internet Explorer and Chrome Dev, yet you can barely ever notice an actual difference, because on most pages the download time will swamp the render time.

 

[hackerman1]

a small update, that might be interesting for others that useTabMixPlus.

i earlier posted that: if "TabMix-Plus" had worked with FF 3.7a i would have used it, so i´m waiting for an update to "TabMix-Plus"...

today i found a new betaversion of "TabMixPlus" that works on FF 3.7a5pre:
http://https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1122#install-beta

so i´m back to using FF now, mainly because there seems to be a bug in PM,
when switching from fullscreen (a "normal", not F11) to a window, it´s very small & cannot be resized.

but 3.7a5 is also faster then PM...

 

[tux]

There are quite regularly TMP updates available here BTW:
Tab Mix Plus Dev-Build 0.3.8.X-Tab Mix Plus

 

[kronckew]

i tried pale moon, seems to work ok, there are at least one firefox addons that it does not work with & throws up an error until you uninstall the addon. the newest version uses it's own profile location rather than sharing firefox's, so this is not a killer as i can use firefox when i want that addon to be effective and pale moon otherwise, if i so desired. this is an improvement over earlier versions. they even provide a profile copying utility that duplicates your firefox profile in pale moon's preferred location, which worked perfectly.

however, when i used the developers feedback link to report the addon error i received a very patronizing reply requesting that i stop reporting it as a bug and that it was the addons fault, not theirs, and that the addon was no good anyway, and that they were an expert in that field and i should bow to their superiority of knowledge and not use it. i am an old fart, who has worked in computer support and security for a long time, as well as having run a customer relations team for an enterprise level software firm, so i did not take their approach at customer relations well and will not be using or recommending their product on the forum i moderate on another site. as they do not seem to want any critical bug reports or feedback, i see no need to clutter up my pc with pale moon. in closing, revo uninstaller removes pale moon effectively.