3 ms·

Ridiculous. I've never heard of power users using Pale moon. it seems like the current `hot fad' in comparison to products like SeaMonkey, which power users hav

• steve-howard 11y ago
  I still use Firefox, but I looked at the status of some of the forks after today's news. It seems that Pale Moon, at the very least, is a true fork, but I don't have a whole lot of confidence that it would be right for me. In particular, it seems that they take a _very_ old-school approach to media on the Web [1], they really only bother with XUL addon compatibility [2], and an attitude that they should only open-source what is legally required of them [3]. There's nothing wrong with these views, but they don't work well for me. I just want my browser to work, with the extensions I like, and until now the way to go about that has been to stick with regular Firefox. Looks like that might not work for very long either. [1] "Media support is a regularly-discussed topic for Pale Moon users, [...] This is, however, not a goal of Pale Moon because of the inherent shift of focus from document content to media content." https://www.palemoon.org/roadmap.shtml https://www.palemoon.org/roadmap.shtml [2] "If you still like to develop JetPack add-ons for Pale Moon, you will likely have to make a completely separate extension specific for Pale Moon targeting." Ibid. [3] "There is no requirement or even reason why I should be forced to also release helper applications that are in no way tied to browser operation as Open Source as well." http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7818 http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7818