3 ms·
Why not Pale Moon?
by tomc1985 9y ago
Why not Pale Moon?
- twobyfour 9y agoBecause Mac? Also, Pale Moon forked much longer ago and has diverged more significantly from Firefox, AFAICT.
- slphil 9y agoPale Moon is a 3.5 fork, it's ancient, although it's gotten a lot of independent development.
- unethical_ban 9y agoDo you not wonder that this fork will suffer the same fate?
- slphil 9y agoWaterfox has been around for a while. What fate are you talking about? Pale Moon is still in active development and use as well. I use it on some older machines for performance reasons.
- kasabali 9y agoAFAIK it's rebased onto Firefox 38 and there will be another rebase in the future based on Basilisk release (should be similar to Firefox 53-54)
- jccalhoun 9y agowhen the first firefox 57 beta came out I tried pale moon and too many of the extensions I used wouldn't work on it. They worked with Waterfox. I use firefox as my main browser but there are a couple extensions that won't be ported over that I keep waterfox installed to use.