4 ms·

One thing that seems to be common amongst many of these Firefox forks is they're very difficult to find which official version they're equivalent in functionali

One thing that seems to be common amongst many of these Firefox forks is they're very difficult to find which official version they're equivalent in functionality to. This one is no exception.

spijdar 4mo ago
Probably because there often isn't a straight answer to that. I've no idea about the progeny of this browser, but I've seen several Firefox forks "interbreed", borrowing patches and feature backports from each other. So there might be a specific version of Firefox you can ultimately trace the repo to, it likely has code from newer versions spliced in. At least, that was my impression.
- userbinator 4mo ago
  The closest they say is: PowerFox is both standards compliant and feature-rich, supporting the latest web technologies to ensure compatibility with modern websites. which means.. next to nothing. No "PowerFox version X has (at least) the same web standards support as Firefox Y". it likely has code from newer versions spliced in That's a good thing, but making it clearer what to expect will make it easier for potential users to decide whether to give it a try.
  - sdf4j 4mo ago
    > That's a good thing, but making it clearer what to expect will make it easier for potential users to decide whether to give it a try. There are not that many options for the potential users.
thisislife2 4mo ago
This is actually based on the Goanna web engine (a fork of the Firefox / Gecko web engine) derived from the https://www.basilisk-browser.org/ https://www.basilisk-browser.org/ . You can find out more here - https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=69&p=275829#p275829 https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=69&p=275829#p2758... .
- dblohm7 4mo ago
  Ah, that explains why there is still NPAPI plugin support.
  - thisislife2 4mo ago
    Yup. The only browsers that still support Flash.
    - tvshtr 4mo ago
      *natively. You can run flash through ruffle in any of the modern browsers.
- userbinator 4mo ago
  The same complaint in my original comment applies - at what version was it forked from, what version of Firefox is it equivalent to? https://www.basilisk-browser.org/features.html https://www.basilisk-browser.org/features.html Basilisk supports the technologies required for the modern web, while deliberately avoiding the rapid architectural and interface changes common in mainstream browsers. Nothing but very vague and useless marketing-speak.
  - thisislife2 4mo ago
    Lookup PaleMoon and Basilisk in Wikipedia. The codebase of Goanna has diverged from Firefox / Gecko a lot, so trying to compare by versions won't tell you much. PaleMoon Goanna is regularly updated and supports nearly all the feature sets of a modern browser rendering engine and is feature compatible with Firefox / Gecko though it doesn't support webRTC - https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=28182 https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=28182, DRM and webExtensions ... https://www.palemoon.org/technical.shtml https://www.palemoon.org/technical.shtml
  - zamadatix 4mo ago
    What you're looking for only makes sense for browser "forks" that just re-skin/layer on top of the latest releases of the main project. Basilisk is an actual fork which has lead development in it's own direction, i.e. they have features newer than the date/version of the fork but it's not because they rebased on the newer Firefox XYZ git and now have equivalence to that version.
prmoustache 4mo ago
Is that a firefox fork? I don't even see mention about license in the website or github repo.
- swiftcoder 4mo ago
  It was forked from Firefox a decade ago, so at this point there's not much relation between the PaleMoon/Basilisk lineage and modern Firefox

One thing that seems to be common amongst many of these Firefox forks is they're very difficult to find which official version they're equivalent in functionality to. This one is no exception.

spijdar 4mo ago

Probably because there often isn't a straight answer to that. I've no idea about the progeny of this browser, but I've seen several Firefox forks "interbreed", borrowing patches and feature backports from each other. So there might be a specific version of Firefox you can ultimately trace the repo to, it likely has code from newer versions spliced in. At least, that was my impression.

userbinator 4mo ago
The closest they say is: PowerFox is both standards compliant and feature-rich, supporting the latest web technologies to ensure compatibility with modern websites. which means.. next to nothing. No "PowerFox version X has (at least) the same web standards support as Firefox Y". it likely has code from newer versions spliced in That's a good thing, but making it clearer what to expect will make it easier for potential users to decide whether to give it a try.
- sdf4j 4mo ago
  > That's a good thing, but making it clearer what to expect will make it easier for potential users to decide whether to give it a try. There are not that many options for the potential users.

thisislife2 4mo ago

This is actually based on the Goanna web engine (a fork of the Firefox / Gecko web engine) derived from the https://www.basilisk-browser.org/ https://www.basilisk-browser.org/ . You can find out more here - https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=69&p=275829#p275829 https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=69&p=275829#p2758... .

dblohm7 4mo ago
Ah, that explains why there is still NPAPI plugin support.
- thisislife2 4mo ago
  Yup. The only browsers that still support Flash.
  - tvshtr 4mo ago
    *natively. You can run flash through ruffle in any of the modern browsers.
userbinator 4mo ago
The same complaint in my original comment applies - at what version was it forked from, what version of Firefox is it equivalent to? https://www.basilisk-browser.org/features.html https://www.basilisk-browser.org/features.html Basilisk supports the technologies required for the modern web, while deliberately avoiding the rapid architectural and interface changes common in mainstream browsers. Nothing but very vague and useless marketing-speak.
- thisislife2 4mo ago
  Lookup PaleMoon and Basilisk in Wikipedia. The codebase of Goanna has diverged from Firefox / Gecko a lot, so trying to compare by versions won't tell you much. PaleMoon Goanna is regularly updated and supports nearly all the feature sets of a modern browser rendering engine and is feature compatible with Firefox / Gecko though it doesn't support webRTC - https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=28182 https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=28182, DRM and webExtensions ... https://www.palemoon.org/technical.shtml https://www.palemoon.org/technical.shtml
- zamadatix 4mo ago
  What you're looking for only makes sense for browser "forks" that just re-skin/layer on top of the latest releases of the main project. Basilisk is an actual fork which has lead development in it's own direction, i.e. they have features newer than the date/version of the fork but it's not because they rebased on the newer Firefox XYZ git and now have equivalence to that version.

prmoustache 4mo ago

Is that a firefox fork? I don't even see mention about license in the website or github repo.

swiftcoder 4mo ago
It was forked from Firefox a decade ago, so at this point there's not much relation between the PaleMoon/Basilisk lineage and modern Firefox