FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Discussion of third-party/unofficial Firefox/Thunderbird/SeaMonkey builds.
User avatar
LIMPET235
Moderator
Posts: 39936
Joined: October 19th, 2007, 1:53 am
Location: The South Coast of N.S.W. Oz.

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by LIMPET235 »

Hi Y'awll,
Would you please keep the conversation/s here on mozillaZine, civil.
No name calling or the like.

Ta muchly..
[Ancient Amateur Astronomer.]
Win-10-H/64 bit/500G SSD/16 Gig Ram/450Watt PSU/350WattUPS/Firefox-115.0.2/T-bird-115.3.2./SnagIt-v10.0.1/MWP-7.12.125.

(Always choose the "Custom" Install.)
User avatar
malliz
Folder@Home
Posts: 43796
Joined: December 7th, 2002, 4:34 am
Location: Australia

Re: So, FF Quantum ...

Post by malliz »

#Sun-Glasses wrote: However, malliz claiming that Waterfox is reaching its end is wishful thinking, or just uninformed nonsense. Or both.
I said it had an uncertain future nothing more nothing less. You are the one who added all the tinfoil political rhubarb.
What sort of man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.
"Terry Pratchett"
Tomatoshadow2
Posts: 435
Joined: May 11th, 2017, 9:52 am

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by Tomatoshadow2 »

I think it's hard for the forks to keep up with all the changes Firefox is going through currently. But I've only used Firefox, so just an observation.
#Sun-Glasses
Posts: 62
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 1:57 pm

Re: So, FF Quantum ...

Post by #Sun-Glasses »

malliz wrote: I said it had an uncertain future nothing more nothing less. You are the one who added all the tinfoil political rhubarb.
Uncertain future? Well, life is all about uncertainty. Mozilla could be involved in some random scandal and it would be over in the short term, as well. Or they are going to die a slow death, with their market share bleeding dry. Who knows.

Your claims are totally unbiased, I guess? (Guess not.)

PS: This one speaks volumes about your attitude... http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic ... #p14791655 :D :D :D
Last edited by #Sun-Glasses on February 15th, 2018, 3:28 am, edited 3 times in total.
#Sun-Glasses
Posts: 62
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 1:57 pm

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by #Sun-Glasses »

tomatoshadow2 wrote:I think it's hard for the forks to keep up with all the changes Firefox is going through currently. But I've only used Firefox, so just an observation.
Depends on what the goal of the fork is. If it is developing Firefox in another direction (Pale Moon), then sure, trouble ahead. If the goal is to keep Firefox clean (Waterfox), then they can go on without any major interruptions.
Tomatoshadow2
Posts: 435
Joined: May 11th, 2017, 9:52 am

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by Tomatoshadow2 »

@ #Sun-Glasses No attacking malliz, remember no personal attacks directed toward users, it's the rules just saying. But, Waterfox still seems to be running into trouble and when you have a very small team developing it, it can be hard to keep up. It might get harder for them as Firefox continues on, who knows.
#Sun-Glasses
Posts: 62
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 1:57 pm

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by #Sun-Glasses »

tomatoshadow2 wrote:@ #Sun-Glasses No attacking malliz, remember no personal attacks directed toward users, it's the rules just saying. But, Waterfox still seems to be running into trouble and when you have a very small team developing it, it can be hard to keep up. It might get harder for them as Firefox continues on, who knows.
The Waterfox developer chose to patch Waterfox 56 while waiting for Firefox 60 ESR, which he is going to use as his next base. He is not in any trouble.

Regarding malliz, I can only say that compared how he treats others even in this very thread...

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic ... #p14791655

...I treat him very humanely. If they delete any of my rather moderate comments, it will only prove that some are more equal than others around here. Ever wondered why Mozillazine is so scarcely populated?
Tomatoshadow2
Posts: 435
Joined: May 11th, 2017, 9:52 am

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by Tomatoshadow2 »

But what will happen after that? Could still be a big change, everyone is treated the same at this forum. No one has status over someone else, we all strive to make this a welcoming community. I think Malliz, is pointing out how he feels about 3rd party builds. I know he doesn't like if people twist what he's trying to say, no one does.
User avatar
JodyThornton
Posts: 153
Joined: August 12th, 2004, 5:59 pm
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario (Canada)
Contact:

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by JodyThornton »

@tomatoshadow2:

I think you're being a tad too forgiving (or perhaps naive) about malliz there. Both he and Frank Lion get a bit more free reign here, and basically get to disparage people much much more than the rest of us. It's left to slide, only because of their long-standing membership here, and that's NOT a good enough reason. No one is treated equally to them. In fact, I find they pretty much call the shots here - just look at who suggests all of the thread locking and off topic split offs. You can't tell me you're blind to that.
Cheers,
Jody Thornton
(Richmond Hill, Ontario)
User avatar
malliz
Folder@Home
Posts: 43796
Joined: December 7th, 2002, 4:34 am
Location: Australia

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by malliz »

Just a note sure Frank and I know the mods we have all been here a long time in many cases before they were mods. The mods never let this stop them from pulling us into line when we need it and in most cases we get less slack than most because we "Should know better"
What sort of man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.
"Terry Pratchett"
#Sun-Glasses
Posts: 62
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 1:57 pm

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by #Sun-Glasses »

malliz wrote:Just a note sure Frank and I know the mods we have all been here a long time in many cases before they were mods. The mods never let this stop them from pulling us into line when we need it and in most cases we get less slack than most because we "Should know better"
Your posting history combined with DanRaisch's moderator status... No comment. Only so much: It basically screams "preferential treatment". No wonder this forum is going downhill.
User avatar
malliz
Folder@Home
Posts: 43796
Joined: December 7th, 2002, 4:34 am
Location: Australia

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by malliz »

Dan is scrupulously fair and any suggestion otherwise is both insulting and plain wrong.
What sort of man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.
"Terry Pratchett"
#Sun-Glasses
Posts: 62
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 1:57 pm

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by #Sun-Glasses »

malliz wrote:Dan is scrupulously fair and any suggestion otherwise is both insulting and plain wrong.

Again, look at all those berating posts in your posting history, especially at those still standing. And then look at DanRaisch's status.

:-k
User avatar
smsmith
Moderator
Posts: 19979
Joined: December 7th, 2004, 8:51 pm
Location: Indiana

Re: FF Quantum compared to Waterfox

Post by smsmith »

This is no longer on topic, and rather than cutting the chaff, I'm just going to lock it.

If you want to question the moderation around here, do so in the site discussion forum, don't sidejack another thread.
Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime.
I like poetry, long walks on the beach and poking dead things with a stick.
Please do not PM me for personal support. Keep posts here in the Forums instead and we all learn.
Locked