off-topic Waterfox discussion split from "on what Walton said"

Discussion of third-party/unofficial Firefox/Thunderbird/SeaMonkey builds.
sepia
Posts: 8
Joined: September 5th, 2018, 5:19 am

off-topic Waterfox discussion split from "on what Walton said"

Post by sepia »

frg wrote:Well with Webassembly and service workers in the future no one needs to tell me about better security :)
Full Ack!
frg wrote:Personally i think they were discontinued so fast because they were unable to make all this work properly with e10s.
Waterfox works fine with all my legacy extensions in multi-process mode.
toolong
Posts: 913
Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by toolong »

sepia wrote:
frg wrote:Well with Webassembly and service workers in the future no one needs to tell me about better security :)
Full Ack!
frg wrote:Personally i think they were discontinued so fast because they were unable to make all this work properly with e10s.
Waterfox works fine with all my legacy extensions in multi-process mode.

Good for you!

But what will you do when they stop working?
sepia
Posts: 8
Joined: September 5th, 2018, 5:19 am

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by sepia »

The Mechanic wrote:
sepia wrote:Waterfox works fine with all my legacy extensions in multi-process mode.

Good for you!

But what will you do when they stop working?
Why should they to begin with?
toolong
Posts: 913
Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by toolong »

sepia wrote:
The Mechanic wrote:
sepia wrote:Waterfox works fine with all my legacy extensions in multi-process mode.

Good for you!

But what will you do when they stop working?
Why should they to begin with?
You do know that Waterfox uses Firefox code? Fudged somewhat but from Firefox code. And that sooner or later their code, when updated to follow The Internet, and changed by Mozilla will change something and that your extension(s) may no longer work?

Think about it. Stuff changes.
sepia
Posts: 8
Joined: September 5th, 2018, 5:19 am

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by sepia »

The Mechanic wrote: You do know that Waterfox uses Firefox code? Fudged somewhat but from Firefox code. And that sooner or later their code, when updated to follow The Internet, and changed by Mozilla will change something and that your extension(s) may no longer work?
No matter what Mozilla does, it doesn't mean that it must impact a fork which uses their engines.
BTW, Waterfox still supports Windows XP despite of code changes made by Mozilla.
toolong
Posts: 913
Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by toolong »

BTW, Waterfox still supports Windows XP despite of code changes made by Mozilla.


Really? Why? No one else does.
sepia
Posts: 8
Joined: September 5th, 2018, 5:19 am

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by sepia »

The Mechanic wrote:
BTW, Waterfox still supports Windows XP despite of code changes made by Mozilla.


Really?
Really.
The Mechanic wrote: Why? No one else does.
Just a wild guess - could it be that Windows XP is still used by some people?

New stats show Windows XP’s market share increased
toolong
Posts: 913
Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by toolong »

sepia wrote:
The Mechanic wrote:
BTW, Waterfox still supports Windows XP despite of code changes made by Mozilla.


Really?
Really.
The Mechanic wrote: Why? No one else does.
Just a wild guess - could it be that Windows XP is still used by some people?

New stats show Windows XP’s market share increased

Did you actually read that article?
User avatar
therube
Posts: 21699
Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
Location: Maryland USA

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by therube »

Waterfox works fine with all my legacy extensions in multi-process mode.
Pertinent part is, "my".
Multi-process breaks some or parts of some extensions.
BTW, Waterfox still supports Windows XP despite of code changes made by Mozilla.
How?
Seemingly some old version, 53.0.3 did?
Current looks to be Win7+ "6.1", & x64 at that, (& regardless of what their website might show [depending on how you look at it]).
Really? Why? No one else does [care].
I would, if it were available.
Fire 750, bring back 250.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript
sepia
Posts: 8
Joined: September 5th, 2018, 5:19 am

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by sepia »

therube wrote:
Waterfox works fine with all my legacy extensions in multi-process mode.
Pertinent part is, "my".
Multi-process breaks some or parts of some extensions.
That's correct. Extensions must support multi-process, otherwise they won't work in multi-process mode.
therube wrote:
BTW, Waterfox still supports Windows XP despite of code changes made by Mozilla.
How?
Seemingly some old version, 53.0.3 did?
Current looks to be Win7+ "6.1", & x64 at that, (& regardless of what their website might show [depending on how you look at it]).
Image
Since I have no Windows XP I did never check if the download link for XP on the main page works.
I thought it were kind of a special maintained 52 ESR for XP. Checking now I realize that the link is not functional.

BTW, Waterfox got an update today, containing the latest security fixes of Firefox ESR.
User avatar
earther
Posts: 725
Joined: July 18th, 2003, 9:25 pm
Location: not a 'buntard!
Contact:

Re: What's your thoughts on what Walton said

Post by earther »

No 32-bit version. Bummer. :(
User avatar
smsmith
Moderator
Posts: 19979
Joined: December 7th, 2004, 8:51 pm
Location: Indiana

Re: off-topic Waterfox discussion split from "on what Walton

Post by smsmith »

Split from here: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic ... &t=3041567

Please refrain from the thread hijacking.
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.
Tomatoshadow2
Posts: 435
Joined: May 11th, 2017, 9:52 am

Re: off-topic Waterfox discussion split from "on what Walton

Post by Tomatoshadow2 »

As The Mechanic and therube point out your various flaws with Waterfox, I think you must remember that the Firefox code is massive. I'm glad and as I think the rest are, that there is room for Gecko. You must not forget that its much harder for smaller teams to keep up with security fixes. That's why I think its the safest way and best way to always support Mozilla's work on Firefox. The smaller forks as both of them have also pointed out, how long will they last?
Brummelchen
Posts: 4480
Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am

Re: off-topic Waterfox discussion split from "on what Walton

Post by Brummelchen »

from all alternatives Waterfox is the best choice. nevertheless when mozilla stopped 52esr there is no longer a current base to rely on - the gecko engine has to be maintained themself and/or fixes in servo have to be reversed down to gecko.
Since I have no Windows XP
there exist no reason since 4 years to keep windows xp, and Vista since a year as those are high vulnerable, xp has over 1500 flaws and vista flaws are growing. and NO browser in the world could fix it - even no antivirus is able to fix it. security is a great illusion on such systems.

btw multi-process is a feature introduced before quantum arrived. but not all legacy extensionw are usable in mp-mode.

Walton? dont know him, but maybe his family ^^
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp7_u0kcQRo
Tomatoshadow2
Posts: 435
Joined: May 11th, 2017, 9:52 am

Re: off-topic Waterfox discussion split from "on what Walton

Post by Tomatoshadow2 »

Yes well said Brummelchen, Its all about keeping Gecko safe and up to date. Yes, still surprised people use those systems, very dangerous indeed.
Post Reply