As pointed out in another comment [0], apparently it’s extremely outdated. Other comments describe it as unstable and lacking Apple Silicon builds. If you’re just looking for a version of Firefox without the user-hostile parts, this ain’t exactly it. From my months-old research such a thing doesn’t really seem to exist yet, but I definitely think it should. It could perhaps initially be shipped as a set of patches to…
This doesn’t paint a clear picture. There are two versions of Waterfox: Classic, based on Gecko 56 that has backported security patches (but is not recommended to be used unless you are desperate to use XUL extensions) and the 3rd Generation (G3) based on ESR releases. Waterfox Classic is based on XUL and while we back port security patches as best we can, I always try motivate existing users to migrate to the newer…
Waterfox Browser
101–105 of 105 posts
Re: Waterfox Browser
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I do use Firefox on mobile, I'm talking about the desktop version, like most people do. The latest rendering improvements are showing great results, and hardware acceleration on Linux is now on part with Windows, so it's fantastic to use on a modern laptop.
Does Firefox do hardware acceleration for videos yet? It still does it in software by default on Linux as far as I know, unless this has changed recently?
Re: Waterfox Browser
#103I customised Firefox fairly heavily, with an assortment of over a dozen addons I'd just accumulated over the years. Firefox Quantum broke all but 2 of them and destroyed the program's usefulness to me.
Waterfox imported my profile intact and allows me to keep my customisations.
I have a vertical tab bar on the left (flat _not_ hierarchical) which is also merged with the bookmarks toolbar, also flattened. I have two download managers, one for ordinary small downloads in a tab, and another that can resume downloads, segment and parallelise large downloads, detect and bypass redirect pages and so on. Another addon automatically detects [Next] links and preloads the content into the first page, so you a big single page instead of multiple sub-pages. Another supplies anonymous login details from a shared public database. Another sorts and dedupes my several thousand bookmarks.
Oh, and on Ubuntu with Unity, Waterfox's menu bar automatically appears in my top panel. Firefox for some baffling reason hides its menu bar, but if enabled, it doesn't go into the top panel and instead wastes a strip of my laptop's fairly small screen.
And so on and so on. Firefox Quantum destroyed all this and delivers an IMHO fairly poor user experience which is as bad as Chrome's and in no way preferable to Chrome.
I have found some workarounds, for instance a vertical tab bar, but I have to enable a setting that enables user customisation, then I have to add a subdirectory to my profile and put some CSS in it in order to hide the crappy horizontal tabs and the pointless header row in the sidebar. It's a pain. WebExtensions are sad crippled little things compared to the power of XUL and they don't allow you to to really change the UI of the browser.
My impression is that today's Firefox developers don't really know or understand what people did with the tools that turn-of-the-century Mozilla provided us with. Since they didn't have a clue what was possible, they decided to rip the whole lot out and fob us off with pathetic Chrome-style extensions, Chrome-style tabs, and Chrome-style lack of customisability.
So I switched to a power user's browser that still lets me do this stuff.
There is no cost to me and contrary to what other commenters claim I can see no performance difference whatsoever. I have kept Firefox around on my Linux boxes because Github bitches about Waterfox, and apart from being much more clunky, Firefox 93 gives me nothing at all. No better speed, no better stability, about 1% of the selection of addons and they're crippled things.
TBH I thought this would be a temporary thing, but it's been four years now and Waterfox Classic is still going strong.
Mozilla, OTOH, has totally lost its way and seems to be flailing.
Re: Waterfox Browser
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Copyright renewal is a real thing. Not in most jurisdictions, no. What's your country where copyright renewal is still a thing? (no judgement here, despite all my hatred for copyright i'd rather have copyright renewal than copyright until 50y after death of all editors/compositors/authors as we have in Europe)
Pretty much all jurisdictions. Even in Europe the copyright is extended if you alter a work.
Re: Waterfox Browser
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Copyright renewal is a real thing. Not in most jurisdictions, no. What's your country where copyright renewal is still a thing? (no judgement here, despite all my hatred for copyright i'd rather have copyright renewal than copyright until 50y after death of all editors/compositors/authors as we have in Europe)
The United States: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_renewal_in_the_Unite... Moreover, under United States law, new editions of a preexisting work are considered "derivative works" and in these cases "the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work." [1] SIGNIFICANTLY, this U.S. government source explicitly mentions the following as cases of der…
Thanks, i was not aware that was still a thing!