Octopuss Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I switched to Pale Moon (FF clone/fork) about a year ago and am absolutely happy with it. If you are unhappy with Firefox but don't want to use something drastically different, this might be a browser for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynthetikHD Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 (edited) I really want to switch from Chrome to something else, but there is just waaay to many to switch to, so I'm totally clueless. ChromiumComodo DragonCyberfoxFirefox BetaIceCatIceDragonPale MoonWaterfox Edit:Firefox Developer EditionFirefox ESRFirefox NightlySeaMonkey Edited August 30, 2015 by SynthetikHD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Firefox Nightly is nothing more than nightly builds so you might scratch this one off your list. Firefox Beta is nothing more than a beta taken from the nightly builds so you might scratch this one off your list. Firefox Developer Edition is essentially Firefox with a lot of developer tool plugins so you can scratch this one off your list. Firefox ESR is an extended support release of Firefox and is theoretically a more stable release of Firefox with fewer updates. This one should be updated much less frequently than regular Firefox. IceCat is Firefox without the commercial plugins and a GNU license. It may be worth a look if you're into this sort of thing. SeaMonkey is Firefox, email and newsgroup client, RSS/Atom feed reader, HTML editor, IRC chat, and web development tools. This might be a bit much if all you need is a browser. Waterfox is fast... because it's built with the Intel C++ compiler instead of the Microsoft C++ compiler or gcc? This should whittle your list down a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynthetikHD Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Updated post. Don't need dev tools and waaay too much stuff in SeaMonkey. Getting updates faster comes with advantages and disadvantages, so not sure about those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 The Firefox nightly builds aren't even guaranteed to work, so take this into consideration. These are primarily intended for testing so cross this one off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynthetikHD Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Updated again. Yes I guess Nightly can be too unstable and it does say it is for testing.I also took of Firefox ESR as they don't get any updates for a whole year. Definitely don't want that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phazer11 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Cyberfox > Waterfox > Pale Moon > Firefox > Torch ~ Chrome 64-bit​Comodo and it's various flavors would be better if they had more plugin support and such but they're fairly solid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynthetikHD Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I know that Firefox will be 64-bit on September 22nd, so will that basically eliminate Cyberfox/Waterfox/Pale Moon if that's all they do? I also know that Firefox Beta has been 64-bit for quite a while now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Octopuss Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 so will that basically eliminate Cyberfox/Waterfox/Pale Moon if that's all they do? I suggest you read a little bit before jumping to conclusions. It's definitely not the case of Pale Moon, which is basically a different browser by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynthetikHD Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 (edited) Wasn't jumping to conclusions. I've done a lot of reading and everyone has a strong opinion when it comes to web browsers, lol. As far as I can tell, the only substantial differences between Pale Moon and FF are:64-bitUses FF's old UISome extensions don't work Edited August 30, 2015 by SynthetikHD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechAngel85 Posted August 31, 2015 Author Share Posted August 31, 2015 That's basically what I got about Pale Moon as well. I've used both Cyberfox and Waterfox before without being particularly impressed. So far my memory usage hasn't climbed so a plugin might be to blame for the high memory usage. I'll give it a few more days of regular use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynthetikHD Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Sorry about kinda derailing the thread from Firefox memory usage to finding out the best browser, Tech. Though maybe if I can figure out which is best you'll switch and not have to worry about it aha. And yeah, I guess I'm not really impressed with Pale Moon or Cyberfox either since there is hardly any performance gain if any at all from 64-bit from what I've looked up, and even less impressed since Firefox is getting 64-bit support really soon.ChromiumComodo DragonFirefox BetaIceCatIceDragonWaterfoxPotentially remove:Cyberfox - 64 bit Pale Moon Anyone else have any thoughts? Edited August 31, 2015 by SynthetikHD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechAngel85 Posted August 31, 2015 Author Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'm cool with it. Stuff like this interests me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Octopuss Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Wasn't jumping to conclusions. I've done a lot of reading and everyone has a strong opinion when it comes to web browsers, lol. As far as I can tell, the only substantial differences between Pale Moon and FF are:64-bitUses FF's old UISome extensions don't work https://www.palemoon.org/technical.shtml#Firefox_Differences Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynthetikHD Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Those still seem like the only three noticeable differences. And after looking up Pale Moon some more, I've came across three benchmarks that show Pale Moon was slower than Firefox each time interestingly. Edit:After spending a lot of time looking up those other Firefox open-source forks, I came to the conclusion that while they are 64-bit, that results in almost no performance gain (because honestly, when is your browser using more than 4GB of ram???) and basically vanilla Firefox outperformed all of them in benchmarks. I'll list a few I saved but I came across a few more I'm too lazy to look up again that said the same thing, Firefox is almost always faster, starts faster, and uses less ram. https://www.softpedia.com/reviews/windows/Cyberfox-Review-470007.shtmlhttps://www.softpedia.com/reviews/windows/Waterfox-Review-445085.shtmlhttps://www.networkworld.com/article/2185649/applications/fast-firefox-faceoff--nightly-vs--pale-moon-vs--waterfox.htmlhttps://portableapps.com/node/39509 If anyone wants my opinion on the best browser, it's this. If you want speed and good performance, Google Chrome is the way to go if you don't care about Google knowing everything you do.If you do care about privacy, Firefox Beta is the best because it's stable unlike Firefox Nightly, and you get performance updates and bug fixes a month before all regular Firefox users. Edited August 31, 2015 by SynthetikHD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now