Olexijl Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) Just found this here:Interested in comparing Pale Moon and Firefox features? Have a look at the following table for a brief overview: https://t.co/IDMvKsHUbb— Pale Moon (@palemoonbrowser) 3. Mai 2014 Edited May 4, 2014 by Olexijl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olexijl Posted May 4, 2014 Author Share Posted May 4, 2014 That is why i have switched to Pale Moon long ago. And i don't regret it. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alhaitham Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Using Firefox hereThey are the same to mePale Moon just integrates addons to its code and changes some about:config values Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myna Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 I do have palemoon installed. That's just for testing certain website related things as my main browser (Firefox) is loaded with the required Addons. The palemoon I have is naked.Palemoon is OK. but nothing major to lure me to shift towards it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olexijl Posted May 4, 2014 Author Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) Really, if you want Australis that much - you can keep Firefox. As for me, that was the major reason for switching.And i would really recommend to view the comparison table here. Edited May 4, 2014 by Olexijl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigmedion Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) Hi,I prefer Cyberfox, optimised for 64 bits, use it's own profile ( from version 28.01), don't use this Australis S**t, and have a really good support via the 8Pcx forum, the Firefox extension remains compatible Edited May 4, 2014 by Bigmedion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myna Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Learn to adapt, boys. Or else you'll fall behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avmad Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 I'm mainly using Palemoon over FF because I have far less browser crashes. No Flash problems or freezes.Works very well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rseiler Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Hi,I prefer Cyberfox, optimised for 64 bits, use it's own profile ( from version 28.01), don't use this Australis S**t, and have a really good support via the 8Pcx forum, the Firefox extension remains compatibleI'm no expert on these two programs, but isn't every one of those things also true for PaleMoon (portable, x64)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kadrex Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Yeah, been using Palemoon for years now. Only thing I missed for a while was the removal of Panorama. The Palemoon dev released an addon to fix but was always buggy for me. I make do using TabGroups Manager. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudboy Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 (edited) Using a 64 bit browser has been discussed here several times. It offers little to no improvements, and in some cases even hinders performance. As far as Australis goes, just use the Firefox Classic Theme Restorer add-on and you have your per Australis theme back - with additional user preferences to tweak. I personally have it set to look like pre-Australis but also set it to use the Australis type rounded tabs. Not everything on that chart is accurate either. For example, you can in fact customize the address bar. Edited May 5, 2014 by spudboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 That file has been uploaded by a Pale Moon employee without taking into consideration the CTR add-on which renders almost every No & Limited in that chart to Yes.As for the 64-bit, (on both my systems - Windows 7 Ultimate and Windows 8.1 Update) nothing comes close to the awesome performance of the Firefox Nightlies - they outperform even the Australis on the very same profile. :showoff: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyes Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 Palemoon is working fine for me.... i like it better than Firefox... Give better speed for me ..... as of now just using Palemoon 32 bit because of some problem with sandboxie and 64 bit flash plugin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 My only problem with a x64-bit browser is that the best password manager for me, RoboForm refuses to work with it - otherwise a 64-bit browser owns it's little x32-bit cousin, any day.Those who fail to find a performance boost with a x64-bit browser would do well to start off from scratch - full clean installation with a new profile after due clearing of all debris from past installations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olexijl Posted May 6, 2014 Author Share Posted May 6, 2014 That file has been uploaded by a Pale Moon employee without taking into consideration the CTR add-on which renders almost every No & Limited in that chart to Yes.As for the 64-bit, (on both my systems - Windows 7 Ultimate and Windows 8.1 Update) nothing comes close to the awesome performance of the Firefox Nightlies - they outperform even the Australis on the very same profile. :showoff:Yeah, you may be right. I already know enough about CTR - i even tried it out. However there are people who do not like Firefox even with CTR, because the codebase have been remade and many things still work "new way" even with CTR using.One of the reasons for switching was that the dev of Pale Moon does not want to have that silly "rapid updates" thing you have on FF and Chrome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudboy Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 (edited) I just ran Firefox 28.0 against PaleMoon 24.5 x64 with the Peackeeper browser test. Firefox 28.0 (x86) won. The only time an x64 browser is of any use, is when you have 2GB worth of tabs open at the same time. Not only Peacekeeper, but several other tests also show that there is absolutely little to no gain when using an x64 browser... and as previously stated it can even hinder performance vs a 32 browser. If you're seeing any performance increase with normal browsing, it's either a placebo or the person can tell a difference of nanoseconds.http://peacekeeper.futuremark.com/Firefox 28.0 x86 - 3714Pale Moon 24.5 x64 - 3155http://html5test.com/Firefox 28.0 x86 - 467Pale Moon 24.5 x64 - 458http://octane-benchmark.googlecode.com/svn/latest/index.htmlFirefox 28.0 x86 - 25826Pale Moon 24.5 x64 - 18502 Edited May 7, 2014 by spudboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalju Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Pale Moon is the repaired Firefox. In addition, it is the only one, which has a really working 64-bit version. The others (Waterfox, Cyberfox) - there usually something is working, but much more as "something" don't work at all. It is also always available Pale Moon .exe, portable.paf.exe and .zip versions.Firefox final - it is simply the Pale Moon pre-alfa version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mlauzon Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 It's not a fair comparison as far as I am concerned, he should include Waterfox & Cyberfox as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I'm glad I don't need to resort to benchmarking to be able to discern the more than perceptible difference in performance between a x64-bit program and a x32-bit program. :showoff: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudboy Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I'm glad I don't need to resort to benchmarking to be able to discern the more than perceptible difference in performance between a x64-bit program and a x32-bit program. :showoff:LoL! You're having a placebo effect. There's not a chance in hell that you can see nanoseconds, if any, of performance improvement unless you have enough tabs open or running something in your browser that is 2+GB. It's been discussed here, by many tech sites, and tons of other places. You're trying to dispute something with factual and technical evidence. Just because there is an x64 version of an app, doesn't 100% of the time mean it's faster. It just doesn't work that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) I'm glad I don't need to resort to benchmarking to be able to discern the more than perceptible difference in performance between a x64-bit program and a x32-bit program. :showoff:There's not a chance in hell . . . . . . . . .Ah, that's the problem - I'm not there . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . are you??? :coolwink: Edited May 8, 2014 by dcs18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudboy Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) I'm glad I don't need to resort to benchmarking to be able to discern the more than perceptible difference in performance between a x64-bit program and a x32-bit program. :showoff:There's not a chance in hell . . . . . . . . .Ah, that's the problem - I'm not there . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . are you??? :coolwink:Sometimes I think I might be. :P Edited May 8, 2014 by spudboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.