Jump to content

Pale Moon vs. Firefox


Olexijl

Recommended Posts

Just found this here:

Edited by Olexijl
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 21
  • Views 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Olexijl

    4

  • spudboy

    4

  • dcs18

    4

  • Myna

    2

Top Posters In This Topic

That is why i have switched to Pale Moon long ago. And i don't regret it. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Alhaitham

Using Firefox here

They are the same to me

Pale Moon just integrates addons to its code and changes some about:config values

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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 by Olexijl
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Bigmedion

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 by Bigmedion
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'm mainly using Palemoon over FF because I have far less browser crashes. No Flash problems or freezes.

Works very well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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

I'm no expert on these two programs, but isn't every one of those things also true for PaleMoon (portable, x64)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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 by spudboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites


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:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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 - 3714
Pale Moon 24.5 x64 - 3155

http://html5test.com/
Firefox 28.0 x86 - 467
Pale Moon 24.5 x64 - 458

http://octane-benchmark.googlecode.com/svn/latest/index.html
Firefox 28.0 x86 - 25826
Pale Moon 24.5 x64 - 18502

Edited by spudboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites


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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


It's not a fair comparison as far as I am concerned, he should include Waterfox & Cyberfox as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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 by dcs18
Link to comment
Share on other sites


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 by spudboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites


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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...