Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Firefox Changes  (Read 8221 times)
KLONDIKEMIKE
Member

Posts: 17




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: September 09, 2017, 10:00:16 AM »

I do use uBlock, and I did use noscript, and they are both there. Never mind... use whatever does the job for you. Sorry for causing so much confusion.
I stand corrected ... and there was no confusion caused by your side. I have uBlock installed on Opera and had forgotten that it was even there. I does not operate the same as on Firefox or Pale Moon ... as in not as good as. If I cannot right click on an object and uBlock it, it is a neutered extension. As for NoScript, I couldn't find it last time I looked because they put a hyphen in their name. It operates a little different but seems to be OK. There are other extensions that I require that were not found in the Opera library. Looks like I have to revisit that again for things like name changes.

There is also a smaller memory impact with Pale Moon as compared to others. This is more significant for systems that don't have 8 Gb. of memory installed.

I didn't start this thread but I appreciated your input. Its only been a few hours since installation but it will take a few weeks of operation before a final verdict is in. As it stands now, the Pale Moon w/uBlock/noscript vs Opera w/uBlock/no-script has Pale Moon out front.  

« Last Edit: September 09, 2017, 10:04:44 AM by KLONDIKEMIKE » Logged
AC7CW
Member

Posts: 962




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: September 10, 2017, 11:25:27 AM »

I like my Chrome browser because of addons: I can select text and with a right click use the context search, I can select an address and with a right click send it to google maps... I couldn't find those addons for Firefox. Things arbitrarily change with Chrome every so often without any advance warning. I think that is a reflection of the self assessed superiority of the introverts that Google has been hiring over the years.
Logged

Novice 1958, 20WPM Extra now... (and get off my lawn)
K2CD
Member

Posts: 10


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #17 on: September 10, 2017, 07:43:40 PM »


There is hope though. This afternoon I ported all my Bookmarks over to 'Pale Moon' which is a browser forked from an earlier version of Firefox. It's a slightly simpler interface BUT the browser runs like lightning!! I've never seen a browser run so fast.

So, if you are worried about the Firefox / Mozilla changes then give Pale Moon a try.

Wow.  This is good stuff!  Very fast indeed.  Thanks for the heads up, Peter. 

73,
Mike, K2CD
Logged
KI7PLD
Member

Posts: 12




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2017, 08:54:20 PM »

The earlier versions of Firefox had memory management problems.

Has Pale Moon addressed those issues?

I currently have 23 tabs open in this browser.
I have a second browser running with 19 tabs open, all different sites.
Logged
KLONDIKEMIKE
Member

Posts: 17




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: September 10, 2017, 09:13:35 PM »

... Has Pale Moon addressed those issues?
Don't know yet, working towards that. No complaints yet. Worthy of downloading and starting your own tests.

Logged
DL8OV
Member

Posts: 754




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: September 11, 2017, 05:20:25 AM »

For me there do not seem to be any memory issues. When I check for new technical blogs on YouTube I open 26 tabs at once, with Firefox this slowed things down to a crawl but with pale Moon I begin to see titles on the tabs about a second after I start.

Peter DL8OV
Logged
K4HB
Member

Posts: 232




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: September 14, 2017, 07:36:12 AM »

I currently have FireFox 55.0.3. (64 bit) I've been disappointed for a while now with it's speed. On pages where you type or scroll, it lags. I also have IE and Chrome installed, and those browsers don't have this problem. I use FF as default because of Adblock Plus, and use Chrome when I know I'll be on a page where FF normally lags way behind. I've downloaded Pale Moon install, but don't know if to install the 32 bit or 64 bit version. My system is Windows 10 64 bit, but a notice said that the 64 bit version of Pale Moon may not be compatible with some plug ins. So what about Adblock Latitude? As anyone tried this add on with Pale Moon 64 bit?
Logged

DL8OV
Member

Posts: 754




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: September 14, 2017, 10:36:39 AM »

If you're running 64-bit MS Windows then you will need to run the 64-bit version of Pale Moon, not doing so will add an extra layer of complexity to everything and possibly slow things down a bit. Adblock Latitude works just fine, I'm running it on my install right now with zero problems.

Peter DL8OV
Logged
K5WLR
Member

Posts: 226




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: September 14, 2017, 11:12:01 AM »

I tried running both 32 and 64 bit versions of Pale Moon but could not get N0HR's Propagation App to run on either version, so went back to Firefox. Any ideas why?  Huh

Will Rogers
K5WLR
Logged
KLONDIKEMIKE
Member

Posts: 17




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: September 14, 2017, 11:31:59 AM »

Those using the Adblock extension anywhere need to be aware that all is not what it seems;
https://www.wired.com/2016/03/heres-how-that-adblocker-youre-using-makes-money/

Regarding running 32bit apps/extensions on a 64bit system ... if you want legacy applications/extensions to run you run a 32bit app to run them. What good is running the 64bit app if there are known problems with it running 32bit apps? We are still in a transition stage from 32bit to 64bit.



Logged
K4HB
Member

Posts: 232




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: September 14, 2017, 11:57:39 AM »

Thanks Peter, DL8OV. I'm using Pale Moon 64 bit now, and Adblock Latitude is doing it's job. Smiley

I find PM similar to FireFox, but it's running much faster. After customizing and giving it a good test drive, I may set it as my default browser.
Logged

VA3VF
Member

Posts: 766




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: September 14, 2017, 05:31:24 PM »

I've downloaded Pale Moon install, but don't know if to install the 32 bit or 64 bit version. My system is Windows 10 64 bit, but a notice said that the 64 bit version of Pale Moon may not be compatible with some plug ins.

I still cannot see any advantage in running 64 bits, quite the contrary. I'm switching back to 32 bits, even though my Win10 installation is 64 bits. YMMV
Logged
VA3VF
Member

Posts: 766




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: September 14, 2017, 05:33:41 PM »

I tried running both 32 and 64 bit versions of Pale Moon but could not get N0HR's Propagation App to run on either version, so went back to Firefox. Any ideas why?  Huh

Will Rogers
K5WLR

I've only one issue with Pale Moon so far. It does seem to be very picky with HTTPS pages. Still trying to figure out why. Opera has no problems with the same pages.
Logged
VA3VF
Member

Posts: 766




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: September 14, 2017, 05:35:30 PM »

Thanks Peter, DL8OV. I'm using Pale Moon 64 bit now, and Adblock Latitude is doing it's job. Smiley

Try uBlock Origin. I used AdBlock for a long time, but switched, and like uBlock better.
Logged
K4HB
Member

Posts: 232




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: September 15, 2017, 08:25:28 AM »

32 bit vs 64 bit Pale Moon? This is from Moonchild, the founder...

https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=2516

Logged

Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!