Why are you responding to a very old thread? The system we tested these 64-bit browsers on was a Dell Inspiron 1440 notebook, running a 2. And from May 12, 2015, to November 12, 2015, Waterfox had its own exclusive charity search engine called Storm. Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date 5 Dec 24, 2018 0 Nov 13, 2018 1 Aug 5, 2018 2 Aug 4, 2018 1 Apr 21, 2018 2 Aug 20, 2017 1 Jun 18, 2017 2 Jan 27, 2017 3 Jan 18, 2017 2 Oct 11, 2016 2 Apr 24, 2016 G 3 Mar 12, 2016 3 Feb 23, 2016 2 Aug 30, 2015 1 Aug 11, 2015 4 Jun 20, 2015 1 Jun 9, 2015 2 Jan 12, 2015 1 Jul 24, 2014 7 Feb 1, 2012. However there are still a few important things to know. I would say - try it! So I am hoping that someone in this forum will give some advice on whether either Pale Moon or Waterfox has any advantages over Firefox. However, in 2016 64-bit Waterfox performed worse than 64-bit in the Kraken, SunSpider, JetStream, and Octane 2. Did anyone mention Waterfox using the firefox profile? I certainly think there are better 'ways' to solve the problem I want solved I was hundreds of webpages immediately accessible when I click on them, and I want them all displayed in a list so tabs that's constantly viewable.
Also there are no others that seem to address the problem I mentioned. Comparing the two for performance, Waterfox is a little faster but yet more bugs. I haven't gotten a chance to try Waterfox yet because you can't open the two at the same time, and Firefox is just continuously open and has thousands of tabs I haven't had time to sort through yet. The reasons I do that aren't really relevant either. There are official releases for including a portable version , , and.
It made a name for itself by being a 64-bit browser based on the Mozilla Firefox code when Mozilla only offered 32-bit versions. I know the obvious answer is to not have 485 tabs open but its 2014 for gawds sake. You can read details at its. Yes, this does mean by having the three tabs open of webmail, Facebook and Netflix that Waterfox will explode up to half-a-gig of memory use just by sitting there just like Firefox does. Startup and shutdown would show no major difference in speed. Now assume I'm extremely hyperactive and work on about 25 personal projects at once, each having web-data I want to open and being unrelated to each other. I suspect anyone saying this just doesn't know anything about Waterfox, or similar browsers e.
Other than your personal opinion s you can not offer much information. I used Waterfox sucessfully for quite a while before I had to quit using it because of an issue. How is it for security? I keep around 12 windows open, each with at least 12+ tabs. I find cyberfox to be the best option out of waterfox or palemoon reason why is waterfox is very slow updating in security issues and palemoon is always on and older code base with supposed back porting of security updates. Keeping Waterfox 56 around was just a courtesy to those who still need some legacy add-on which haven't been updated yet.
Im afraid thats not even remotely true. I understand the per process address space limit for x32 executables, but most of the time that black Firefox window issue occurs with Firefox only using about 1-1. Now Firefox is available in a 64-bit version. Mozilla also does not provide a 64-bit version of Firefox Beta for Windows 64-bit. Up to you to figure out. Adding them to the directory means more work to keep them up to date and more confusion for the end user. When I queried the folks at Pale Moon and Waterfox about how their browsers are different from Firefox, the answers I got back referred me to lists of modules or other features of their respective browsers that have been added, removed, substituted, modified, turned on or turned off, none of which I am computer-literate enough even remotely to understand.
With 400+ tabs open, you seem to simply be running out of memory. Once a port is running there's often a large number of critical test failure and correctness issues. It's more used, but I was asking for the functionality spec. No, this is not an accusation of laziness whatsoever. Try Waterfox for yourself and see if it works fro you. Each open tab consumes resources. Now, the developer is doing the same thing again, basing this new version largely on the pre-Quantum Firefox code.
I think what he is trying say, politely I might add, that since you have already made your choice you participate there and not here. I have found that some extensions and web pages behave and load differently between the two. And if we judge impartiality by the useragents than you should take a look at yours first. Out of curiousity, I revisited this. Otherwise, some Flash sites and media may not run when you use one of these 64-bit web browsers. Waterfox is based on Firefox and is compiled using various compilers and using Intel's Math Kernel.
Which was already answered above. If you decide to install any of these 64-bit browsers, we suggest you still keep the 32-bit version of Firefox on your system. Does anyone know how to do this? There's not much point adding a Chrome or Firefox-derived browser when it doesn't add anything. Having said that I would first try to offer solutions in regular Firefox to see if they satisfy the poster. Only when you click on them, they load. It could not be uninstalled, but it could be disabled which we did prior to testing. However, other than Chrome, all other browsers are either in low single digits or headed that way.
Since I started using the heavy script, Firefox crashes almost once a day and Palemoon crashes once every 3rd day. . Im nowhere near to running out of memory. So trying waterfox is as easy as trying on new shoes, you can just go on walking. That, my friend, is a problem.