Has anybody else tried Pale Moon (browser) and had any good success with it?

[superfifthgear]

I recently downloaded and installed both the x86 version, and XP/Atom version (specifically designed to run on low-powered processors) of Pale Moon after having the browser recommended to me because of its supposedly low CPU-usage – this appealed to me because I am using an older dual-core machine. Both versions installed perfectly fine, as expected. I also liked the interface of the browser once it launched, however, I noticed that neither version was particularly fast when I was navigating the web, and the x86 version (now the most up to date version because the Atom/XP version of the program is an older version) actually crashed, and froze while loading YouTube. I thought that was odd because that’s never happened to me when I’ve been using any other browser, and gave it the benefit of the doubt. I then tried to play a YouTube video; on both Firefox and Chrome I can easily play 480P videos and 720P as long as the video is at the standard 30FPS, rather than 60FPS. Running Pale Moon I selected “720P” for the quality (by default it had set itself to 480P) and the videos just froze, and were constantly freezing and buffering. Again, not good.

I then opened my favourite browser to use on older computers, Opera (browser with an interface very similar to Google Chrome, despite Google Chrome not being supported on either Windows XP, or Vista – my operating system on this computer that I’m typing this out on), and because I had copied the link on YouTube I pasted it, loaded the page and by default the browser had set itself to 720P and began playing the same video issue free.

Currently, that’s about as far as my experience with Pale Moon goes, and in my personal opinion I would have to recommend Opera if you want a fast and secure web browser to use on an older computer. Failing that I would just stick with Firefox which will be supported for another couple of years on both operating systems. Has anybody else tried Pale Moon? What are other people’s thoughts on it?

 

[Alabalcho]

You would be served much better if you post this question in the PaleMoon support section.

On "old computers", modern web is going to be slow. JavaScript is being widely used, and it needs CPU and RAM - as simply as that.

 

[superfifthgear]

You would be served much better if you post this question in the PaleMoon support section.

On "old computers", modern web is going to be slow. JavaScript is being widely used, and it needs CPU and RAM - as simply as that.

Thank you for your reply - I will do. I completely understand that, however why is a browser that's specifically designed to work with older hardware even worse with managing system resources in terms of performance than a browser that isn't made for older machines? That was more my question.

 

[mailheroine]

Yes, the performance is not good. But worse is that the Moonchild (yes, this is what the dev calls himself, lmao) thinks he should decide what software users get to install:

https/forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=16504

 

[alwan.rosyidi]

Palemoon runs very well on Linux machine. I'm using it on my ubuntu 16.04 and it runs blazingly fast compared to regular firefox. I don't know about the performance in windows machines, because I haven't using windows for a long while.