I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?

--
Snag

On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 23:00:29 -0500, "Terry Coombs"
wrote:

I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?

I don't know about that, but for years, I've been losing tabs when FF
crashed, and maybe even when I closed it normally.

I'd definitely lose recently opened tabs and still have recently
closed tabs. In one case, "recent" mean anything in the last 13
hours.

So I installed Session Manager and things are much better. Maybe
perfect. I thought, since the whole purpose is to save sessions, it
would do that autmoatically,m but I think I had to go into options and
set a time that it would store the session, every N minutes, before it
actually started working. I chose 3 or 7, one of them.

On 04/26/2016 11:00 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?




For security reasons and site-rendering capabilities I'd recommend not
using an older browser.

One thing that seems to degrade Firefox is some of the add-ons which I
keep to an absolute minimum.

Additionally, there are so many alternatives.


Besides the well know Chrome there are these browsers as well:


Vivaldi

Maxthon

Brave Browser

Opera



I've been using Vivaldi a lot lately and really like it.

Maxthon is very good , especially for those who like an alternative to
Internet Explorer.

Nice thing about Opera is that XP is still supported



Brave Browser is still in Beta but has the ability to block all ads.

I've tried it and found it works fine on Win10 but (at least for me) did
not work at all on Win7

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 6:11:47 AM UTC-4, philo wrote:
On 04/26/2016 11:00 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?




For security reasons and site-rendering capabilities I'd recommend not
using an older browser.


+1

It isn't too long before older browsers typically start having problems with
newer sites.

On 2016-04-27, Terry Coombs wrote:
I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?

Stop using Firefox and change to Seamonkey. Seamonkey is from the
same ppl who bring you Firefox (Mozilla), only Seamonkey is more like
the older, much-missed, Netscape. More control, all-in-one suite,
uses same plug-ins, etc. Seamonkey is like Firefox dragged back to
its Netscape days. It has tabs, sure, but I turn 'em all off.

FF seem to be headed down that we-know-better-than-you road, the one
where a "if it ain't broke, it needs more features" mindset prevails
and non-stop bloat seem to be the goal. SM is yer solution.

Actually, SM has a lotta issue, too. Like FF, it has an ungodly
amount of bloat, already. While the user has much more control via
"preferences". It also has more intuitive interface. FF has become
so arcane, I cannot even find some features. Like, how does one "open
file"? I can no longer find this feature on regular FF menus. 8|

nb

| I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
| about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version
that
| was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
| alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
| "best" ?
|

There are stable versions periodically that get
supported. Those are designed for companies and
Linux builders who want to keep one version for
awhile. 24, 31, 38, 45 all have those "esr" versions.

http://archive.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/

It doesn't mean much for most people. It's
more important to corproate IT people who like
to test any software changes.

I currently use Pale Moon 24 with most things
disabled. I then have FF 36 wwith NoScript for
times when I need to allow an interactive webpage.
Why 36? No real reason. I generally install a new
version when necessary for some reason. If it
works I avoid anything newer because these days
newer is usually worse.
One big factor is extensions. Newer extensions
won't work with older versions. So you need to either
keep copies of the older extensions or update FF
to support newer extensions.

Aside from that I don't find any big differences.
The Mozilla people keep breaking things, so with
each new FF I install I need another 1 or 2 extensions
to fix it. So far that's worked for me. I now have
FF38 on a life support system of about 8 extensions
and some userChrome customization. But I always
fear that the next update will be unfixable.

There are also tradeoffs with functionality. Google,
especially, has become obnoxious with their constant
demanding of newer browser versions. But you can avoid
that problem to some extent by spoofing the userAgent.
(I'm on XP with FF 38 but I travel as Win7 with FF45 or
some such. I update it periodically to look generic.)

It's a rock-and-a-hard-place scenario. Firefox is
going downhill. IE was never safe to use. Edge has
broken all IE functionality and still has the fatal flaw
of being built into the OS. Chrome is spyware. Vivaldi,
which many people are talking about, is extremely
limited crapware. I can't understand why anyone likes
it.

I suspect the big difference in preferences comes
down to functionality. FF is still the only browser for
people who like to get under the hood or customize.
Browsers like Chrome and Vivaldi are a new trend in
convenience:
Consumer browsers with few controls or settings
to fret about. Just lots of big buttons on the home
screen to take you to your shopping destination.
They repesent the changing face of computers. If
you want to use a highly functional computer to do
various things then you probably want FF. If you
want to shop on a tablet or phone then Chrome may
seem better designed. I get the feeling that the
Mozilla people may be trying to straddle those two
camps, creating a self-driving shopping vehicle but
also allowing 3rd-parties to put back the steering
wheel for people who want that.

notbob writes:

Actually, SM has a lotta issue, too. Like FF, it has an ungodly
amount of bloat, already. While the user has much more control via
"preferences". It also has more intuitive interface. FF has become
so arcane, I cannot even find some features. Like, how does one "open
file"? I can no longer find this feature on regular FF menus. 8|

?

My Firefox menu:
File - Open File

Of course one could always type a URL beginning with:

file://


--
Dan Espen

On 2016-04-27, Dan Espen wrote:

notbob writes:

so arcane, I cannot even find some features. Like, how does one "open
file"? I can no longer find this feature on regular FF menus. 8|

My Firefox menu:
File - Open File

I have Firefox 24.1, which is at least 2 yrs old. The "menu" button
is 3 horiz lines, stacked vertically. I selected it and there is no
"file" selection to be seen, anywhere.

So, I finally found the "customize" feature and eventually found the
"open file" icon and I dragged/dropped it to the "regular" menu. B4
that, I used Ctrl-o from my keyboard to open a file. Problem solved,
so thanks fer that.

I use Seamonkey as my primary browser, but all locked down with
NoScript and cookies disabled. If I need real interaction with a
certain website, I'll use FF with no security plug-ins and cookies
enabled. The reason I didn't know about FF's "open file" icon is
simple. I don't use it, much. Also, Seamonkey has all that cool
old-school stuff, like full menus. It's Firefox that keeps hiding all
it's security features and claiming, "NEW! and improved". Whatta
crock.

nb

| I have Firefox 24.1, which is at least 2 yrs old. The "menu" button
| is 3 horiz lines, stacked vertically. I selected it and there is no
| "file" selection to be seen, anywhere.
|

You have to find the View options and
select Menu Bar. Then it will be back to
normal. I can't imagine what inexperienced
people do. Those bars don't imply that there's
something useful to click there.

On 2016-04-27 1:21 PM, Mayayana wrote:
| I have Firefox 24.1, which is at least 2 yrs old. The "menu" button
| is 3 horiz lines, stacked vertically. I selected it and there is no
| "file" selection to be seen, anywhere.
|

You have to find the View options and
select Menu Bar. Then it will be back to
normal. I can't imagine what inexperienced
people do. Those bars don't imply that there's
something useful to click there.


Because tapping the ALT key is so difficult.

--
Froz....

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 2016-04-27, Mayayana wrote:

You have to find the View options and
select Menu Bar. Then it will be back to
normal. I can't imagine what inexperienced
people do.

I have no "View" selection nor can I imagine what yer talking about.

nb --experienced enough to dump Windows

On 2016-04-27, FrozenNorth wrote:

Because tapping the ALT key is so difficult.

Not a case of difficulty, but of knowledge.

I knew of ALT-f (first letter of menu group) from my old browser days,
but did not know merely "tapping the ALT key" would pop-up a usable
menu. Again, more due to ignorance from lack of use, than anything
else. Thank you, kindly, fer that excellent tip.

nb

On 4/26/2016 11:00 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?


How about the original Mosaic if you have a turn of the century
computer... ftp://ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/Windows/v3.0/

notbob writes:

On 2016-04-27, Dan Espen wrote:

notbob writes:

so arcane, I cannot even find some features. Like, how does one "open
file"? I can no longer find this feature on regular FF menus. 8|

My Firefox menu:
File - Open File

I have Firefox 24.1, which is at least 2 yrs old. The "menu" button
is 3 horiz lines, stacked vertically. I selected it and there is no
"file" selection to be seen, anywhere.

You have the Menu Bar turned off.
Select View - Toolbars - Menu Bar

So, I finally found the "customize" feature and eventually found the
"open file" icon and I dragged/dropped it to the "regular" menu. B4
that, I used Ctrl-o from my keyboard to open a file. Problem solved,
so thanks fer that.

I use Seamonkey as my primary browser, but all locked down with
NoScript and cookies disabled. If I need real interaction with a

I've been using NoScript for a while now.
Every once in a while I'll get confused since one or more
site functions won't work. But for someone that is willing
to deal with those kind of issues, I almost recommend NoScript.

Stopping cookies? I don't see the point.
There is private browsing.

certain website, I'll use FF with no security plug-ins and cookies
enabled. The reason I didn't know about FF's "open file" icon is
simple. I don't use it, much. Also, Seamonkey has all that cool
old-school stuff, like full menus. It's Firefox that keeps hiding all
it's security features and claiming, "NEW! and improved". Whatta
crock.

Hmm...

--
Dan Espen

notbob writes:

On 2016-04-27, Mayayana wrote:

You have to find the View options and
select Menu Bar. Then it will be back to
normal. I can't imagine what inexperienced
people do.

I have no "View" selection nor can I imagine what yer talking about.

nb --experienced enough to dump Windows

Of course you have no View selection, you have the menu bar turned off.
Try Alt-V.

--
Dan Espen

On 04/27/2016 07:30 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 6:11:47 AM UTC-4, philo wrote:
On 04/26/2016 11:00 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?




For security reasons and site-rendering capabilities I'd recommend not
using an older browser.


+1

It isn't too long before older browsers typically start having problems with
newer sites.




I've been using Vivaldi extensively for the past few days and really
like it.

Some here may want to give it a try.

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 05:11:44 -0500, philo wrote:

On 04/26/2016 11:00 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?




For security reasons and site-rendering capabilities I'd recommend not
using an older browser.

One thing that seems to degrade Firefox is some of the add-ons which I
keep to an absolute minimum.

Additionally, there are so many alternatives.


Besides the well know Chrome there are these browsers as well:


Vivaldi

Maxthon

Brave Browser

Opera



I've been using Vivaldi a lot lately and really like it.

Maxthon is very good , especially for those who like an alternative to
Internet Explorer.

Nice thing about Opera is that XP is still supported



Brave Browser is still in Beta but has the ability to block all ads.

I've tried it and found it works fine on Win10 but (at least for me) did
not work at all on Win7




I wont even use FF above version 20. What once was a great browser is
not a bloated memory hogging piece of ****.

Seamonkey and Kmeleon work well and are more what FF used to be.

I wont even touch Chrome with all the built in spyware.

I never even heard of Vivaldi. I'll have to try it.

Opera is total and complete garbage. I hated it in the 90's and still
hate it after trying nearly every version until 3 or 4 years ago, when I
decided that it will never get any better so the hell with it.

Never heard of Brave Browser either.

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 13:25:36 -0500, My 2 Cents wrote:

On 4/26/2016 11:00 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?


How about the original Mosaic if you have a turn of the century
computer... ftp://ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/Windows/v3.0/

Why bother with Mosaic, when you can install and run SLIPKNOT from Dos.
That was the first graphical browser, and it ran from dos. I still have
the installer, and Mosaic as well.

On 04/29/2016 08:35 PM, wrote:
Seamonkey and Kmeleon work well and are more what FF used to be.

You might try Pale Moon. Seamonkey is tied to the Firefox code base.
Pale Moon is a fork going its separate way with the Goanna engine rather
than Gecko.

Pale Moon does require processors with the SSE2 instruction set but that
includes almost anything in the last 15 years other than elderly AMD
processors like the Athlon XP.

On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 10:37:37 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 05:11:44 -0500, philo wrote:

On 04/26/2016 11:00 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
I think it was on this group that there was a discussion a while back
about older versions of Firefox . Seems there was a particular version that
was stable and very functional , but before it got too bloated . I have
alink to the older version library , anyone remember which version was the
"best" ?

For security reasons and site-rendering capabilities I'd recommend not
using an older browser.

One thing that seems to degrade Firefox is some of the add-ons which I
keep to an absolute minimum.

Additionally, there are so many alternatives.


Besides the well know Chrome there are these browsers as well:

Vivaldi

Maxthon

Brave Browser

Opera

I've been using Vivaldi a lot lately and really like it.

Maxthon is very good , especially for those who like an alternative to
Internet Explorer.

Nice thing about Opera is that XP is still supported

Brave Browser is still in Beta but has the ability to block all ads.

I've tried it and found it works fine on Win10 but (at least for me) did
not work at all on Win7

I wont even use FF above version 20. What once was a great browser is
not a bloated memory hogging piece of ****.

Seamonkey and Kmeleon work well and are more what FF used to be.

I wont even touch Chrome with all the built in spyware.

I never even heard of Vivaldi. I'll have to try it.

Opera is total and complete garbage. I hated it in the 90's and still
hate it after trying nearly every version until 3 or 4 years ago, when I
decided that it will never get any better so the hell with it.

Never heard of Brave Browser either.

On my big computer at home, I have Internet Explorer, Torch Browser, Pale Moon, Firefox and Maxthon Cloud Browser. Torch has a torrent downloader function built-in. If something doesn't look right or display on one browser, I can switch to another. With a Chromebook, I'm stuck with the Chrome Browser. I miss all the toys I have at home. O_o

[8~{} Uncle Browser Monster

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 21:58:46 -0600, rbowman wrote:

On 04/29/2016 08:35 PM, wrote:
Seamonkey and Kmeleon work well and are more what FF used to be.

You might try Pale Moon. Seamonkey is tied to the Firefox code base.
Pale Moon is a fork going its separate way with the Goanna engine rather
than Gecko.

Pale Moon does require processors with the SSE2 instruction set but that
includes almost anything in the last 15 years other than elderly AMD
processors like the Athlon XP.

About 2 or 3 years ago, I tried to install it. It refused to install.
The computer was not a top of the line new machine, but it was no slug
either. I dont recall what processor it had. I no longer have the
computer, since I sold it. All I know is I was running XP-pro, SP3.

On 04/30/2016 04:20 AM, wrote:
About 2 or 3 years ago, I tried to install it. It refused to install.
The computer was not a top of the line new machine, but it was no slug
either. I dont recall what processor it had. I no longer have the
computer, since I sold it. All I know is I was running XP-pro, SP3.

It probably was an AMD processor. Intel came up with the SSE2
instructions and it took a while for AMD to implement them. There was
nothing wrong with the AMD's and I preferred them but they just didn't
have SSE2.

A few years ago we were trying to install software from a major GIS
company. The installation went fine on most machines, but failed on
others with no reported errors. I worked with the company to solve the
problem and it turned out to be SSE2. They weren't even aware of it. The
compiler optimizations used the instructions by default and everything
they tested on was Intel. I wound up writing a little assembler program
to incorporate into our installation package. It was only a few lines
but tried to use a SSE2 instruction. If it failed, we knew the software
could not be installed on that machine.

As a user, I have no problem with older machines and operating systems.
However, when I put my programmer hat on for my day job, supporting
older systems is a pain in the ass. My approach is if our software runs
on your Windows 2000 box, great. If it doesn't, you're SOL.