Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Saturday February 11 2017, @02:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the mozilla-killa dept.

Fans of the Pale Moon web browser are probably already aware of this, but version 27.1 has been released as of February 9th, 2017. This update brings a number of improvements, some of them pretty major; here's a handful that I think are worth noting:

This version introduces the so-called "PMkit" modules, our effort to restore most compatibility with Firefox Jetpack/SDK extensions

Reworked the media back-end completely (thanks Travis!) to use FFmpeg (including support for FFmpeg v3 and MP3 playback) and our own MP4 parser, and no longer relying on gstreamer on Linux

Changed the way scripts are handled when they are stopped from the "unresponsive script" dialog, to prevent browser lockup

Made the use of let as a keyword versionless and ES6 compliant

You can read the full release notes in the forum thread about it or on the release notes page.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 12 2017, @06:26AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 12 2017, @06:26AM (#466037)

    Man, what a sense of entitlement. The dev was right, there are other browsers you can use, maintaining a whole bunch of accessibility code is a lot of work that could be put into other areas they are more interested in.
    Demanding that every application cater to the disabled is like requiring every vehicle on the road have a wheelchair lift. Some vehicles need one, and some vehicles in each class should have one, but fitting them to every car on the road just because of the ADA would be stupid and wasteful.

    Also, it is still open source, if you don't like what they are doing, fork it and fix it.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Flamebait=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 1) by ShadowSystems on Sunday February 12 2017, @07:08AM

    by ShadowSystems (6185) <ShadowSystemsNO@SPAMGmail.com> on Sunday February 12 2017, @07:08AM (#466047)

    Entitlement? No. Age proofing. Yes.
    We all get old, Our eyesight gets worse. We need glasses, magnifiers, screens that can zoom to 100x normal magnification, or a screen reader if vision fails entirely.
    What good are all your "pretty icons" if there's no AltText to go with them that your glasses, magnifier, zooming, or screen reader can make heads nor tails of to let you interact with them?
    By having removed a part of the browser that was already present in the original, a part the original creaters were perfectly capable of coding to let old folks use, then what does that say about the PM folks?
    They didn't feel like catering to anyone without perfect vision, perfect reflexes, & perfect intuition about what all those icons mean.
    I'm not "entitled" to a browser that is accessible, I just expect a bunch of devs not to prove themselves intentional morally bankrupt assholes that deserve to be forced to use their own non-compliant browser when their own sight fails, reactions get worse (hello arthritus, Parkenson's, or any other form of muscular degeneration), & their memory get patchy with age.

    And the "don't like it, fork it, write your own" is just bullshit.
    I am not a programmer. I don't write code. But now I'm supposed to somehow teach myself how to do so to fix something that I didn't break in the first place.
    Using your logic, don't ever take your car in for any repairs because "don't like it? Fix it your damn self!"
    Can you see how fucked up that attitude is, or are you more blind than the blind guy pointing it out to you?

    Every. Other. Browser. seems to be able to do accessibility to some degree or another.
    Some do it better than others, some suck, but PM is the only one I've run across thus far that has gone out of it's way to *REMOVE IT ALTOGETHER*.
    If the PM devs find it too difficult to code for accessibility, they shouldn't be calling themselves coders in the first place.
    If everyone else can do it, why can't you?

    • (Score: 2, Disagree) by ThatIrritatingGuy on Friday February 17 2017, @09:47AM

      by ThatIrritatingGuy (5857) on Friday February 17 2017, @09:47AM (#468153)

      > Every. Other. Browser. seems to be able to do accessibility to some degree or another.
      So why can't you use one of them instead?

      PM is filling a specific niche - a stripped-down version of Firefox. It is obvious from your comment that it is not for you. By insisting that the last browser that does not cater to your special needs do so, you show a very strong sense of entitlement.