SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Mozilla is rebranding Firefox. The company is asking for feedback on the new look, which will try to cover the various Firefox offerings. For most people, Firefox refers to a browser, but the company wants the brand to encompass all the various apps and services that the Firefox family of internet products cover, “from easy screenshotting and file sharing to innovative ways to access the internet using voice and virtual reality.” The fox with a flaming tail “doesn’t offer enough design tools to represent this entire product family,” Mozilla believes. Instead of recoloring the logo and dissecting the fox, the company wants to start from scratch. That said, the name “Firefox” is staying, so Mozilla doesn’t have that much wiggle room.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Mozilla is Rebranding Firefox and Wants Your Opinion
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 75 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Tax reform means "Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind
the tree."
-- Russell Long
(Score: 2) by Kell on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:33PM (4 children)
Any feedback on how Waterfox compares to Palemoon?
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 3, Informative) by toddestan on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:50AM (2 children)
Waterfox until recently was basically an alternative build of Firefox with some of the questionable stuff pulled out of it and some other tweaks. Waterfox is not going to Quantum so now it's a fork of Firefox 56. A few fixes have been backported but overall it's basically still Firefox 56. There's not a big team behind Waterfox (basically one guy) so while I wish him luck, now that Waterfox is a fork it's going to be hard to keep up with the major browsers. I use Waterfox but I expect at some point Firefox 56 is just going to be too out of date for the modern web.
Palemoon was the same way for a while - you were basically using a dated version of Firefox and after a while it really started to show. I used it for a while, switched away when it just felt too dated and too much stuff was broken, but the project has picked up some steam and Palemoon managed to catch up enough that I switched back. However, my experience is that there are still a few things that don't work right in Palemoon that do work when I try them in Waterfox, and if neither works I'll try the latest official Firefox, though annoyingly there seems to be more and more websites that don't work right on anything except webkit/blink browsers.
(Score: 2) by Kell on Thursday August 02 2018, @05:24AM
Very helpful, thanks! :D
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 2) by KritonK on Friday August 03 2018, @12:18PM
I think that you are referring to Pale Moon, which is indeed a fork, with the version under development being based on version 52, with no hope for a later rebase, as Mozilla have removed/changed too much code in later versions.
Although Waterfox is still at version56, the plan [waterfoxproject.org] is to follow ESR versions, keeping support for classic addons enabled, instead of disabling it in release builds, like Mozilla does.
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:16PM
Would it be helpful or wrong to think of Waterfox as a rebrand of "Firefox ESR 56" (if that existed), analogous to the "Firefox ESR 52" in Debian 9 "Stretch"?