Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pale Moon: Firefox Without DRM, Interface Breakage

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pale Moon: Firefox Without DRM, Interface Breakage

    Phoronix: Pale Moon: Firefox Without DRM, Interface Breakage

    For those upset with Mozilla's recent decision to add EME / HTML5 video DRM support to Firefox, the "Pale Moon" fork of Firefox may be of interest...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Re

    So you would rather install software from an absolutely mistrustful source?
    This guys were trying before to drag users by saying that their fork is faster than the original Firefox...
    The first thing they did after the fork is redirect the revenue from the search engine towards them...

    Comment


    • #3
      The Inclusion isn't so bad, sure it shouldn't exist but companies are greedy and every other big browser already has drm built-in, Chrome even comes with flash built-in.
      Remember, it's only an on-demand blob grabber that you will most likely be able to disable the fetch of closed source DRM component, so the actual closed source DRM stuff isn't coded in or included at all.
      This is overblown for no reason other than controversial headlines targeting people who aren't informed...

      Comment


      • #4
        I've been a long user of Pale Moon in Windows, and as soon as Pale Moon for Linux appeared there as well; but I might end up going back to Firefox again or another alternative in the future.

        We may or may not be OK with DRM and the like, but sites like Netflix, Amazon Video, etc. use it and you're (i.e. your player is) required to support it if you wish to access the content. Many people that want to use DRM in content stick to Flash (even leaving Linux out of the question), maybe after a while if most browsers implement DRM in HTML5 they'd choose it over Flash.

        From my experience, the average joe couldn't care less if the content he wishes to access is protected or not, he just wishes to access it, that upon pressing "Play" the content is displayed. That's what probably motivated Mozilla to implement DRM in HTML5 to begin with.

        I do prefer things without DRM over things with it, but given the situation I think I'd compromise and use whatever browser allows me to access the content.

        Comment


        • #5
          That's completely retarded.
          Firefox won't come bundled with the DRM plugin, you'll have to download it from adobe.
          So what's the point of not supporting the API? If you don't want DRM support well just don't install the DRM module.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by HeavensRevenge View Post
            The Inclusion isn't so bad, sure it shouldn't exist but companies are greedy and every other big browser already has drm built-in, Chrome even comes with flash built-in.
            Remember, it's only an on-demand blob grabber that you will most likely be able to disable the fetch of closed source DRM component, so the actual closed source DRM stuff isn't coded in or included at all.
            This is overblown for no reason other than controversial headlines targeting people who aren't informed...
            I absolutely agree, there isn't anything different between the Flash plugin and the DRM component. On the contrary, the DRM component is basically a subset of what a Flash plugin or a Silverlight plugin does. Every browser that supports Flash supports DRM!

            Anyway, calling Palemoon a "fork" isn't exactly correct, it's just Firefox with different icons, some features removed and a different key for the search engine revenues...

            Comment


            • #7
              +1 @HeavensRevenge

              Aside from the Aurora interface (which I think Iceweasel uses), aren't these pretty much the same thing?

              Comment


              • #8
                As I've said before, Palemoon will soon need to adapt or die. So far it keeps going because Mozilla backport security/stability patches to Firefox 24 ESR, but soon it will die for FIrefox 31 ESR.
                Since it's mostly a single-man project, I don't see how he'll manage the huge feat of backporting every patch to his fork, especially considering that the Pale Moon and the Firefox codebase will keep diverging. And sooner or later Firefox will implement a feature on which many sites will rely on (it could be EMCAScript 6, it could be some new css3 features...), and he'll have to backport those as well.

                My prediction? It will soon switch to Firefox 31 with CTR and his "optimizations applied" (remove code that it's not get used until you use that feature anyway, and compiled with a different compiler).

                Originally posted by Alliancemd View Post
                So you would rather install software from an absolutely mistrustful source?
                This guys were trying before to drag users by saying that their fork is faster than the original Firefox...
                The first thing they did after the fork is redirect the revenue from the search engine towards them...
                I agree with this as well. I trust Mozilla with my money and my accounts, I don't know if I'd trust moonchild (The author of palemoon) over them.

                ---

                About the ads, Michael keep spreading wrong news. Firefox is still going to include sponsored tiles, he'd know if he bothered to read comments on his site.
                Since he seems to not care, what's the best way to contact him? I've once tried to send an email to [email protected] but it went ignored.

                Comment


                • #9
                  You are both wrong, from the Pale Moon forum:

                  Pale Moon actually entails in-house development, and incorporates a number of features not present in Firefox ESR. Pale Moon is not a simple rebuild any more; it includes a number of UI changes and additional features (such as TLS 1.2 and OCSP stapling); these are not present in Firefox ESR. Pale Moon is not just about removing features arbitrarily: features are removed if they are not used widely and if they give a sufficient performance advantage.

                  In fact, the development of Pale Moon and Firefox are completely independent. While Pale Moon bases itself on the Firefox codebase, it will evolve according to its own development roadmap. Some people keep claiming that Pale Moon will jump on to whatever (ESR) version that is released:

                  Pale Moon intends to become a real fork, in fact, already has a number of major changes. Pale Moon will retain the old UI, no matter what. Work may be involved to keep it free from the Australis UI, but it can be done.
                  And here the list of some major differences between Pale Moon and Firefox:



                  For disclaimer, i am just someone who recently switched from Opera to Pale Moon, because the new Firefox is an abomination and I'm not a chubby chaser.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Have they removed NPAPI, as that can be used to load DRM plugins (flash and silverlight).

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X