Firefox vs Pale Moon browser – Which one is better?


  1. I switched to Pale Moon 64-bit months ago.
    Pale Moon is fast, all my addons work, and it looks “normal”.
    Support on their forum is excellent.
    Pale Moon & Firefox are independent, so you can have both installed, and use them at the same time.
    It´s very simple to get started, install PM and copy the profile from FF….

  2. Greetings, I figured it would be a good idea to clear up a few of the misconceptions with this post in the name of clarity. I will make additions and corrections based on the main point headings.

    * Intro
    Pale Moon is an independent and divergent fork unlike Cyberfox and Waterfox. The former being somewhat customized but not really changed to any substantial degree and the latter being a straight 1:1 x64 build. Also, calling it stripped down is not entirely accrate as described below.

    * Features of Pale Moon
    Pale Moon’s feature set being largely (but not identical to) that of pre-australis Firefox is true, however, there are more than “small changes”. While the changes to the backend gecko code are not extremely extensive as of the 24.5 release, the changes to the browser specific code located in /browser of the overall codebase is quite extensive and compared with the base Firefox ESR 24 code.

    * Features Disabled In Pale Moon Browser
    With a few small exceptions like tab groups (who’s code was very underdeveloped by Mozilla and when put to the Pale Moon community it was decided the functionality was removed from the browser core and turned into an extension) all the features such as accessibility and webrtc draft were simply disabled and not built when compiling the browser. They do still exists in the codebase and can be included if you build Pale Moon yourself.

    * Firefox vs Pale Moon browser
    While generally comparing Pale Moon to Firefox is not strictly as simple as it may have been in the past due to the divergent evolutionary paths of both products, you should link to the original Google Drive spreadsheet as this list is continuously being updated as new versions are developed and more differentiating features are expressly pointed out by Moonchild and the community.

    * Conclusion
    What is disabled at build time or removed completely does not make Pale Moon any less full featured as if the need arises they would be considered for re-inclusion. At a fundamental level Pale Moon, even without those features, is far more full featured than any browser on the market today.

    I hope this clears up a few points and thank you for your indulgence.


    Matt A. Tobin of Binary Outcast
    (and a Pale Moon user and community member)

  3. I have used PM as my default browser for over a year now and I would never go back to Firefox. Every Firefox addon I have tried works just fine,it is quicker than Firefox by such a margin that its noticeable, the Interface is more polished and it’s simply a better experience. They also supply their own back up and restore tools, both can import Firefox profiles so you can quickly get it setup the way you want. I would say if you are on Firefox and are fed up with the update cycle, memory leaks and other bugs then you should give it a try, it also has a portable version available now..

  4. I really was enthused by this article, by Mr. Tobin’s words, and by Mr. Hopkin’s words re ending FF memory leaks. Admittedly, Pale Moon may work well on bigger PCs, but here’s what I got on a non-hyperthread supporting dual core laptop with Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64 bit updated to current.

    Trying first 64 bit portable version, very slow loadings. Next trying Pale Moon’s own web installer which installed 32 bit version automatically (never a problem in itself), very fast page loads, and w/o any extensions added even GMail didn’t throw “get a modern browser” notes at me (as it did/does with FF28, 29 and Noscript et al). This made me happy, but at Futuremark’s “Peacekeeper’ HTML5 test page, Pale Moon scored 1206 (about same as my IE 11 for Windows 7) whereas FF29 add-ons and all scored 1348.

    So on my tiny 4GB RAM huff-and-puff, Pale Moon is like another IE11. Lastly, although Privazer e.g. can see and distinguish between Chrome variants (say Chrome itself and SRWare Iron), neither it nor CCleaner nor Advanced Uninstaller could see it as itself or even part of FF leftover data. For me, this was too bad (would replace erratic “elastic” memory problems of FF with problem of undeleted data bloat), and I had to remove Pale Moon; but it does appear to clean uninstall w/o orphans of any kind.

    If this kind of stuff isn’t an issue for you, well…with the right Firefox extensions which Pale Moon can use, Pale Moon appears a so-called “modern browser” equal to IE11 but which you can better protect re XSS/CSRF. Hope this is useful to someone some day; cheers!

  5. I have changed over to PM since FF went version 29 and they removed and changed the buttons its just not friendly any more

  6. – Pale Moon is the get-go alternative Firefox fork for Australis UI haters (because Moonchild Productions does not want the controversial UI to be included in Pale Moon)
    – has some outdated icons
    – Faster for me as advertised

  7. Hello, all.
    Started using PM concurrently w/ FF, 2011
    Well over a year ago began running PM as main browser,
    primarily because it was more stable [at that time].
    Still use FF Aurora occasionally,
    but I think its still not as stable as PM.
    Current main browser = PM, v.24.5.0 (x86).
    My system = Win7 HP
    AMD Athlon II X4 640
    12GB DDR3-1333.
    Mr. Tobin has done an excellent job w/ PM
    [many thanks].
    I usually run minimum 20-30 windows open,
    w/ occasionally up to 80-90, or more.
    I don’t like “tabbed interfaces”.
    The situation may have improved,
    but in the past,
    software with “tabs” *always* had memory leaks.

    Have a GREAT day, Neighbors!

  8. I am but an enthusiastic user and community member of Pale Moon. Moonchild is the developer. His great vision gives us a browser that is.. well still a browser and not some insane cheap knock off swiss army knife that can’t seem to do much of anything well anymore.

  9. firefox australis is for tablets. they ditched the pc market, like microsoft did with windows8. history is repeating itself.

  10. I tried Pale Moon for a few days after uninstalling Firefox when from version 29 onwards it started to look like Google Chrome, a browser which I love to hate. However, I did not like the experience. Though its UI is a clone of the much loved Firefox version 24, it is much much slower than Firefox, contrary to what the Pale Moon individual developer claims. The browser becomes so irritatingly slow, especially when multiple Wifi accounts are used in the same building at the same time (I stay in an apartment). Add-ons and extensions which can be installed from Firefox add-ons store further worsen the speed. And I have my own doubts about whether this browser is even safe and legit, because the Kaspersky antivirus which I use has detected this web browser to be a Trojan. The only advantage of this browser is that it doesn’t give warning messages while accessing social networking or email sites unlike Firefox.

    It’s better to try Seamonkey browser instead if you can’t tolerate Firefox v29+ but still prefer Gecko-based web browsers. Though the UI looks ancient (it’s the reincarnation of the now-defunct Mozilla Application Suite, whose last release was a decade ago in 2004), it’s seriously fast, easier to use than the latest Web browsers and does not degrade in performance when multiple Wifi accounts are used in the same building at the same time.

  11. I had reached the point where Firefox was crashing half a dozen times a day, page loads had become hopelessly lengthy – often freezing altogether, and memory leaks were horrendous, and processor loops at 100% far too frequent. Switching to Pale Moon has allowed me to retain my add-ons, and restored stable performance with much lower memory use. It happily copes with the best part of 100 tabs while Firefox had ceased being able to cope with 30.

  12. Palemoon is obviously faster than firefox as many of us have attested. Either your pc is a problem or you’re are just talking rubbish.

  13. Installed it a couple of days ago to deal with the the fact that the invaluable google maps route converter from which stopped working in firefox and ie over a year ago.

    The converter “bookmarklet” works fine in Pale Moon plus it restores the firefox interface that is clearer and easier than the interface the firefox has evolved into.

  14. Pale Moon is NOT an independent and divergent fork unlike Cyberfox and Waterfox.
    Been in IT for over 30 years. Pale Moon is basically FF ESR 24 code with some of the components removed. Also Pale Moon uses extensive amounts of RAM and crashes repeatedly.
    As an IT professional I do not recommend this browser to clients.

    Firefox, Cyberfox and SeaMonkey are excellent browsers and are superior to Pale Moon.

  15. Pale Moon is indeed slower than Firefox.
    Tested it on 30 computers and compared the browser also to SeaMonkey and Cyberbox and Waterfox. These browsers were faster and didn’t crash like Pale Moon.

  16. Respectfully disagree.
    Am in IT and test browsers on a day to basis for corporations and in universities.
    Pale Moon is slower than Firefox and kept crashing.
    Firefox, SeaMonkey, Cyberfox, Waterfox all ran smoothly without crashing.
    This was done on over 100 computers.

  17. Didn’t have that issue with Firefox.
    Runs very smoothly on my desktop with Windows 7.
    And on my laptop with Windows 8.1.
    Runs very well in Ubuntu 14.04 LTS.
    Pale Moon had memory leaks and was crashing very frequently.
    Pale Moon is not a bad browser, but, it does need significant improvement.

  18. “At a fundamental level Pale Moon, even without those features, is far more full featured than any browser on the market today.”
    Respectfully disagree with that comment.

    Don’t see any major difference between Pale Moon and Firefox 24 ESR.

  19. Firefox recently has had improvements and is much faster that PM.
    SeaMonkey is also very good and faster than PM.
    Cyberfox is also a very good alternative.
    As an IT professional I highly recommend Firefox, SeaMonkey and Cyberfox.

  20. You can always used classic theme restorer with Firefox.
    My colleagues really enjoy Firefox and it is really, really fast!

  21. Have no issue with that url you mentioned in Firefox.
    And the converter “bookmarklet” works fine in Firefox as well.
    You can also use classic theme restorer in Firefox.
    Another excellent alternative to Firefox is SeaMonkey and it too is far faster than Pale Moon.

  22. Just tested Pale Moon 25 beta. Absolutely terrible. Kept crashing and a lot of Firefox extensions and add ons don’t function well with this version of Pale Moon. Better to stick with Firefox. You can use classic theme restorer if you dislike Australis. Or use SeaMonkey which I personally use.

  23. Not everyone agrees with you on that. It misses out on a number of features and doesn’t operate the same way.

  24. I think you’re just a troll. I don’t trust a word you say. Completely at variance with many, many people’s reported experiences.

  25. Yeah, we get it. You don’t like Pale Moon so that’s why you left several comments on a dead thread. Give it a rest or just come out and say what you really have against Pale Moon.

  26. I see a few anti-PM folks on here but I have to say FF simply does not work here. No matter what I do with Flash driven content it will crash on FF. Even did the FF suggestion of rolling Flash backwards, thereby also removing all security updates. FF running Flash crashed more than a bunch of good ole boys on a NASCAR track. Now Pale Moon? Always works, unless a page is FUBARd somehow (it happens).

    Don’t care if you’re an IT person or even Gates/Jobs it doesn’t mean FF works. As I mentioned in beginning, Flash (YouTube and others) were a no-go here. Found and installed PM as a test and rarely if ever do I have a problem with Flash. And no, I am not running a low-end computer. FF & Flash just don;t play nice together.

  27. I have to agree with you, I recently switched from FF due to the browser spiking in CPU usage every few seconds. The minute I transferred everything from to PM I realized how bloated FF had become. All-in-all I found increased speed in every facet and better streaming quality for videos. I will never go back to Firefox after feeling these changes.

  28. Well i have windows 8.1 i had problems with chrome, i switched to
    FireFox & in there i have problems with videos, freezes 3 times per
    Episode, 1 freeze 1sec or 2sec long, so i switch to Waterfox after i
    updated waterfox to 33.0.2, my memory usage went from over 500MB to over
    800MB & yesterday i so even 907M, no idea is it normal for waterfox or not, to use it until it starts to cause browser crash before i switch to another browser? i always have 4 Tabs open, 2 of them are video Tabs watching 1 while other1 is loading

  29. i don’t think he is a Troll, well at least when it comes about FireFox ,cause in my old PC with Win 7 FireFox worked well for me to, but i have no idea about Never FireFox cause it was years ago, & maybe he was talking about what was years ago as well, in win 8 & 8.1 chrome & FireFox are bad, one has crash issue & the other Video issue

  30. about CCleaner, reg cleaners are bad, reg cleaners can FK UP ur system, unless u know what to mark to delete, cause deleting all it finds can FK UP ur system, but there are some antispyware programs that delete some reg stuff to like SpyBot, Microsoft said that type of program is safe

  31. with 32bit version i have same issue that i have with firefox, cause flash plugin runs directly, with waterfox i cant see flash running cause it uses its own built in software what works with Flash, helps flash, my point its not browser fault, but the issue is that flash is not compatible 64bit system, or its not
    compatible with win 8 & 8.1 64bit or just win 8 & 8.1 no matter the version, i bet pale moon 64bit works same way like waterfox in 1 way, that it has build in video software to, but not gonna try right new, some say no matter what browser i get in win 8 i will have problems with browsers either way, mostly when it comes to videos

  32. Awesome torrent , u could search key words “windows 8.1 key sale” on bing? ,it’s quite convenient ,thx !

  33. so i hope pale moon team will think of something so Flash would not run directly in Pale Moon 32Bit, just like with waterfox, Flash is not shown in TaskManager, so that means Flash Runs trough some waterfox build in video software that help & works with flash, i say this cause something like this is needed in Win 8.1, why i don’t want that 64bit version? well cause install warned me that it has issue with 3th party add-ones, that 32bit Pale Moon has to be installed first & then 64bit version to avoid issues, it would be grate if Pale Moon Dev’s think something, so that win 8.1 users can watch videos with no issue despite win 8.1 flaws 🙂

  34. I found PM by seeking a way to stream videos on my good old Lenovo S205 W7/64 – 2×1,65gHz AMD E450 – HD 6320.
    With half CPU and NO problems the 64bit-version works great !
    FF with Flash and nearly same AddOns didn’t work, or had ‘double’ CPU…
    (it’s no fun to see 2 x 85 to 99 % CPU and the fan is running ‘hot’)
    That’s what counts for me – everybody wants something different, right ?

  35. I’m getting ready to try out Palemoon myself. The thing is with Firefox is you won’t have any problems with it most likely if you got a newer system. They tend to handle the bloatware much better then some of us with outdated systems. Unfortunately we can’t all afford to upgrade to the newest hardware. With what your running on your pc and laptop, it seems yours is much more up to date. So I can see firefox being faster on your end. The same might not be true for those with older systems. Flash freezes up a lot on firefox on my pc, i get script errors and lots of plugin hangs. It can be annoying at times. There are other times when I don’t have much issues at all. My laptop which is even more ancient then my pc, can’t handle newer versions of firefox at all. I have had to resort to using lightweight browsers on it. Even Seamonkey is too much for it. The main problem with the mainstream browsers in general is that while they try to make them faster, the more they add to them the more bloated they become and they become less usable for older systems. They think their making them better but their not. They only seem better because the newer systems are becoming more powerful and can handle them without a problem.

  36. Can’t share this opinion about Pale Moon 64bit. I’m just comparing it with Internet Chromium Secure from Comodo and K-meleon and have to say that Pale Moon is the slowest browser of the three. The Comodo’s browser loads pages in a second, but it takes about five or more seconds to fully load a page in Pale Moon. The only advantage is that Pale Moon takes about ten per cent less of memory from the system, but on the other hand maybe that’s why it is so slow.

  37. Well, i’m having problems with Paypal. I can only see weird symbols and mistakes in the website, i don’t know if this is due i’m using Pale Moon or another thing i don’t know yet.


    And even sometimes, this also happens with my e-mail. It’s the only bad thing i can say about Pale Moon.

    Have a nice day 🙂

  38. CCleaner doesn’t clean the registry unless you run that part of the program which is a separate tab in CCleaner. It does clean all the temp files from any browser you may havw been using, plus other aspects of Windows that bog everybody’s computer slowly but surely. I know, I’ve had to troubleshoot several computers that simply had accumulated so much “crap” that their computers would not even load web pages anymore. and you are right, you need to know what you are doing with anything in the registry. Most people don’t even know it’s there.

  39. I messed-up my Registry doing that. Well, messed-up a bit, not enough to fret or cause me to lose functionality.

  40. Pale Moon Install contains pup.optional.softonic.a, so keep an eye on installation choices, & even after installing it scan ur PC with malwarebytes just in case, i took a look at palemoon & uninstalled it, i just wanted to look what its like, but i still have palemoon installer, so far in Win 8.1 i have had issues with all browsers, chrome comododragon firefox IE waterfox, IE & firefox video lag, chrome crashes a lot, on opening it crashes for 8min before it opens, waterfox has memory leak

    When I opened a youtube playlist, any time the next song started to play
    (when it chose new song) memory usage number went up. WaterFox started
    to take more & more memory with each new song, I was on forums at
    the time, I noticed when the browser suddenly crashed & then it was
    over 1.4BG

    i bet i will have same issues with palemoon, cause when i took a look at it, it did not seem much different from waterfox, i bet it would be good browser in win7 or XP, i personally like win7

  41. palemoon should change the 64bit version, cause it requires 32bit version installed before, with out it some add wont work, that’s what i did not like about it

  42. pup.optional.softonic.a is not a virus or malware, but it can cause problems & behaves like MAL, that’s why it is listed as malware, in some cases it causes problems & in some cased it doesn’t, but i discovered it week after installing, when i scanned my pc & palemoon was only thing i installed within the week, maybe Dev’s have cleaned their install up by new, who knows, it was few months back

  43. Komodo IceDragon is not bad either. But I also have used Quipzilla and Opera. Never heard of CyberFox or WaterFox. Vivaldi is a new one in test phase from the former creator of Opera. Testing out Pale Moon and it resembles Comodo and FF. Torch browser is one I hear people talk about before but never used.

  44. Your reply is irrelevant when mentioning Quipzilla and Opera. Quipzilla is using the Webkit engine and Opera uses the Blink engine(Webkit Fork). These 2 browsers are not relevant with Gecko which make up Palemoon and Firefox. You probably haven’t heard of Lawlietfox, PCXFirefox, Ayakawa Firefox, HTGuard Firefox, Unofficial Firefox 64-bit, Firefox Light, K-Meleon, Cometbird, Epic Browser(Used to be Gecko but went Chromium).

  45. Just mentioning browsers I tested out. I know they aren’t all based on the same webkit engine as FireFox. Comodo IceDragon is.

  46. Firefox uses the Gecko Engine, not Webkit.
    Yes, Ice Dragon looks cool, but it doesn’t compare to Palemoon in performance.
    If you want to try one, try Lawlietfox or HTGuard’s Firefox, very optimized.

  47. Which is the most secure browser without keeping log files to windows system?

    Why Palemoon does not appear on CC Cleaner?

    Please advise!

  48. Given i3(3GHZ) [no overclocking] dual-core, Windows7 Ultimate (32bit) with 4GB DDR5 RAM, nVidia GT640 2GB DDR3 VRAM system:
    Memory usage in Firefox – disastrous 1.8+ GigaBytes.
    Memory usage in Pale Moon – sleek 740MegaBytes.

    Both within 30 minutes of launch, with only 7 permanent tabs open full-time, and maybe 3-5 temporary tabs. Not excessive, by a long chalk.
    I find your claims specious, and require citations, with proofs to back them up.

  49. Pale Moon is awesome. That’s it! Try it and you’ll see!
    All my Firefox add-ons and extensions work in Pale Moon.
    PM has been my default browser for almost a year, and it never fails me.
    Productivity is SO MUCH BETTER than Firefox.

  50. This review is still based on Pale Moon v24.5,
    so please update it. What has happened since then is Pale Moon now uses it’s own “GUID starting from v25.0.0 onward to properly
    differentiate from Firefox. The new GUID is: {8de7fcbb-c55c-4fbe-bfc5-fc555c87dbc4}” But the latest Pale Moon version is 25.3.2; this was released today. We also have a new start page and is now customizable. The stability and speed has increased by
    a lot, not to mention what they have removed since then, witch is the media
    navigator, the Mozilla plug-in finder service and other dead weight code that is
    not needed. Major improvements in security; POODLE vulnerability and FREAK vulnerability patched. All in all this is a great firefox based/forked browser with improved stability, speed and security.

  51. FUBARd =>


    (the ‘d’ comes from turning the acronym into a Past-Tense verb – not normal but this is Net Speak here)

    Hope it helps.

  52. Actually what komputrguru said is quite factual.
    Also have had many issues with Pale Moon.
    Don’t see any reason why that person should be called a troll.

  53. Don’t have a bad Profile.
    I teach computer programming at a University and am very familiar with all types of computer browsers as well and OSs.
    Been in the field for over 30 years.
    Pale Moon IMHO and professional opinion is indeed sluggish.

  54. My PC build must be different because Palemoon works great, and sluggish is just your way of saying that is not en-par in performance, it renders too slow compared to the others, but doesn’t make your browsing come to a halt/stutter, right?

    Yes, I tend to read about people mentioning that they are in IT and still proven to be wrong, don’t throw that around. I can get a dumb friend and put him in IT, he will gloat about it…Not that I’m in IT, so you got me there.

  55. Come to the forums and state your problem, we will do our best to help you solve the problem.

  56. My colleagues in my department have also tested Pale Moon and have found it to be sluggish. It is indeed very slow compared to the other browsers.
    And kindly refrain from making personal comments.
    It is very disrespectful and does not add to the discussion.

  57. You go by benchmarks or by Real-World experience?

    “I’m an IT.” Is taken as, “I know more than you, so feel my superior position.”
    I take it as an offense.

  58. If you are in IT, why not point out what makes it slow? You and your colleagues should be able to know the inner-workings of the browser, and find the regressions.
    I’ll get in touch with the developer to work on the regressions, or you can join us at the forums.
    And I apologize for my temper.

  59. Settings are different? What sites?

    I usually bump this site as my test:

    Some insight:

    Edit: I’ll admit that Firefox has increased in performance, very noticeable. I have nothing against Firefox.
    I am merely questioning the views of “sluggish,” which makes the browser look bad, but I don’t see this “sluggishness.” Of course I had the liberty to find it offensive, sounds like bad propaganda.

  60. You must have a really badly set-up office then (an idiotic firewall/antivirus would be my guess), since so many home users (non-IT professionals) run Pale Moon with absolutely no problems. If sites were rendered “very, very slowly” Pale Moon wouldn’t have lasted and flourished for so many years.

  61. Pale Moon doesn’t install anything apart from itself. You obviously downloaded the installer from some shady third-party website. They tend to offer their own, modified installers and that has nothing to do with Pale Moon.

  62. I try to cope and empathize when issues arrive, but I’ve been using Palemoon since the Legacy version 2.0 era.
    I’ll admit if Palemoon has problems, without hesistation. Saying that is “sluggish” is too general.
    It’s like saying that movie sucks, but not indication on what made it “suck.”
    If it involves rendering of sites, some tend to be favored towards different browsers, like those made for IE, etc.
    Also, system proxy settings can be culprit. Many variables that cause regression.

    Edit: I’m not an IT, so I feel bested when it comes to profession, but I do have years of experience. 🙂

  63. Your message above is wrong. The 64-bit version does not require the 32-bit version installed at all. You are probably confused by the fact that some plug-ins (not extensions) are simply not available for 64-bit browsers (all of them, not just Pale Moon). Such a plug-in will appear in the 32-bit browser but not in the 64-bit one. Most major plug-ins are available for 64-bit though (Flash, Java etc.).

  64. Some sites don’t work with Pale Moon.
    Whereas I’ve had no issues when using Firefox, SeaMonkey, Cyberfox, Waterfox whilst using these browsers.
    Best of luck to you on your project.

  65. Contacted the developer of PaleMoon and he told me that what the sites that were having the issues when I tried to view them, not Pale Moon. Very, very strange to me since they all worked quite fine with my using Firefox, SeaMonkey and Cyberfox.

  66. If they render correctly and look fine, then we can’t blame the browser.
    Give me examples, but usually I prefer to do this in the forums.

  67. We don’t have a badly set-office. Nor do we use firewalls and even antivirus on our computers. In addition the earlier versions of Pale Moon were quite good.
    The newest version IMHO and professional opinion isn’t.

  68. The pin tabs, when using Ice Dragon, were an issue to me. I’ll admit that I love the layout in Dragon better than Palemoon(Which is just the older default Firefox look).
    Rendering when opening the browser tends to favor Palemoon, as it loads the pages very fast.

  69. What sites? I get that a lot but not which ones, at least one to try-out.
    If one doesn’t seem to work, it’s picking favorites, meaning the mainstream browsers, thus we suggest Firefox Compatibility Mode, which just tells the site that you are using Firefox, only for the site to work, but nothing changes other than make-believing that it’s using Firefox.

  70. The issues we see mostly are sites not recognizing Pale Moon. We don’t see that issue with Firefox, SeaMonkey, Cyberfox, Google Chrome, Ice Dragon, K-Meleon, Waterfox, Vivaldi, Opera, Safari, Maxthon, etc.

  71. Ok, but if only you notice the very same problem on all thirty computers, clearly something is wrong in your part. Don’t blame Pale Moon, or other software.

  72. I don’t think you got my reply back then.
    I use nicolas11x12techx as my rendering test comparison.

    Anything else could be Proxy settings. It’s hard to explain how Palemoon works
    fast for me comparing to other browsers, while you guys struggle, I
    start to make assumptions.(The feeling is mutual on assumptions)

  73. It’s the string that we use, it’s unique(Since we try to make sure they read Palemoon), unlike these other browsers that have Firefox, Safari, or Chrome on their string.
    We can use Compatibility Mode or adjust the string to another browser that has access to the site.(Even Maxthon advices this on incompatible sites.)

    Main reason why it doesn’t want to recognize Palemoon is because we use version 25, which is outdated number to them.

  74. Nope. Nothing is wrong on our part.
    We’ve been doing this for over thirty years.
    We also different problems while testing the browsers.

    We don’t make assumptions, nor blames, just facts after our testing.

  75. Then you are just slandering Pale Moon which is even worse. It’s of course ok to not like a browser for whatever reason, but “very, very slow website rendering” is NOT inherently related to PM no matter what you say or how good your office computers are. So, instead of throwing such accusations around (which might seem innocent to you, but they are not) I’d suggest some more research on the subject.

  76. Am not here to slander Pale Moon just stating issues that we see while testing it.
    In our tests we also use Benchmark.js, Dromaeo, Kraken and SunSpider, etc.
    Also TestComplete is where we also take a look at regressions.
    Am not throwing out accusations either.
    The earlier versions of Pale Moon were very, very good.

  77. We took a careful look at the code that Pale Moon uses.
    And also a statement from the developer:
    Pale Moon 25 includes code from 24, 25, 26, 27, 28,
    (not so much) 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34. More from all these versions
    will be cherry-picked if found desirable in the future. In addition,
    there is plenty of Pale Moon-specific code.
    Why version 25? Wouldn’t it make more sense to use a higher version number?
    Also wanted to add the earlier versions of Pale Moon that we tested performed very, very well in our testing.
    So my colleagues are not here to slander nor attack Pale Moon we wish it the best of luck.
    It does have promise as a browser.

  78. Moonchild doesn’t want to keep changing numbers just for the sake of changing them. That’s just because Firefox is following Chrome in the rapid releases and it’s messing up for add-on developers that have to keep updating their add-ons to meet code. Also, it’s unnecessary, it’s only a decision from the Executives and end-users are affected.
    I am still down that they worry about a number just to indicate if the browser should work.

  79. You need to read Moonchild’s stance on the benchmarks.
    If you know the regressions please enlighten us in the forums, anything to improve is welcomed by Moonchild and us BETA testers.

  80. Windows 8.1 and Pale Moon 25.4.1 (x86) here.
    In over a year, I don’t think I have EVER had
    even one browser crash with Pale Moon 32-bit.
    It certainly eliminated the Firefox memory bloat
    that kept swallowing up my 4GB machine. The
    Firefox add-ons I can use are limited, though.

  81. “Pale Moon employs DuckDuckGo search engine, so that your searches are not stored anywhere.”

    Sorry, I laughed. DuckDuckGo not only stores your data but they actively sell it using a secondary company. If you do the research, you’ll notice the several dozen staff employed in both companies and the same owner as well.

  82. PM works great, I have all of the addons I could want, and there are tricks like setting it to use ram instead of disk cache making it even faster.

  83. No browser is perfect and you might even find some flaws. The idea stands, trying something new to see how it fits you.
    If it doesn’t work to your liking, in the end, it’s okay. You gave Palemoon a try, that’s more to say than those that just diss it without trying it.
    Yes, some might have their own personal opinions and don’t speak for everyone.
    Since the Moderators and community aren’t paid employees, they aren’t pushed to be as generous as employees that have to do it systematically.

    After all, no one is perfect as well, but we all tend to try.
    If it’s not me, I can assume who it is, but not throwing names.

  84. They both suck.

    Firefox has been going downhill for a long time as they try to slavishly copy Chrome and promote their browser using marketing techniques instead of actually being better in their own ways.

    Pale Moon was great until they got arrogant and decided to become a “real browser” and break compatibility with all the add-ons that made classic Firefox great.

    Pale Moon developers expect Add-On developers to modify their add-ons for compatibility with Pale Moon, but surprise!, no one wants to waste time on that, so now both browsers suck.

  85. At a fundamental level Pale Moon, even without those features, is far more full featured than any browser on the market today.

    No it’s not. It’s no longer compatible with many of Firefox’s extensions, which means that Firefox by default has more features.

  86. It’s easier to tell the accurate part – the first two lines about Firefox, and even that is exaggerated.

  87. The whole post is accurate, actually. Compatibility with add-ons was intentionally broken in Pale Moon v25, and hasn’t been fixed yet. They insist that add-on developers cater to them instead of the other way around, and add-on developers reply: “wtf is pale moon, I’m not wasting time on that”, so they have to write their own versions of every add-on, which don’t work as well as the originals.

  88. You clearly don’t know much about what happened. That change (to become a “real browser” as you say) was both necessary and unavoidable, for technical reasons too. Read the details. No one woke up one day and “got arrogant”, it’s a bit more complicated than that, as life in general.

    As for add-ons, yes it is FAR more realistic for the add-on developer to make a few, usually minor changes for a browser, than for the browser developer to make these changes for thousands of extensions (and without knowing the code, since he didn’t create them).

    And anyway, my 32 extensions are all working perfectly fine and all Pale Moon users know this is quite possible. Don’t blame others for your lack of knowledge and research.

    Your “wtf is pale moon, I’m not wasting time on that”, so they have to write their own versions of every add-on, which don’t work as well as the originals.” is 100% inaccurate since many developers actively support Pale Moon.

  89. There was no reason to break compatibility except “We’re a real browser now!”

    Most extensions still don’t work. Pale Moon is Firefox without the extensions, which is useless.

  90. Hahhaha! Alright n00bie, lesson 101, ok pip squeak: do your RESEARCH before commenting with those half backed remarks.


    to put it in a few sentences, “Pale Moon is not Firefox and never will
    be again” because they’re totally two different browsers, with different
    sets of features, aiming for a different user base and have goals of
    their own to reach full potential; “Pale Moon doesn’t aim for 100%
    parity with other browsers and compatibility of extensions written for a
    different product, which we obviously can’t guarantee since Pale Moon
    will run these extensions in a limited compatibility mode. This is also
    why extensions can be written for Pale
    exclusively and/or adapted to Pale Moon as an individual product
    (unlike “re-branded Firefox rebuilds”).”

    But you seem to
    dislike Firefox as well, hmm, it sounds like you have a hard time with
    developmental changes in a browser. Here’s some helping advise: stop
    your b******* and start contributing, instead of commenting with those
    half backed remarks of yours, ok.

  91. He’s right. Whether you like it or not. Also, go check up on Palemoon’s forum… the main leader is a real arrogant git.

  92. Oh please, you guys are so sensitive. I know the forum very well, thank you. Bill said: “Most extensions don’t work, it’s Firefox without the extensions”.

    PLEASE EXPLAIN ME THEN how on earth I and so many users have DOZENS of installed and WORKING extensions and a browser that works just fine? I’d even post you a screenshot of my Add-Ons Manager with currently 25 installed extensions if YOU weren’t so arrogant.

    Did I need to replace A FEW extensions that weren’t working? Of course, it is natural and related to purely technical reasons. If ALL of Firefox’s extensions worked (as in 100%) then it would be Firefox, not ANOTHER browser.

  93. Yes, you aren’t far from the truth, there.
    There was an topic where people felt a developer was being a bit hard, so people voiced their opinions and your statement sums it. The last thing we want is to be belittled.

    Now, the real question is, “Did you use the browser because of the attitude of the developers or because of the product itself?”

  94. Both – but mainly the latter. The problem is if the developer is arrogant and won’t listen to the userbase, the product suffers. Which Firefox and Palemoon have for the exact same reason.

  95. Pale Moon is really starting to suck. 32 bit version on win 7 64 bit PC . Trying to find a solution to the multiple problems too time consuming and cumbersome via google or too technical or non responsive on their forum. I came here looking for an alternative. My problems
    Going through Yahoo basic email inbox prev or next works about 25% of the time
    You Tube takes 2 or 3 attempts to work without an error message and doesn’t work embedded in other sites
    Pages freezing
    Button for subtitles in Adobe streaming video for network tv programs, not there
    Disqus overlay for commenters profile page and previous comments doesn’t come up
    Spinning wheels for Target. The websit never comes up

  96. Technically speaking, Pale Moon has always sucked. It has just become more readily apparent to many more users because as it attempts to become it’s own standalone browser, it is slowly sacrificing it’s own vertebrae and it will soon render itself spineless (if it hasn’t already) if a different approach isn’t taken. A couple years back, it started to gain some quick recognition but that is not because it was a “better browser,” but because it was touted as something it was not: a so-called “Faster version of Firefox.” People seem(ed) unable to grasp the fact that there is/was no such thing as a “Faster version of Firefox,” yet they love to throw that term around all willy nilly. Yes, granted it may have done a couple of things “faster” than Firefox, that’s not because it was of higher quality, or somehow performed better than Firefox. It was simply because a bunch of Firefox’s code was stripped away, leaving less information for your computer to process. The part Pale Moon’s peddlers often seem to leave out is the fact that less information equates to less functionality. Simple, right? Have you ever noticed how thin & healthy people tend to run faster than obese, sickly people? Similar concept, minnus the health concerns. If you “trim the fat,” you’ll be able to move faster, but it will be at the expense of “lost fat” or, in the case of our browser: lost data. This is why “faster” does not equate to “better.” It’s a give-and-take situation like many other things in life. If you want to go faster, you must sacrifice some fat (aka data/information), and the same in reverse. Consuming more information/data? Not unless you sacrifice some speed. Obviously the ideal balance between the two will differ depending on the specific scenario.

    So basically, Pale Moon originated as a chopped-up, and therefore less stable version of Firefox that simply ran around claiming to be something it wasn’t. As it gained popularity through the “Wish-I-Could-Hack” (better known as the “I’m l33t cuz I type g00fy”) crowd, who often label themselves as “gurus” or “professionals” for no other reason than knowing how to perform a Google search and/or build a very basic website with Squarespace (Freemium!), Pale Moon’s name, along with the rumors that sounded too good to be true (and clearly were, to those in the know), was essentially being hastily painted all over the different sectors of the web by anybody who was gullible enough to buy into it… like a train covered in plagiarized Cropsy graffiti. And because of this quasi-viral outbreak, and an abundance of misinformation combined with an utter boat-load of self-prescribed “geeks” who truly yet mistakenly think they know enough about computer software to not only be (falsely) confident in their (incredibly situational) declaration of the web’s “best” or “fastest browser,” but to go as far as making suggestions and recommendations regarding what software OTHER people should be using as well. This resulted in a plethora of “tech-geek” style websites popping up all over the place that were blatantly pushing the fallacy that this browser was actually a “better and faster” version of the most praised and popular browser on the net at the time, as well as in the history of web browsing (Firefox). And… as baffling as it was to the technically savvy, PM’s notoriety appeared to continue increasing. Somehow they had gotten the simple strategy of spreading misinformation to work! Well, kind of…

    Those who really DO know their stuff made some small, but futile attempts to get the truth out there regarding this (and soon to be many others) over-hyped browser that was basically claiming to be some sort of “miracle download” that could somehow vastly out-perform all of the web’s most popular, most secure, and most stable browsers. What?!? No. In reality, someone had simply taken Firefox’s source code and then chiseled and whittled away at it until it had sacrificed a bunch of utility in favor of a (very) negligible increase in speed. And because there are so many of these people who drastically over-estimate their true understanding of computer software & how it actually operates (on both micro & macro levels)… Yeah, the same people who think a subscription to PC World Magazine renders them qualified to be giving their (often radically incorrect) opinions to other people while having the blind audacity to be calling it “advice.” — Yep, you guessed it. The same exact people who would become mind-numbingly obsessed with benchmarking ANYTHING and EVERYTHING they got their hands on, while foolishly pretending they actually knew what most of the benchmark results even meant to begin with (most clearly didn’t, they just enjoyed crunching numbers & even better if it made them sound intelligent!).

    But see, this was still a very critical moment for them as they now had their so-called “hard evidence.” They finally had numbers in writing that they could tout around their nerd-circles and begin to peddle as “proof” that Pale Moon did “this” and “that” at X.X seconds faster than Firefox, yet they ALWAYS seemed to conveniently leave out the information that was exponentially more important: What had been sacrificed in order to achieve these (marginally faster) numbers that the multi-million (perhaps even billion) dollar IT corporations apparently couldn’t even achieve? Hopefully you guessed correctly: Utility and stability. Arguably the two most important qualities of a web browser. Those are the things that were being sacrificed in order to load a java applet 64 one-hundredths of a second faster than Firefox (as if that makes much difference to even the most picky of min-maxers). And while the true IT professionals and gurus saw straight through the smoke and mirrors, it was ultimately the casual, forum-hopping laymen and the naive, Youtube-obsessed cubicle workers who were being hoodwinked. These number nazis & benchmark bullies who should’ve never had a frog fart’s chance of being heard by anyone, or at least be taken even remotely seriously, were actually influencing the majority by simply flooding the net (specifically the popular search engine indexes) with blatant misinformation that, sadly, was immediately and effectively brainwashing (via simple, yet well written tags, metas, keywords & social marketing) any poor soul who happened to Google something like “Best” or “Fastest Web Browser,” completely unaware of the fact that Google does not do any “fact checking” before it hands over what most people assume to be “valuable” information in the form of “results” that are supposed to be conveniently ranked (by relevance to my search term) and then listed by order of importance. Why else would it be the “top” result queried by the “best” engine on the planet, right? It must be solid, factual information, right? Wrong. Most people do not care about, and therefore have no idea how or why Google indexes things the way it does, or that with enough knowledge, determination, and/or manpower it becomes incredibly easy (and extremely common) for sheer & utter nonsense (disguised as factual information) to be spread throughout the interweb while misguiding it’s inhabitants at a dangerously fast pace, similar to a raging wildfire in a pasture sprinkled with rose-covered bullshit. Even more-so with the sudden, albeit massive social networking boom of recent years.

    The simple fact is this: When an unhealthy number of loudmouthed net-dorks, proficient in both social networking and basic web design, yet inherently prone to overestimating their true understanding of all things technical, are provided with some potentially groundbreaking (MIS)information related to software they often use, such as “this new browser is bigger, faster and stronger than everything else!” – are then given a platform that easily and effectively reaches the majority of people on the planet (especially those with similar interests, who are likely to help carry the turd-torch) – you’ve sparked an unfortunate albeit inevitable recipe for disaster. Or, at the very least; a recipe that will result in an overwhelming number of very vocal web-geeks who are overtly excited to be part of what they (erroneously) assume to be the release of some amazing, new, innovative and revolutionary browser that will most certainly change the way we surf the net forever! C’mon folks, give me a break. All of this unnecessary misinforming & confusion, instead of simply taking a day or two to delve into the inner-workings of these majestic web transports we call browsers? And then, once you’ve realized that all of the relevant information has literally just come FULL CIRCLE (as this comment just did, as well), you’re left with a simple and basic understanding of why, as I stated at the very beginning of this rant: it wasn’t possible then, it isn’t possible now, and it will NEVER BE POSSIBLE to create that ever-elusive “Faster version of Firefox.”


  97. I switched to Pale Moon in late 2015 and loved it. But in late 2016 it started to become slugglish at times on certain sites. It also bothered me that, due to a lack of proper HTML 5 support, including HTML 5 DRM functions, and due to a lack of Silverlight support, Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, Hulu, Comcast On Demand, HBO GO, and pretty much any premium streaming site other than YouTube does not work with it. It also bothers me that the dev, MoonChild, did not release a single update for nearly 5 months. And when he finally did, non of the issues I was having were fixed, and a new one popped up: it is no longer compatible with the newest version of Java, and the incompatiblity is causing major javascript errors on some sites. Adding to that, as Pale Moon continues to move farther and farther away from Firefox, many of the addons that were once compatible with it are no longer working. Yet not a single new addon has appeared on the Pale Moon official addon site in over a year.
    For me, Pale Moon is almost as dead as K-Meleon at this point and it is a shame.

  98. hi, thx for post. you say ” if you want speed over anything else, go for this alternative browser”, but then you link to a page with 27 browsers! Which one are you recommending for speed? thx

  99. I have been using Pale Moon for several years. I have become frustrated with extension incompatibilities, but have yet to find a suitable alternative browser for the way I browse. I have typically between 250 and 600 browser tabs across three windows. I have not been able to find another browser that can do this. Does Chrome now allow this? I think the last time I tried it, Chrome had a separate process for each tab, yikes! 600 processes? I know my usage isn’t typical, and I’d love to hear about other ways (maybe with tab grouping and some sort of tab group session saving) that would work for me. When I’m searching for something I like to have all items open. Searching for a laptop? I want each option (say on eBay) on a separate tab. Searching for a car? I want all the cars I’m interested in on Craigslist opened on separate tabs. That can be over a hundred tabs on one search. Once I’ve spent hours searching, if I’m interrupted, I want to be able to come back and pick up where I left off. With Pale Moon, when I’m really using lots of tabs, every once in a while I have to kill the browser and reopen, and restore the session. Understandable when I am so hard on the browser. I’d love to find a more efficient browser, just haven’t found one.

  100. I’ve been using PaleMoon as my main browser at work and have provided better functionality than FF or Chrome. The Add-ons I require are available and all company applications work perfectly. I am even recommending my users to switch to avoid current errors with FF.

  101. Pale Moon has quickly become my favorite lightweight browser. It’s lightweight while still offering pretty robust support for various standards. The main thing to keep in mind with it is it aims to just be a browser, not an entire platform like Firefox and Chrome.

    It also won’t be supporting Widevine (so no Netflix) or WebRTC (So no VoIPing through the browser without a plugin) anytime soon. Not because the developers can’t support those, but they decided not to, due to the opensource nature of it, on the Widevine side, and various bulky reasons on the WebRTC side.

    Pale Moon integrates well into any environment where a user prefers to use separate specialized programs instead of an all-in-one program. I have Pale Moon playing nice with uGet, Liferea, Pidgin, and XPlayer. It also still supports NPAPI for those that might need slightly more functionality, like Google’s Talk Plugin or VLC’s Plugin.

    There’s also a lot of addons made specifically for Pale Moon now, by various developers and the community. A lot of Firefox addons also work fine under it, though some might have to run in compatibility mode. All my essentials work fine: uBlock Origins, Decentraleyes, and Xmarks.

    If you’re looking for something that offers functionality on the level of Firefox or Chrome that isn’t Firefox or Chrome, I’d recommend checking out Vivaldi or Opera instead.

  102. I switched to Pale Moon many months ago. After Firefox Quantum came out I tried it, and thought it was pretty fast. But then Pale Moon released an update shortly thereafter and it runs even faster than Firefox Quantum! Amazing browser. I hope Pale Moon will continue for as long as the Internet.

  103. what about now? I had to leave Pale Moon because it did not support some add-ons that i need anymore or new ones i found that i needed

  104. Firefox used to be my go-to browser. In recent months, however, the frequent appearance of the “Gah, your tab just crashed” page in Firefox had me looking for alternatives. I’ve yet to see a similar error pop up in Pale Moon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 + 9 =