Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: Pale Moon: Firefox Without DRM, Interface Breakage

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,099

    Default 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...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTY5NzM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    125

    Default 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...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30

    Default

    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...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2

    Unhappy

    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.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    743

    Default

    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.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Quote 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...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,381

    Default

    +1 @HeavensRevenge

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

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    145

    Default

    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).

    Quote 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 news@phoronix.com but it went ignored.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1

    Default

    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.

  10. #10

    Default

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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •