Jump to content



Photo

Anyone using Waterfox?


34 replies to this topic

#1 +macoman

macoman

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 25-December 13

Posted 23 January 2014 - 03:13

Waterfox is my default browser, the true 64bit compiled firefox based browser. I love it. Anyone using it?




#2 Brendeth

Brendeth

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 10-March 10
  • Location: Qld, Australia

Posted 23 January 2014 - 05:02

I've only seen the name mentioned here and there, but after looking into it I'll have to put it on my computer this evening.



#3 MeowPurr

MeowPurr

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 23-April 13
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 920

Posted 23 January 2014 - 06:22

I used to use it. I hate it. They bundled ads with the installer in the past, but the worst part is that they are incredibly slow to keep up with Firefox's updates. Stay with an outdated browser? Hells no. Also, the performance increases of using a native 64 bit browser are minimal.



#4 panacea

panacea

    technical cannibal

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 20-November 01
  • OS: win 8.1 | classic shell
  • Phone: htc one

Posted 23 January 2014 - 06:33

I used it for a while.   I am now back to normal Fox and I like it better.    Waterfox is slow to keep up and I noticed ZERO improvement over Firefox, other then the knowledge that it is 64bit...  

which is totally useless to me, as it does not add any real performance gains.



#5 The_Decryptor

The_Decryptor

    STEAL THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 28-September 02
  • Location: Sol System
  • OS: iSymbian 9.2 SP24.8 Mars Bar

Posted 23 January 2014 - 07:36

I used to use it. I hate it. They bundled ads with the installer in the past, but the worst part is that they are incredibly slow to keep up with Firefox's updates. Stay with an outdated browser? Hells no. Also, the performance increases of using a native 64 bit browser are minimal.


For a long time the 64bit browser was actually slower than the 32bit variant.

Mozilla don't consider the 64bit Windows build to be "shippable" for a reason, that includes hard to track down bugs, compiler issues, etc.

#6 AMPSV

AMPSV

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 13-September 03
  • Location: Sol 3

Posted 23 January 2014 - 08:15

I use Cyberfox 64bit  did use waterfox but the slow updates got anoying



#7 Wakers

Wakers

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 30-July 07

Posted 23 January 2014 - 08:58

I'm using it at the moment.  I know it was slow to update in the past, but at the moment it's at the current Firefox version, 26.

 

It's much better than Firefox, which gets bogged down and takes an age to load a page (stuck on establishing a connection) after it's been open for a while, even on a high end system.  Oh, and it still, after 2 years, has the issue where flash videos pause briefly every few seconds if the browser has been open for a while as well.

 

Waterfox doesn't.

 

I also tried Firefox Light, which was even snappier, however Adfender doesn't support it at this point in time.  Never heard of Cyberfox, I'll look into that.

 

EDIT; just looked at Cyberfox, there's a tremendous lack of information about it on their own site - what do they cut out? What does it do different?



#8 The_Decryptor

The_Decryptor

    STEAL THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 28-September 02
  • Location: Sol System
  • OS: iSymbian 9.2 SP24.8 Mars Bar

Posted 23 January 2014 - 10:39

I'm using it at the moment.  I know it was slow to update in the past, but at the moment it's at the current Firefox version, 26.
 
It's much better than Firefox, which gets bogged down and takes an age to load a page (stuck on establishing a connection) after it's been open for a while, even on a high end system.  Oh, and it still, after 2 years, has the issue where flash videos pause briefly every few seconds if the browser has been open for a while as well.
 
Waterfox doesn't.
 
I also tried Firefox Light, which was even snappier, however Adfender doesn't support it at this point in time.  Never heard of Cyberfox, I'll look into that.
 
EDIT; just looked at Cyberfox, there's a tremendous lack of information about it on their own site - what do they cut out? What does it do different?


I've never encountered that, are you sure you don't have some 32bit app hooking into Firefox?

I leave Firefox open for weeks at a time, it's never slow to respond.

#9 ThaCrip

ThaCrip

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 28-November 04
  • Location: USA

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:12

i tried it a while ago but Pale Moon x64 seems like the better all around choice for a 64bit variation of Firefox. i been using Pale Moon x64 for a while now and i have no issues and it gets updates (security etc) pretty quickly to.



#10 cork1958

cork1958

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 04-October 02

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:12

I've used it a few times, but simply quit because it was a Firefox wanna be, and I've never liked Firefox anyway, and it never really blew my hair back.

 

Never heard of  Cyberfox either. May look into it.



#11 OP +macoman

macoman

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 25-December 13

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:26

I used to use it. I hate it. They bundled ads with the installer in the past, but the worst part is that they are incredibly slow to keep up with Firefox's updates. Stay with an outdated browser? Hells no. Also, the performance increases of using a native 64 bit browser are minimal.

They may added ads in the past but they don't anymore, very clean browser... it has not slow performance, don't know its because i have 8GB in my laptop. But so far the experience with waterfox is similar to Firefox with the latest updates.

#12 Max Norris

Max Norris

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 15
  • Joined: 20-February 11
  • OS: Windows 8.1, BSD Unix
  • Phone: HTC One (Home) Lumia 1020 (Work)

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:52

Just another one to toss out there for consideration is pcxFirefox, has both x86 and x64 builds.  Seemed pretty reliable last time I experimented with it.

 

But I'm of a similar mind to The_Decryptor, I've yet to run a 64 bit version on my hardware that was faster than the x86 build (at least on the benchmark sites), nor have I had a burning need for a 64 bit build.  Quite happy with the vanilla x86 build myself, solid as a rock for me.



#13 OP +macoman

macoman

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 25-December 13

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:17

I used it for a while.   I am now back to normal Fox and I like it better.    Waterfox is slow to keep up and I noticed ZERO improvement over Firefox, other then the knowledge that it is 64bit...  

which is totally useless to me, as it does not add any real performance gains.

Are you sure?

 

Waterfox features:

  • Compiled in Intel's C++ Compiler
  • Intel's Math Library
  • Streaming SIMD Extensions 3
  • Advanced Vector Extensions
  • Jemalloc
  • Profile-Guided Optimisation
  • /O3 Switch
  • 100% Extension Compatibility
  • 64-bit Plugin Support
  • Future Proof!


#14 +_Alexander

_Alexander

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 21-January 13
  • Location: USA
  • OS: W8.1 u1
  • Phone: Nokia 521

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:22

Mozilla should really pull its head out of its behind. Windows has been 64-bit since Windows 2003.



#15 OP +macoman

macoman

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 25-December 13

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:30

Mozilla should really pull its head out of its behind. Windows has been 64-bit since Windows 2003.

Waterfox is made by Mozilla ;)