Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > aus.computers > #47335 > unrolled thread

Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser

Started byfelix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
First post2015-08-14 14:52 +1000
Last post2015-08-18 07:49 +0800
Articles 20 on this page of 107 — 21 participants

Back to article view | Back to aus.computers


Contents

  Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-14 14:52 +1000
    Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:18 +1000
      Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-14 19:43 +1000
        Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 05:39 +1000
      Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-15 07:36 +1000
        Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 09:56 +1000
          Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-16 08:18 +1000
            Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 08:36 +1000
              Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-16 08:45 +1000
                Re: Water fox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-16 23:15 +1000
    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:36 +1000
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Jeßus <fcx_communications@fmi.com> - 2015-08-14 17:19 +1000
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-14 19:43 +1000
        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-14 20:27 +1000
          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-14 23:05 +1000
            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 05:51 +1000
              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-15 07:32 +1000
                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 09:45 +1000
    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-14 13:53 +0800
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-14 19:44 +1000
        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-18 00:16 +0800
    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Jeßus <fcx_communications@fmi.com> - 2015-08-14 17:15 +1000
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-14 19:44 +1000
        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Jeßus <j@invalid.lan> - 2015-08-15 10:28 +1000
          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-15 11:31 +1000
            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 14:00 +1000
              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-08-15 14:12 +1000
                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-15 11:03 +0000
                  Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 05:52 +1000
                  Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-08-16 08:01 +1000
                    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-16 09:08 +0000
                      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-19 08:28 +0800
                        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Ördög Abaddon Belphegor Lucifer Mephisto Satan <lies-greed-corruption-hate@liberal.org.au> - 2015-08-19 11:14 +0000
                          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-20 07:55 +0800
                            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Ördög Lucifer Belphegor Abaddon Satan Beelzebub <lies-greed-corruption@liberal.org.au> - 2015-08-20 03:16 +0000
                              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-22 06:27 +0800
                                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser rb <snafu@khyber.org> - 2015-09-05 00:32 +1000
                                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser news13 <newsthirteenspam-spam@woa.com.au> - 2015-09-04 16:07 +0000
                                  Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 10:45 +1000
                              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-27 08:14 +1000
                                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-27 07:07 +0800
                                  Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-27 10:47 -0600
                                    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Ördög Mephisto Belphegor Lucifer Satan <Belphegor@Hell.biz> - 2015-08-28 22:52 +0000
                                      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-09-03 16:36 +0800
                                        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Ördög Lucifer Belphegor Abaddon Satan Beelzebub <lies-greed-corruption@liberal.org.au> - 2015-09-03 21:41 +0000
                                          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-09-05 07:44 +0800
                                            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-05 12:23 +1000
                                              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-05 13:17 +1000
                                                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-09-07 15:37 +1000
                                            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser news13 <newsthirteenspam-spam@woa.com.au> - 2015-09-05 04:37 +0000
                        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-22 18:17 +0000
                          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-27 07:19 +0800
                            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-27 09:45 +0000
                              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-28 09:43 +1000
                                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-28 11:23 +0800
                                  Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-28 19:33 +0000
                                    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-29 17:29 +0800
                                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-28 19:31 +0000
                                  Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-29 07:17 +1000
                                    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-29 18:00 +0000
                                      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-30 02:08 +0800
                              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-28 11:23 +0800
                                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-28 19:44 +0000
                                  Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-29 17:30 +0800
                                    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-29 18:11 +0000
                                      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-08-30 23:17 +1000
                                        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-08-31 07:40 +1000
                                          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-08-31 21:41 +1000
                                            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-08-31 21:56 +1000
                                              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-09-01 00:35 +0800
              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-18 00:18 +0800
                Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 07:24 +1000
                  Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-18 07:35 +0800
                    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 17:48 +1000
                      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-19 00:53 +0800
                        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 05:40 +1000
                          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-19 08:15 +0800
                        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-19 17:07 +1000
                          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-20 00:07 +0800
                          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 05:41 +1000
                    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-19 17:06 +1000
            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-15 15:40 +1000
            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Jeßus <j@invalid.lan> - 2015-08-16 11:11 +1000
              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 11:18 +1000
        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-03 14:16 +1000
          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Ördög Mephisto Belphegor Lucifer Satan <Belphegor@Hell.biz> - 2015-10-03 06:30 +0000
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-15 12:28 +1000
        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-08-15 12:08 +0000
          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Jeßus <j@invalid.lan> - 2015-08-16 11:08 +1000
          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-18 07:46 +0800
            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-08-18 10:09 +1000
              Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-18 14:57 +0800
            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Alterego <mindcraft@sanity.org> - 2015-08-18 01:59 +0000
    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser news13 <newsthirteenspam-spam@woa.com.au> - 2015-08-14 13:43 +0000
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-15 00:10 +1000
    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-15 12:33 +1000
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-15 15:41 +1000
    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 14:10 +1000
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-18 07:48 +0800
        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 17:50 +1000
    Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Fran Farmer <ask@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> - 2015-08-15 14:44 +1000
      Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-15 15:43 +1000
        Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2015-08-16 02:42 +0000
          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "Pelican" <water-birds@sea.somewhere.org.ir> - 2015-08-16 12:44 +1000
          Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser felix_unger <me@nothere.biz> - 2015-08-16 23:16 +1000
            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-08-17 07:41 +1000
            Re: Waterfox. a 64bit mozilla based web browser Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2015-08-18 07:49 +0800

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →


#47445

FromClocky <notgonna@happen.com>
Date2015-08-18 00:16 +0800
Message-ID<55d208ca$0$1665$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#47346
On 14/08/2015 5:44 PM, felix_unger wrote:
> On 14-August-2015 3:53 PM, Clocky wrote:
>> On 14/08/2015 12:52 PM, felix_unger wrote:
>>>
>>> Waterfox is a 64 bit version of firefox..
>>> https://www.waterfoxproject.org/
>>>
>>
>> In what way is it better then the steaming turd that is Firefox?
>
> another person who can't read..
>

I can read just fine, perhaps you don't understand the question. Firefox 
is shit, so how is this better?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47341

FromJeßus <fcx_communications@fmi.com>
Date2015-08-14 17:15 +1000
Message-ID<pb5rsahvve5tmdg5uue83nqdfk8ojmd639@4ax.com>
In reply to#47335
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:52:14 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
wrote:

>
>Waterfox is a 64 bit version of firefox.. https://www.waterfoxproject.org/

Mozilla based? I'll pass.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47347

Fromfelix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
Date2015-08-14 19:44 +1000
Message-ID<d35rkqFr7chU5@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#47341
On 14-August-2015 5:15 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:52:14 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
> wrote:
>
>> Waterfox is a 64 bit version of firefox.. https://www.waterfoxproject.org/
> Mozilla based? I'll pass.

so what do you use?


-- 
rgds,

Pete
-------
"When tolerance becomes a one-way street it leads to cultural suicide" -Col. Allen West
http://thereligionofpeace.com
https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/
http://pamelageller.com/
coming to a street near you!.. http://ausnet.info/islam/lakemba.html
Brigitte Gabriel's answer to 'peaceful' moslems.. http://tinyurl.com/brigitteGab
"No need for concern. Only 5-10% of muslims are extremists. In 1940 only 7% of Germans were Nazis. How did that turn out?"
"ISIS's actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith"
-Barack Obama, idiotic President of the USA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=56&v=QxzOVSMUrGM

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47370

FromJeßus <j@invalid.lan>
Date2015-08-15 10:28 +1000
Message-ID<de1tsap2ilh4s46bsmnlr72737vbrnur7p@4ax.com>
In reply to#47347
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 19:44:49 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
wrote:

>On 14-August-2015 5:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:52:14 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Waterfox is a 64 bit version of firefox.. https://www.waterfoxproject.org/
>> Mozilla based? I'll pass.
>
>so what do you use?

Firefox (sadly) ATM and Tor.

I don't have a favourite browser - I don't particularly like *any* of
them for differing reasons. All I know is I've tried just about all
the Mozilla variants and they suffer from being Mozilla based.

Firefox was excellent in the beginning, over time it and Thunderbird
gradually declined. They always seem to slow machines down gradually.
The other week I did a fresh install of Win 7 on someone's machine.
The only other things installed was Clamwin, Malwarebytes, Tbird and
Firefox. Within 5 days the machine was running slow, with FF not
responding/crashing on a regular basis. We really, really need
something fresh to come along in the browser world.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47373

Fromfelix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
Date2015-08-15 11:31 +1000
Message-ID<d37j4gFah6uU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#47370
On 15-August-2015 10:28 AM, Je�us wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 19:44:49 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14-August-2015 5:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:52:14 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Waterfox is a 64 bit version of firefox.. https://www.waterfoxproject.org/
>>> Mozilla based? I'll pass.
>> so what do you use?
> Firefox (sadly) ATM and Tor.
>
> I don't have a favourite browser - I don't particularly like *any* of
> them for differing reasons. All I know is I've tried just about all
> the Mozilla variants and they suffer from being Mozilla based.
>
> Firefox was excellent in the beginning, over time it and Thunderbird
> gradually declined. They always seem to slow machines down gradually.
> The other week I did a fresh install of Win 7 on someone's machine.
> The only other things installed was Clamwin, Malwarebytes, Tbird and
> Firefox. Within 5 days the machine was running slow, with FF not
> responding/crashing on a regular basis. We really, really need
> something fresh to come along in the browser world.

chrome! and of course w10 will have M$ 'new' browser

-- 
rgds,

Pete
-------
"When tolerance becomes a one-way street it leads to cultural suicide" -Col. Allen West
http://thereligionofpeace.com
https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/
http://pamelageller.com/
coming to a street near you!.. http://ausnet.info/islam/lakemba.html
Brigitte Gabriel's answer to 'peaceful' moslems.. http://tinyurl.com/brigitteGab
"No need for concern. Only 5-10% of muslims are extremists. In 1940 only 7% of Germans were Nazis. How did that turn out?"
"ISIS's actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith"
-Barack Obama, idiotic President of the USA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=56&v=QxzOVSMUrGM

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47379

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2015-08-15 14:00 +1000
Message-ID<d37rqqFcbivU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#47373

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.biz> wrote in message 
news:d37j4gFah6uU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 15-August-2015 10:28 AM, Je�us wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 19:44:49 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14-August-2015 5:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:52:14 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Waterfox is a 64 bit version of firefox.. 
>>>>> https://www.waterfoxproject.org/
>>>> Mozilla based? I'll pass.
>>> so what do you use?
>> Firefox (sadly) ATM and Tor.
>>
>> I don't have a favourite browser - I don't particularly like *any* of
>> them for differing reasons. All I know is I've tried just about all
>> the Mozilla variants and they suffer from being Mozilla based.
>>
>> Firefox was excellent in the beginning, over time it and Thunderbird
>> gradually declined. They always seem to slow machines down gradually.
>> The other week I did a fresh install of Win 7 on someone's machine.
>> The only other things installed was Clamwin, Malwarebytes, Tbird and
>> Firefox. Within 5 days the machine was running slow, with FF not
>> responding/crashing on a regular basis. We really, really need
>> something fresh to come along in the browser world.
>
> chrome!

Too slow to start and it’s a very minimal browser, no session manager at 
all.

I do use it on the phone and tablet and on the desktop
system for a few things it does better than other browsers
like groups.google and translate, but it’s a very minimal
browser that doesn’t do what I need to so with sessions.

> and of course w10 will have M$ 'new' browser
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47381

From"SG1" <lost@the.races.com>
Date2015-08-15 14:12 +1000
Message-ID<55cebc1d$0$3287$b1db1813$145976f0@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#47379
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:d37rqqFcbivU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>
> "felix_unger" <me@nothere.biz> wrote in message 
> news:d37j4gFah6uU1@mid.individual.net...
>> On 15-August-2015 10:28 AM, Je�us wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 19:44:49 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14-August-2015 5:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:52:14 +1000, felix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Waterfox is a 64 bit version of firefox.. 
>>>>>> https://www.waterfoxproject.org/
>>>>> Mozilla based? I'll pass.
>>>> so what do you use?
>>> Firefox (sadly) ATM and Tor.
>>>
>>> I don't have a favourite browser - I don't particularly like *any* of
>>> them for differing reasons. All I know is I've tried just about all
>>> the Mozilla variants and they suffer from being Mozilla based.
>>>
>>> Firefox was excellent in the beginning, over time it and Thunderbird
>>> gradually declined. They always seem to slow machines down gradually.
>>> The other week I did a fresh install of Win 7 on someone's machine.
>>> The only other things installed was Clamwin, Malwarebytes, Tbird and
>>> Firefox. Within 5 days the machine was running slow, with FF not
>>> responding/crashing on a regular basis. We really, really need
>>> something fresh to come along in the browser world.
>>
>> chrome!
>
> Too slow to start and it’s a very minimal browser, no session manager at 
> all.
>
> I do use it on the phone and tablet and on the desktop
> system for a few things it does better than other browsers
> like groups.google and translate, but it’s a very minimal
> browser that doesn’t do what I need to so with sessions.
>
>> and of course w10 will have M$ 'new' browser

Yes "Edge" is the reason I use IE11 in W10. The new product from M$ is 
crapware.

>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47393

FromFrank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
Date2015-08-15 11:03 +0000
Message-ID<d38kk4Fi749U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#47381
SG1 <lost@the.races.com> wrote:
[...]
> Yes "Edge" is the reason I use IE11 in W10. The new product from M$ is 
> crapware.

  I have no experience wit "Edge", but for *me*, IE11 is utter crap.

  I have IE11 since about 3 months on a new 8.1 installation. IE11
crashed and crashed since day one. Sometimes 'only' 1 tab. Sometimes
all tabs. Sometimes it could recover, sometimes it couldn't. I never had
these kinds of problems with IE9 on Vista.

  So the moral of this story is that webbrowsers are very, very much a
YMMV/YMWV thing! :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47396

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2015-08-16 05:52 +1000
Message-ID<d39jjnFq1i6U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#47393
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote 
> SG1 <lost@the.races.com> wrote

>> Yes "Edge" is the reason I use IE11 in W10. 
>> The new product from M$ is crapware.
 
>  I have no experience wit "Edge", but for *me*, IE11 is utter crap.

More of your wild exaggeration. 
 
> I have IE11 since about 3 months on a new 8.1 installation. 
> IE11 crashed and crashed since day one. 

Yes, that is the main downside with it. 

> Sometimes 'only' 1 tab. Sometimes all tabs. 

I've never seen all tabs crash but then I usually have dozens open. 

> Sometimes it could recover, sometimes it couldn't. 

Killing it with the Task Manager and accepting the offer to 
restore when you start it again has always worked fine for me. 

> I never had these kinds of problems with IE9 on Vista.

I had a much worse problem with IE9 and 10 on Win7,
when it had gone mental it was a damned nuisance to 
kill it in the Task Manager, it would keep restarting tabs
that you had killed there and took a lot of farting around
to get it to stop. Now with 11 you just End Process Tree
on the top 64 bit instance in the Task Manager and watch
it kill all the tabs and then restart it and accept the offer
to restore the last session. 
 
>  So the moral of this story is that webbrowsers 
> are very, very much a YMMV/YMWV thing! :-)

And that's why I routinely run 5 of them and 
use the one that suits the particular need best.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47397

From"SG1" <lost@the.races.com>
Date2015-08-16 08:01 +1000
Message-ID<55cfb6ba$0$42759$c3e8da3$9deca2c3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#47393
"Frank Slootweg" <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote in message 
news:d38kk4Fi749U1@mid.individual.net...
> SG1 <lost@the.races.com> wrote:
> [...]
>> Yes "Edge" is the reason I use IE11 in W10. The new product from M$ is
>> crapware.
>
>  I have no experience wit "Edge", but for *me*, IE11 is utter crap.
>
>  I have IE11 since about 3 months on a new 8.1 installation. IE11
> crashed and crashed since day one. Sometimes 'only' 1 tab. Sometimes
> all tabs. Sometimes it could recover, sometimes it couldn't. I never had
> these kinds of problems with IE9 on Vista.
>
>  So the moral of this story is that webbrowsers are very, very much a
> YMMV/YMWV thing! :-)

What do U use for newsgroups???

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47409

FromFrank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
Date2015-08-16 09:08 +0000
Message-ID<d3b27hF66fgU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#47397
SG1 <lost@the.races.com> wrote:
> "Frank Slootweg" <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:d38kk4Fi749U1@mid.individual.net...
> > SG1 <lost@the.races.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> >> Yes "Edge" is the reason I use IE11 in W10. The new product from M$ is
> >> crapware.
> >
> >  I have no experience wit "Edge", but for *me*, IE11 is utter crap.
> >
> >  I have IE11 since about 3 months on a new 8.1 installation. IE11
> > crashed and crashed since day one. Sometimes 'only' 1 tab. Sometimes
> > all tabs. Sometimes it could recover, sometimes it couldn't. I never had
> > these kinds of problems with IE9 on Vista.
> >
> >  So the moral of this story is that webbrowsers are very, very much a
> > YMMV/YMWV thing! :-)
> 
> What do U use for newsgroups???

  Can't you bloody read the bloody headers!? :-)

  But seriously, I use 'tin' for newsgroups.
  
  tin is a CUI ('Console'/Character UI) newsreader. After all, why use a
GUI for something which is only text?

  tin is a newsreader of UNIX origin. I use it 'under' Cygwin, which is
a Linux-like environment under Windows.

  So basically, I'm using an excellent newsreader on a crappy OS! :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47463

FromClocky <notgonna@happen.com>
Date2015-08-19 08:28 +0800
Message-ID<55d3cdb6$0$11101$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#47409
On 16/08/2015 5:08 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> SG1 <lost@the.races.com> wrote:
>> "Frank Slootweg" <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:d38kk4Fi749U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> SG1 <lost@the.races.com> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> Yes "Edge" is the reason I use IE11 in W10. The new product from M$ is
>>>> crapware.
>>>
>>>   I have no experience wit "Edge", but for *me*, IE11 is utter crap.
>>>
>>>   I have IE11 since about 3 months on a new 8.1 installation. IE11
>>> crashed and crashed since day one. Sometimes 'only' 1 tab. Sometimes
>>> all tabs. Sometimes it could recover, sometimes it couldn't. I never had
>>> these kinds of problems with IE9 on Vista.
>>>
>>>   So the moral of this story is that webbrowsers are very, very much a
>>> YMMV/YMWV thing! :-)
>>
>> What do U use for newsgroups???
>
>    Can't you bloody read the bloody headers!? :-)
>
>    But seriously, I use 'tin' for newsgroups.
>
>    tin is a CUI ('Console'/Character UI) newsreader. After all, why use a
> GUI for something which is only text?

Because it's 2015 and people don't use Linux on the desktop.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47470

FromÖrdög Abaddon Belphegor Lucifer Mephisto Satan <lies-greed-corruption-hate@liberal.org.au>
Date2015-08-19 11:14 +0000
Message-ID<8mue09.c49.19.2@news.alt.net>
In reply to#47463
Clocky predicted:

> Because it's 2015 and people don't use Linux on the desktop.

Speak for yourself!

However this response of mine comes from a GUI news reader called "PAN" 
that works quite well and is user friendly and is running on the Linux 
Platform: *Linux Mint 17.2 Long Term support distro*
Linux have progressed from the ancient days of text in a terminal only.
These days KDE desktop environment gives you anything M$ can offer (and 
often more) for free.
In fact, you don't even need to install anything! Just insert a live DVD 
and give it a try. You can't do that with Windows, can you?

-- 
Ördög ---- I show you the real Hell on Earth
  Lies, greed, envy, endemic corruption, hunger for power,
  unbridled hate, institutional sociopathy...  
  The largest political terrorist organisation
  in the Southern Hemisphere:
       *Liberal Party of Australia*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47483

FromClocky <notgonna@happen.com>
Date2015-08-20 07:55 +0800
Message-ID<55d5178e$0$1665$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#47470
On 19/08/2015 7:14 PM, Ördög Abaddon Belphegor Lucifer Mephisto Satan wrote:
> Clocky predicted:
>
>> Because it's 2015 and people don't use Linux on the desktop.
>
> Speak for yourself!
>

I speak for most people.

> However this response of mine comes from a GUI news reader called "PAN"
> that works quite well and is user friendly and is running on the Linux
> Platform: *Linux Mint 17.2 Long Term support distro*
> Linux have progressed from the ancient days of text in a terminal only.
> These days KDE desktop environment gives you anything M$ can offer (and
> often more) for free.

No it doesn't. I've used mint. It's good, but it's pointless as it does 
nothing better then Windows 7 and less support for hardware and the apps 
I use. When stuff doesn't work you find out just how backward Linux is 
under that thin veneer of trying to be Windows like.

> In fact, you don't even need to install anything! Just insert a live DVD
> and give it a try. You can't do that with Windows, can you?
>

Yes you can.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47486

FromÖrdög Lucifer Belphegor Abaddon Satan Beelzebub <lies-greed-corruption@liberal.org.au>
Date2015-08-20 03:16 +0000
Message-ID<8n06bg.a4l.19.2@news.alt.net>
In reply to#47483
Clocky decreed:

> On 19/08/2015 7:14 PM, Ördög Abaddon Belphegor Lucifer Mephisto Satan
> wrote:
>> Clocky predicted:
>>
>>> Because it's 2015 and people don't use Linux on the desktop.
>>
>> Speak for yourself!
>>
> I speak for most people.
>
No you don't. Not in Usenet!
> 
>> However this response of mine comes from a GUI news reader called "PAN"
>> that works quite well and is user friendly and is running on the Linux
>> Platform: *Linux Mint 17.2 Long Term support distro*
>> Linux have progressed from the ancient days of text in a terminal only.
>> These days KDE desktop environment gives you anything M$ can offer (and
>> often more) for free.
> 
> No it doesn't. I've used mint. It's good, but it's pointless as it does
> nothing better then Windows 7 ...

...definitely not true regarding the purchase price, eh?
I don't like to use pirated software.

> and less support for hardware and the apps
> I use. When stuff doesn't work you find out just how backward Linux is
> under that thin veneer of trying to be Windows like.

Which OP one chooses should depend on what productivity application one 
need to use and how much money one wants to spend on software licences. 
For me Mint does everything except plays the latest high end 3D PC games. 
The same argument you use in favour of Windows I have heard from rusted 
on Mac user whinging about Windows.
BUT! Don't you worry, I am not trying to 
convince you to do anything you don't like.
All I am saying is that Linux is quite capable. It certainly provides 
fast, stable and secure web-browsing, e-mail, news-reader clients and a 
comprehensive office suit. All that for free including the OP itself.
 
>> In fact, you don't even need to install anything! Just insert a live
>> DVD and give it a try. You can't do that with Windows, can you?
>>
>>
> Yes you can.

Really now! How? And without breaking M$ licence conditions???
Are you sure Windows-PE is quite legal?

-- 
Ördög ---- I show you the real Hell on Earth
  Lies, greed, envy, endemic corruption, hunger for power,
  unbridled hate, institutional sociopathy...  
  The largest political terrorist organisation
  in the Southern Hemisphere:
       *Liberal Party of Australia*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47493

FromClocky <notgonna@happen.com>
Date2015-08-22 06:27 +0800
Message-ID<55d7a5e7$0$1588$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#47486
On 20/08/2015 11:16 AM, Ördög Lucifer Belphegor Abaddon Satan Beelzebub 
wrote:
> Clocky decreed:
>
>> On 19/08/2015 7:14 PM, Ördög Abaddon Belphegor Lucifer Mephisto Satan
>> wrote:
>>> Clocky predicted:
>>>
>>>> Because it's 2015 and people don't use Linux on the desktop.
>>>
>>> Speak for yourself!
>>>
>> I speak for most people.
>>
> No you don't. Not in Usenet!

Most people don't use Usenet and most people don't use Linux.
I would be surprised if most people on Usenet use Linux.

>>
>>> However this response of mine comes from a GUI news reader called "PAN"
>>> that works quite well and is user friendly and is running on the Linux
>>> Platform: *Linux Mint 17.2 Long Term support distro*
>>> Linux have progressed from the ancient days of text in a terminal only.
>>> These days KDE desktop environment gives you anything M$ can offer (and
>>> often more) for free.
>>
>> No it doesn't. I've used mint. It's good, but it's pointless as it does
>> nothing better then Windows 7 ...
>
> ...definitely not true regarding the purchase price, eh?
> I don't like to use pirated software.
>

Just because it's free doesn't make Mint better. Perhaps you get what 
you paid for but what if that is not enough? In any case, Linux being 
free is a misnomer since it's only free if nothing goes wrong and you 
don't have to invest countless hours getting it to work properly.

Worse was approaching Linux forums as a relative noob and asking for 
advice and getting blamed rather then helped such was the snobbery and 
denial that Linux had any kind of issue. Or it would start some kind of 
use this distro instead of that distro argument which helped nobody.

>> and less support for hardware and the apps
>> I use. When stuff doesn't work you find out just how backward Linux is
>> under that thin veneer of trying to be Windows like.
>
> Which OP one chooses should depend on what productivity application one
> need to use and how much money one wants to spend on software licences.

When I was expected to buy a printer driver for $30 to get better then 
text only output from my printer I said no thanks.


> For me Mint does everything except plays the latest high end 3D PC games.
> The same argument you use in favour of Windows I have heard from rusted
> on Mac user whinging about Windows.
> BUT! Don't you worry, I am not trying to
> convince you to do anything you don't like.
> All I am saying is that Linux is quite capable. It certainly provides
> fast, stable and secure web-browsing, e-mail, news-reader clients and a
> comprehensive office suit. All that for free including the OP itself.
>

Most have a Windows port, making that point rather moot as is the 
security issue Linux users keep banging on about. I was more concerned 
with the number of Windows programs that I run not having a Linux port. 
Linux simply offered no advantage to simply booting into Windows and 
that is what most people find.

The other point I'll make is that under that pretty exterior Linux is a 
disorganised mess of endless distros all with half baked hardware 
support and crappy drivers.

That's why Linux is dead on the desktop.


>>> In fact, you don't even need to install anything! Just insert a live
>>> DVD and give it a try.

I have countless times. I even distributed the Ubuntu Live CD's at one time.


You can't do that with Windows, can you?
>>>
>>>
>> Yes you can.
>
> Really now! How?

With Winbuilder. You need a licensed copy of Windows with a key AFAIK.

  And without breaking M$ licence conditions???

No idea.

> Are you sure Windows-PE is quite legal?
>

I've never had a use for it so have no idea.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47729

Fromrb <snafu@khyber.org>
Date2015-09-05 00:32 +1000
Message-ID<msc9vg$1og$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#47493
On 22/08/2015 8:27 AM, Clocky wrote:

> Just because it's free doesn't make Mint better. Perhaps you get what
> you paid for but what if that is not enough? In any case, Linux being
> free is a misnomer since it's only free if nothing goes wrong and you
> don't have to invest countless hours getting it to work properly.
>
> Worse was approaching Linux forums as a relative noob and asking for
> advice and getting blamed rather then helped such was the snobbery and
> denial that Linux had any kind of issue. Or it would start some kind of
> use this distro instead of that distro argument which helped nobody.
>
ooh I resemble that - 'read the white paper' was the most useful 
suggestion I ever got
rb

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47730

Fromnews13 <newsthirteenspam-spam@woa.com.au>
Date2015-09-04 16:07 +0000
Message-ID<mscfk6$dkl$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#47493
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 06:27:51 +0800, Clocky wrote:


> Most people don't use Usenet

Lol, they do, but in alternate forms such as google groups, or yahoo 
groups.

> and most people don't use Linux.

Lol, most people are just like smokers; just the sucker on the end of the 
computer. Very few people actually "use" their computer.

>>
> Just because it's free doesn't make Mint better. Perhaps you get what
> you paid for but what if that is not enough? In any case, Linux being
> free is a misnomer since it's only free if nothing goes wrong and you
> don't have to invest countless hours getting it to work properly.

Can be true, but either you're trying to make it work a way it wasn't 
intended or doing something very complex.
> 
> Worse was approaching Linux forums as a relative noob and asking for
> advice and getting blamed rather then helped such was the snobbery and
> denial that Linux had any kind of issue.

You are spot on there. I walked out of being involved in a LUG when that 
attitude became dominant. Linux will never be anything other than a 
curiosity on the desktop for that attitude.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47737

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2015-09-05 10:45 +1000
Message-ID<d4usa9F5053U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#47730

"news13" <newsthirteenspam-spam@woa.com.au> wrote in message 
news:mscfk6$dkl$1@dont-email.me...
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 06:27:51 +0800, Clocky wrote:
>
>
>> Most people don't use Usenet

> Lol,

Village eejut imitations cut no mustard around here.

> they do,

Nope.

> but in alternate forms such as google groups, or yahoo groups.

That ain't usenet, stupid.

>> and most people don't use Linux.

> Lol, most people are just like smokers; just the sucker on the end
> of the computer. Very few people actually "use" their computer.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

>> Just because it's free doesn't make Mint better. Perhaps you get what
>> you paid for but what if that is not enough? In any case, Linux being
>> free is a misnomer since it's only free if nothing goes wrong and you
>> don't have to invest countless hours getting it to work properly.

> Can be true, but either you're trying to make it work a
> way it wasn't intended or doing something very complex.

Even sillier and more pig ignorant than you usually manage.

>> Worse was approaching Linux forums as a relative noob and
>> asking for advice and getting blamed rather then helped such
>> was the snobbery and denial that Linux had any kind of issue.

> You are spot on there. I walked out of being involved in a
> LUG when that attitude became dominant. Linux will never be
> anything other than a curiosity on the desktop for that attitude.

That ain't the reason it will never be anything other than a curiosity on
the desktop. Pity about what tablets and smartphones and Macs use tho. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#47524

Fromfelix_unger <me@nothere.biz>
Date2015-08-27 08:14 +1000
Message-ID<d46s0iF5bfsU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#47486
On 20/08/2015 1:16 PM, Ördög Lucifer Belphegor Abaddon Satan Beelzebub 
wrote:
> Which OP one chooses should depend on what productivity application one
> need to use and how much money one wants to spend on software licences.
> For me Mint does everything except plays the latest high end 3D PC games.
> The same argument you use in favour of Windows I have heard from rusted
> on Mac user whinging about Windows.
> BUT! Don't you worry, I am not trying to
> convince you to do anything you don't like.
> All I am saying is that Linux is quite capable. It certainly provides
> fast, stable and secure web-browsing, e-mail, news-reader clients and a
> comprehensive office suit. All that for free including the OP itself.
>   

that is certainly true. someone in a 'financially disadvantaged' 
situation can get an old second hand computer, put Mint on it, and do 
all of that.

-- 
rgds,

Pete
-------
"When tolerance becomes a one-way street it leads to cultural suicide" -Col. Allen West
http://thereligionofpeace.com
https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/
http://pamelageller.com/
coming to a street near you!.. http://ausnet.info/islam/lakemba.html
Brigitte Gabriel's answer to 'peaceful' moslems.. http://tinyurl.com/brigitteGab
"No need for concern. Only 5-10% of muslims are extremists. In 1940 only 7% of Germans were Nazis. How did that turn out?"
"ISIS's actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith"
-Barack Obama, idiotic President of the USA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=56&v=QxzOVSMUrGM

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | aus.computers


csiph-web