Waterfox Reviews

Unsigned extensions

about Waterfox and Mozilla Firefox · · Helpful Not helpful 7 Helpful Report as spam

From the release 41 Firefox will start blocking unsigned extensions.
Waterfox will keep the possibility to install them, another reason to prefer this software to the original one.



about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful 7 Helpful Report as spam

Ok.... but,

+Disabled Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) +Removed Pocket +Removed Telemetry +Removed data collection +Removed startup profiling +Removal of Sponsored Tiles on New Tab Page

-Allow running of all 64-Bit NPAPI plugins
-Allow running of unsigned extensions

I believe that once firefox was upgraded to version 58, and that each clone is updated on security issues, the kernel remains the same.
however, many of the old extensions were maligned, problematic, and unreliable, for that reason they are not to be informed in quantum version 58.
Also all the positives options easilly can be removed from about:config section at Firefox quantum.

[Edited by CpaRta, February 11]

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful 5 Helpful Report as spam

Best Firefox-fork out there, no telemetry & faster than Mozilla's browser.

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful 4 Helpful Report as spam

I've been using Waterfox for several days now, and honestly, I can't tell the difference between it and Firefox 56. It may not be as fast as Quantum, but it's not the early-2000s, and browser speed is not nearly as important to me as overall functionality.

I was forced to switch, because Firefox refuses to support the Tab Mix Plus addon, and not having multi-row tabs is a researcher's nightmare. Thankfully, Waterfox continues to include security updates and other improvements, instead of leaving millions of long-time Firefox users in the dust.

about Waterfox · · 4 Helpful Report as spam

Continues to be updated, while allowing me to use favorite addons, especially Tab Mix Plus (for multi-row tabs).

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful 3 Helpful Report as spam

While I do like that Waterfox continues to support legacy extensions Firefox dropped in version 57, I don't recommend it because it's slow to update. As of the day this was written, Waterfox is on version 56, and Firefox Quantum (regular edition, not beta or nightly) is on version 59. This means Waterfox users will have to wait longer before they get security patches and updates, making the browser more dangerous to use than a Firefox browser configured for security and privacy using the PrivacyTools config.

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful Report as spam

As I find Firefox more and more intrusive and Chrome-like, I installed Waterfox some months after trying Palemoon and at the moment I keep Firefox Quantum and Waterfox on my PC (Palemoon is very good but what about not being able to install so usefull add-on like uBlock origin ? )
With Watefox, I had to reinstall the add-ons I have in Firefox, each time fetching an"older version" to be compatible, but these these versions were not so old.

What I dislike in Firefox is that it seems more and more to run after Chrome.
I really don't like the Options menu in Firefox. Sometimes your may ask yourself in wich part of the menu you are, because there is no really landmark on this entirely white screen. I imagine that the main purpose of this non-ending screen is to dissuade people to modify the options (for example blocking all third party cookies, uncheck sending reports to Mozilla, disabling Web push completely and so on).
Perhaps within some time I will keep only Waterfox.

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful Report as spam

This is the second Firefox, but with remove telemetry.

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful Report as spam

A Firefox alternative. Worth it on 64 computerse.

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful Report as spam

The staff had hopes for this, but it didn't pan out. Multiple portal sights for differing purposes were no longer usable / could not log in. Much as we want to abandoned the new (polluted) FireFox, this is not (yet) the solution. It brought our work flow to a halt.

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful -3 Helpful Report as spam

So much better than Firefox Quantum.


I believe this browser is no longer updated

about Waterfox and Pale Moon, Mozilla Firefox · · Helpful Not helpful -8 Helpful Report as spam

and therefore poses a security threat to those who use it

My advise is going with Pale Moon x64


or plain Firefox, actually

I'm not sure if we can trust Pale Moon

Well I'm using Waterfox version 35, only one tiny point release behind Firefox, so it seems it is being updated now.

Waterfox is currently at 55.2.2 while Firefox is at 56.0.2. Updates are documented at https://www.waterfoxproject.org/blog/ … and it seems they have caught up, except that they will keep the old extensions API because WF seems to be for experienced users. FF is becoming more mainstream-orientated to not put off new internet users.

"FF is becoming more mainstream-orientated to not put off new internet users."

No sooner than one piece of misinformation is squashed....along comes another. I'm pretty sure Mozilla have been incredibly clear about why they moved Firefox away from the old extension platform and their other changes, and it had nothing to do with chasing "new internet" users. If anything, they're chasing after Chrome users.

about Waterfox · · Helpful Not helpful -8 Helpful Report as spam

Highly problematice (old school) install on Linux. Such a shame, making it hard to test for a basic linux user.


I use Linux Mint. Just download the .tar.gz file from the website to wherever you want it, extract it, go into the Waterfox folder, and click on the "waterfox" executable. Add a desktop or panel link to make it simple for daily use.

It's literally the same procedure as installing any new version of Firefox has been for the past decade or so.

Sorry, the file format is .tar.bz2, but it's the same procedure.

There is (always) a better way that is more accessible to more people wanting to use linux. Never give people only an archive and figuring out where to extract it. If only the original developer would just take a few more steps.

See the "internet" section at

Or go directly to the source at...

Why would you spam garbage links to unofficial sources and other websites?

The official GitHub is:


and installing via non-official source is a lot less accessible than unzipping an official archive, considering that casual users don't generally install dev files and headers on their systems, much less compilers and debuggers.

Not spam; alternative sources for those unable to do as you think is so easy. This show you do not have legitimate experience with a wider user base. We do.