Talk:Waterfox

Possible lack of diversity of views. Negative information about performance provided. No newer sources or recent independent testing

 * Are there new relevant data about Waterfox performance that can be provided here? Despite the information might be accurate, the actual article seems too negativist. Timofonic (talk) 04:23, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Market share
What is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.73.159.165 (talk) 09:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Ethical
We should add a section detailing The Waterfox Ethics as it seems like an important discriminator for this browser, briefly mentioned both in this wiki and in more detail in the .org website for Waterfox.

In the wiki it states Waterfox is "Speedy and Ethical" but what are these ethics Waterfox has above the other browsers, who by implication, do not? The .org website for Waterfox says "absolutely no data or telemetry is sent back to Mozilla or the Waterfox project" so am I guessing that's the ethical difference ... we should include it in the wiki entry, supplementing the vague "and ethical" phrase. I feel the ethics in question need to be detailed out because everything has some ethics, even Hitler had ethics when he needed to, so "... and Ethical" is just too vague.

Also, the Waterfox .org website's "About" section mentions Waterfox uses a search engine that plants trees ... is that important to include as part of the ethics? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.10.5.213 (talk) 17:31, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Versions of Waterfox vs Firefox
Hello together,

can someone please add a section with a list, that include the versions of waterfox there you can see the baseversion of firefox?

I think it will be good to see which version of firefox is base of which waterfox version.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thoys (talk • contribs) 07:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Cookie prompting
Waterfox 56.0.x had cookie prompting, but it was temporarily removed due to bugs, so I've also (temporarily) removed the following line from the list:


 * Cookie prompt from version 56.0 (beta)

- Mardus /talk 01:55, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Removing dead references
7. "Waterfox - Help Waterfox". Waterfox Project. 2017. Retrieved 6 February 2017. https://www.waterfoxproject.org/en-US/support-waterfox

This link 404 - please remove it or update it. There may also be others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.207.205.214 (talk) 2018-09-26 (UTC)

Android version last updated on 9 June ?
Here in the description box it is said that the Android version was last updated on 9 June 2019, however on the Playstore, ApkMirror it isn't mentioned so with the last update date being 19 August 2018, almost a year ago. Also, the developer hasn't even mentioned anything about Waterfox for Android on its official website, there is the Windows, MacOS and Linux version there but no specific Android version is found. I don't think that the Android version might have been updated on 9 June 2019 CaptainGKPrime (talk) 05:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I went to the Google Play page of the app and it say that it was updated to 68.0a2 on June 9, 2019.--Boris Baran - ✉ 11:37, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Can you provide a link, I don't seem to find any (link) to its latest version on Playstore or even ApkMirror. CaptainGKPrime (talk) 21:00, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Google is going to dismiss support
I am using Waterfox now. Youtube may be accessed, but a warning message alerts users that "we’ll stop supporting this browser soon. For the best experience please update your browser", linking this website. the supported browsers are Microsoft Edge, Mozilla Firefox, Opera and Google Chrome. Google reCAPTCHA are still not yet supported.

Inn 2019, Privacy One Group Ltd has become the owner of the Startpage search engine.

Some of those informations, may be hopefully integrated in the WP article.Micheledisaveriosp (talk) 23:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

article is hollow
if all uncited text and primary cited text were removed there would be no article left. is waterfox even notable? ive done a cursory look but cannot find any substantial coverage in secondary sources. any objections to culling wide swaths of the article like the following?:

- removing 'reception' section entirely, two weak sources do not a section make. also the citation for Alex Kontos facing criticism does not seem to contain any criticism

- simplifying history section to focus less on versioning (ie. 4.0 released on date xyz) more on actual large changes and events, if such changes/events exist

- the features section is cited to specific old versions of the browser (via dead links), i dont think such version-specific citations can be generalized to apply to the Waterfox project as a whole in perpetuity. would remove the majority of listed features.

- reducing introductory paragraphs to something like "Waterfox is an open-source web browser based on Firefox and developed by System1. There are official Waterfox and Waterfox Classic releases for Windows, macOS, Linux and Android"

after these changes the article will still need to be re-expanded upon, or possibly sent to afd if such expansions ultimately arent possible. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty nine (talk) 09:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)


 * fifteen thousand two hundred twenty nine (talk) 23:10, 3 November 2022 (UTC)