Why aren't you using the Firefox 64 bit /g/?
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/43.0b8/win64/en-US/
>>51677050
Because I'm an edgelord
>>51677050
Because I'm using 64-bit Opera 12.16
>win64
GNU/Linux has had 64 bit firefox for like a decade now.
>>51677166
And that is Microsoft fault because...
Windows XP 64 existed long before you could cum.
>>51677102
Just out of curiosity, why Opera over Firefox? If you want speed go with Maxthon, if you feel lonely go with Chrome, if you haven't been hacked in a while IE.
But why Opera?
>>51677266
It has too many features that either aren't implemented or aren't implemented well enough in SeaMonkey and Firefox
>>51677279
name 3
>>51677366
mail client
Opera Turbo
tab stacks
>>51677419
Semenkey's mail client is fine.
>>51677474
I prefer Opera's
I don't have a computer lol
>installation folder
>Program Files (x86)
lol
>>51677419
is it that hard to go to gmail.com and work from there?
Opera turbo? lol why does that even have a name?
Tab stacks? like rows of tabs? Pic related is me and the reason why you dont need stacking
>>51677546
WHAT? if you click custom install it goes to regular program files NOT x86
>>51677546
>>51677552
>webmail instead of a client
No thank you, plus some of the emails I use have no webmail interface.
>Opera turbo? lol why does that even have a name?
It's a built in data compression VPN
>tab stacks
Like collapsible folders in the tab bar
>>51677616
are you using opera 12?
If I were to grab it is there an easy way to transfer all of my add-ons and settings?
I really don't want to fuck with all that shit again.
>>51677654
Yeah
I'm using x64 Firefox Developer Edition that allows me to install unsigned addons and has the great developer theme.
>>51677662
yup but install first THEN uninstall x86 version. everything transfers over because it uses the same AppData folder
>>51677186
And xp64 was late to the table on 64 bit OSes
>>51677266
>If you want speed go with Maxthon
It's too bad that Maxthon is the opposite of that, I want to go back but the startup times and general "just open this fucking page already god damn it" takes a century compared to other browsers
I'm using cyberfox. Superior optimization with better UI
>>51677186
xp64 was an abomination of an OS
>>51677756
Okay, am I doing something wrong?
It seems to point to the x86 folder.
Should I just manually direct it to the regular folder?
Is it because I already have 32 bit installed?
>>51677783
I dont know what maxthon youre using... Mine feels like the notepad of browsers. Literally lightning fast, even before I disabled all that clutter.
>>51677616
Opera turbo is botnet. Smfh tbqh fâm.
>>51677819
Did you click custom AND it points to the x86 folder? Ive installed this twice and first time I had the x86 version installed and it still pointed to the 64 bit folder.
Does it have x64 in the file name after you download
>>51677880
No it's a dataminer. Regardless I don't use it for anything remotely sensitive (it doesn't work on HTTPS pages anyway) and would expect such a thing from an advertising company.
>>51677893
Yes and no.
I've downloaded from the OP link twice.
I guess I'm retarded
>>51677050
Because I'd rather Firefox be restricted to using 3GB of my RAM than using all 16GB.
>>51677926
im the op so you figured out the problem?
>>51677952
Probably the one correct answer.
>>51677969
Nope, I don't appear to be downloading the 64bit version despite it being in the 64bit directory of the site.
>>51677986
Actually disregard my previous post. It does NOT have 64 in the filename after download, I thought it did.
But install it manually into your 64 bit program files folder and launch it. I dont have the x86 firefox anymore can you open up task manager and see if it has 32 next to firefox.
>>51678046
I'll go ahead and manually specify the path and tell you how it goes.
>>51677817
xp 64bit was based on 2003 64bit, easily the best two systems microsoft has ever made
Because i value customization more than being a wanna be Chrome clone!
>>51677580
That is not Program Files (x86)
>>51678046
Seems to have worked fine and it indeed no longer has the 32bit indicator in my process list.
Not sure why it didn't want to install to the regular program folder by default.
>>51678144
I just looked it up and if you right click on the firefox.exe > properties > compatability mode
if you see windows 95 then its 32 bit if you see windows vista as the oldest one than its 64... just to confirm
>>51678173
Seems to be in order.
When the fuck will we get 86 bits software? x64 is getting old I anyway have x86 already
Installing. Thanks, OP.
>>51677050
64-bit Developer Edition has existed for a while now.
>>51678540
Which isn't even beta.
>>51677050
but I am :3
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-42.0-SSL&os=win64&lang=en-US
I'll wait for esr, if firefox won't die before it happens.
>>51677050
I'm not a Winpleb so I've been using 64-bit Firefox for fucking years.
Also, if Firefox 64-bit is now "Stable" why the fuck have they still not added links here?
https://www.mozilla.org/firefox/all/
Check mate Winfags.
I can't even remember the last time I had a 32-bit Firefox. Windows, as always, inferior to the alternatives.
>>51677050
>win64
>still using windows
Firefox had perfect 64 bit builds on linus for years
>>51680839
It's been possible to make 64-bit Firefox builds on Windows for years too, but Mozilla just never made a official one
I'm using chrome on w7 because it's nice to have it all synced up with my nexus 5 correctly. Why should I switch to Firefox?
>>51677491
Opera it's based in chromium now for this Opera has the same shortcomings that chrome
>>51680745
OP here, been using 64 bit for a couple of weeks and haven't noticed a difference from the 32 bit.
>>51681620
because noscript, because customization, and because you have too much ram installed on your computer which you will never use and firefox can most willingly oblige
>>51682269
Yea chrome never reaches those 8gb o' mine anon, still I don't know why should I need a browser that uses more, Chrome's never crashed on me since like a year
>>51677050
Because I am using Pale Moon 64 bit
>>51682350
I just hate those ugly curved chrome tabs and the lack of noscript which is a deal breaker for me. Literally everyone wants your data and noS is hands down more effective than any antivirus/firewall when it comes to web browsing.
>>51677050
>current year
>using sjwfox
>>51682549
Alternative?
Inb4 all botnets
>>51682549
>clinging to a non-tech argument
>willingly giving companies your data so that they can make money with you
>not understanding that Firefox, albeit flawed, is still the best all-around-browser by far
Loading 200-300 post threads still lags out.
I was hoping it would fix, its bit better, still not by much.
Will multi-process makes things better?
>>51677050
Because it's shit.
>>51683036
Chromium. Don't be a kek.
>>51681774
I'm not talking about Chopera, I'm talking about Opera.
>>51683036
Whatever fork tickles your fancy.
Pale Moon, Cyberfox, Waterfox, Icecat, Iceweasel, whatever.
>>51683036
Every alternative is just a fork from Firefox or full botnet. I'll just continue to use Firefox, at least it's a decent browser with a cool name and works on every platform unlike some of the forks. It's nice to be able to bring up some old article with your phone that you read on your laptop originally. Like some science article about a new innovation that you are discussing with other people and you're not on your computer right now.
>>51677050
Because Chromium is simply faster.
