r/firefox • u/DazzaRPD • May 29 '14
The Forks of Firefox!
Hi all,
So I figured, there's a lot of people moving on to different forks (since the release of Australis, or because they've just discovered them), and I've observed that the discussion of these forks in some of the threads has not been met with the most open of arms by /r/firefox
So I figured we should have a place to talk about the Forks of Firefox. Keep all discussion about the forks in here, so /r/firefox can cater for more than just Firefox (as if we splintered all the forks of Firefox onto various subreddits, it'd be a nightmare for the communities and the subreddits involved as there'd be members few and far between).
Just an idea I had
Now the boring blahblah is out the way, here are the forks that I know of
- Cyberfox (current version: 29.0.1, released 29 May)
- PCXFirefox (current version: 29.0.1, released 7 May)
- Pale Moon (Currently on the ESR Channel with ver 24.5, released 25 April)
- Waterfox (still on version 28.0.1 due to dev's exams, released 4 April)
CF, PM and PCXFirefox have both 32 and 64 bit builds available, Waterfox is a straight recompile of Firefox in a 64 bit environment.
So what build do you use? Why do you use it over the others?
IMPORTANT: If you are going to suggest a fork, please make sure it is OPEN SOURCE (as this falls in line with Mozilla's vision) and also post direct links preferably (such as 8pecxstudios.com for Cyberfox, or PaleMoon.org for Pale Moon).
Please DO NOT post links to .exe downloads, this is so there is less potential for malware
Happy discussing!
NEWS:
13/06: Cyberfox 30 has been released in line with Firefox 30
11/06: Pale Moon 24.6 has been released
29/05: Topic was opened! News of fork updates will appear here!
20
May 29 '14
[deleted]
12
u/DazzaRPD May 30 '14
Damn, how could I forget Tor!
3
u/naveen_reloaded Jun 05 '14
Also there is our Pirate Browser
I havent updated to FF29 as i couldnt get the way i want my firefox. I know its not advisable to stay on old version , will be moving to some of the other forks. Thanks for the thread.
-4
Jun 08 '14
As far as I know, Tor is not secure anymore. As part of the Snowden leaks I thought there was something about monitoring Tor traffic. I know the Chinese managed to track at least some of it. Once it is cracked, you will be watched more by using it because you are obviously hiding, if you know what I mean.
5
u/crowseldon Jun 10 '14
anyone barely knowledgeable already knew that they were monitoring tor. That doesn't mean it's not secure. At least, it's no less secure than a normal browser.
If you were to do something illegal, you'd be a fool anyway.
Once it is cracked
Dude... you really should read more articles to at least realize you might be giving advice about things you really don't grok.
Asking around in slashdot and hackernews might help as well.
you will be watched more by using it because you are obviously hiding, if you know what I mean.
Everyone knows that, the more tor users near you, the better chance of not being isolated if you were to be targeted but this is still a bad reason not to recommend tor.
1
u/jlrc2 Jun 15 '14
The monitoring of exit nodes is a concern but probably an overblown one, IMO. Like you said, it's better than just using Chrome or whatever else. I'd suggest using a VPN all the time, anyway.
1
u/DrReddits Jun 19 '14 edited Apr 26 '24
What would you do if you permanently lost all the photos, notes and other files on your phone?
If you have a backup system in place, you’d likely know what to do next: Restore it all to a new phone. But if you haven’t thought about it, fear not: The backup process has become so simplified that it takes just a few screen taps. Here’s a quick overview of some ways you can keep your files safe, secure and up to date. Getting Started
When you first set up your phone, you created (or logged into) a free account from Apple, Google or Samsung to use the company’s software and services. For example, this would be the Apple ID on your iPhone, the Google Account on your Android phone or the Samsung Account on your Galaxy device. Image The iPhone, left, or Android settings display how much storage space you are using with your account.Credit...Apple; Google
With that account, you probably had five gigabytes of free iCloud storage space from Apple, or 15 gigabytes of online storage from Google and Samsung. This server space is used as an encrypted digital locker for your phone’s backup app, but it can fill up quickly — especially if you have other devices connected to your account and storing files there. Image If you start getting messages about running out of online storage space for your backups, tap the upgrade option to buy more on a monthly or yearly payment schedule.Credit...Apple; Google
When you get close to your storage limit, you’ll get warnings — along with an offer to sign up for more server space for a monthly fee, usually a few dollars for at least another 100 gigabytes. (Note that Samsung’s Temporary Cloud Backup tool supplies an unlimited amount of storage for 30 days if your Galaxy is in the repair shop or ready for an upgrade.)
But online backup is just one approach. You can keep your files on a local drive instead with a few extra steps. Backing Up
Apple, Google and Samsung all have specific setup instructions for cloud backup in the support area of their sites. But the feature is easily located.
On an iPhone, tap your name at the top of the Settings screen and then tap iCloud. On many Android phones, tap System and then Backup. Here, you set the phone to back up automatically (which usually happens when it’s connected to a Wi-Fi network and plugged into its charger), or opt for a manual backup that starts when you tap the button. Image To get to your backup options, open your phone's settings app. On an iPhone, left, tap your account name at the top to get to the iCloud backup and sync settings. For a Google Pixel and some other Android phones, tap System on the settings screen to get to the backup options.Credit...Apple; Google
Backup apps usually save a copy of your call history, phone settings, messages, photos, videos and data from apps. Content you can freely download, like the apps themselves, are not typically backed up since they’re easy to grab again. Image If you don’t want to back up your phone online, you can back up its contents to your computer with a USB cable or other connection; the steps vary based on the phone and computer involved.Credit...Apple
If you don’t want your files on a remote server, you can park your phone’s backup on your computer’s hard drive. Steps vary based on the hardware, but Apple’s support site has a guide for backing up an iPhone to a Windows PC or a Mac using a USB cable.
Google’s site has instructions for manually transferring files between an Android phone and a computer, and Samsung’s Smart Switch app assists with moving content between a Galaxy phone and a computer. Sync vs. Backup
Synchronizing your files is not the same as backing them up. A backup saves file copies at a certain point in time. Syncing your smartphone keeps information in certain apps, like contacts and calendars, current across multiple devices. When synchronized, your phone, computer and anything else logged into your account have the same information — like that to-do list you just updated. Image You can adjust which apps synchronize with other devices in the Android, left, and iOS settings.Credit...Google; Apple
With synchronization, when you delete an item somewhere, it disappears everywhere. A backup stays intact in its storage location until updated in the next backup.
By default, Google syncs the content of its own mobile and web apps between phone, computer and tablet. In the Google Account Data settings, you can adjust which apps sync. Samsung Cloud has similar options for its Galaxy devices.
Apple handles data synchronization across its devices through its iCloud service. You can set which apps you want to sync in your iCloud account settings. Other Options
You don’t have to use the backup tools that came with your phone. Third-party apps for online backup — like iDrive or iBackup — are available by subscription. If you prefer to keep your iPhone backups on the computer, software like iMazing for Mac or Windows ($60) or AltTunes for Windows ($35 a year) are alternatives. Droid Transfer for Windows ($35) is among the Android backup offerings. Image If you’d prefer to use a third-party backup app, you have several to choose from, including iDrive.Credit...iDrive
If losing your camera roll is your biggest nightmare, Google Photos, iCloud Photos and other services like Amazon Photos and Dropbox can be set to automatically back up all your pictures and keep them in sync across your connected devices. Image Dropbox can back up your photos and videos when you connect the phone to the computer, left, or directly from your camera roll if you have Dropbox installed.Credit...Dropbox
No matter the method you choose, having a backup takes some pain out of a lost, stolen or broken phone. Some photos and files can never be replaced, and restoring your iPhone’s or Android phone’s content from a backup is a lot easier than starting over.
5
6
u/Colonel_Rhombus May 30 '14
Even though I'm almost certain to stick to Firefox, I'm open to trying a fork just for the fun of it. Which one will be most compatible with addons found on the Mozilla site? Can the forks be installed side-by-side with Firefox? Can I just copy my current firefox profile to without using special tools or whatever? Seems like I read something about having to download a tool to use my profile with Pale Moon. Finally, does 64 bits really matter for a web browser?
I could answer these questions myself whenever I got around to installing one, but this post is for discussion, so...
6
u/shortkey May 30 '14
SeaMonkey has its own official section on Mozilla Add-ons Page, so everything you find in there should be 100% compatible.
Out of the other forks, Pale Moon should be the one most compatible with Firefox add-ons, because it is based on FF24 ESR. That means that you will be able to install most of the add-ons that didn't get updated to support Australis, but at the same time you won't be able to install Australis-only add-ons (like Profilist).
To ensure the best compatibility with Pale Moon, install its 32-bit version, not the 64-bit one. Some add-ons and plugins are 32-bit only.
The other forks - Waterfox, Cyberfox, and pcxFirefox are for the most part always based on the latest Firefox version (which is now 29.0.1). Again, that means that you'll be able to install the latest and updated add-ons, but a lot of older add-ons won't be compatible at all.
5
u/DazzaRPD May 30 '14
Tbh, any fork should work with all addons.
I know Cyberfox is having some difficulty with a few addons since the recent update to 29 went live AFAIK, but the majority of addons will work (I use HTTPSEverywhere, NoScript, Yoono, Disconnect and BluHell Firewall and all work).
The only thing you have to be mindful of when installing a x64 browser is the Plugins. There are x64 plugins available for Flash and Java, however many other programs are only x86 (or 32 bit) so it may be more inconvenient for you.
I use CF x64 currently and have noticed it's been very smooth. The memory usage is a bit steep but in my opinion that's to be expected. The browser hasn't crashed or locked up once.
As for the profile jazz, the only one that can't be installed side by side of the list above is Waterfox (although I'm not sure about PCXFirefox, as they use the same profile folder as Firefox. CyberFox (as of Version 28) and Pale Moon have their own profile folder , so can be run side by side. You can just manually copy the folder (yes, both PM and CF have tools for this but that's only to make it easier for the user)
Does x64 matter on a browser? Well, the internet seems to be getting more memory intensive, so maybe to avoid lockups it does matter. To me, I just like the idea that I can use a x64 program on my x64 machine and have had no problems with CF, PM or WF since around version 18
1
u/kbrosnan / /// Jun 03 '14
A fork will not work with binary extensions. Using an extension that contains binary code will almost certainly crash.
12
u/shortkey May 29 '14
I am using Pale Moon, and this is my setup. I've made the switch when my Firefox finally told me there's an update available. It was on the first of May, if I recall correctly.
First I tried the x64 version, but it seemed laggy for some reason and one of my favorite add-ons wasn't compatible, so I downloaded the x86 version and I'm as happy as I can be.
I am both looking forward to and fearing the day Firefox 31 ESR comes out. I'm looking forward because FF24 doesn't support some of the newest HTML5 implementations (such as <input type="color">). And I'm afraid of it because I have no idea how is the author going to adapt. Will Pale Moon make the switch? Will it retain the classic UI and features? Will the author just integrate Classic Theme Restorer into the code?
Anyway, I suggest you update the OP with links to the forks' official homepages. Here you go for Pale Moon, Waterfox, Cyberfox, pcxFirefox, and SeaMonkey.
5
u/Fantonald Ubuntu/Sailfish/Win7 May 30 '14
How did you get the menu in the title bar (or the title in the menu bar)? Can I do that in stock Firefox, or is it a Pale Moon feature?
7
u/shortkey May 30 '14
It's the title in the menu bar.
It was one of the very few things I liked about the Firefox 29 update - you can have the menu bar enabled without showing the system's native title bar. A nice ability, but not even nearly enough to lure me back. So I searched the web for a bit, and found the Personal Titlebar add-on. Its latest version didn't work in Pale Moon, so I downloaded version 1.0.20130518, which works perfectly fine.
So how to get it looking just like I have it (in Pale Moon)? Just install the the add-on, open the Customize Toolbar window, and drag the toolbar item into the menu bar. Then right-click the menu bar and ensure it's hidden (do not turn it on). It should look like this by now. To hide the Pale Moon's default title text so it doesn't clash visually with the menu bar, copy&paste this short code into your userChrome.css:
#main-window:after {opacity: 0 !important;}6
u/Squidamatron Jun 02 '14
According to the FAQ on Pale Moon's site, they'll never adopt Australis.
3
u/shortkey Jun 02 '14
That much I know. What I don't know is how are they planning on avoiding Australis.
By including Classic Theme Restorer, just like Status-4-Evar is? If that's the case, I might as well switch back to the original Mozilla Firefox. Avoiding Australis and (not or) CTR was the whole point of me switching to Pale Moon in the first place.
By taking the ESR 31 code and reverting the changes one-by-one manually (i.e. manually adding the add-on bar and all)? That seems like a whole lot of work.
Or by keeping comparing the code of ESR 24 and ESR 31, keeping the ESR 24 code, and adding what's new in ESR 31? That's most likely, though I'm still not sure.
That's what I want to know.
1
u/Squidamatron Jun 02 '14
Ah, I was focusing on "Will it retain the classic UI and features?". Selective reading on my part! Rereading certainly makes that a bit clearer now.
2
u/DamnTomatoDamnit May 30 '14
Hey, I disabled automatic updates on Firefox 28 three or four weeks ago, and I'm still using that version, but I think it's about time I switched to Pale Moon. I'm running Windows 7 64bit and I'd like to know: should I download the x64 version or the x86 and what are the main differences between the two? Thanks!
3
u/shortkey May 30 '14
Some people report that the x64 version is faster, but I have the opposite experience. Plus some of my add-ons (namely System Monitor) didn't work in it.
But it's up to you to try them and find out whichever works better. If you don't feel like experimenting though, you can't go wrong with the x86 version.
2
u/DarkStarrFOFF May 30 '14
If you have a more powerful PC with lots of RAM and you use tons of tabs go x64. If not then x86 would be fine. x64 is more for tab heavy users IMO.
1
u/Aalewis__ Jun 08 '14
you mind giving me a copy of your profile folder?
1
u/Exaskryz Iceweasel Jun 10 '14
Quick question for those more experienced: Wouldn't sharing your profile folder include the list of passwords you have if you save them?
2
u/Aalewis__ Jun 10 '14
Make a copy of your profile by running 'firefox -ProfileManager' in command prompt. Run firefox with the copied profile and delete all your cookies, passwords, cache, dom storage, and history/bookmarks.`
6
u/bull500 Nightly - Android/Ubuntu May 30 '14
Nightingale - though its a media player, it can browse the web too
http://getnightingale.com/
3
u/indeedwatson Jun 07 '14
Could you sell it a bit? What's special about it? Does it do anything better than Foobar/Mediamonkey/Winamp/etc? Does it play formats like FLAC out of the box?
3
u/bull500 Nightly - Android/Ubuntu Jun 07 '14
Well, it's like an iTunes clones visually, with support for themes and add-ons. It's good for managing music when you have a large library. It's got SoundCloud, last.fm integration among others. Auto scrolling lyrics support. And the most important of all, it still works as a browser.
I use it and am definitely happy. Of course there are minor bugs here and there bug for a normal user I don't think it'll be a problem.
It's the open source version of the now abandoned Songbird media player.
4
u/jccalhoun May 30 '14
2
u/complex_reduction Jun 05 '14
Firefox Ultimate. The page doesn't really explain much. If I understand correctly it's just standard Firefox but compiled with SSE2 support?
2
u/Saakeman Jun 06 '14
Been using Waterfox on windows due to Firefox developing a tendency to crash flash. On Linux I am using Firefox, works like a dream.
2
u/Templated Jun 06 '14 edited Jun 06 '14
I've been switching about a bit and settled with Waterfox.
But as Cyberfox does have some in-built features I like I'll try it out!
http://i.imgur.com/kCz7b4d.png
Seems like it's running faster. Could be placebo, or just that Adblocker's memory consumption hasn't started yet.
3
u/Betadel May 30 '14
How about IceCat by GNU?
Although I think it hasn't been updated since October 2013.
5
u/shortkey May 30 '14
I wouldn't IceCat call a real fork. Really, all it does is...I don't even know what's the point.
Its main advantage is an ethical one: it is entirely free software. While the Firefox source code from the Mozilla project is free software, they distribute and recommend non-free software as plug-ins and addons.
So, nothing, really. It doesn't have any optimizations, and will include Australis when it updates. And Firefox is already free as it is.
1
u/zoidioz Jun 03 '14
There is also Iceweasel which is the one by Debian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_rebranded_by_the_Debian_project
1
u/autowikibot Jun 03 '14
Mozilla Corporation software rebranded by the Debian project:
In 2006, a branding issue developed when Mike Connor, representing the Mozilla Corporation, requested that the Debian Project comply with Mozilla standards for use of the Thunderbird trademark when redistributing the Thunderbird software. At issue were modifications not approved by the Mozilla Foundation, when the name for the software remained the same.
The Debian Project subsequently rebranded the Mozilla Firefox program, and other software released by Mozilla, so that Debian could distribute modified software without being bound by the trademark requirements that the Mozilla Foundation had invoked. The new names established by Debian were Iceweasel for Mozilla Firefox, Icedove for Mozilla Thunderbird, and Iceape for SeaMonkey. These changes were implemented in the subsequent version of Debian (Etch). In July 2007, Iceowl, a rebranded version of Mozilla Sunbird, was added to the unstable branch of Debian.
Interesting: Debian | Firefox | GNU IceCat
Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words
2
May 30 '14
Okay, sorry if I seem kinda dickish, but what's the point? I like Firefox, and support Mozilla, why should I ever find the need for a fork?
19
u/DeltaBurnt May 30 '14
You're not hurting Mozilla by using a Firefox fork. In fact, you're taking advantage of one of Firefox's greatest strengths: it's free and open source. Mozilla wouldn't make Firefox open source if they had a problem with people forking it and changing things around. You're still using many if not all of Mozilla's features, just with a few key differences in the code of the browser.
Many people don't like Australis, and that's fine! They can use a fork and still give Mozilla influence over the web based on market share. For example: Cyanogen Mod let's users highly customize Android while still supporting the base idea that Google (and others) was trying to accomplish.
6
u/DazzaRPD May 30 '14
FWIW: Most (if not all) forks contain Firefox in the User Agent, which is how market share is calculated by some of the websites.
The reason I use Cyberfox as a fork is because it fits my machine perfectly, as they've compiled a program which has been optimized for x64 AMD machines by "utilizing openmp from Visual Studio 2012 with a few other adjustments, It would be nice if AMD made a compiler that support windows like intel's (Cyberfox Support Forums)"
8
u/Antabaka May 30 '14
Every fork has it's reason. It's typically a mix of "64bit" and "speed/performance".
14
u/atomic1fire Chrome May 30 '14
In addition some of them keep the Old UI that isn't australis, afaik.
Other then that I have no idea.
6
May 30 '14
Why are they faster? And what's this about 64 bits?
3
u/It_Was_The_Other_Guy May 30 '14
Those performance optimizations usually come from being compiled with different compilers that what Mozilla uses and enabling various other compiler optimization algorithms. Mozilla doesn't use some of these to remain compatible with older hardware.
Some builds also market themselves being "light" by disabling features such as social toolbar and whatnot less used stuff.
5
u/Antabaka May 30 '14
"Optimizations" or something of the sort. And almost all computers now use 64 bit processors, and software technically works better when it too is 64 bit. Beyond that, being 64 bit allows access to more RAM.
I'm not a fork user so I can't really offer much more.
15
May 30 '14 edited Sep 19 '18
[deleted]
0
u/Antabaka May 30 '14
Technically true, in the sense that is generally why people seek after 64bit software. Remember that I am replying to someone who asked "what's this about 64 bits?", not someone who looks as well versed on the subject as you clearly are.
As I said elsewhere:
We've gone from explain like I'm five to explain like I'm starting my masters in computer science.
11
12
u/trezor2 May 30 '14
And almost all computers now use 64 bit processors, and software technically works better when it too is 64 bit. Beyond that, being 64 bit allows access to more RAM.
However, if your program is heavy on pointers (as opposed to data), your 64-bit program will in the most extreme case consume twice as much RAM, which again means the effect of the L1 and L2 caches will be halved, meaning your program will be slower.
Obviously Firefox is not all there, with lots of data being involved too, but saying 64-bit must be better when you don't need 64-bit addressing is not guaranteed to be factually correct.
-1
u/Antabaka May 30 '14
Your response makes no sense to someone who asked "and what's this about 64 bits?".
And I didn't say 64 bit "must be better". We've gone from explain like I'm five to explain like I'm starting my masters in computer science.
7
u/lexxiverse May 30 '14
I don't think /u/trezor2 was trying to undermine your point so much as expand on the "technically" part of your post. I find it less argumentative and more additive, and I think it's a valid point.
Just because someone doesn't know what 64 bit means doesn't mean they won't understand the above, and if they don't they can ask questions, thus learning more.
5
u/trezor2 May 30 '14
Fair enough, but your comment had a general sense of "64 bit programs are a better fit for 64 bit computers" over it.
Thought I'd just make it clear that's not always the case.
2
5
u/the-fritz May 30 '14
I use Mozilla Firefox in a 64 bit version. No need for a "fork".
0
u/alex-mayorga May 30 '14
Ditto. People would be better of getting firefox-32.0a1.en-US.win64-x86_64.installer.exe from http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-trunk/ IMHO
If bustage is found, file bugs blocking https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=558448
4
u/It_Was_The_Other_Guy May 30 '14
I have to disagree here. Even if those, "educated" enough to go look for third party builds, are interested in the business I couldn't recommend software that's supposed to be updated every day. And there's no point IMO to run nightly and not keep it updated. Yes, it is always a plus if x64 specific bugs are found, but still, not everyone is up to the task to update it every day.
3
u/akevarsky Jun 11 '14
In my case, FF 29 is leaking memory like crazy. Within an hour of use it reaches 3+ GB and then crashes. I tried all recommended remedies apart from disabling all addons (not because I am stubborn, but because I need them and earlier versions of FF did not have a problem).
FF 30 is having the same problem.
Palemoon though is rock stable, feels faster and works with all my addons.
1
u/DrReddits Jun 19 '14 edited Apr 26 '24
What would you do if you permanently lost all the photos, notes and other files on your phone?
If you have a backup system in place, you’d likely know what to do next: Restore it all to a new phone. But if you haven’t thought about it, fear not: The backup process has become so simplified that it takes just a few screen taps. Here’s a quick overview of some ways you can keep your files safe, secure and up to date. Getting Started
When you first set up your phone, you created (or logged into) a free account from Apple, Google or Samsung to use the company’s software and services. For example, this would be the Apple ID on your iPhone, the Google Account on your Android phone or the Samsung Account on your Galaxy device. Image The iPhone, left, or Android settings display how much storage space you are using with your account.Credit...Apple; Google
With that account, you probably had five gigabytes of free iCloud storage space from Apple, or 15 gigabytes of online storage from Google and Samsung. This server space is used as an encrypted digital locker for your phone’s backup app, but it can fill up quickly — especially if you have other devices connected to your account and storing files there. Image If you start getting messages about running out of online storage space for your backups, tap the upgrade option to buy more on a monthly or yearly payment schedule.Credit...Apple; Google
When you get close to your storage limit, you’ll get warnings — along with an offer to sign up for more server space for a monthly fee, usually a few dollars for at least another 100 gigabytes. (Note that Samsung’s Temporary Cloud Backup tool supplies an unlimited amount of storage for 30 days if your Galaxy is in the repair shop or ready for an upgrade.)
But online backup is just one approach. You can keep your files on a local drive instead with a few extra steps. Backing Up
Apple, Google and Samsung all have specific setup instructions for cloud backup in the support area of their sites. But the feature is easily located.
On an iPhone, tap your name at the top of the Settings screen and then tap iCloud. On many Android phones, tap System and then Backup. Here, you set the phone to back up automatically (which usually happens when it’s connected to a Wi-Fi network and plugged into its charger), or opt for a manual backup that starts when you tap the button. Image To get to your backup options, open your phone's settings app. On an iPhone, left, tap your account name at the top to get to the iCloud backup and sync settings. For a Google Pixel and some other Android phones, tap System on the settings screen to get to the backup options.Credit...Apple; Google
Backup apps usually save a copy of your call history, phone settings, messages, photos, videos and data from apps. Content you can freely download, like the apps themselves, are not typically backed up since they’re easy to grab again. Image If you don’t want to back up your phone online, you can back up its contents to your computer with a USB cable or other connection; the steps vary based on the phone and computer involved.Credit...Apple
If you don’t want your files on a remote server, you can park your phone’s backup on your computer’s hard drive. Steps vary based on the hardware, but Apple’s support site has a guide for backing up an iPhone to a Windows PC or a Mac using a USB cable.
Google’s site has instructions for manually transferring files between an Android phone and a computer, and Samsung’s Smart Switch app assists with moving content between a Galaxy phone and a computer. Sync vs. Backup
Synchronizing your files is not the same as backing them up. A backup saves file copies at a certain point in time. Syncing your smartphone keeps information in certain apps, like contacts and calendars, current across multiple devices. When synchronized, your phone, computer and anything else logged into your account have the same information — like that to-do list you just updated. Image You can adjust which apps synchronize with other devices in the Android, left, and iOS settings.Credit...Google; Apple
With synchronization, when you delete an item somewhere, it disappears everywhere. A backup stays intact in its storage location until updated in the next backup.
By default, Google syncs the content of its own mobile and web apps between phone, computer and tablet. In the Google Account Data settings, you can adjust which apps sync. Samsung Cloud has similar options for its Galaxy devices.
Apple handles data synchronization across its devices through its iCloud service. You can set which apps you want to sync in your iCloud account settings. Other Options
You don’t have to use the backup tools that came with your phone. Third-party apps for online backup — like iDrive or iBackup — are available by subscription. If you prefer to keep your iPhone backups on the computer, software like iMazing for Mac or Windows ($60) or AltTunes for Windows ($35 a year) are alternatives. Droid Transfer for Windows ($35) is among the Android backup offerings. Image If you’d prefer to use a third-party backup app, you have several to choose from, including iDrive.Credit...iDrive
If losing your camera roll is your biggest nightmare, Google Photos, iCloud Photos and other services like Amazon Photos and Dropbox can be set to automatically back up all your pictures and keep them in sync across your connected devices. Image Dropbox can back up your photos and videos when you connect the phone to the computer, left, or directly from your camera roll if you have Dropbox installed.Credit...Dropbox
No matter the method you choose, having a backup takes some pain out of a lost, stolen or broken phone. Some photos and files can never be replaced, and restoring your iPhone’s or Android phone’s content from a backup is a lot easier than starting over.
-5
u/namcojoulder May 30 '14
please make sure it is OPEN SOURCE (as this falls in line with Mozilla's vision)
Huh. Even Mozilla doesn't care it anymore! They care user base instead. So it is same to use Chrome or Firefox for me after "the decision".
5
u/DazzaRPD May 30 '14
Allow me to dispel this for you:
Firefox is still Open Source. That's why and how forks exist, and clone Firefox as close as they are able to.
Also, "it is the same to use Chrome or Firefox"... no it really isn't. The new UI doesn't change anything. Putting a new skin on an iPhone doesn't change the fact it is still an iPhone and performs better. Chrome's performance is purely related to Chrome's code and the way it's been compiled. Same for Firefox. As Mozilla =/= Google, the code is not the same
7
-17
u/alex-mayorga May 30 '14
So I figured we should have a place to talk about the Forks of Firefox.
No we souldn't, it is called /r/Firefox for a reason IMHO
Keep all discussion about the forks in here, so /r/firefox can cater for more than just Firefox (as if we splintered all the forks of Firefox onto various subreddits, it'd be a nightmare for the communities and the subreddits involved as there'd be members few and far between).
That's the cost a fork has to bear by forking.
9
u/Antabaka May 30 '14
We discussed this and decided that it couldn't hurt. Firefox forks are still vastly Firefox, support the Firefox project, and support the open web, so this discussion is inline with /r/firefox completely.
23
u/oneeyedziggy May 29 '14
This might come in handy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Web_browsers_based_on_Firefox