In message , Bill in Co
writes:
Bill in Co wrote:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

I think I missed your response on this one, John:
[]
I thought you liked the older versions, like me? :-) FF11?? What's so
good
about the newer FF11? (I still have version FF ver 3.5 installed).

I too was (am) uneasy about Firefox's upgrade rate (though it seems to
have stopped for a moment - I just checked, and 11.0 is still up to
date; AFAICR, it's been 11 for some time). Trouble is, I could never see
an obvious point at which to stop it upgrading, and now am reluctant to
go back, lest something (and yes, I don't know what!) I've grown used to
working.

You also might consider Pale Moon, which was coded for Windows, and not a
bunch of OS's as is FF. At any rate, Pale Moon seems quicker to load for
me.


Yes, I keep hearing of it, mostly from people who're happy with it (or,
it might be that it's always the same person, possibly you!). It's just
lethargy on my part, and reluctance to learn (however small the
differences) yet another browser.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove
that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are
right. -H.L. Mencken, writer, editor, and critic (1880-1956)