Because a browser doesn’t just needs to keep working, it needs to evolve to adapt to the evolving web. New technologies get developed (webgpu, csp, cors, http3, etc…, some would add AI to the list but I wouldn’t) and browsers need to implement them, and old technologies get improved (faster more secure JavaScript engines, faster document renderers).
These are all things an actively developed browser engine will have to do, and things that a 2009 fork of Firefox receiving less than 10 commits per month by a single developer won’t achieve without getting them from upstream Firefox. But if you need to rely on upstream Firefox then once again you won’t survive meaningfully without Firefox.
Or you can just do the hipster and keep on using a 15 year old browser. Maybe use lynx or w3m to cut on the bloat. Or switch to gopher. You do you, it’s not my job to convince you.
Why is Pale Moon not “worth using”?
Because a browser doesn’t just needs to keep working, it needs to evolve to adapt to the evolving web. New technologies get developed (webgpu, csp, cors, http3, etc…, some would add AI to the list but I wouldn’t) and browsers need to implement them, and old technologies get improved (faster more secure JavaScript engines, faster document renderers).
These are all things an actively developed browser engine will have to do, and things that a 2009 fork of Firefox receiving less than 10 commits per month by a single developer won’t achieve without getting them from upstream Firefox. But if you need to rely on upstream Firefox then once again you won’t survive meaningfully without Firefox.
Or you can just do the hipster and keep on using a 15 year old browser. Maybe use lynx or w3m to cut on the bloat. Or switch to gopher. You do you, it’s not my job to convince you.