[userbinator]

One thing that seems to be common amongst many of these Firefox forks is they're very difficult to find which official version they're equivalent in functionality to. This one is no exception.

[thisislife2]

This is actually based on the Goanna web engine (a fork of the Firefox / Gecko web engine) derived from the https://www.basilisk-browser.org/ . You can find out more here - https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=69&p=275829#p2758... .

[dblohm7]

Ah, that explains why there is still NPAPI plugin support.

[thisislife2]

Yup. The only browsers that still support Flash.

[userbinator]

The same complaint in my original comment applies - at what version was it forked from, what version of Firefox is it equivalent to?

https://www.basilisk-browser.org/features.html

Basilisk supports the technologies required for the modern web, while deliberately avoiding the rapid architectural and interface changes common in mainstream browsers.

Nothing but very vague and useless marketing-speak.

[thisislife2]

Lookup PaleMoon and Basilisk in Wikipedia. The codebase of Goanna has diverged from Firefox / Gecko a lot, so trying to compare by versions won't tell you much. PaleMoon Goanna is regularly updated and supports nearly all the feature sets of a modern browser rendering engine and is feature compatible with Firefox / Gecko though it doesn't support webRTC - https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=28182, DRM and webExtensions ... https://www.palemoon.org/technical.shtml

[spijdar]

Probably because there often isn't a straight answer to that. I've no idea about the progeny of this browser, but I've seen several Firefox forks "interbreed", borrowing patches and feature backports from each other. So there might be a specific version of Firefox you can ultimately trace the repo to, it likely has code from newer versions spliced in. At least, that was my impression.

[userbinator]

The closest they say is:

PowerFox is both standards compliant and feature-rich, supporting the latest web technologies to ensure compatibility with modern websites.

which means.. next to nothing. No "PowerFox version X has (at least) the same web standards support as Firefox Y".

it likely has code from newer versions spliced in

That's a good thing, but making it clearer what to expect will make it easier for potential users to decide whether to give it a try.

[sdf4j]

> That's a good thing, but making it clearer what to expect will make it easier for potential users to decide whether to give it a try.

There are not that many options for the potential users.