Cyberfox

Submit portable freeware that you find here. It helps if you include information like description, extraction instruction, Unicode support, whether it writes to the registry, and so on.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Midas
Posts: 4606
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Cyberfox

#1 Post by Midas » Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:20 pm

Another x64 iteration of Mozilla code aiming for the fastest slot. Untested, but has a PAF version available...
Cyberfox is Compiled with Microsoft visual studios 2012, Windows 8 SDK and Intel composer XE 2013. Making It Faster Then Other Browsers.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cyberfox/

http://virtualcustoms.net/showthread.ph ... of-Firefox (registration required)

Image


Download latest portable (v18.0.1) at http://sourceforge.net/projects/cyberfoxportabl/

User avatar
guinness
Posts: 4118
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: Cyberfox

#2 Post by guinness » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:37 am

I've never understood why people create forks of Firefox. Why not put the effort you spend into creating a brand new package into the official Firefox.

Correct, I'm on Firefox's side for once and I didn't even mention Opera, whoops!
Last edited by guinness on Wed Jun 11, 2014 2:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Added 179 Applications: Portable

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 4606
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Cyberfox

#3 Post by Midas » Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:41 am

Sorry, didn't get that: didn't Mozilla cease their x64 development?

User avatar
Userfriendly
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:41 pm

Re: Cyberfox

#4 Post by Userfriendly » Sun Jan 27, 2013 5:21 am

guinness wrote:I've never understood why people create forks of Firefox. Why not put the effort you spend into creating a bran new package into the official Firefox.

Correct, I'm on Firefox's side for once and I didn't even mention Opera, whoops!
Not all features and changes can make it to the official builds. Stuff like that needs testing and approval from Mozilla. The beauty of open source is that you can make your own fork with the features you want with no restraints.
Midas wrote:Sorry, didn't get that: didn't Mozilla cease their x64 development?
Mozilla sorta resumed development of x64 nightly builds. From More info: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgr ... OihL2429NM

x64 nightly builds are available here:
http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/ ... a-central/

From what I can understand, they will continue to make x64 firefox nightlies but they won't provide support for anyone using them if they encounter any bugs.

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 4606
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Cyberfox

#5 Post by Midas » Sun Jan 27, 2013 6:50 am

Userfriendly wrote:Mozilla sorta resumed development of x64 nightly builds. From More info: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgr ... OihL2429NM

x64 nightly builds are available here: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/ ... a-central/

From what I can understand, they will continue to make x64 firefox nightlies but they won't provide support for anyone using them if they encounter any bugs.
Thanks for clarifying that, Userfriendly. :)

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: Cyberfox

#6 Post by webfork » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:52 pm

What are the system requirements? Like do you need only an Intel processor built after 2010?
Userfriendly wrote:The beauty of open source is that you can make your own fork with the features you want with no restraints.
  • There are some restraints, but I'd like to think of them as good restraints (the share-and-share alike requirements) rather than bad restraints (our software sucks but it's required to do X, you can't share it with anyone, you can't change or modify it to suit your needs or to fix something).
  • One reason you might want an optimized version of Firefox is if you're using it for a few specific operations and do it very, very fast. Such as a JavaScript computation or Web-only application.
  • One reason you might not want an optimized version of Firefox is that it may not work with all devices and sites. The very name "web browser" implies looking around, not just specific places or areas. Additionally, Mozilla would likely have no interest as it's in contrast to the very nature of the open tools and protocols that Firefox is trying to advocate.
Note: Haller will likely jump in here and make the point that the use of the word "fox" is a trademark issue. Although I don't disagree (I really don't know), please visit this topic we've covered before to avoid rehashing.
Last edited by webfork on Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: (better wording)

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 4606
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Cyberfox

#7 Post by Midas » Mon Jul 28, 2014 2:39 pm

Cyberfox Portable is currently v31.0 (changelog and download at http://sourceforge.net/projects/cyberfoxportabl/files/).

See also http://8pecxstudios.com/cyberfox-portable-edition...

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 4606
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Cyberfox

#8 Post by Midas » Sat Jun 09, 2018 7:17 am

Cyberfox v52.8 released (changelog at https://8pecxstudios.com/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=2051).

bitcoin
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 6:32 pm

Re: Cyberfox

#9 Post by bitcoin » Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:56 pm

guinness wrote:
Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:37 am
I've never understood why people create forks of Firefox. Why not put the effort you spend into creating a brand new package into the official Firefox.
they're useful to me because i can open like 4-5 different portable browsers each with a different purpose (one for weather, another for tech tabs, another with 50 twitter tabs, another multi-purpose, etc) - i cant open 4 different Firefox last i tried anyway

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 4606
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Cyberfox

#10 Post by Midas » Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:40 am

ATM, I am having trouble accessing Cyberfox homepage with vanilla Firefox 66.0.2 64-bit. :(

Secure Connection Failed

An error occurred during a connection to cyberfox.8pecxstudios.com. SSL received a record that exceeded the maximum permissible length. Error code: SSL_ERROR_RX_RECORD_TOO_LONG

bitcoin wrote: i cant open 4 different Firefox last i tried anyway
I know this is possible, you just have to use some command line fu to specify a different profile for each...

bitcoin
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 6:32 pm

Re: Cyberfox

#11 Post by bitcoin » Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:56 am

Midas wrote:
Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:40 am
ATM, I am having trouble accessing Cyberfox homepage with vanilla Firefox 66.0.2 64-bit. :(

Secure Connection Failed

An error occurred during a connection to cyberfox.8pecxstudios.com. SSL received a record that exceeded the maximum permissible length. Error code: SSL_ERROR_RX_RECORD_TOO_LONG
yeah me too. i used "Is it down for everyone or just me" site and it says just me but if i try Startpage proxy it looks like a Go Daddy parked domain

commenter at Major Geeks says the site was gone 2 months ago

last update 2018-06-30 for cyberfox at Sourceforge :(



Midas wrote:
Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:40 am


I know this is possible, you just have to use some command line fu to specify a different profile for each...
i wont be able to tell the difference though between the browsers on the taskbar

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 8340
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: Cyberfox

#12 Post by webfork » Sat Mar 30, 2019 7:42 pm

bitcoin wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:56 pm
i cant open 4 different Firefox last i tried anyway
You can run multiple instances a few ways but the method for Portable Firefox is listed detailed in the Customize Firefox thread. The only thing I'd ad to that is that if you want to run multiple copies, you'd want to modify the Performance setting to reduce the total processes to 1 or 2.

Image

I also probably would use the developer version of Firefox for one of those instances just to avoid icon duplication on your taskbar (standard orange+red vs. a nifty blue):

Image

Post Reply