{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreiei7dp4wfjvpwij7bidhfik6qtptcbxck5ncxsfeem45y7ggklomq",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:hqad6xwuzg7oqfmwylfkvqfm/app.bsky.feed.post/3mlhh2biqs4h2"
  },
  "path": "/viewtopic.php?t=33437&p=273763#p273763",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-09T23:08:39.000Z",
  "site": "http://forum.palemoon.org",
  "textContent": "The closer the website is to the full fledged web application, the worse it will perform in Pale Moon. Though there are also some where JavaScript is not primary offender, but the HTML document is just very large with possibly some tricky styling added to it.\n\nYou mention Flash animations, I'm assuming you encountered the site that runs it with Ruffle? Ruffle is a poor substitute for real Flash plugin and performs especially poor in Pale Moon. Maybe if you tell the site in question, maybe someone can help you get it to run with actual Flash, but don't count on it, not many people here who love hacking / programming. It may be easier to find the SWF file and run it locally.\n\nAnyway, some sites are pointless to try and use in Pale Moon and if your habits exclusively contain sites that perform poorly in Pale Moon, then using Pale Moon may be an exercise in futility for you.\n\n\n> Pale Moon has not gotten the many rounds of significant performance-focused development that other big two engines have gotten throughout the decades. These other browser engines (on the same hardware) will run noticeably faster. And it is not mostly placebo/theater either. I'm talking about real, actual, significant speed differences.\n\nNext version might improve on that somewhat, I saw some potentially interesting changes, though I haven't got around to compiling the development version to try it yet.\n\n* * *",
  "title": "Browser Support • Re: Why is Pale Moon so slow?",
  "updatedAt": "2026-05-09T23:08:39.000Z"
}