{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreig3bz757gtbk3axobztq3a7i5gvxtyfb7iu2rumioldpbdqccvaye",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:hqad6xwuzg7oqfmwylfkvqfm/app.bsky.feed.post/3mmv7domliru2"
  },
  "path": "/viewtopic.php?t=33466&p=274789#p274789",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-28T03:10:28.000Z",
  "site": "http://forum.palemoon.org",
  "textContent": "> We would really prefer to avoid another such fork, if I am being honest.\n\nI understand why you wish to avoid such a fork, both from how this sort of forking tends to kill larger projects and especially after realising the (more realistic) scenario where the extant XP forks expand their scope to adopt Windows 7 users and capture most of them would be about equivalent. Alas, it is hard for me to see another peaceful way forwards without people changing their values. This is not to say none exists; I am ill tonight and might not be my most mentally acute. My hope is really that such forks not see themselves as _hostile_ to you, when I believe they can do what they want, and you can do what you want, without stepping on each other’s toes.\n\nAlthough I am striving to show you that not everybody is as hardcore, unwilling to compromise, ready to blame or otherwise hostile as it can seem at times, for I know you have often felt pressured to avoid doing what you actually want, I can understand that the fear that you might lose most of your community by pursuing your authentic interests is daunting. I am reminded a bit of the survey which had been held in 2022, where the community was equally split between those who wanted what Pale Moon had always been meant to be, and those who merely wished old Firefox extensions. I dare not propose such a (clearly non-binding!) poll about this topic be held today, but the situation is murky when we can only guess how many people would actually be lost.\n\n\n> I also think that if you get past the point of expecting about 10 years of support for older stuff, it goes from being \"opposition to planned obsolescence\" to being something like \"burying your head in the sand and being stubborn while making developer's lives harder\"\n\nTo be clear, the only developers who should be working on maintaining the older systems (or the newer ones, for that matter) are those who want to do so. This is why I lay such stress on the existence of the forks: they are being maintained by the people who want to be involved with that sort of thing. You do not, and I want to be clear I do not mean to urge you in that direction in any way. It just means you want different things in life, and that is alright.\n\n\n> I think now people are going to the other extreme of wanting to treat a computer like an appliance that should last a lifetime, and really don't want to replace it until it breaks…\n\nGuilty as charged here. I should not hide it, and my statement was meant to wear it on my sleeve.\n\n\n> One thing that makes me a little annoyed about this is I feel like if it continues, companies might stop making new computers and then we'll _all_ be forced to do everything on the smartphone or keep old stuff on life support forever. I don't want to live in that world[…]While I and many others actually still don't accept that it's \"dead,\" and want to keep using the newer PC software and hardware as it comes along, but also feel like the retro holdouts are accidentally proving the post-PC people right in the eyes of companies by making new PCs unprofitable.\n\nI see the matter otherwise. The good things in life are never profitable. If good PC are unprofitable, so much the worse for the profiteer. I do not think we need firms for profit to create hardware, any more than we do for software. Where the interest exists, matters can be arranged.\n\n* * *",
  "title": "General Discussion • Re: Pale Moon's PR Problem",
  "updatedAt": "2026-05-28T03:10:28.000Z"
}