What is the difference between Iceweasel and Firefox?Why does Stackoverflow in Iceweasel cause high CPU usage...
Some interesting calculation puzzle that I made
Word meaning to destroy books
What happens to unproductive professors?
Is there any word for "disobedience to God"?
If your plane is out-of-control, why does military training instruct releasing the joystick to neutralize controls?
Placing text inside a loop
How do you move up one folder in Finder?
What is this little owl-like bird?
Why did Harry Potter get a bedroom?
How quality assurance engineers test calculations?
Why do people keep referring to Leia as Princess Leia, even after the destruction of Alderaan?
Does throwing a penny at a train stop the train?
How to deal with moral/legal subjects in writing?
How do native German speakers usually express skepticism (using even) about a premise?
Switching interface VLAN ID Mid-Production
How to know if blackberries are safe to eat
Is English unusual in having no second person plural form?
Misspelling my name on my mathematical publications
Shortest hex dumping program
RPI3B+: What are the four components below the HDMI connector called?
How can I effectively communicate to recruiters that a phone call is not possible?
OR-backed serious games
Employers keep telling me my college isn't good enough - is there any way to fix this?
Why return a static pointer instead of an out parameter?
What is the difference between Iceweasel and Firefox?
Why does Stackoverflow in Iceweasel cause high CPU usage for Xorg?LMDE: Install latest Iceweasel or FirefoxOn Debian Testing: How to get a recent Iceweasel Release (non-ESR) version without updating to Unstable?H.264 support in Firefox (Iceweasel) 24How do I make IceweaselFirefox only display images on specified sites?Install Flash player without root privileges in Iceweasel (Firefox)sync on Firefox between Linux Mint and different platformsIs it better to download Firefox from the website or use the package manager?Infinality and Firefox/ThundebirdWhat are the differences between iputils-ping and inetutils-ping?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
I used Mozilla Firefox in Windows, and now I'm using Iceweasel in Debian 6. Is there any difference to the two programs? What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program? Which one seems better?
debian firefox iceweasel
add a comment |
I used Mozilla Firefox in Windows, and now I'm using Iceweasel in Debian 6. Is there any difference to the two programs? What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program? Which one seems better?
debian firefox iceweasel
Related: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:22
I've provided a much more complete answer and uptodate. Please consider marking it as accepted or providing input.
– Evan Carroll
15 mins ago
add a comment |
I used Mozilla Firefox in Windows, and now I'm using Iceweasel in Debian 6. Is there any difference to the two programs? What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program? Which one seems better?
debian firefox iceweasel
I used Mozilla Firefox in Windows, and now I'm using Iceweasel in Debian 6. Is there any difference to the two programs? What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program? Which one seems better?
debian firefox iceweasel
debian firefox iceweasel
edited Nov 6 '17 at 14:48
kubanczyk
8865 silver badges16 bronze badges
8865 silver badges16 bronze badges
asked Jul 29 '12 at 2:39
MughilMughil
1,1234 gold badges14 silver badges23 bronze badges
1,1234 gold badges14 silver badges23 bronze badges
Related: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:22
I've provided a much more complete answer and uptodate. Please consider marking it as accepted or providing input.
– Evan Carroll
15 mins ago
add a comment |
Related: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:22
I've provided a much more complete answer and uptodate. Please consider marking it as accepted or providing input.
– Evan Carroll
15 mins ago
Related: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:22
Related: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:22
I've provided a much more complete answer and uptodate. Please consider marking it as accepted or providing input.
– Evan Carroll
15 mins ago
I've provided a much more complete answer and uptodate. Please consider marking it as accepted or providing input.
– Evan Carroll
15 mins ago
add a comment |
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
It's the same thing. See wikipedia. Basically, you are not allowed to re-compile the source code and still call it Firefox for trademark reasons.
8
Trademark reasons, not copyright. Mozilla own the Firefox trademark and have several restrictions on the use of the trademark by third-parties. The restrictions are generally quite reasonable and understandable, but conflict with the needs of distributions (incl. Debian) to update and patch the code themselves.
– cas
Jul 29 '12 at 2:57
2
I would just like to leave the comment that the goals and policies of the debian project are just as reasonable and understandable as the mozilla foundation's restrictions on their trademark. Neither party had unreasonable policies, yet there still seems to be a great amount of misunderstanding surrounding the issue. It was nothing more than a simple conflict that needed to be worked around to the satisfaction of both parties.
– umeboshi
Feb 3 '15 at 20:29
1
But why is name "Firefox" still used, e.g. in Ubuntu? Does it mean that Debian security patches (which, from the wiki page, seems to be the deal breaker) don't make it to the Ubuntu package repositories?
– andrybak
Nov 3 '15 at 19:21
2
According to this answer, there are differences: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:23
add a comment |
Ice isn't fire, and weasels aren't foxes, but IceWeasels and Firefoxen are the same thing. Apparently it's IceCat now. Also be on the lookout for Icedove, Iceape, and Iceowl.
Debian refused to use Firefox's logo because it is not free (as in speech, not as in beer), and in turn Mozilla said that they can't call it Firefox if they're going to use their own (non-Mozilla-approved) logo, so they called it IceWeasel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_rebranded_by_the_Debian_project
3
According to the IceCat Wikipedia page, IceCat is actually GNU IceCat, and is distributed by the GNU Project. Debian's version is still referred to as IceWeasel. Just wanted to clarify, based on your "Apparently it's IceCat now" statement :-)
– ND Geek
Aug 2 '12 at 17:11
Great, it has 3 names? :( Thanks for the heads up.
– wjl
Aug 2 '12 at 20:50
Actually there is also an Abrowser
– xuhdev
May 6 '15 at 9:16
add a comment |
There is no difference it is basically just a different name due to trademark issues - see the origins of the dispute.
However Firefox is provided by Mozilla whereas Iceweasel is provided by Debian.
add a comment |
While this question has been asked long back, things might have changed since then.
Is there any advantage of using Iceweasel and Firefox?
Is there any difference to the two programs?
What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program?
- Firefox is provided by Mozilla. Iceweasel is provided by the Linux distribution that offers it (debian*). If you have a distribution that has Iceweasel, then Firefox may not be present in its repos and installing Firefox on such distro needed to be done manually by downloading binary from Mozilla. In such a case, Updates for Iceweasel are provided automatically by distro whereas you need to update Firefox manually. Considering Security Updates for browser really important, this matters. Iceweasel is the winner.
- The current Iceweasel is based on Firefox Extended Support Release. Meaning that Feature Updates aren't available until they are well tested. Only Security Updates are deployed. Even before when there is no Firefox Esr, feature updates of Firefox didn't make it to Iceweasel. Organisations that use Iceweasel are benefitted by this. And recently Firefox has got many unnecessary additions like Pocket and Hello. Iceweasel also removes all of these.
- Mozilla will not allow the changed Firefox code to be compiled and released under the same brand name. Its reasonable. Hence Iceweasel came out with a different logo. But basically its Firefox with more stability and unnecessary components removed.
Which one seems better?
Its a personal choice. If u need stability and not concerned about new features then Iceweasel is the choice. If not, U may use Firefox.
add a comment |
Update 2016, and onward.
What is the difference between Iceweasel and Firefox?
The short of it In 2016, Iceweasel went away, and now for all of Debian's purposes the product is called Firefox, and the package is calledfirefox-esr. The package is described as "a powerful, extensible web browser with support for modern web application technologies."
Useless Historic Backstory Ice Weasel was an old name that amount to more of a fork because Mozilla wanted to protect their trademarks. Firefox automatically updates from Mozilla; Ice Weasel updates through the repository. Mozilla at one point didn't like you calling things they viewed as being out of date, and not maintained by them as "Firefox". And Debian was applying patches that Mozilla viewed as being not strictly Firefox. Debian patches a lot of software to make them play well with other software they package, and all their software goes out through their own distribution channel. This is rather routine. In 2016, Mozilla relented and this changed their stance stating "Mozilla recognizes that patches applied to Iceweasel/Firefox don’t impact the quality of the product,". Mozilla had come to trust Debian, and to this day the Debian distribution is patched without regard to Mozilla's trademark concerns or approval, and distributed through Debian's official channels. It is disclaimed as being "modified from upstream by removing a set of sourceless binary, non-free, and VCS-related files."
add a comment |
Reportedly, Iceweasel and other variants generally are behind in versions compared to Firefox. That's a red flag for me. I tried to use Iceweasel to log into my credit union. Finally, it loaded--it took several minutes, even, though. (I proved surprised when it actually succeeded.)
Possibly a better solution exists: Some time ago, someone wrote some scripts to induce (more accurately, to "deceive") problem sites into "believing" that Iceweasel actually is from XP! It required changing to an enabled user--"on the fly"--just for such special situations!
I'd like to use Iceweasel: It must be kept up to date, though--otherwise, I just can't trust it. I believe that it lacks integrity: Recently, I couldn't kill the browser and also couldn't log out cleanly, either: I had to reset. FF likely would have performed better.
(A similar situation exists with clamtk--the current version of clamtk must be downloaded separately, from sourceforge.net. That's easy enough: But, why?! That's another issue, of course....)
I'm thus going to mozilla.org in order to obtain Firefox. I'll keep Iceweasel on, though: After all, it's the distro's official browser. I desire for it to succeed better.
Really, though, petty squabbling over logos, branding, and idiot legal manueuvering is just slapping the faces of so many who benefit the community so greatly! Fiefdoms:They weaken a community greatly and tarnish its ideals. Unfortunately, these great "code-wizards" merely are human and actually prove to be from earth, after all!
1
They aren't "behind in version", they are based on the Extended Support Release. The current version (38.2.1 - released 28 August 2015 ) was released one day after the Firefox ESR release (27 August 2015).
– Thomas Weinbrenner
Aug 30 '15 at 12:58
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f44215%2fwhat-is-the-difference-between-iceweasel-and-firefox%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It's the same thing. See wikipedia. Basically, you are not allowed to re-compile the source code and still call it Firefox for trademark reasons.
8
Trademark reasons, not copyright. Mozilla own the Firefox trademark and have several restrictions on the use of the trademark by third-parties. The restrictions are generally quite reasonable and understandable, but conflict with the needs of distributions (incl. Debian) to update and patch the code themselves.
– cas
Jul 29 '12 at 2:57
2
I would just like to leave the comment that the goals and policies of the debian project are just as reasonable and understandable as the mozilla foundation's restrictions on their trademark. Neither party had unreasonable policies, yet there still seems to be a great amount of misunderstanding surrounding the issue. It was nothing more than a simple conflict that needed to be worked around to the satisfaction of both parties.
– umeboshi
Feb 3 '15 at 20:29
1
But why is name "Firefox" still used, e.g. in Ubuntu? Does it mean that Debian security patches (which, from the wiki page, seems to be the deal breaker) don't make it to the Ubuntu package repositories?
– andrybak
Nov 3 '15 at 19:21
2
According to this answer, there are differences: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:23
add a comment |
It's the same thing. See wikipedia. Basically, you are not allowed to re-compile the source code and still call it Firefox for trademark reasons.
8
Trademark reasons, not copyright. Mozilla own the Firefox trademark and have several restrictions on the use of the trademark by third-parties. The restrictions are generally quite reasonable and understandable, but conflict with the needs of distributions (incl. Debian) to update and patch the code themselves.
– cas
Jul 29 '12 at 2:57
2
I would just like to leave the comment that the goals and policies of the debian project are just as reasonable and understandable as the mozilla foundation's restrictions on their trademark. Neither party had unreasonable policies, yet there still seems to be a great amount of misunderstanding surrounding the issue. It was nothing more than a simple conflict that needed to be worked around to the satisfaction of both parties.
– umeboshi
Feb 3 '15 at 20:29
1
But why is name "Firefox" still used, e.g. in Ubuntu? Does it mean that Debian security patches (which, from the wiki page, seems to be the deal breaker) don't make it to the Ubuntu package repositories?
– andrybak
Nov 3 '15 at 19:21
2
According to this answer, there are differences: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:23
add a comment |
It's the same thing. See wikipedia. Basically, you are not allowed to re-compile the source code and still call it Firefox for trademark reasons.
It's the same thing. See wikipedia. Basically, you are not allowed to re-compile the source code and still call it Firefox for trademark reasons.
edited Jul 29 '12 at 3:17
Renan
14.8k6 gold badges57 silver badges81 bronze badges
14.8k6 gold badges57 silver badges81 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 '12 at 2:54
Aaron D. MarascoAaron D. Marasco
3,75115 silver badges23 bronze badges
3,75115 silver badges23 bronze badges
8
Trademark reasons, not copyright. Mozilla own the Firefox trademark and have several restrictions on the use of the trademark by third-parties. The restrictions are generally quite reasonable and understandable, but conflict with the needs of distributions (incl. Debian) to update and patch the code themselves.
– cas
Jul 29 '12 at 2:57
2
I would just like to leave the comment that the goals and policies of the debian project are just as reasonable and understandable as the mozilla foundation's restrictions on their trademark. Neither party had unreasonable policies, yet there still seems to be a great amount of misunderstanding surrounding the issue. It was nothing more than a simple conflict that needed to be worked around to the satisfaction of both parties.
– umeboshi
Feb 3 '15 at 20:29
1
But why is name "Firefox" still used, e.g. in Ubuntu? Does it mean that Debian security patches (which, from the wiki page, seems to be the deal breaker) don't make it to the Ubuntu package repositories?
– andrybak
Nov 3 '15 at 19:21
2
According to this answer, there are differences: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:23
add a comment |
8
Trademark reasons, not copyright. Mozilla own the Firefox trademark and have several restrictions on the use of the trademark by third-parties. The restrictions are generally quite reasonable and understandable, but conflict with the needs of distributions (incl. Debian) to update and patch the code themselves.
– cas
Jul 29 '12 at 2:57
2
I would just like to leave the comment that the goals and policies of the debian project are just as reasonable and understandable as the mozilla foundation's restrictions on their trademark. Neither party had unreasonable policies, yet there still seems to be a great amount of misunderstanding surrounding the issue. It was nothing more than a simple conflict that needed to be worked around to the satisfaction of both parties.
– umeboshi
Feb 3 '15 at 20:29
1
But why is name "Firefox" still used, e.g. in Ubuntu? Does it mean that Debian security patches (which, from the wiki page, seems to be the deal breaker) don't make it to the Ubuntu package repositories?
– andrybak
Nov 3 '15 at 19:21
2
According to this answer, there are differences: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:23
8
8
Trademark reasons, not copyright. Mozilla own the Firefox trademark and have several restrictions on the use of the trademark by third-parties. The restrictions are generally quite reasonable and understandable, but conflict with the needs of distributions (incl. Debian) to update and patch the code themselves.
– cas
Jul 29 '12 at 2:57
Trademark reasons, not copyright. Mozilla own the Firefox trademark and have several restrictions on the use of the trademark by third-parties. The restrictions are generally quite reasonable and understandable, but conflict with the needs of distributions (incl. Debian) to update and patch the code themselves.
– cas
Jul 29 '12 at 2:57
2
2
I would just like to leave the comment that the goals and policies of the debian project are just as reasonable and understandable as the mozilla foundation's restrictions on their trademark. Neither party had unreasonable policies, yet there still seems to be a great amount of misunderstanding surrounding the issue. It was nothing more than a simple conflict that needed to be worked around to the satisfaction of both parties.
– umeboshi
Feb 3 '15 at 20:29
I would just like to leave the comment that the goals and policies of the debian project are just as reasonable and understandable as the mozilla foundation's restrictions on their trademark. Neither party had unreasonable policies, yet there still seems to be a great amount of misunderstanding surrounding the issue. It was nothing more than a simple conflict that needed to be worked around to the satisfaction of both parties.
– umeboshi
Feb 3 '15 at 20:29
1
1
But why is name "Firefox" still used, e.g. in Ubuntu? Does it mean that Debian security patches (which, from the wiki page, seems to be the deal breaker) don't make it to the Ubuntu package repositories?
– andrybak
Nov 3 '15 at 19:21
But why is name "Firefox" still used, e.g. in Ubuntu? Does it mean that Debian security patches (which, from the wiki page, seems to be the deal breaker) don't make it to the Ubuntu package repositories?
– andrybak
Nov 3 '15 at 19:21
2
2
According to this answer, there are differences: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:23
According to this answer, there are differences: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:23
add a comment |
Ice isn't fire, and weasels aren't foxes, but IceWeasels and Firefoxen are the same thing. Apparently it's IceCat now. Also be on the lookout for Icedove, Iceape, and Iceowl.
Debian refused to use Firefox's logo because it is not free (as in speech, not as in beer), and in turn Mozilla said that they can't call it Firefox if they're going to use their own (non-Mozilla-approved) logo, so they called it IceWeasel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_rebranded_by_the_Debian_project
3
According to the IceCat Wikipedia page, IceCat is actually GNU IceCat, and is distributed by the GNU Project. Debian's version is still referred to as IceWeasel. Just wanted to clarify, based on your "Apparently it's IceCat now" statement :-)
– ND Geek
Aug 2 '12 at 17:11
Great, it has 3 names? :( Thanks for the heads up.
– wjl
Aug 2 '12 at 20:50
Actually there is also an Abrowser
– xuhdev
May 6 '15 at 9:16
add a comment |
Ice isn't fire, and weasels aren't foxes, but IceWeasels and Firefoxen are the same thing. Apparently it's IceCat now. Also be on the lookout for Icedove, Iceape, and Iceowl.
Debian refused to use Firefox's logo because it is not free (as in speech, not as in beer), and in turn Mozilla said that they can't call it Firefox if they're going to use their own (non-Mozilla-approved) logo, so they called it IceWeasel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_rebranded_by_the_Debian_project
3
According to the IceCat Wikipedia page, IceCat is actually GNU IceCat, and is distributed by the GNU Project. Debian's version is still referred to as IceWeasel. Just wanted to clarify, based on your "Apparently it's IceCat now" statement :-)
– ND Geek
Aug 2 '12 at 17:11
Great, it has 3 names? :( Thanks for the heads up.
– wjl
Aug 2 '12 at 20:50
Actually there is also an Abrowser
– xuhdev
May 6 '15 at 9:16
add a comment |
Ice isn't fire, and weasels aren't foxes, but IceWeasels and Firefoxen are the same thing. Apparently it's IceCat now. Also be on the lookout for Icedove, Iceape, and Iceowl.
Debian refused to use Firefox's logo because it is not free (as in speech, not as in beer), and in turn Mozilla said that they can't call it Firefox if they're going to use their own (non-Mozilla-approved) logo, so they called it IceWeasel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_rebranded_by_the_Debian_project
Ice isn't fire, and weasels aren't foxes, but IceWeasels and Firefoxen are the same thing. Apparently it's IceCat now. Also be on the lookout for Icedove, Iceape, and Iceowl.
Debian refused to use Firefox's logo because it is not free (as in speech, not as in beer), and in turn Mozilla said that they can't call it Firefox if they're going to use their own (non-Mozilla-approved) logo, so they called it IceWeasel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_rebranded_by_the_Debian_project
edited Jan 7 '16 at 17:40
Community♦
1
1
answered Jul 29 '12 at 7:55
wjlwjl
2031 silver badge2 bronze badges
2031 silver badge2 bronze badges
3
According to the IceCat Wikipedia page, IceCat is actually GNU IceCat, and is distributed by the GNU Project. Debian's version is still referred to as IceWeasel. Just wanted to clarify, based on your "Apparently it's IceCat now" statement :-)
– ND Geek
Aug 2 '12 at 17:11
Great, it has 3 names? :( Thanks for the heads up.
– wjl
Aug 2 '12 at 20:50
Actually there is also an Abrowser
– xuhdev
May 6 '15 at 9:16
add a comment |
3
According to the IceCat Wikipedia page, IceCat is actually GNU IceCat, and is distributed by the GNU Project. Debian's version is still referred to as IceWeasel. Just wanted to clarify, based on your "Apparently it's IceCat now" statement :-)
– ND Geek
Aug 2 '12 at 17:11
Great, it has 3 names? :( Thanks for the heads up.
– wjl
Aug 2 '12 at 20:50
Actually there is also an Abrowser
– xuhdev
May 6 '15 at 9:16
3
3
According to the IceCat Wikipedia page, IceCat is actually GNU IceCat, and is distributed by the GNU Project. Debian's version is still referred to as IceWeasel. Just wanted to clarify, based on your "Apparently it's IceCat now" statement :-)
– ND Geek
Aug 2 '12 at 17:11
According to the IceCat Wikipedia page, IceCat is actually GNU IceCat, and is distributed by the GNU Project. Debian's version is still referred to as IceWeasel. Just wanted to clarify, based on your "Apparently it's IceCat now" statement :-)
– ND Geek
Aug 2 '12 at 17:11
Great, it has 3 names? :( Thanks for the heads up.
– wjl
Aug 2 '12 at 20:50
Great, it has 3 names? :( Thanks for the heads up.
– wjl
Aug 2 '12 at 20:50
Actually there is also an Abrowser
– xuhdev
May 6 '15 at 9:16
Actually there is also an Abrowser
– xuhdev
May 6 '15 at 9:16
add a comment |
There is no difference it is basically just a different name due to trademark issues - see the origins of the dispute.
However Firefox is provided by Mozilla whereas Iceweasel is provided by Debian.
add a comment |
There is no difference it is basically just a different name due to trademark issues - see the origins of the dispute.
However Firefox is provided by Mozilla whereas Iceweasel is provided by Debian.
add a comment |
There is no difference it is basically just a different name due to trademark issues - see the origins of the dispute.
However Firefox is provided by Mozilla whereas Iceweasel is provided by Debian.
There is no difference it is basically just a different name due to trademark issues - see the origins of the dispute.
However Firefox is provided by Mozilla whereas Iceweasel is provided by Debian.
edited Jul 29 '12 at 3:21
answered Jul 29 '12 at 2:54
Ulrich DangelUlrich Dangel
21.1k2 gold badges60 silver badges72 bronze badges
21.1k2 gold badges60 silver badges72 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
While this question has been asked long back, things might have changed since then.
Is there any advantage of using Iceweasel and Firefox?
Is there any difference to the two programs?
What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program?
- Firefox is provided by Mozilla. Iceweasel is provided by the Linux distribution that offers it (debian*). If you have a distribution that has Iceweasel, then Firefox may not be present in its repos and installing Firefox on such distro needed to be done manually by downloading binary from Mozilla. In such a case, Updates for Iceweasel are provided automatically by distro whereas you need to update Firefox manually. Considering Security Updates for browser really important, this matters. Iceweasel is the winner.
- The current Iceweasel is based on Firefox Extended Support Release. Meaning that Feature Updates aren't available until they are well tested. Only Security Updates are deployed. Even before when there is no Firefox Esr, feature updates of Firefox didn't make it to Iceweasel. Organisations that use Iceweasel are benefitted by this. And recently Firefox has got many unnecessary additions like Pocket and Hello. Iceweasel also removes all of these.
- Mozilla will not allow the changed Firefox code to be compiled and released under the same brand name. Its reasonable. Hence Iceweasel came out with a different logo. But basically its Firefox with more stability and unnecessary components removed.
Which one seems better?
Its a personal choice. If u need stability and not concerned about new features then Iceweasel is the choice. If not, U may use Firefox.
add a comment |
While this question has been asked long back, things might have changed since then.
Is there any advantage of using Iceweasel and Firefox?
Is there any difference to the two programs?
What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program?
- Firefox is provided by Mozilla. Iceweasel is provided by the Linux distribution that offers it (debian*). If you have a distribution that has Iceweasel, then Firefox may not be present in its repos and installing Firefox on such distro needed to be done manually by downloading binary from Mozilla. In such a case, Updates for Iceweasel are provided automatically by distro whereas you need to update Firefox manually. Considering Security Updates for browser really important, this matters. Iceweasel is the winner.
- The current Iceweasel is based on Firefox Extended Support Release. Meaning that Feature Updates aren't available until they are well tested. Only Security Updates are deployed. Even before when there is no Firefox Esr, feature updates of Firefox didn't make it to Iceweasel. Organisations that use Iceweasel are benefitted by this. And recently Firefox has got many unnecessary additions like Pocket and Hello. Iceweasel also removes all of these.
- Mozilla will not allow the changed Firefox code to be compiled and released under the same brand name. Its reasonable. Hence Iceweasel came out with a different logo. But basically its Firefox with more stability and unnecessary components removed.
Which one seems better?
Its a personal choice. If u need stability and not concerned about new features then Iceweasel is the choice. If not, U may use Firefox.
add a comment |
While this question has been asked long back, things might have changed since then.
Is there any advantage of using Iceweasel and Firefox?
Is there any difference to the two programs?
What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program?
- Firefox is provided by Mozilla. Iceweasel is provided by the Linux distribution that offers it (debian*). If you have a distribution that has Iceweasel, then Firefox may not be present in its repos and installing Firefox on such distro needed to be done manually by downloading binary from Mozilla. In such a case, Updates for Iceweasel are provided automatically by distro whereas you need to update Firefox manually. Considering Security Updates for browser really important, this matters. Iceweasel is the winner.
- The current Iceweasel is based on Firefox Extended Support Release. Meaning that Feature Updates aren't available until they are well tested. Only Security Updates are deployed. Even before when there is no Firefox Esr, feature updates of Firefox didn't make it to Iceweasel. Organisations that use Iceweasel are benefitted by this. And recently Firefox has got many unnecessary additions like Pocket and Hello. Iceweasel also removes all of these.
- Mozilla will not allow the changed Firefox code to be compiled and released under the same brand name. Its reasonable. Hence Iceweasel came out with a different logo. But basically its Firefox with more stability and unnecessary components removed.
Which one seems better?
Its a personal choice. If u need stability and not concerned about new features then Iceweasel is the choice. If not, U may use Firefox.
While this question has been asked long back, things might have changed since then.
Is there any advantage of using Iceweasel and Firefox?
Is there any difference to the two programs?
What are the advantages and disadvantages to each program?
- Firefox is provided by Mozilla. Iceweasel is provided by the Linux distribution that offers it (debian*). If you have a distribution that has Iceweasel, then Firefox may not be present in its repos and installing Firefox on such distro needed to be done manually by downloading binary from Mozilla. In such a case, Updates for Iceweasel are provided automatically by distro whereas you need to update Firefox manually. Considering Security Updates for browser really important, this matters. Iceweasel is the winner.
- The current Iceweasel is based on Firefox Extended Support Release. Meaning that Feature Updates aren't available until they are well tested. Only Security Updates are deployed. Even before when there is no Firefox Esr, feature updates of Firefox didn't make it to Iceweasel. Organisations that use Iceweasel are benefitted by this. And recently Firefox has got many unnecessary additions like Pocket and Hello. Iceweasel also removes all of these.
- Mozilla will not allow the changed Firefox code to be compiled and released under the same brand name. Its reasonable. Hence Iceweasel came out with a different logo. But basically its Firefox with more stability and unnecessary components removed.
Which one seems better?
Its a personal choice. If u need stability and not concerned about new features then Iceweasel is the choice. If not, U may use Firefox.
edited Jan 13 '16 at 22:12
Community♦
1
1
answered Aug 30 '15 at 5:42
Bharat GBharat G
3262 silver badges13 bronze badges
3262 silver badges13 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
Update 2016, and onward.
What is the difference between Iceweasel and Firefox?
The short of it In 2016, Iceweasel went away, and now for all of Debian's purposes the product is called Firefox, and the package is calledfirefox-esr. The package is described as "a powerful, extensible web browser with support for modern web application technologies."
Useless Historic Backstory Ice Weasel was an old name that amount to more of a fork because Mozilla wanted to protect their trademarks. Firefox automatically updates from Mozilla; Ice Weasel updates through the repository. Mozilla at one point didn't like you calling things they viewed as being out of date, and not maintained by them as "Firefox". And Debian was applying patches that Mozilla viewed as being not strictly Firefox. Debian patches a lot of software to make them play well with other software they package, and all their software goes out through their own distribution channel. This is rather routine. In 2016, Mozilla relented and this changed their stance stating "Mozilla recognizes that patches applied to Iceweasel/Firefox don’t impact the quality of the product,". Mozilla had come to trust Debian, and to this day the Debian distribution is patched without regard to Mozilla's trademark concerns or approval, and distributed through Debian's official channels. It is disclaimed as being "modified from upstream by removing a set of sourceless binary, non-free, and VCS-related files."
add a comment |
Update 2016, and onward.
What is the difference between Iceweasel and Firefox?
The short of it In 2016, Iceweasel went away, and now for all of Debian's purposes the product is called Firefox, and the package is calledfirefox-esr. The package is described as "a powerful, extensible web browser with support for modern web application technologies."
Useless Historic Backstory Ice Weasel was an old name that amount to more of a fork because Mozilla wanted to protect their trademarks. Firefox automatically updates from Mozilla; Ice Weasel updates through the repository. Mozilla at one point didn't like you calling things they viewed as being out of date, and not maintained by them as "Firefox". And Debian was applying patches that Mozilla viewed as being not strictly Firefox. Debian patches a lot of software to make them play well with other software they package, and all their software goes out through their own distribution channel. This is rather routine. In 2016, Mozilla relented and this changed their stance stating "Mozilla recognizes that patches applied to Iceweasel/Firefox don’t impact the quality of the product,". Mozilla had come to trust Debian, and to this day the Debian distribution is patched without regard to Mozilla's trademark concerns or approval, and distributed through Debian's official channels. It is disclaimed as being "modified from upstream by removing a set of sourceless binary, non-free, and VCS-related files."
add a comment |
Update 2016, and onward.
What is the difference between Iceweasel and Firefox?
The short of it In 2016, Iceweasel went away, and now for all of Debian's purposes the product is called Firefox, and the package is calledfirefox-esr. The package is described as "a powerful, extensible web browser with support for modern web application technologies."
Useless Historic Backstory Ice Weasel was an old name that amount to more of a fork because Mozilla wanted to protect their trademarks. Firefox automatically updates from Mozilla; Ice Weasel updates through the repository. Mozilla at one point didn't like you calling things they viewed as being out of date, and not maintained by them as "Firefox". And Debian was applying patches that Mozilla viewed as being not strictly Firefox. Debian patches a lot of software to make them play well with other software they package, and all their software goes out through their own distribution channel. This is rather routine. In 2016, Mozilla relented and this changed their stance stating "Mozilla recognizes that patches applied to Iceweasel/Firefox don’t impact the quality of the product,". Mozilla had come to trust Debian, and to this day the Debian distribution is patched without regard to Mozilla's trademark concerns or approval, and distributed through Debian's official channels. It is disclaimed as being "modified from upstream by removing a set of sourceless binary, non-free, and VCS-related files."
Update 2016, and onward.
What is the difference between Iceweasel and Firefox?
The short of it In 2016, Iceweasel went away, and now for all of Debian's purposes the product is called Firefox, and the package is calledfirefox-esr. The package is described as "a powerful, extensible web browser with support for modern web application technologies."
Useless Historic Backstory Ice Weasel was an old name that amount to more of a fork because Mozilla wanted to protect their trademarks. Firefox automatically updates from Mozilla; Ice Weasel updates through the repository. Mozilla at one point didn't like you calling things they viewed as being out of date, and not maintained by them as "Firefox". And Debian was applying patches that Mozilla viewed as being not strictly Firefox. Debian patches a lot of software to make them play well with other software they package, and all their software goes out through their own distribution channel. This is rather routine. In 2016, Mozilla relented and this changed their stance stating "Mozilla recognizes that patches applied to Iceweasel/Firefox don’t impact the quality of the product,". Mozilla had come to trust Debian, and to this day the Debian distribution is patched without regard to Mozilla's trademark concerns or approval, and distributed through Debian's official channels. It is disclaimed as being "modified from upstream by removing a set of sourceless binary, non-free, and VCS-related files."
answered 18 mins ago
Evan CarrollEvan Carroll
6,83113 gold badges49 silver badges99 bronze badges
6,83113 gold badges49 silver badges99 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
Reportedly, Iceweasel and other variants generally are behind in versions compared to Firefox. That's a red flag for me. I tried to use Iceweasel to log into my credit union. Finally, it loaded--it took several minutes, even, though. (I proved surprised when it actually succeeded.)
Possibly a better solution exists: Some time ago, someone wrote some scripts to induce (more accurately, to "deceive") problem sites into "believing" that Iceweasel actually is from XP! It required changing to an enabled user--"on the fly"--just for such special situations!
I'd like to use Iceweasel: It must be kept up to date, though--otherwise, I just can't trust it. I believe that it lacks integrity: Recently, I couldn't kill the browser and also couldn't log out cleanly, either: I had to reset. FF likely would have performed better.
(A similar situation exists with clamtk--the current version of clamtk must be downloaded separately, from sourceforge.net. That's easy enough: But, why?! That's another issue, of course....)
I'm thus going to mozilla.org in order to obtain Firefox. I'll keep Iceweasel on, though: After all, it's the distro's official browser. I desire for it to succeed better.
Really, though, petty squabbling over logos, branding, and idiot legal manueuvering is just slapping the faces of so many who benefit the community so greatly! Fiefdoms:They weaken a community greatly and tarnish its ideals. Unfortunately, these great "code-wizards" merely are human and actually prove to be from earth, after all!
1
They aren't "behind in version", they are based on the Extended Support Release. The current version (38.2.1 - released 28 August 2015 ) was released one day after the Firefox ESR release (27 August 2015).
– Thomas Weinbrenner
Aug 30 '15 at 12:58
add a comment |
Reportedly, Iceweasel and other variants generally are behind in versions compared to Firefox. That's a red flag for me. I tried to use Iceweasel to log into my credit union. Finally, it loaded--it took several minutes, even, though. (I proved surprised when it actually succeeded.)
Possibly a better solution exists: Some time ago, someone wrote some scripts to induce (more accurately, to "deceive") problem sites into "believing" that Iceweasel actually is from XP! It required changing to an enabled user--"on the fly"--just for such special situations!
I'd like to use Iceweasel: It must be kept up to date, though--otherwise, I just can't trust it. I believe that it lacks integrity: Recently, I couldn't kill the browser and also couldn't log out cleanly, either: I had to reset. FF likely would have performed better.
(A similar situation exists with clamtk--the current version of clamtk must be downloaded separately, from sourceforge.net. That's easy enough: But, why?! That's another issue, of course....)
I'm thus going to mozilla.org in order to obtain Firefox. I'll keep Iceweasel on, though: After all, it's the distro's official browser. I desire for it to succeed better.
Really, though, petty squabbling over logos, branding, and idiot legal manueuvering is just slapping the faces of so many who benefit the community so greatly! Fiefdoms:They weaken a community greatly and tarnish its ideals. Unfortunately, these great "code-wizards" merely are human and actually prove to be from earth, after all!
1
They aren't "behind in version", they are based on the Extended Support Release. The current version (38.2.1 - released 28 August 2015 ) was released one day after the Firefox ESR release (27 August 2015).
– Thomas Weinbrenner
Aug 30 '15 at 12:58
add a comment |
Reportedly, Iceweasel and other variants generally are behind in versions compared to Firefox. That's a red flag for me. I tried to use Iceweasel to log into my credit union. Finally, it loaded--it took several minutes, even, though. (I proved surprised when it actually succeeded.)
Possibly a better solution exists: Some time ago, someone wrote some scripts to induce (more accurately, to "deceive") problem sites into "believing" that Iceweasel actually is from XP! It required changing to an enabled user--"on the fly"--just for such special situations!
I'd like to use Iceweasel: It must be kept up to date, though--otherwise, I just can't trust it. I believe that it lacks integrity: Recently, I couldn't kill the browser and also couldn't log out cleanly, either: I had to reset. FF likely would have performed better.
(A similar situation exists with clamtk--the current version of clamtk must be downloaded separately, from sourceforge.net. That's easy enough: But, why?! That's another issue, of course....)
I'm thus going to mozilla.org in order to obtain Firefox. I'll keep Iceweasel on, though: After all, it's the distro's official browser. I desire for it to succeed better.
Really, though, petty squabbling over logos, branding, and idiot legal manueuvering is just slapping the faces of so many who benefit the community so greatly! Fiefdoms:They weaken a community greatly and tarnish its ideals. Unfortunately, these great "code-wizards" merely are human and actually prove to be from earth, after all!
Reportedly, Iceweasel and other variants generally are behind in versions compared to Firefox. That's a red flag for me. I tried to use Iceweasel to log into my credit union. Finally, it loaded--it took several minutes, even, though. (I proved surprised when it actually succeeded.)
Possibly a better solution exists: Some time ago, someone wrote some scripts to induce (more accurately, to "deceive") problem sites into "believing" that Iceweasel actually is from XP! It required changing to an enabled user--"on the fly"--just for such special situations!
I'd like to use Iceweasel: It must be kept up to date, though--otherwise, I just can't trust it. I believe that it lacks integrity: Recently, I couldn't kill the browser and also couldn't log out cleanly, either: I had to reset. FF likely would have performed better.
(A similar situation exists with clamtk--the current version of clamtk must be downloaded separately, from sourceforge.net. That's easy enough: But, why?! That's another issue, of course....)
I'm thus going to mozilla.org in order to obtain Firefox. I'll keep Iceweasel on, though: After all, it's the distro's official browser. I desire for it to succeed better.
Really, though, petty squabbling over logos, branding, and idiot legal manueuvering is just slapping the faces of so many who benefit the community so greatly! Fiefdoms:They weaken a community greatly and tarnish its ideals. Unfortunately, these great "code-wizards" merely are human and actually prove to be from earth, after all!
answered Jun 8 '13 at 16:19
user157259user157259
11
11
1
They aren't "behind in version", they are based on the Extended Support Release. The current version (38.2.1 - released 28 August 2015 ) was released one day after the Firefox ESR release (27 August 2015).
– Thomas Weinbrenner
Aug 30 '15 at 12:58
add a comment |
1
They aren't "behind in version", they are based on the Extended Support Release. The current version (38.2.1 - released 28 August 2015 ) was released one day after the Firefox ESR release (27 August 2015).
– Thomas Weinbrenner
Aug 30 '15 at 12:58
1
1
They aren't "behind in version", they are based on the Extended Support Release. The current version (38.2.1 - released 28 August 2015 ) was released one day after the Firefox ESR release (27 August 2015).
– Thomas Weinbrenner
Aug 30 '15 at 12:58
They aren't "behind in version", they are based on the Extended Support Release. The current version (38.2.1 - released 28 August 2015 ) was released one day after the Firefox ESR release (27 August 2015).
– Thomas Weinbrenner
Aug 30 '15 at 12:58
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f44215%2fwhat-is-the-difference-between-iceweasel-and-firefox%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Related: opensource.stackexchange.com/a/544/5199
– Revetahw
May 28 '16 at 13:22
I've provided a much more complete answer and uptodate. Please consider marking it as accepted or providing input.
– Evan Carroll
15 mins ago