Firefox Portable All Builds Online Installer

[demon.devin]

Here's an online installer for all versions of Firefox.

A very detailed and exhaustive list of features, end-user notes, and other extras (like multiple profile support) this advanced, feature-rich portable version of Firefox can be found over at: https://portableapps.com/node/56965

The source is also included for those who are curious.

This took me all day to complete, so somebody better had appreciate this PAF!

Download
https://www.upload.ee/files/7592554/Fir ... f.exe.html

Download Rev. 2 - Thanks to Userfriendly's suggestions..
https://www.upload.ee/files/7601871/Fir ... f.exe.html

[Userfriendly]

So besides the latest release build, you can type the specific version number that corresponds to the directory name from https://download-installer.cdn.mozilla. ... /releases/

So if i wanted the previous release I would type in 55.0. Can also download beta and esr builds by typing in stuff like 57.0b11 or 52.4.1esr. But I would have to know that specific version number of those builds exist.

It would also be nice to download the latest beta, devedition, nightly, and esr builds with the online installer without typing in specific version numbers. It's possible with these URLs:

(for x64 builds, change url string from os=win to os=win64)
Beta
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US

DevEdition
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US

Nightly
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US
en-US only
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US
Other Languages
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... =win&lang=
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... =win&lang=

ESR
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US

Latest Stable Release
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US
https://download.mozilla.org/?product=f ... lang=en-US

It could have been already possible to download builds like nightly or devedition with the installer. But I couldn't find anything in PortableApps.comInstaller.nsi that references those builds or any other input string besides 'latest' and version number.

The readme though... FukenGruven retired So thats why his site stopped updating. I Know "illegal" portable app sites are frowned upon here but I have no such filter. I just like all portable apps

[demon.devin]

Yes, you could type in the specific version you would like to install but I will add the links you provided and enable those latest builds for download as well. Thank you Userfriendly (you're living up to your username ..lol.).

And yes, FukenGruven is no longer with us.. but I've taken it upon myself to continue his work. My modified version of PAL was his to begin with and I just continued developing it and made it more readable and understandable.

John removed my link over at PA.c but the notes I wrote about this version is still available.

[demon.devin]

It would also be nice to download the latest beta, devedition, nightly, and esr builds with the online installer without typing in specific version numbers.

I've added the suggestions that Userfriendly had suggested during install. Look for the Rev. 2 download link above.

Thanks again Userfriendly!

=)

[Userfriendly]

Works great! Now maybe the next thing to do is get some feature parity with the official launcher. Well at least some of the launcher INI options that might seem useful. I use the AllowMultipleInstances one to make it possible to do just that, run multiple instances of Firefox. Unless there's a command-line switch I can use to do that.

[webfork]

Think this is a pretty good synopsis:

With this online installer you're able to install the latest builds of the stable version, Beta version, DevEdition version, ESR version, Nightly version, or any older versions of Firefox. Plus, it supports installing either one of the 32-bit/64-bit or both. All that with just this ONE online installer without bundling the Firefox application with the installer either.

John removed my link over at PA.c but the notes I wrote about this version is still available.

You might want to look at this thread as the issue of handling Firefox tweaks has come up more than a few times.

I think the project ultimately comes down to Mozilla being very careful with their brand, especially right now while they're struggling to stay relevant. If it were me I'd start posting about it inside Mozilla's forums and make a case for why it's great. I suspect they want hobbyist enthusiasm but they want to be able to maintain some kind of handle on it.

[demon.devin]

I have read their trademark policy on their website, specifically the section about using their name and logo for distribution, and came to the conclusion that I was perfectly okay to do so and was abiding by Mozilla's trademarks policy that applied to what my online installer is and/or has.

I'm not redistributing their product and since my installer is downloading Firefox directly from their servers, their policy on that states that they recommend downloading the latest, stable builds. Since my installer is doing exactly that for any version, I'm well within their legal premises.

I think John is just afraid of anyone else having the ability to do something better than what he's got which is why he removed my link. If he wasn't so damn selfish, he would have seen that I was just trying to make his version better and much more feature-rich. I guess it's true about what they say, people are afraid of what they don't understand and John has admitted to me he doesn't understand PAL like he should.

[webfork]

I have read their trademark policy on their website, specifically the section about using their name and logo for distribution, and came to the conclusion that I was perfectly okay to do so and was abiding by Mozilla's trademarks policy that applied to what my online installer is and/or has.

I'm not redistributing their product and since my installer is downloading Firefox directly from their servers, their policy on that states that they recommend downloading the latest, stable builds. Since my installer is doing exactly that for any version, I'm well within their legal premises.

That does make sense. This is actually how I was going to resolve a problem with my portable software distribution system ("Kitchen Sink") many years ago, but I didn't have the technical know-how to build it.

If he wasn't so damn selfish, he would have seen that I was just trying to make his version better and much more feature-rich. I guess it's true about what they say, people are afraid of what they don't understand and John has admitted to me he doesn't understand PAL like he should.

I'd probably describe it as protectionist. He's got a successful project, it's working well, and his effort has a gigantic userbase. He saw the "app store" approach to software distribution before a lot of similar projects.

There are many cases where I thought he took that protectionism too far and maybe put out the fire of interest by similar projects, but I can't deny that he's brokered deals with major companies like Microsoft, Oracle, and Mozilla when even the most community-friendly of these (Mozilla) won't even answer their email for trademark questions. He's also maintained an open approach in the face of a lot of similar projects either stopped moving or went a more lucrative, less open model. Hell, the top Linux distro has Amazon integration and Google's various open platforms just get more and more closed with time.

[Userfriendly]

I have read their trademark policy on their website, specifically the section about using their name and logo for distribution, and came to the conclusion that I was perfectly okay to do so and was abiding by Mozilla's trademarks policy that applied to what my online installer is and/or has.

I'm not redistributing their product and since my installer is downloading Firefox directly from their servers, their policy on that states that they recommend downloading the latest, stable builds. Since my installer is doing exactly that for any version, I'm well within their legal premises.

He just wants to protect his website. I can understand this at least. Legal stuff can be tricky and losing support from Mozilla is something he doesn't wanna risk. There are plenty of unapproved rogue projects and sites out there that provide alternative Firefox builds and launchers. He just doesn't want to host one on his site.

The current Firefox portable installers available there work as they should. Even if they aren't feature rich with neat options that make you marvel at the coding wizardry. Sometimes the if it ain't broke why fix it approach is fine too. Keeping it simple is also to the benefit of more tech inept users. Download for one specific thing and click next next next and done. Reading and typing options could be too much for a lot of people. You can provide some input and code examples on how to improve things. But of course its up to him if to decide if he wants to use it.

Besides, the PortableApps Platform thing already serves that AIO function. Advanced users just need to enable in the options and they can install the separate launchers for beta, nighter, etc. if they wanted.

You don't have to get that personal. He reads and posts on this forum too. Also how can he not understand PAL lol. He's like the one that started this whole business of portable launchers.

[demon.devin]

You don't have to get that personal. He reads and posts on this forum too.

John may post here and I'm sure he's well-aware that I've shared my work here at TPFC as well. I don't really care what he thinks anymore. As far as I'm concerned, he can take his dying portable brand name and work things out by himself. I told him I quit (not that I was hired to do anything but he did ask me personally to share my thoughts on expanding PAL) and that I'm done trying to by apart of that nonsense. I poured countless hours into trying to develop and expand upon the PA.c Launcher and was disregarded. For example, have a look at this thread and tell me that wasn't a good idea I had. I could not believe he just dismissed that idea even after I went into great detail about the use case. Which brings me to my next point...

Also how can he not understand PAL lol. He's like the one that started this whole business of portable launchers.

He doesn't understand PAL because he wasn't the one who wrote or developed it. A gentleman by the name of Chris Morgan was the brilliance behind that framework. I can also tell you that he was not the person who started the whole portable apps craze. He was just the first person to capitalize on the craft and was quick to market the idea with a standards-base specification. Granted, John was the one who wrote the custom code for the portable launchers before Chris Morgan created PAL but that doesn't mean he's the sole reason we now have portable programming. People worked with batch files and other developers made use of AutoIt which has been adopted as the main scripting preference (or at least it was) at reboot.pro. Reboot.pro is all about portable operating systems which makes use of making portable software to go with those live operating systems; which, by the way, has a huge community and is by far way more active than PortableApps.com. Plus, it has also been around just as long as PA.c—if not longer.

Forgive me if I'm being a bit over zealous with my reply. I'm just at my wit's end with the whole thing. I really tried to be apart of John's brand and the whole PortableApps.com idiom. Alas, I just misunderstood what that man and his website was really about. I had high hopes of what that place could have been; or I was just telling myself that.

Blah blah blah. Lol.

=)

[SYSTEM]

For example, have a look at this thread and tell me that wasn't a good idea I had. I could not believe he just dismissed that idea even after I went into great detail about the use case.

I have to say that I understand where he's coming from. You gave two concrete examples about the use cases of ExecAsUser:

1. File associations. As John said, file associations don't require admin rights because they can be done in HKCU. And more important, PortableApps.com doesn't want portable file associations because they have numerous problems.

2. Junctions. Highly problematic if the program crashes.

All features have a maintenance cost. The more code a program has, the harder it is to maintain (refactoring operations are larger, and features can interfere with each other in unexpected ways). The usefulness of each feature needs to be pitted against the maintenance cost, and because there don't seem to be any important use cases for ExecAsUser, it appears that it's best not to integrate it.

[Midas]

I'm finding the debate here highly interesting. Thanks to all involved.

[demon.devin]

I have to say that I understand where he's coming from. You gave two concrete examples about the use cases of ExecAsUser

I didn't plead my case as well as I should have but I digress.

[demon.devin]

John and I have been discussing our little qualm in a private venue and things have been resolved. It was just a misunderstanding (mostly on my end..) and we're better friends now for it.

You don't have to get that personal. He reads and posts on this forum too.

You're right, I was letting it get a little personal and I have apologized for it. So please excuse me for what I have said previously.

John is a really good guy and I'm glad to have gotten the chance to work with him. Thanks you guys.