Mozilla lists the minimum requirements for Firefox 144 as "1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster compatible processor or System on a Chip (SoC)" and 1 GB of RAM.
32-bit Pentium III and 4 will support up to 4 GB of RAM, but it's going to be dogshit slow.
1 GHz is clearly a simplification for a more complex metric and very obviously doesn't have in mind a Pentium III 1400 @ 1.4 GHz.
As for Pentium 4, you need to qualify that, because Pentium 4 wasn't exclusively 32-bit – only the earlier ones were. Cedar Mill and many Prescotts supported Intel 64. So we'll assume a generous case that someone is using something like a Pentium 4 505, where "capable of running" probably still isn't the same as "running decently on any modern website".
macOS 10.15 required for Firefox 144, so no macOS users.
Firefox 144 does not support Windows 7, 8, or 8.1.
Windows 11 straight-up will not boot with that CPU.
So you're left with Linux or BSD. Firefox's Linux requirements are fairly lax, so we can assume you're not running into compat issues. That leaves you with someone who:
Is using a CPU manufactured around 2004 or earlier.
Is on Windows 10 32-bit (despite EOL) Linux, or BSD.
Specifically wants to use Firefox.
That's such an obscenely negligible percentage of people (and will keep falling off a cliff as that hardware dies out and fewer applications support it) that, combined with the terrible UX of a modern web browser on that hardware, the baggage that comes with not assuming 64-bit can't be justified.
@TheTechnician27@kittenzrulz123 The idea that you can run Firefox on a system with 1GB of RAM is laughable. I had to upgrade my system to 16GB because running Firefox in fewer became too painful.
@devfuuu@msage This is my experience exactly. I don't care much for this thread, the fact is Firefox won't run in 1MB and in my experience won't run very well in 8MB. If other peoples' mileages magically vary, good for them.
Looks like the Pi 1, 2, and Zero are 32-bit (and probably other old or low spec SBCs). I'm also not sure if Firefox is distinguishing between 32-bit ARM and 32-bit x86.
Good. Honestly it's staggering they've supported it for this long. It's hard to envisage such an old system browsing the web using Firefox, the modern web is so bloated that any 32-bit system will seriously struggle.
It's much better to have that developer/testing effort spent elsewhere. Mozilla doesn't exactly have the infinite resources that Google has.
24 Comments
expatriado@lemmy.world · 56 pts · 289d
remember the 32 to 64 bit transition 15-20 years ago, respect for people still running PCs that old
frongt@lemmy.zip · 36 pts · 289d
Even FreeBSD is dropping support for 32-bit toasters.
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org · 40 pts · 289d
TIL they even kept it around that long.
There is no 32 bit hardware capable of running a recent FF version, let alone browse the www with it.
kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 10 pts · 289d
Some Pentium 3 and 4 machines are absolutely capable of running a recent version of FF
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 289d
Mozilla lists the minimum requirements for Firefox 144 as "1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster compatible processor or System on a Chip (SoC)" and 1 GB of RAM.
As for Pentium 4, you need to qualify that, because Pentium 4 wasn't exclusively 32-bit – only the earlier ones were. Cedar Mill and many Prescotts supported Intel 64. So we'll assume a generous case that someone is using something like a Pentium 4 505, where "capable of running" probably still isn't the same as "running decently on any modern website".
So you're left with Linux or BSD. Firefox's Linux requirements are fairly lax, so we can assume you're not running into compat issues. That leaves you with someone who:
That's such an obscenely negligible percentage of people (and will keep falling off a cliff as that hardware dies out and fewer applications support it) that, combined with the terrible UX of a modern web browser on that hardware, the baggage that comes with not assuming 64-bit can't be justified.
khleedril@cyberplace.social · 9 pts · 288d
@TheTechnician27 @kittenzrulz123 The idea that you can run Firefox on a system with 1GB of RAM is laughable. I had to upgrade my system to 16GB because running Firefox in fewer became too painful.
msage@programming.dev · 5 pts · 288d
What do you do in browser?
At work I would be extremely fine with 8GB, and we use Windows browser apps. Even they would run fine with 4GB of RAM.
So why 16?
WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 288d
1000 tabs obvs
devfuuu@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 288d
I can barely do anything else on my personal machine with 8GB if I have firefox open. And it swaps.
Now I'm missing my pentium 3 1Ghz with 128mb of ram because of this thread.
khleedril@cyberplace.social · 2 pts · 287d
@devfuuu @msage This is my experience exactly. I don't care much for this thread, the fact is Firefox won't run in 1MB and in my experience won't run very well in 8MB. If other peoples' mileages magically vary, good for them.
msage@programming.dev · 1 pts · 288d
Do you use Windows?
devfuuu@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 287d
No. Not in almost 20 years.
Cyber@feddit.uk · 3 pts · 289d
Aren't the Raspberries and SBCs 32b?
I know some have 64b capabilities, but not all, and I thought they are using FF for signage...?
duckythescientist@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 pts · 288d
Looks like the Pi 1, 2, and Zero are 32-bit (and probably other old or low spec SBCs). I'm also not sure if Firefox is distinguishing between 32-bit ARM and 32-bit x86.
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org · 2 pts · 288d
I should've added this as a possible caveat.
lichtmetzger@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 287d
I have a computer with two Pentium 3 processors (2x1.4GHz) and 4gigs of RAM that would be technically capable of running it, albeit a bit slowly.
It's like the holy grail of retro computing and not that common - but that's not the point! :D
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 14 pts · 289d
Meanwhile, the steam client...
progandy@feddit.org · 13 pts · 288d
I believe you can still compile it, but you will get no fixes or help with problems from Mozilla.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 287d
Good. Honestly it's staggering they've supported it for this long. It's hard to envisage such an old system browsing the web using Firefox, the modern web is so bloated that any 32-bit system will seriously struggle.
It's much better to have that developer/testing effort spent elsewhere. Mozilla doesn't exactly have the infinite resources that Google has.
boaratio@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 287d
64 bit desktop processors have existed for longer than I've had kids. Valve killing 32 bit support, as well as Mozilla is a nothing story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Athlon_processors
galacticwaffle@lemmings.world · -4 pts · 289d
Eh_I@lemmy.world · -12 pts · 289d
WE RIOT
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 289d
I want to live in your world. All the shit going on right now, and 32 bit firefox is what gets you to grab a pitchfork?
Eh_I@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 288d
good grief