Waterfox
Waterfox copied to clipboard
BrowserWorks
No longer Win7 compatible?
What happened?
The website still lists Windows 7 as the minimum, but when trying to auto-update from 6.0.5 to latest version it is reported that my operating system is unsupported. I tried downloading the installer and updating that way but it reports that Windows 10 is required.
Reproducible?
- [ ] I have checked that this issue cannot be reproduced on Mozilla Firefox.
Version
G6
What platform are you seeing the problem on?
Windows
Relevant log output
That's right. Last FF for W7 is 115, so Waterfox 6.0.20 is also last version for W7. 6.5.0 is based on newer Firefox, so W10 is required.
That's disappointing. I suppose that means I'll need to look for another browser for my older machine. They ought to update the website to reflect the new minimum requirements.
I think that you should rather prepare to switch to some Linux (maybe Ubuntu or Zorin) if you can't upgrade to W10 :smile:.
@hawkeye116477 The main reason I was hoping for Win 7 compatibility to continue is for my retro pc. I've got a system with Linux Mint and Windows 10, although I've mostly abandoned Windows 10 at this point with no plans of downgrading to Windows 11.
I hope this will be fixed eventually. This page lists Windows 7 as minimum OS, and trying to update redirects me to a non-existent page (and same for the installer). This makes me assume this is unintended.
The release notes for 6.5.0 mention "A re-jig of the system requirements to run Waterfox. We now expect the same minimum as Windows 10" I feel like I can safely assume that means they also expect Windows 10 at minimum. Sorry to say this probably isn't a bug.
That said, if you're still running Windows 7 or 8.1, you're likely comfortable using an OS that has had no security updates in almost 5 or 2 years respectively, so you're probably fine to stick to the previous Waterfox version until the next big wave of internet overhauls eventually break it (though in my opinion, if you must browse the internet at all on an OS that old, you should probably be using a much more hardened browser to begin with.)
That said, I would be happy to be proven wrong here and learn this is a bug, because I can respect still using older Windows versions. I'm still not totally happy with Windows 10, and my new Laptop will come with 11, which is... Less than ideal. Personally hoping I can get more comfortable with some distribution of Linux as a daily driver, because if 10 was a step too far, 11 is running straight off the edge of a cliff Looney Tunes style.
as IS4Code mentioned, the download page still lists windows 7 as the minimum required version, which is incorrect; that should be fixed if there are no plans to support it.
That's right. Last FF for W7 is 115, so Waterfox 6.0.20 is also last version for W7. 6.5.0 is based on newer Firefox, so W10 is required.
This portable version 6.5.0 seems to work. But seems to be modded. https://github.com/adeii/supermium-portable/releases/download/F130/Waterfox-portable-6.5.0-x64.7z
I ran into this issue today. The Minimum System Requirements on the download page show Windows 7, leading someone else to suggest Waterfox for a sidekick browser on 4 of my 5 machines. Alas, the minimum system requirements are outdated as of 6.5.0. Fixing the web site seems to be the expected solution.
And that 404 page should be populated, or links to it removed.
That said, if you're still running Windows 7 or 8.1, you're likely comfortable using an OS that has had no security updates in almost 5 or 2 years respectively
The latest Windows 7 update to date was released on January 14, 2025. Firefox/Waterfox does not support Windows 7 solely for "political" reasons. There is nothing critically needed for the browsers in Windows 10 that is not in Windows 7.
Drop the Foxes, use PaleMoon.
That said, if you're still running Windows 7 or 8.1, you're likely comfortable using an OS that has had no security updates in almost 5 or 2 years respectively
The latest Windows 7 update to date was released on January 14, 2025. Firefox/Waterfox does not support Windows 7 solely for "political" reasons. There is nothing critically needed for the browsers in Windows 10 that is not in Windows 7.
Drop the Foxes, use PaleMoon.
Are you trolling? All editions of Windows 7 stopped recieving even extended support over 5 years ago. If you're getting new updates, they arent official.
Are you trolling? All editions of Windows 7 stopped recieving even extended support over 5 years ago. If you're getting new updates, they arent official.
The updates are completely official, from Microsoft. They are intended for Windows Server 2008 R2, but are perfect for Windows 7 - internally these systems are totally identical. To install updates, you will need an ESU license. Moreover, Vista can be updated in the same way.
Are you trolling? All editions of Windows 7 stopped recieving even extended support over 5 years ago. If you're getting new updates, they arent official.
The updates are completely official, from Microsoft. They are intended for Windows Server 2008 R2, but are perfect for Windows 7 - internally these systems are totally identical. To install updates, you will need an ESU license. Moreover, Vista can be updated in the same way.
Yeah sorry, I'm not counting using updates from a seperate OS as Windows 7 "still recieving updates", even if they're almost identical internally. That's just a hacky workaround to keep using a long-outdated OS, and is by no means official support for Windows 7 itself.
That's just a hacky workaround to keep using a long-outdated OS, and is by no means official support for Windows 7 itself.
There is nothing hackish about this way. Standalone update installers are simply downloaded from the Microsoft Download Center and installed. Important detail: the installers do not indicate anywhere that they are intended specifically for Windows Server. It is simply written - Windows.
whether you can update windows 7 or not has nothing to do with this bug.
It's crazy how some people just take offense at the fact that some of us want to continue using software we like instead of embracing the ever more exploitative slop Microsoft is pushing out.
I mean, I switched to Linux Mint for my main system well over a year ago, but I just liked the look and feel of Windows 7, and it's somehow a crime against humanity to want to continue using it. It's a shame that Waterfox has dropped support, but they should update all instances where Windows 7 is listed as the minimum requirement. The fact that another issue was raised about this just recently ought to be an indicator of this.
I mean, I switched to Linux Mint for my main system well over a year ago, but I just liked the look and feel of Windows 7, and it's somehow a crime against humanity to want to continue using it.
Linux is built on 60-year-old standards, for 60-year-old computers that were kept in secure rooms and run by scientists. This operating system is not as safe in the hands of the average user as a howitzer or a bazooka. Giving a howitzer to civilians is a crime. Using Windows 7 is not a crime.
It's crazy how some people just take offense at the fact that some of us want to continue using software we like instead of embracing the ever more exploitative slop Microsoft is pushing out.
I mean, I switched to Linux Mint for my main system well over a year ago, but I just liked the look and feel of Windows 7, and it's somehow a crime against humanity to want to continue using it. It's a shame that Waterfox has dropped support, but they should update all instances where Windows 7 is listed as the minimum requirement. The fact that another issue was raised about this just recently ought to be an indicator of this.
Yeah, the documentation needs to be updated everywhere for certain... But I understand it not being a priority given Windows 7 doesn't exactly have a booming installbase these days.
Trust me, I would be using Windows 7 still too if I thought it was a legitimate option. But I'm not willing to spoof my system into getting updates from a server version in order to have a secure(ish) system, and if I was to use it I'd be giving my performance at a big detriment due to the lack of support for things like DirectX12 and increasingly poor driver support from newer hardware.
It's not a crime to find workarounds for all this, but requesting that Waterfox devs put in extra time to ensure that an OS that has not been officially updated in over 5 years is supported by new versions of their browser, is a bit ridiculous. If you're okay using an old OS with all the problems that entails, you should be okay using an old browser too. Or find a fork of Firefox that does have Win7 support to this day (I'm sure there's at least 1 or 2 given how many forks there are)
I get it though, as someone who has SEVERE issues getting used to changes (for reference, I still have my Waterfox set up to have a UI as close as I can to Firefox's v4 UI, and have done many ill-advised tweaks to my Windows 10 to make it function as similarly to 7 as possible): I clung to Windows 7 as long as I could. I even clung to 8.1 for longer than I should have. I only updated when getting new computers that came with a newer OS and was too cheap to buy a license for an old version. And now I'm clinging to 10 desperately, despite knowing in just a few months it'll be losing support too. When that happens, I'll either migrate to 11 and spend weeks tweaking it until I consider it usable (probably still hating it with every fiber of my being as has been the case every time I've had to use a computer that's infected with it) or I'll finally switch to Linux, which I tried once before, but couldn't get used to the differences.
Anyway, this conversation has long since derailed.
Again, I'd reccommend either looking for other Firefox forks that still have Win7 support, or just use old versions for now. Given how many people still use Windows 7, I wouldn't be surprised if someone was already working on a modern Windows 7 fork of Waterfox itself. Everyone has to understand that as Operating Systems move forward, not every version can be supported by every piece of software forever. There are too many architectural differences, it would lead to a more and more bloated codebase. As someone who has had the misfortune of programming since a young age, I wish it was easy to keep a codebase working with multiple versions of a dependant platform, but it just isn't (well, except in very specific circumstances, but this isn't one of those).
... if 10 was a step too far, 11 is running straight off the edge of a cliff Looney Tunes style.
Totally agree ...
.
So, any progress on getting a build for windows 7, or are we considered non-entities for not wanting to pay for the privilege of perpetually beta testing a buggy mess of an operating system that microsoft insists is an upgrade?
Hi everyone,
I completely understand the disappointment around dropping support for older operating systems (especially a popular one like Windows 7). I know how frustrating it can be when software you rely on is no longer compatible with your system, especially when that system is still serving you well.
This wasn't a decision I made lightly. Even if I personally wanted to maintain support for these older OS versions, the reality is that I simply don't have the development capacity to properly support and test across all these platforms while also moving the project forward with new features and security updates.
Supporting older operating systems requires significant ongoing effort - not just initial compatibility work, but continuous testing, debugging platform-specific issues, and ensuring security patches work correctly across all supported versions. With limited time and resources, I have to make difficult choices about where to focus development efforts.
I know there are some devs doing the work for it - but I'm already spread so thin as is it's not really something I can promise or give for Waterfox.
Closing this ticket completely misses the point. As described in the initial report, and reiterated in my initial post here: https://github.com/BrowserWorks/waterfox/issues/3609#issuecomment-2578944019
The issue is not about drumming up support for Windows 7.
The issue is that the download page of the web site shows Windows 7 as a compatible OS, when it is not. It can't take that much dev resources to fix the verbiage on the download page, can it?
I think that you should rather prepare to switch to some Linux (maybe Ubuntu or Zorin) if you can't upgrade to W10 😄.
ubuntu is a total unstable pile of shit, zorin is sketchy. better go with mint cinnamon instead
That said, if you're still running Windows 7 or 8.1, you're likely comfortable using an OS that has had no security updates in almost 5 or 2 years respectively
The latest Windows 7 update to date was released on January 14, 2025. Firefox/Waterfox does not support Windows 7 solely for "political" reasons. There is nothing critically needed for the browsers in Windows 10 that is not in Windows 7. Drop the Foxes, use PaleMoon.
Are you trolling? All editions of Windows 7 stopped recieving even extended support over 5 years ago. If you're getting new updates, they arent official.
If you haven't figured that out yet, some people are power users, and simply don't give 2 shits about m$ updates, they know how to keep their pcs clean and they don't do any mission-critical stuff on their computers.