I'm still on the fence on whether or not I want FF-3 with all of its changes and asked about it over at FireFox Support:
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=846065
Someone suggested I try FFP-3.
Ah, that's an idea. I then asked some questions about it and was directed here:
Other than being portable and self contained, what is the difference?
More to the point, what is the advantage of having the regular FF over the portable? Is there a (lower?) limit (e.g.) to the size of the bookmark file/folder and/or restriction to the number and types of add-ons available?
Browsing through the PFF forum it is said that none of the code etc., can be changed from the regular FF, thus I presume all of the user files are the same between FF and FFP—?
If so, could/should I first install PFF-2, get it up and running, then
copy over all of the user files (prefs, bookmarks, sessionstore, etc.) from FF2——since they should be the same——THEN "upgrade" to PFF-3 and see how everything looks?
~KMGC~
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
Since you are not actually installing, you can have multiple firefoxes whether it be 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 etc. on your computer or portable drive to use and play around with. You just have to name the folder something different if all of the firefoxes are stored in the same directory. There are no limitations to the program, "portable" does not mean "smaller". I believe the only difference is the cache is set at 0 MB in the portable, I have all of mine set to 1000 MB since I do not run FFP off of flash drives.
Also, just keep a backup of your "Data" folder that can be copied into all of your Firefoxes.