Mozilla extends Firefox support for Windows 7 and older macOS until 2026

[DragonSlayer101]

In a nutshell: Mozilla has announced another support extension for Firefox on older operating systems, including Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, and macOS 10.12 Sierra, 10.13 High Sierra, and 10.14 Mojave. The company confirmed that Firefox ESR 115 (extended support release) will remain supported on these legacy platforms for an additional six months, through March 2026.

Mozilla has remained committed to supporting Windows 7 through 8.1, even years after Microsoft officially ended updates for those operating systems. Last September, the company announced it would extend Firefox support on these platforms until March 2025, and in February it added another six months.

With support for Firefox's ESR branch on Windows 7 – 8.1 and macOS 10.12 – 10.14 set to expire this month, Mozilla has once again responded to user demand. The company pledged to continue releasing security patches and bug fixes for its browser on these legacy platforms through at least March 2026. Mozilla said it will reassess the situation in February to determine whether further extensions are warranted.

Firefox is now the only mainstream browser still supporting Windows 7, as Chrome, Edge, Opera, and Vivaldi dropped the platform long ago. Last year, Mozilla acknowledged that maintaining support for legacy operating systems is becoming increasingly difficult both financially and technologically, but noted that there are still enough Firefox users on Windows 7 to justify the effort.

The extended support applies only to security patches and major bug fixes. New features will continue to roll out exclusively on operating systems still supported by their vendors, meaning only Windows 10 – 11 and macOS 13 – 15 users will see the latest functionality.

Mainstream support for Windows 10 will end in October, leaving Windows 11 as the only version still officially supported by Microsoft. Apple has not confirmed how long it will maintain macOS Ventura, Sonoma, and Sequoia, but based on its three-year update cycle, Ventura may have already received its final update last month.

Mozilla's announcement signals that it may extend support for legacy platforms beyond March 2026. Still, users are strongly advised to upgrade to a supported version of Windows or macOS when possible. Modern platforms not only provide the latest features but also offer stronger security and better protection against cybercrime.

Permalink to story:

Mozilla extends Firefox support for Windows 7 and older macOS until 2026

 

[ibnMuhammad]

Problem is, it's Firefox v115, which was released over 2 years ago and sadly, many websites don't build their bloated web apps for older versions except the last 2-4 releases (autoprefixer / postcss / babel / etc).

So essentially, already starting to see websites not work correctly on Firefox v115, most notably WhatsApp

At some point, I'll be forced to move to spyware-ridden Win10.
Not touching Win11 - too inflexible, many config options removed and even registry hacks don't work.

 

[Axeia]

At some point, I'll be forced to move to spyware-ridden Win10.
Not touching Win11 - too inflexible, many config options removed and even registry hacks don't work.

So you plan on moving from one outdated and no longer supported OS to another?

Why not just install a long term supported Linux distro. No spyware at all and works fine with the latest Firefox. More responsive on low end hardware as well if that's the issue, and if it isn't - time to run windows under Virtual box for what must be a rather uncommon use case?

 

[GeoffreyA]

At some point, I'll be forced to move to spyware-ridden Win10.
Not touching Win11 - too inflexible, many config options removed and even registry hacks don't work.

If you do migrate to W10, OpenShell, ShutUp10++, and AppBuster will help put everything right. The LTSC build is more streamlined but might miss feature updates from the last branch of W10.

As Axeia notes, Linux is a good alternative too, especially Mint. The latest version, Zara, got released today.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Shows how desperate Mozilla really is to stay relevant.

 

[ibnMuhammad]

Shows how desperate Mozilla really is to stay relevant.

Quite the opposite.

If they were desperate, they would concentrate resources where the majority of users are.

It actually shows how much they care for users to continue to put time and effort and dev resources to back-porting and fixing security issues.

I'll always support Firefox, despite their poor management. Because it's the last privacy-focused browser with their own js/markup/rendering/networking engine. And before people utter "telemetry", it's only used for stats to see which UI elements work and which don't, and to fix bugs (read their privacy policy). Regardless, it's easy to switch off.

Even with poor management, it goes to show that under one umbrella organisation, where devs work together and argue out ideas (unlike Linux, where each devs throws a tantrum and goes off and forks the product), they create a unified, organised, and well-maintained product with an excellent UI. Still putting users first, unlike Google et al.

 

[ibnMuhammad]

So you plan on moving from one outdated and no longer supported OS to another?

Why not just install a long term supported Linux distro. No spyware at all and works fine with the latest Firefox. More responsive on low end hardware as well if that's the issue, and if it isn't - time to run windows under Virtual box for what must be a rather uncommon use case?

I didn't want to get into it.

But to summarise: Linux is still a joke, and will always be a joke on the desktop.
It's held together by duct-tape and strings.

See: the v2 kernel *stable* release, which corrupted the entire filesystem during shutdown/unmount. Or the ext3 bug which caused data loss and constant fsck. Or the numerous issues intro'd by systemd, such as bootup failures. On another occasion, it took me 2 full days and several hours to find why X11 became massively slow - an update caused a change to config file which made it think I only had a few mb of system memory!

Linux only makes sense on the desktop if you don't value time, and like being constantly told to go RTFM or fix a bug yourself.

Linux (especially BSD) works fine in light use cases with minimal changes, such as firmware and firewall boxes or servers with constant transfers. But on a more complex use case, such as a full-blown GUI with multiple applications competing for resources and heavily threaded apps, managing cpu/memory, and on top of that, constant usage of gpu and misc hardware devices, MS Windows still excels.

Secondly, Linux on the desktop, using a gui is a mess to say the least, nothing is unified, everything works against the user, especially a user like me who customises greatly and relies heavily on the keyboard for shortcuts. Sadly, MacOS is similar but to a lesser degree, where keyboard shortcuts differ between applications - and don't get me started with the horror that is Finder.

Linux will never be successful* on the desktop unless it comes under one organisation and management guiding developers, uniting them, and uniting the product. Canonical with Ubuntu is perhaps the closest it came to something a little better on desktop. Otherwise, all the kids still infight and go off in a tantrum to fork yet-another-product.

Success examples: Mozilla foundation, The Document Foundation, Apache foundation, etc.

 

[Burty117]

I didn't want to get into it.

But to summarise: Linux is still a joke, and will always be a joke on the desktop.
It's held together by duct-tape and strings.

See: the v2 kernel *stable* release, which corrupted the entire filesystem during shutdown/unmount. Or the ext3 bug which caused data loss and constant fsck. Or the numerous issues intro'd by systemd, such as bootup failures. On another occasion, it took me 2 full days and several hours to find why X11 became massively slow - an update caused a change to config file which made it think I only had a few mb of system memory!

Linux only makes sense on the desktop if you don't value time, and like being constantly told to go RTFM or fix a bug yourself.

Linux (especially BSD) works fine in light use cases with minimal changes, such as firmware and firewall boxes or servers with constant transfers. But on a more complex use case, such as a full-blown GUI with multiple applications competing for resources and heavily threaded apps, managing cpu/memory, and on top of that, constant usage of gpu and misc hardware devices, MS Windows still excels.

Secondly, Linux on the desktop, using a gui is a mess to say the least, nothing is unified, everything works against the user, especially a user like me who customises greatly and relies heavily on the keyboard for shortcuts. Sadly, MacOS is similar but to a lesser degree, where keyboard shortcuts differ between applications - and don't get me started with the horror that is Finder.

Linux will never be successful* on the desktop unless it comes under one organisation and management guiding developers, uniting them, and uniting the product. Canonical with Ubuntu is perhaps the closest it came to something a little better on desktop. Otherwise, all the kids still infight and go off in a tantrum to fork yet-another-product.

Success examples: Mozilla foundation, The Document Foundation, Apache foundation, etc.

So what you’re saying is, you don’t really value your privacy, you came into the comment section to tell the world you’re moving from Win7 to 10, not happy about it, but happy enough that there’s no alternative?

I don’t understand how so many people have issues with Linux, been in and out of daily Linux use over the past 15 years, but made it full time on my laptop in the last couple of years, definitely run into less issues than I did in Windows.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

I didn't want to get into it.

But to summarise: Linux is still a joke, and will always be a joke on the desktop.
It's held together by duct-tape and strings.

See: the v2 kernel *stable* release, which corrupted the entire filesystem during shutdown/unmount. Or the ext3 bug which caused data loss and constant fsck. Or the numerous issues intro'd by systemd, such as bootup failures. On another occasion, it took me 2 full days and several hours to find why X11 became massively slow - an update caused a change to config file which made it think I only had a few mb of system memory!

Linux only makes sense on the desktop if you don't value time, and like being constantly told to go RTFM or fix a bug yourself.

Linux (especially BSD) works fine in light use cases with minimal changes, such as firmware and firewall boxes or servers with constant transfers. But on a more complex use case, such as a full-blown GUI with multiple applications competing for resources and heavily threaded apps, managing cpu/memory, and on top of that, constant usage of gpu and misc hardware devices, MS Windows still excels.

Secondly, Linux on the desktop, using a gui is a mess to say the least, nothing is unified, everything works against the user, especially a user like me who customises greatly and relies heavily on the keyboard for shortcuts. Sadly, MacOS is similar but to a lesser degree, where keyboard shortcuts differ between applications - and don't get me started with the horror that is Finder.

Linux will never be successful* on the desktop unless it comes under one organisation and management guiding developers, uniting them, and uniting the product. Canonical with Ubuntu is perhaps the closest it came to something a little better on desktop. Otherwise, all the kids still infight and go off in a tantrum to fork yet-another-product.

Success examples: Mozilla foundation, The Document Foundation, Apache foundation, etc.

Interesting. I've been dailying linux for several years now, both mint and manjaro, and have never suffered any of the issues you have described. No issues with customization either.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Quite the opposite.

If they were desperate, they would concentrate resources where the majority of users are.

It actually shows how much they care for users to continue to put time and effort and dev resources to back-porting and fixing security issues.

I'll always support Firefox, despite their poor management. Because it's the last privacy-focused browser with their own js/markup/rendering/networking engine. And before people utter "telemetry", it's only used for stats to see which UI elements work and which don't, and to fix bugs (read their privacy policy). Regardless, it's easy to switch off.

Even with poor management, it goes to show that under one umbrella organisation, where devs work together and argue out ideas (unlike Linux, where each devs throws a tantrum and goes off and forks the product), they create a unified, organised, and well-maintained product with an excellent UI. Still putting users first, unlike Google et al.

Looks like most FF users are running an unsupported OS in 2025. It won't end well. Say your goodbyes now. Choosing privacy over security is silly, and FF won't be missed. It was good in the internet explorer days, but not anymore.

"Mozilla faces significant financial and market share challenges due to declining user numbers and reliance on a Google search deal that is under threat from a US antitrust lawsuit. While Firefox remains a viable, privacy-focused, and open-source alternative with ongoing development, its future depends on Mozilla's ability to diversify its revenue streams and adapt to the highly competitive browser market."

Nothing you haven't heard before. I didn't pull my claim out of thin air. The writing is carved in the wall.

 

[amghwk]

I didn't want to get into it.

But to summarise: Linux is still a joke, and will always be a joke on the desktop.
It's held together by duct-tape and strings.

See: the v2 kernel *stable* release, which corrupted the entire filesystem during shutdown/unmount. Or the ext3 bug which caused data loss and constant fsck. Or the numerous issues intro'd by systemd, such as bootup failures. On another occasion, it took me 2 full days and several hours to find why X11 became massively slow - an update caused a change to config file which made it think I only had a few mb of system memory!

Linux only makes sense on the desktop if you don't value time, and like being constantly told to go RTFM or fix a bug yourself.

Linux (especially BSD) works fine in light use cases with minimal changes, such as firmware and firewall boxes or servers with constant transfers. But on a more complex use case, such as a full-blown GUI with multiple applications competing for resources and heavily threaded apps, managing cpu/memory, and on top of that, constant usage of gpu and misc hardware devices, MS Windows still excels.

Secondly, Linux on the desktop, using a gui is a mess to say the least, nothing is unified, everything works against the user, especially a user like me who customises greatly and relies heavily on the keyboard for shortcuts. Sadly, MacOS is similar but to a lesser degree, where keyboard shortcuts differ between applications - and don't get me started with the horror that is Finder.

Linux will never be successful* on the desktop unless it comes under one organisation and management guiding developers, uniting them, and uniting the product. Canonical with Ubuntu is perhaps the closest it came to something a little better on desktop. Otherwise, all the kids still infight and go off in a tantrum to fork yet-another-product.

Success examples: Mozilla foundation, The Document Foundation, Apache foundation, etc.

Seems like either you just couldn't get hang of Linux or you left Linux just after you started, or you got screwed by unhelpful holier-than-thou forum users **cough** arch **cough**

Changed to Linux as the main OS ever since Windows 8 came out. Looking at the direction Microsoft is taking with Windows 8, I knew I had to make a strong decision... To enter the uncharted territory of Linux.

And my first experience when trying out Linux was interesting and fun.

The GUI, depending on your preference, is a joy to use. Hyper-customizable with KDE-Plasma and XFCE.

Rolling-release based OS do have functionality breaking issues, especially Arch, and it's not for the faint hearted.

I too was using Arch for a long time, but got tired of constant updates and sometimes something gets broken, and now using Debian Stable and Fedora (both with) XFCE. Linux Mint with Cinnamon is also a solid alternative for beginners coming from Windows.

Debian has a very good supportive community and I am happy with it.

Using Fedora in my main desktop for running newer Steam games since Fedora uses more updated versions of drivers and libraries.

Don't give up. Try again. And you will find being liberated from the Windows ecosystem is so rewarding.

Not to say against Windows totally. I just missed the days of Windows 3.1x and Win9x up to Windows XP and 7. And I still run them (DOS, Win3.x up to Win98SE in 86Box under Debian. And bought a used laptop for running XP and 7. Just for nostalgia sake.

Coming back to the topic, my main browser is Firefox too. Been using it ever since Netscape Navigator was killed.

 

[mountains]

For any of you still on Win 7:

I loved that OS and stayed on it much longer than most. The way I left it was to dual boot, then triple boot: W7, W10 LTSC, and Linux Mint. Now I mostly use W10 LTSC, and I really like it, but I still have W7 if I were to need it. I am hoping W11 LTSC works out, but that is not a sure thing.

As GeoffreyA above says, stuff like OpenShell and ShutUp10++, as well as good security practices, are necessary for any recent Win version.

As for FF sort of supporting W7? I don't really need that now, but I think it is awesome! Heck yeah! A lot of the decisions that company make leave me shaking my head, but this is cool.

 

[Win7User]

Microsoft did well in XP and Windows 7 Pro! Windows 7 Pro by far is the best operating system Microsoft ever created! However, they really F up, with Windows 11 Pro! It's just garbage! I took it out of my HP desktop, and installed Linux Mint.