Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 57 as the first release where only WebExtensions will be supported

blog.mozilla.org

21–30 of 336 posts

Re: Firefox 57 as the first release where only WebExtensions will be supported

#21

IMO Firefox has just 2 things to beat Chrome: better add-ons (like treestyle tabs) and politics (made by Mozilla instead of an ads company). They are burning the first one.

If Firefox 56 is the last release to support Tree Style Tabs, it will be the last release of Firefox before I begrudgingly switch to Chromium.

Why? Does Chromium support Tree Style Tabs despite using WebExtensions? If that's the case, why would that not be possible for Firefox? Or would you switch to make a statement?

Re: Firefox 57 as the first release where only WebExtensions will be supported

#23
post #8

I am honestly starting to believe that Mozilla is trying to run Firefox into the ground. I am not sure if it's just bad decision making or if the decision makers themselves had been bought off by competition, but it sure does feel like this. Why do we need one more Chrome like browser out there? I specifically use Firefox because it's a) not chrome, b) has better addons. If you hamstring the addons and make everythin…

> has better addons

The add-ons might be better, but XUL-based Firefox add-ons are not better. They essentially give full control of your computer to the developer of the add-on. There's no permission model. The "APIs" are mostly the internals of Firefox itself, and when Firefox updates, lots of add-ons break.

Most add-ons can be ported to webextensions. The ones that can't probably shouldn't have ever been add-ons to begin with.

Lots of other browsers used to do the same thing Firefox does, and chose to use a webextension-like model instead. Why? Because those screenshots of folks with half their screen consumed by toolbars, weird popups, overlays in the browser viewport, extensions that sneakily inject ads into pages, and track user behavior _still exist_. And there's really nothing Mozilla can do to stop them.

Do you know how Firefox add-ons get approved? A human sits down and sifts through the obfuscated source code. I helped build these tools years ago, I can tell you it's hell. Beyond being error-prone, it causes months-long delays in add-ons getting approved.

Firefox will be better off for only supporting webextensions.

Re: Firefox 57 as the first release where only WebExtensions will be supported

#25

Is it just me or are Chrome's dev tools superior in every way to FF?

Almost every day I use both of them. They both have pros and cons. It's all about having practice and spending time on any of them. But one thing for sure is a game changer that is FF dev tools can show you the events bound on element right next to it, unlike chrome's list of events.

Re: Firefox 57 as the first release where only WebExtensions will be supported

#27
post #3

I use Firefox because of 2 things: 1) vimperator 2) single process handling multiple tabs (I typically have upwards of 40 tabs open at a time) Firefox is in the process of removing plugins like 1) so that it makes it possible to remove 2). Wonderful.

About 2) : the multi-process model is not "1 process per tab", but "M tabs sharing N processes". So you won't end up with 40 processes in your case. I've been running nightly with 5 processes for months and found that to be a good setup.

Re: Firefox 57 as the first release where only WebExtensions will be supported

#28
According to NetMarketShare stats [0], Firefox is now at under 12% of desktop marketshare... and falling. I've switched over to Chromium (and Safari on OSX) because I just couldn't justify slower speeds and much poorer performance overall anymore. I've also noticed it used a lot more CPU than alternative browsers... which is an issue if you're using a laptop. Once Mozilla kills off XPCOM and XUL-based addons [1], there won't be any real reasons left to use Firefox. Lots of Firefox die-hard users I know have already moved to Palemoon which will support XPCOM/XUL addons for the foreseeable future [2].

It's amazing to me how badly managed Mozilla is these days. They've been on a downward slope for the last two years and they still haven't done much to improve their position. Last week I checked Mozilla's homepage and couldn't even figure out what their guiding purpose is anymore. They seem to care more about social issues than about browsers and technology [3]. Unfortunately, they don't have much future.

[0] https://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qpr...

[1] https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-dev...

[2] https://www.palemoon.org/roadmap.shtml

[3] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/

Re: Firefox 57 as the first release where only WebExtensions will be supported

#29

I use Vimperator. I have not upgraded Firefox since 43.0.4 in order to continue to use Vimperator. I will not upgrade Firefox past the point where it does not support Vimperator.

> Note: Firefox 51 requires Vimperator 3.16 which is being reviewed by Mozilla and coming soon. For now, you can get the release on GitHub. However, in order to install unsigned add-ons (like releases on GitHub), you must use the Developer Edition of Firefox and after that open about:config and change the xpinstall.signatures.required property to false.

Re: Firefox 57 as the first release where only WebExtensions will be supported

#30
post #28

According to NetMarketShare stats [0], Firefox is now at under 12% of desktop marketshare... and falling. I've switched over to Chromium (and Safari on OSX) because I just couldn't justify slower speeds and much poorer performance overall anymore. I've also noticed it used a lot more CPU than alternative browsers... which is an issue if you're using a laptop. Once Mozilla kills off XPCOM and XUL-based addons [1], the…

> I just couldn't justify slower speeds and much poorer performance overall anymore... once Mozilla kills off XPCOM and XUL-based addons, there won't be any real reasons left to use Firefox.

Now, make an enlightened guess as to why they're getting rid of XUL.

Post reply on HN