Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 336 posts

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

#281

Post by saurik »

jdlshore wrote: post #206

Okay, I read through the entire comment tree and I didn't see a single top-level comment explaining why they're doing this. So I'm going to give it a shot. If you don't run an ad-blocker, and you go to a typical commercial web site (say, nytimes.com), Firefox can be incredibly slow and laggy. Scrolling is janky and the whole experience is just bad. The whole browser can lock up. This is because Firefox's UI uses the…

> This is because Firefox's UI uses the same single-threaded JavaScript engine that web pages do.

JavaScript contexts are single threaded, but even in a single process you can (and do) give separate web pages their own JavaScript contexts and run them in separate threads.

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

#282

Post by CaptSpify »

user5994461 wrote: post #272
CaptSpify wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The strategy to mimick chrome makes sense, because the masses think this is how the browser -- or as they call it the "internet" -- should look like. But that's what FF has been doing for the past ~5 years, and how has their share been doing? Not so well. Chrome has much more marketing behind it. And it comes from a name that people know and trust. Most people don't know who Mozilla is. And most people don't care a…

> Chrome has much more marketing behind it. Allow me to be more specific. Chrome is an adware that is distributed by Google. It is bundled with most of Google products and a huge amount of software setup, because Google pays publishers some pennies for every new installation. I have seen a lot of people who have had Chrome installed without knowing it, some of which transitioned without being aware of it simply becau…

> Chrome is an adware that is distributed by Google

I don't really disagree. They push it in a lot of ways that Mozilla isn't shady-enough to do (thank you, Mozilla). But whatever you call it, Chrome's tactics work.

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

#283

Post by beerbaron23 »

bonzini wrote: post #108
detaro wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Mozilla cares about average users, not about making something for power-users only. That seems to be the big conflict here: power users saying "you've lost the masses, so make something for us" while Mozilla's mission is making something that would be good for the masses, and they'd rather fail trying than failing that mission by abandoning it.

Most average users have already switched to Chrome. Even slightly above average users are going to lose from the switch to WebExtensions. I do not consider myself a power user of Firefox, but the two extensions I use (DownThemAll and tab groups) are not going to be ported.

But when they roll out their Servo Renderer late this year everyone will be singing a different tune. Firefox is already faster then Chrome with the Electrolysis update, but Servo is rendering completely on the GPU. I just tested the the dev build of Servo and it's so fast it almost kicked my dick off!

Servo has been in Dev for 5 years, so if google isn't working on something to compete with that, Firefox is going to completely dominate the web for years.

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

#284

Post by stewbrew »

Kubuxu wrote: post #265
mook wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting the APIs in place isn't enough, though; there needs to be time for the addons to adapt too (or for new addons to show up to replace the old ones). I'm not sure they have planned enough time for that to happen, but time will tell.

The change was first announced in August 2015 [0]. Some developers decided to ignore all warnings and now the Mozilla is the bad guy. [0]: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-dev...

Because the required APIs don't exist maybe?

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

#285

Post by josteink »

user5994461 wrote: post #272
CaptSpify wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The strategy to mimick chrome makes sense, because the masses think this is how the browser -- or as they call it the "internet" -- should look like. But that's what FF has been doing for the past ~5 years, and how has their share been doing? Not so well. Chrome has much more marketing behind it. And it comes from a name that people know and trust. Most people don't know who Mozilla is. And most people don't care a…

> Chrome has much more marketing behind it. Allow me to be more specific. Chrome is an adware that is distributed by Google. It is bundled with most of Google products and a huge amount of software setup, because Google pays publishers some pennies for every new installation. I have seen a lot of people who have had Chrome installed without knowing it, some of which transitioned without being aware of it simply becau…

> Chrome is an adware that is distributed by Google. It is bundled with most of Google products and a huge amount of software setup, because Google pays publishers some pennies for every new installation.

On top of that gmail/google users receive email SPAM about installing Chrome each time they log into a new computer.

https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/5srruc/every_time_...

You never asked for it and can't opt out. They've basically crossed the line where they can't be discerned from regular email spammers. All in the name of killing all non-Google browsers.

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

#286

Post by stewbrew »

hackuser wrote: post #152
stewbrew wrote: post #145

They should conduct a survey how many add-ons will stop working, won't be ported to web extensions, and thus how many users they'll lose -- probably not that many because the majority most likely doesn't use add-ons but those people will most likely use anything other people recommend to them. I personally don't know if I'll continue recommending FF.

> They should conduct a survey ... They have; I've seen the data on some Mozilla blog but I can't remember where.

There is https://arewee10syet.com/ ... ~ 85% unknown (and that's compatibility with e10s, not with web extensions).

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

#287

Post by beerbaron23 »

hutzlibu wrote: post #270
beerbaron23 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is impossible to recommend Firefox in any case, because it performs so poorly compared to Chrome ... See that's some odd misinformation that's been spread around since Chrome first was released, it was the fastest browser at the time. Well since then, Chrome and Firefox have been going back and forth on which is the fastest. At this moment Firefox is a good margin faster than Chrome since their Electrolysis upda…

"Well since then, Chrome and Firefox have been going back and forth on which is the fastest. At this moment Firefox is a good margin faster than Chrome since their Electrolysis update." In benchmarks, yes. But in the real world, with many different tabs open, where one badly designed website could screw up your whole surfing experience, not so much. Even thoug it is possible that they fied that behavior by now. I don…

Yah and that's why I included 3 very real world heavy benchmarks that run random multiple real world usage patterns for extended periods of time. An those were the benchmarks that Firefox pulled a head of the pack by a large margin. The basic Java Benchmarks like Sunspider and Ocatane that useless tech sites use to compare the browsers test nothing more then the Java engines of the browsers, pushing numbers while omitting the browsers respected renderers completely.

If we are comparing Chromiums V8 Java engine vs Firefox's Spidermonkey then Chromiums V8 is faster, but would you even be able to tell the difference?

Now day to day usability I am forced to use Firefox because I'm a tab whore and constantly run 80 tabs at all times. When I try doing that with other browsers they choke within an hour to up-to 2 days. Firefox allows me to run ~80 tabs with up-times approaching 2 months regularly. But that's the way I use my browser, other people would care about other features more.

Now of coarse different builds on different OS's you will run into different problems. On my Debian stable box, Firefox doesn't play nice and I'm forced to use Chromium, but on Ubuntu, Firefox performs solid. Now the main reason Firefox is running like ass on some systems is due to having old extensions installed, which forces Firefox to drop HW acceleration and fall back into compatibility mode. The Problem on my Debian box is that Firefox is not loading the WebGL2 drivers (gives me a bad driver error), thus HW acceleration is broken and it runs like ass.

You can confirm this on your install by typing in "about:support" in the address bar. If you are running 51.0.1 you can see if Electrolysis is enabled by looking at the line "Multiprocess Windows 1/1 (Enabled by user)" if yours reports "0/1 (Disabled)" then a shitty extension is forcing it in compatibility mode. You can manually force it on and type "about:performance" to see what extension is the culprit.

Also in "about:support" take a look at the Graphics table, your Compositing should be OpenGL and your WebGL renders should be the name of your GPU without a reported error. You can also "refresh" Firefox at the top right of the page, but if you can't get HW acceleration in FF then use Chromium of coarse, but if you can solve the problem quickly you will have another powerful tool to tackle the web and I'd like to know how it Performs in Arch.

Plus, since you are working with WebGL content it would be great to get Firefox working, cause at the moment Firefox is almost 4x as fast as Chromium on WebGL2 Unity3D.

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

#288

Post by josteink »

pvg wrote: post #35
exceptione wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right. I did and do not say every chrome user is stupid, there might be legitimate use-cases. But the vast amount of people just install chrome or get it side-loaded with some freeware and don't even think about their options and the impact of their choice. Now that is less than smart.

It's the most secure browser available. That's a not a 'might be legitimate' use case.

> It's the most secure browser available. That's a not a 'might be legitimate' use case.

It may be Jesus on a popsicle, but I'm not going to trust something distributed via drive-by-installers, marketed through SPAM and made by the world's biggest data-hoarder and privacy-invader no matter what.

It's adware/malware short and simple.

Make it 100% FOSS. Remove any technical connection to Google. Don't require Google-logon to sync. Only distribute it to users who actually asked to have it installed. Etc etc.

At that point I might consider starting trusting it. Not before.

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

#289

Post by ReverseCold »

exceptione wrote: post #12

Ouch, the comments over there are extremely negative. As mozilla is our last bastion of hope between advertising giants it pains me to see mozilla having an increasingly hard time to sustain a positive brand image. It is crazy if you think about it, because Mozilla is the last giant that respects its users. It has a very good proposition with regards to privacy and user-interest alignment. There are still tons of les…

I last used Firefox in December 2017, and there was something else weird that made me stop using it.

I'm waiting for Mozilla servo to be released as a standalone browser that doesn't use more memory than chrome, and doesn't have trash font support. Right now it's worse than chrome for battery life and RAM usage on Windows.

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

#290

Post by beerbaron23 »

throwanem wrote: post #276
beerbaron23 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm betting it's your addon's/extensions/plugins causing the problem. A bad extension can bring Firefox down to it's knee's just like anything else programmed by Auntie Thelma. Download Firefox 51.0.1 then in the URL box type "about:support" then look for the line that says "Multiprocess Windows - 1/1 (Enabled by User)" that indicates whether electrolysis is enabled. If it says "0/1 disabled" you will have to manuall…

I'm already well familiar with these tools and this advice, but I nonetheless appreciate you taking the time; perhaps someone else will benefit from their presence here. Extensions aren't the problem, and Firefox 51 with e10s enabled is amazingly snappy by comparison with the 45 ESR that I usually run. On the other hand, 51 on Windows also refuses to load or render content from files located in directories mounted vi…

I guess the difference between Windows, Linux and OSX builds come with their own special quirks that break it for a percentage of people.

Have you given the Developers edition of Firefox a go? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/

Post reply on HN