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

uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

discourse.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 340 posts

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#71

Post by JoshTriplett »

timlyo wrote: post #62
abandonliberty wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is maybe 80% of the way there. Just like in the IE Anitrust days, firefox suffers from sites that do not design with it in mind. Still better than Google Creep. Change to a search engine that protects privacy too.

Can you recommend a search engine? I'm trying DuckDuckGo, but it's just not as good.

> I'm trying DuckDuckGo, but it's just not as good.

It took me a while of using DDG before I realized how much I had equated "good" with "looks like Google".

What finally hit me, hard, was that I switched the DDG theme to a color scheme designed to look like Google search results, and all of a sudden the results "felt better". Markedly better.

So, I started regularly comparing results, every time I found something that I felt I didn't get the results I expected for. I would search, and then search again with !g. And almost every time I ran into something that I didn't like the DDG results for, the Google results weren't actually any better. (The rare times they were, I reported that, and often it got fixed.)

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#72

Post by ChickeNES »

zeep wrote: post #39
syshum wrote: post #38

Web/browser Extensions is a terrible standard is it EXTREMELY limiting for power users. While that my not impact a ad blocker, there are countless extensions that can not work with Web Extensions and will make Chrome err sorry Firefox far less appealing to people. For me, more than a few of the extensions I use regularly are not compatible with Web Extensions, and a few of them that are critical to my productivity ar…

Do you have one example of such extension that won't work with web extensions?

Session Manager, which I've used since Firefox 2. To add insult to injury I downgraded to an earlier nightly and it no longer worked either, had to blow away the UI customization config and reinstall the addon for it to re-appear and work again.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#73

Post by JoshTriplett »

nvarsj wrote: post #34
ohthehugemanate wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

57 is lightning fast. Like, almost uncomfortably so on my machine. Broay this is because quantum is much further along in nightly than on the other channels. Specifically, they're more aggressive with multithreaded settings, multiprocess is enabled, and the quantum css component is turned on, too. Is also helps that we compare to chrome. On Linux chrome doesn't even do GPU rendering. So the HN crowd probably has a di…

Firefox has always been unbearably slow on Linux for me. It's the main reason I swapped to Chrome in the first place. I tried switching back to Firefox about 6 months ago, same problem of extremely slow and laggy UI. Interesting to hear 57 is faster now, it may be worth trying again.

Do you have any extensions installed?

Have you tried using a fresh profile, just to narrow the possible variables?

If you've checked both of those things, and you can characterize the slowness in the context of specific operations (e.g. what "laggy" means, precisely), then I'd recommend filing a bug and working with the developers to track down the problem. Because that is not normal.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#74

Post by weaksauce »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #71
timlyo wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you recommend a search engine? I'm trying DuckDuckGo, but it's just not as good.

> I'm trying DuckDuckGo, but it's just not as good. It took me a while of using DDG before I realized how much I had equated "good" with "looks like Google". What finally hit me, hard, was that I switched the DDG theme to a color scheme designed to look like Google search results, and all of a sudden the results "felt better". Markedly better. So, I started regularly comparing results, every time I found something th…

!sp will give you the google results without the google tracking as it's a proxy of google results.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#75

Post by inopinatus »

djsumdog wrote: post #41
i2shar wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is indeed disturbing. Why should a web page be able to detect if dev tools has been opened? Isn't this a browser security issue?

It's pretty insane how much your browser knows about you: http://webkay.robinlinus.com/ There's another one I can't find, but it writes out things like "user moved mouse to x,y. User has been idle for 10 seconds, page lost focus, page gained focus" .. kinda creepy how much is available to the Javascript engine.

This is pretty normal for a UI programming framework. The creepy thing for me is when that stuff is reported back to the origin over a websocket.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#76

Post by Silhouette »

smkdtr wrote: post #61
Karunamon wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be perfectly honest I'm not at all interested in "better permissions" for plugins when it comes with the removal of flexibility that you get for free. If I've got plugin-installing malware on my system, I've got worse problems than a rogue plugin. Give me more useful over more secure any day of the week.

As someone worried about security; I hope that is not the majority opinion.

It's not entirely unreasonable. We use software because it's useful. If you make it so secure that it is no longer useful, what have you got left?

In the case of Firefox extensions, I'm aware of the risks of the old model, but the fact is that the only observable difference it has made to me so far is that when I accidentally hit back on a page with an unsubmitted form the other day I lost about 20 minutes' worth of work, because the extension I used to use that would have saved everything automatically no longer works. This is not progress.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#77

Post by kibwen »

syshum wrote: post #59
kibwen wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen people recommend this as a WebExtension-compatible replacement for TreeStyle Tabs, though I can't vouch for it myself: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-tabs/

It is no where near the same and has the same failing of the Chrome Vertical Tab Solutions like https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chrome-side-tabs/h... https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/vtabs/okpnlgbgcfch... It is not part of the UI part of the browser like the XUL TreeStyleTabs but a separate Panel that ends up being buggy and feeling separate from the experience almost like managing your tabs from a…

The screenshot alleges that it's in a sidebar, no? How is that different from TreeStyle Tabs, which is also in a sidebar?

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#78

Post by eridius »

Hasknewbie wrote: post #52

Slightly OT: is that what a 'Discourse' page looks like? It's pretty awful: it will automatically update the URL as you scroll past each post in any direction, while breaking the Back button, so good luck getting back to the original post, since neither clicking on Back nor reloading the page will get you there. Basic UX failure.

What browser are you using? Because when I scroll on that page and the URL changes, it doesn't affect my Back stack (this is in Safari).

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#79

Post by uwu »

INTPenis wrote: post #16
penpapersw wrote: post #2

Huh. These actually sound like good arguments to switch to Firefox, arguments I've never heard before until now.

One thing I learned several years ago when I decided to jump on the bandwagon and try Chrome was that Chrome was unable to safely block javascript the way NoScript does because the plugin framework doesn't allow a plugin to block Javascript before it's loaded. So all the noscript equivalent for Chrome could offer was to block Javascript after it had loaded. Which seemed unreal and pointless. So I stayed on Firefox. B…

chrome has a setting to block scripts and it lets you add exceptions for sites

it's also easy to access: http://cdn2.ubergizmo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/site-in...

i wish firefox came with something similar

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#80

Post by settyness »

djsumdog wrote: post #41
i2shar wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is indeed disturbing. Why should a web page be able to detect if dev tools has been opened? Isn't this a browser security issue?

It's pretty insane how much your browser knows about you: http://webkay.robinlinus.com/ There's another one I can't find, but it writes out things like "user moved mouse to x,y. User has been idle for 10 seconds, page lost focus, page gained focus" .. kinda creepy how much is available to the Javascript engine.

You must be talking about clickclickclick.click

And thanks for the new novelty website bookmark :D

Post reply on HN