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

101–110 of 340 posts

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#101

Post by amaranth »

Manishearth wrote: post #85
syshum wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Hiding the top tabbar is one of the webextension APIs folks are working on, IIRC.

For now you can use userchrome.css to hide it, can't you?

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#102

Post by fmoralesc »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #73
nvarsj wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Also, current Firefox has `about:performance`, where you can diagnose what addons and tabs can be slowing down the browser. It's quite neat.

I just refreshed my profile and performance improved immensely.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#103

Post by unexistance »

weaksauce wrote: post #74
JoshTriplett wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

awesome, DDG rocks

just tried !spi and it works as image search :D

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#104

Post by unexistance »

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…

how'd you report to DDG? tried reporting that !gi does not utilizes encrypted.google.com (which I think it should), seems like no dice

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#105

Post by notgood »

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 can block JavaScript before it's loaded, its what uBlock Origin does and others as well (using the WebRequest API available to Chrome extensions)

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#106

Post by jhatax »

Silhouette wrote: post #76
smkdtr wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If you hit Backspace in error, you can disable the “Go Back” action associated with the backspace key using about:config like so:

browser.backspace_action = 2

Read [1] for more instructions.

If you explicitly used the mouse to click the Back button, I am sorry for the time you lost.

1. http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.backspace_action

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#107

Post by wyc »

fabrice_d wrote: post #98
wyc wrote: post #94

Keep in mind that it's not within Google's incentives to facilitate ad-blocking and prevention of tracking. After all, that's where the lion's share of their revenue comes from. However, Mozilla is free to actively support such efforts.

If that was that clear cut, they would ship tracking protection enabled by default, not just in Private Browsing mode. The default configuration of Safari is actually protecting you better than Firefox's and most users don't have an ad blocker installed.

Good point. Mozilla made most of their money from Google, and other advertisers, iirc. "More free" might've been prudent.

You make a good observation about Safari too. Apple doesn't make much money from advertising--they still sell hardware. They can provide privacy to users at little expense to their core business.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#108

Post by pcwalton »

Silhouette wrote: post #76
smkdtr wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The idea that the XUL extension model is necessary for a browser to be useful is obviously false. The majority of Web users use browsers that do not have a XUL extension model.

(And, of course, I don't believe your desired functionality is incompatible with Web Extensions anyhow.)

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#109

Post by Manishearth »

amaranth wrote: post #101
Manishearth wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hiding the top tabbar is one of the webextension APIs folks are working on, IIRC.

For now you can use userchrome.css to hide it, can't you?

Yes, though I haven't tried that yet (I'm just going to wait for the API)

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#110

Post by fencepost »

abandonliberty wrote: post #46
ehaughee wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This actually made me try switching to Firefox again. There's some minor things missing, but for the most part all the features I want are there.

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.

If you think "not designed with Firefox in mind" breaks things, try using uMatrix for a while.
Post reply on HN