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

261–270 of 340 posts

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#261

Post by konart »

baby wrote: post #239
haddr wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like a lot the "tabs outliner" extension for Chrome. It's especially useful when you work with many tabs open at the same time, and want to preserve sessions, etc. Unfortunately there is now alternative to that in Firefox. Session Manager comes close, but is painful to use. So I'm still looking forward to such extension for Firefox, because honestly I prefer FF to Chrome for most of the things.

Honestly nothing beats Tree Style Tab, have you tried it?

I've tried it. Three times, I guess, since the early versions of it. All three times I found it useless even though I usually have 30+ tabs opened.

Honestly, this kind of statement is nothing but a superstition that you usually hear from people that think that it's impossible to be productive using different approaches.

For me nothings beats Vimium's "T" or Session Buddy + Keepin' Tabs extensions pair.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#262

Post by baby »

NoGravitas wrote: post #253
baby wrote: post #241

Related: Can we have Tree Style Tabs implemented by default in Firefox?

Currently, there aren't even the APIs needed by Tree Style Tabs in WebExtensions. That's likely to change, but not until after Firefox 57.

That's why I wish they would implement it as a default function of Firefox, not as an extension.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#263

Post by bovine3dom »

StevePerkins wrote: post #246
bovine3dom wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably a good place to plug the fact that Vimperator is going to die with FF57 [1]. If anyone wants to help with making an alternative, look through that thread. I'm particularly invested in Tridactyl [2] but other people are working on others. [1] https://github.com/vimperator/vimperator-labs/issues/705 [2] https://github.com/cmcaine/tridactyl

I've been using VimFX all along, which is actively maintained and already compatible with multiprocess. It's a web browser, not an actual text editor. 99% of the time, you're just wanting familiar keyboard commands for navigation. It feels like Vimperator does so many impractical things almost tongue-in-cheek, just to show how cool it is that they're theoretically possible.

I disagree, respectfully.

I like that there's always more stuff to learn about Vimperator. It's fun. There's a nice thread on GitHub where people are talking about their favourite features:

https://github.com/vimperator/vimperator-labs/issues/729

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#264

Post by baby »

snakeanus wrote: post #251
baby wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're the type with a lot of tabs open Then pray for Tree Style Tabs to be implemented by default in Firefox.

I hope not. I believe that it is better for Firefox to be as light and bloat-free by default while users are free to install whatever addon provides any extra features that they need.

Tree Style Tab could be an opt-in functionality of vanilla Firefox, that wouldn't be an issue for new users.

Although I firmly believed that tabs on the side make more sense for any kind of users. Nesting tabs require a bit more practice though and that could be an opt-in option.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#265

Post by baby »

snakeanus wrote: post #260
baby wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the pdf.js exploit Overall having pdf.js is a benefit to internet browsing. Should we not innovate and try to improve our tools just to preserve security?

> Overall having pdf.js is a benefit to internet browsing I would doubt it. The experience that pdf.js provides is inferior to dedicated programs like xpdf. > Should we not innovate and try to improve our tools just to preserve security? We should, but we should not make such things like pdf.js unable to be disabled by the user.

> I would doubt it. The experience that pdf.js provides is inferior to dedicated programs like xpdf.

That's not the point, I open dozens of PDF daily and I don't want to have to switch programs all the time. An integrated light PDF viewer is one of the best new feature of modern browsers.

PS: You can set the pdfjs.disabled pref to true on the about:config page to disable the build-in PDF viewer

PS2: Not sure this still works.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#266

Post by snakeanus »

xeromal wrote: post #22
Aissen wrote: post #5

> I am not aware of any anti-fingerprinting initiative taken up with Chromium Brave is Chromium-based and has anti-fingerprinting tech (which it was the first to include IIRC): https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/wiki/Fingerprinting-... It also works on Brave for Android.

I'm using Brave atm, but I'm about to give it up. The tabs frequently freeze and I can only hover over them to preview. I can't click on them. Adding a bookmark takes about a minute. Brave won't remember BASIC passwords General sluggishness Kickass Torrents is able to launch ads when clicking in the search box.

> Kickass Torrents

But Kickass Torrents died a year ago or so.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#267

Post by baby »

konart wrote: post #261
baby wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly nothing beats Tree Style Tab, have you tried it?

I've tried it. Three times, I guess, since the early versions of it. All three times I found it useless even though I usually have 30+ tabs opened. Honestly, this kind of statement is nothing but a superstition that you usually hear from people that think that it's impossible to be productive using different approaches. For me nothings beats Vimium's "T" or Session Buddy + Keepin' Tabs extensions pair.

That is odd, you should try to use for longer periods of time. I personally use it with hundreds of tabs open and I haven't found anything else that can compare.

> Honestly, this kind of statement is nothing but a superstition that you usually hear from people that think that it's impossible to be productive using different approaches.

Maybe, but I'm pretty sure I'm more productive than you. We should compare each other browsing reddit some day.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#268

Post by littlestymaar »

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.

It looks like a feature to me : this way when you copy the address it links directly to the right comment. Of course this comes at the expense of a working back button.

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#269

Post by cesarb »

pawadu wrote: post #189

I still think Chrome has some advantages. For example you can disable a lot of things like location services in the settings. In Firefox you can decline access to location once a site asks for it but I would rather disable it once and for all if I am setting up a machine for a less tech-savvy person. Also, firefox comes with tons of built in features you cannot disable. In past they have caused security issues (e.g.…

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/geolocation/ "How do I turn off Location-Aware Browsing permanently?"

Just set geo.enabled to false.

There's also a preference to permanently disable pdf.js there. Or you can change the default PDF reader: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/disable-built-pdf-viewe...

Re: uBlock Origin Maintainer on Chrome vs. Firefox WebExtensions

#270

Post by snakeanus »

baby wrote: post #265
snakeanus wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Overall having pdf.js is a benefit to internet browsing I would doubt it. The experience that pdf.js provides is inferior to dedicated programs like xpdf. > Should we not innovate and try to improve our tools just to preserve security? We should, but we should not make such things like pdf.js unable to be disabled by the user.

> I would doubt it. The experience that pdf.js provides is inferior to dedicated programs like xpdf. That's not the point, I open dozens of PDF daily and I don't want to have to switch programs all the time. An integrated light PDF viewer is one of the best new feature of modern browsers. PS: You can set the pdfjs.disabled pref to true on the about:config page to disable the build-in PDF viewer PS2: Not sure this sti…

I will admit that I just took pawadu's word for it. I personally had no idea if it is possible to disable pdfjs or not.

That being said, I will also agree that it is convenient sometimes but it is much slower and much less compatible than native viewers, making it useless for me about half the time. Still, I see no reason why it needs to be integrated into firefox instead of being just an addon (even if it is installed by default).

Post reply on HN