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

Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 446 posts

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#301

Post by humblebee »

alanfranzoni wrote: post #132

Still no live javascript editing, like Chrome scripts tab? This is a major setdown that prevents me from using Firefox. Chrome has that since so many years that I can't believe Firefox still hasn't got it. I think the latest Firefox releases are fast and good as browsers.. but as a developer, that's a showstopper.

I've always seen this feature, but never used it. How does it work? I'm curious if this works well with nodejs build systems, or if this only works with "workspaces" (does souce maps allow this?).

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#302

Post by mderazon »

I would love switching but the only thing preventing me is the lack of profiles like Chrome has. Containers is not the same as you can't have different extensions for each container like chrome has for each profile.

For example, I have 2 LP accounts one for home and one for work and there's no way to use both of then at the same time in FF

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#303

Post by andrewaylett »

baby wrote: post #16
EasyTiger_ wrote: post #3

I've been trying out the nightly versions of 57 and it's really fast. Would recommend people try out the Beta.

Is Tree Style Tab working on it? I've disabled updates until further notice.

Yes! I updated at work and it didn't, but by the time I came home they'd released an update and it works here :).

The top bar doesn't auto-hide yet, the API for that will be in a future release apparently.

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#304

Post by mderazon »

mtgx wrote: post #54

That video in the post seems to show Chrome is still significantly faster in half of the tests shown there. How is that possible? From what Servo was initially promising (even 3-4x the speed of old Firefox), it didn't look like Chrome would come close either. Did they make that many compromises when "porting parts from Servo" to Gecko? What's hurting Firefox's performance so much that even after implementing Electrol…

Maybe it's because most websites today optimize for Chrome / use Chrome in development? That might change in the future

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#305

Post by Manishearth »

timwaagh wrote: post #165

This a most pointless decision. making firefox fast at the expense of the extensions. why would it make people switch back to FF? because it's 1% faster than chrome? come on, it's 2k17 and few care about that. Edge might be faster than both and people still would not use it. FF had its selling point to power users which is why i'm currently browsing from ff. Now there is no reason at all to use it. I guess there is n…

The perf improvements of Quantum have nothing to do with extensions, actually.

Firefox removed the old extensions model because it was literally just "here's our code, hook into it however you want", where everything was a public API. This means addons broke all the time and it was effort to keep things semi-stable.

With the multiprocess stuff most addons had broken anyway, except Firefox took a model where multiprocess would only turn on if you had compatible addons. But it was going to move off it; which it did in a previous release, disabling non-multiprocess compatible addons (I think).

So the addons stuff is at best related to Firefox becoming faster because of multiprocess, which happened a couple releases ago. So the decision to kill the old extension API was related to the timing of the multiprocess stuff and also just because it was a long time coming and let Firefox move to a cleaner architecture.

The new API is growing, though. Firefox can already support many kinds of addons that Chrome doesn't, including stuff like Tree Style Tabs or Tab Center.

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#306

Post by xxkylexx »

k__ wrote: post #62
DiabloD3 wrote: post #44

As someone that jumped ship from how slow Chrome has gotten and went to Nightly /w Stylo and (CPU threads - 1) e10s processes enabled about 2 monthsish ago... Holy damn Firefox is actually fast. Fair comparison, both having Pocket, uBlock, Evernote, OneNote, Pushbullet, and Bitwarden; neither of them having an extension the other doesn't. Above described Firefox Nightly config vs Chrome Dev. Test machines are a works…

I switched to Chrome years ago and every time I try Firefox it feels sluggish, so I don't switch back. Last time was a week ago :\

Check your addons. They can really slow things down.

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#307

Post by kuschku »

Myrmornis wrote: post #227
kuschku wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, you can on Firefox even use different profiles per tab since a few releases ago.

This documentation still makes it sound very clunky and inconvenient compared to chrome: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox/Multiple_profile... > You cannot change the profile while Firefox is running. Although it is possible in some cases to have multiple instances of Firefox running in different profiles, to avoid confusion, you should first exit/quit/terminate all running instances of Firefox, FirefoxDeve…

That’s a different thing than I’m describing. Try out the new ContainerTabs ;)

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#308

Post by mannigfaltig »

bowmessage wrote: post #249
virtualwhys wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, thankfully there's a nightly build[1]. Until there's a stable/signed release you have to allow unsigned extensions; set `xpinstall.signatures.required` to false. To hide the default tab bar I needed to put the following in ~/.mozilla/firefox/xyz123-profile-here/chrome/userChrome.css #TabsToolbar > * { visibility: collapse; } Some features, like autohide, aren't available with the new web extensions model, but ot…

Thank you so much! I've been searching for a way to hide the top bar for a while now.

A better modification is this:

    #TabsToolbar > * {
      visibility: collapse;
    }
    
    #TabsToolbar {
      margin-bottom: -21px !important;
    }
You can also re-enable the title bar under hamburger menu > Customize > "Title Bar" at the bottom left.

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#309

Post by Fnoord »

gervase wrote: post #195
Fnoord wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dead to me ever since they decided to raise the price with 100% for no reason (from consumer PoV) whatsoever. Classic bait & switch. Is there an easy way to convert your current Lastpass database to Bitwarden?

Yes: https://help.bitwarden.com/article/import-from-lastpass/

Thanks, both of you.

Seems 2FA (YubiKey) costs 10 USD/year instead of 24 USD/year which LastPass costs.

I've been looking for a recent feature comparison, the Wikipedia one is rather shallow and incomplete [1] [2].

My (incomplete) take on feature comparison:

Both are relatively cross-platform, widely supported by what I consider status quo platforms (Windows, Linux, Android, macOS, iOS, Chrome, Firefox).

Advantages of Bitwarden are open source and public development, approx half the price (and approx same as Lastpass before purchased by Logmein), and the ability to self-host.

Advantages of Lastpass are different login for accessing to account and decrypting database. This is important because without this, a MITM attack gets access to the master password.

I also found the announcement of Bitwarden, approx 1 year old now, on HN [3]. It includes some feedback about the software. Bitwarden uses AES256-CBC. How secure is AES256-CBC in this case, and what does Lastpass use? Another criticism is usage of Google Analytics. This can be disabled in the application, but I don't feel it serves a purpose for the user. It should never have been included in the first place. I also don't think either software is audited.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_password_managers

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_password_manager...

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12676979

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#310

Post by rocketraman »

fhood wrote: post #59
DiabloD3 wrote: post #44

As someone that jumped ship from how slow Chrome has gotten and went to Nightly /w Stylo and (CPU threads - 1) e10s processes enabled about 2 monthsish ago... Holy damn Firefox is actually fast. Fair comparison, both having Pocket, uBlock, Evernote, OneNote, Pushbullet, and Bitwarden; neither of them having an extension the other doesn't. Above described Firefox Nightly config vs Chrome Dev. Test machines are a works…

Chrome is an insane ram hog. It is inexcusable to be using >400MB per tab, but I see that all the time.

Agreed. Microsoft Azure Portal is taking up 934 MB, Gmail is 502 MB, Pocket is 309 Mb. Google Keep takes 180 Mb or so.
Post reply on HN