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

Firefox 57.0 Released

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 836 posts

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#261

Post by huhtenberg »

oblio wrote: post #245
huhtenberg wrote: post #218

Is there a pre-57 theme for the UI? The new one is way too minimalist. It also appears to target people with poor sight all chrome elements suddenly became larger. EDIT - The upgrade also wiped all GreaseMonkey scripts for some reason. Hmm. EDIT - Downgraded back to 56. Way too many jarring UI changes as well as the AddOn breakage to justify the new snappiness. Mozilla also appears to have pulled the link to the "old…

You can reconfigure almost everything back... For the chrome elements size: Menu -> Customize -> Density -> Compact.

Yeah, saw that. That's not "Compact" though, that's "Cluttered".

The top part of the browser window is now an utter mess. I can live with the new tab style, but the layout with absolutely no vertical spacing/padding and these new "minimalist" icons is just... ugly, and unnecessary at that. I don't think I'm the only person who cares for how things _look_ in addition to how they _work_.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#262

Post by zeveb »

Vinnl wrote: post #10
Asdfbla wrote: post #9

Is there a good Vimperator replacement for the new webextension addon system?

Depends on your needs. If it's mostly the shortcuts, Vimium works pretty well (at least for me). If you want the full-blown UI customisation, then I'm afraid extensions are not allowed that anymore due to the associated security risks.

> If you want the full-blown UI customisation, then I'm afraid extensions are not allowed that anymore due to the associated security risks.

That's total BS. It's my software running on my computer. I get to decide what I consider a security risk, not Mozilla.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#263

Post by Yoric »

deisner wrote: post #185
louiz wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what concerns do you have regarding firefox’s security?

It's just that if security is a core priority, you'd expect to see this mentioned at least once. Based on what I read, the core priorities are speed, privacy, and convenience. Compare this to Chrome, Safari, and Edge (tagline: "A fast and secure browser that's designed for Windows 10"): https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/features.html , https://www.apple.com/safari/ , https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/micros…

For what it's worth, in most companies, marketing material is typically created by marketing people, with very limited interaction with engineering.

The message for Firefox 57 is performance. This doesn't mean that other stuff wasn't improved (case in point, better sandboxing), just that you can only tell one story at a time.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#264

Post by ucha »

cvburgess wrote: post #53

Anyone know how the new FireFox compares on battery-life? Safari crushes Chrome on this front currently, but I'm curious how FireFox compares now.

It has not been improved and still consumes significantly more power than Safari. It's the major reason why I won't switch.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#265

Post by leoedin »

DamnInteresting wrote: post #212
eoger wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have a look here [0] for legacy extensions replacements. [0] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TFcEXMcKrwoIAECIVyBU...

There's no replacement for ScrapBook, a plugin where I have a decade of stored annotated documents (no hyperbole, my oldest files date from 2007). Ever since I discovered that FF57 was going to kill ScrapBook I had to disable Firefox updates so I don't lose access to ~6GB of stored data. It's a mix of past, present, and future writing research. I know I have access to clumsy workarounds such as copying FF56 to a VM w…

Is the Web Scrapbook extension compatible with the files it generates? It seems to have a lineage (via Scrapbook X) that descends from ScrapBook.

https://github.com/danny0838/webscrapbook

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#266

Post by Yoric »

tmzt wrote: post #244
callahad wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We track most of our bugs in Bugzilla ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org ). Once you've created an account, go to File a Bug, Core, and choose "Audio/Video: Playback" as the Component in the form. (In general, it's fine to chuck bugs into Firefox -> Untriaged and they'll eventually land in the right place.) If Bugzilla's a bit of a pain, just let me know and I'll happily file it for you.

Are Quantum bugs in bugzilla or Github?

Bugzilla. There are a few exceptions, but if you misfile a bug to Bugzilla, don't worry, it will be moved to Github during triage.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#267

Post by TheRealPomax »

SadWebDeveloper wrote: post #162
Severian wrote: post #75

I won't touch it until NoScript is available.

+1 m using Chrome + uBO + uMatrix + uBlock Protector while NoScript 10 gets released.

Slightly confused here: what's the point of "using Chrome instead" when FF supports all of the addons you're using 'in the mean time' already? Just use FF with those addons until NoScript gets its official release in tandem with the official FF release?

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#268

Post by DerfNet »

cryptos wrote: post #11

I hope that firefox will continue to protect users privacy as good as possible. I'm thinking of super cookies and the like. Other brother vendors don't seem to be very engaged in this area.

user privacy is exactly why I'm excited to finally have a decent mainstream competitor to Chrome. If nothing else this is a nice gate out of the Google ecosystem.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#269

Post by bzbarsky »

xpil wrote: post #205

It scores 97/100 in ACID3. Not that it matters but stil...

Right, because some of the relevant standards got changed slightly in some of the edge cases ACID3 tests (e.g. to deal with shadow DOM), and browsers got updated to follow the standards, but the maintainer of ACID3 doesn't want to change the test. See https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2017Jul/000...

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#270

Post by Already__Taken »

Yoric wrote: post #238
doodpants wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Note that the webextension APIs are still under active development. In which case, switching to webextension support exclusively is premature at this point, don't you think? It would have been better to wait until the API was robust enough to allow 99.99% of legacy extensions to be ported.

Unfortunately, this would have meant no Firefox Quantum. As a Firefox dev (I'm still working at Mozilla, although not much on Firefox atm), I have seen many, many occurrences in which I couldn't optimize codepaths, or even in some case fix bugs, because the old extension mechanism made it impossible. Consider the necessary steps: 1. realize that an internal API is broken; 2. come up with a new non-broken API; 3. port…

Also by moving ahead you are making the platform more valuable to get authors of plugins to come back and develop upon.
Post reply on HN