351–360 of 836 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I just tried that and it changes the private window to light as well. I guess it doesn't matter much cause i don't use private much, but it's weird they have removed that distinction now.
In Firefox private mode you will always see a purple icon with a white face mask in the top right corner
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Open a new window: the tabs are not there by default It's not ideal but not a showstopper for me. I mostly use one window, where the toolbar is restored by default, and when I open a new window I got used to clicking the toolbar button (which I moved to the left) or pressing F1. > You need a css hack to hide the standard bar > There’s an ugly title thingy at the top of the tab pane I just copied the "css hack" once…
Thanks! Here's how I did it on macOS: 1. Go to about:support in Firefox URL bar. 2. the address is in "Profile Folder" row.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't know that that's fair. The discussions I've seen and participated in have revolved around equivalency, not identity. I've developed a couple of Firefox extensions. One of those was an e10s-compatible replacement for Vimperator, because Vimperator relied on XUL[0]. (Vimperator broke long before Firefox 57, because e10s broke backwards compatibility with some extensions long before Firefox 57 did). The old ex…
electrovim is in no way a replacement for Vimperator. It's a couple of keyboard shortcuts. None of the current vim-like plugins for FF57 match what vimperator/pentadactyl can do. The problem I have isn't that they broke legacy things, it's that they broke legacy things without offering a path to rebuild them.
Uh, yes, I'm the author of Electrovim, so I'm quite aware of the functionality that I was literally unable to implement because no equivalent API existed.
> The problem I have isn't that they broke legacy things, it's that they broke legacy things without offering a path to rebuild them.
Did you not read the rest of the comment, where I explain why there is no feasible way that they could have offered any path to rebuild them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When has any proof ever been given that they’re any more privacy conscious than any other search engine?
Their privacy statement is pretty clear. That's a legally binding document and lying in that will get you pretty high fines even in the US.
Netflix revenue: $8,800,000,000
Lawsuit amount: $9,000,000 (or approx 0.1%)
Lawyers received: $2,100,000
Plaintiffs received: $30,000
[0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/class-action-law...
I just upgraded. It completely changes the chrome of the browser on OSX and it is _absolutely hideous_. There are a lots of unnecessary animations that I find very jarring. I don't know if there's a way to change it back yet. UPDATE: There is a "Customize Firefox" button which allows modifying the theme, which fixes the colors, but not the shape of the tabs or the animations. UPDATE: In about:config, you can disable…
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mozilla doesn't create all those extensions. And the extensions' authors had, what, two years advance warning or so? Criticize the real culpits, not Mozilla.
My browser and extensions did useful things yesterday that they do not do today. Who changed something in the meantime? Obviously I paid nothing for Firefox and Mozilla owes me the same nothing in return, but if it wants to keep users and remain significant, breaking arguably its main advantage might not be the best plan.
As a Firefox user (and dev) I believe that breaking some extensions today in a clean manner that will let us maintain compatibility in the future is way prefereable than randomly breaking extensions with every single version of Firefox, as this has been happening forever. Plus this break has set us free to actually improve Firefox and make it competitive again, something I believe is in everybody's interest. I realize that it's painful for the users who lost some add-ons upon which they relied, but I believe that given the alternative, this was the best choice possible.
This is so close to great but can a mac snob ask how to get a more consistent UI experience out of firefox? I'm totally happy with how everything behaves inside the web panel but: 1. At a minimum I'd be happy with a toolbar icon set that was a little more in step with OS X design (but willing to hear if I just have misunderstanding of design :D) 2. As a reach, os-native menus or at least more native-style menus for t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't seem to find where it is in firefox preferences. Could you please extend your solution?
This got me too. It's not in preferences, you have to use the hamburger menu thingy. Then, it's shoved randomly at the bottom. The overall design is really a mess in 57, although browsing does seem faster.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not murdering battery because it's "harnessing the full power of the CPU", it's chomping through almost 1% battery a minute on Mac while doing virtually nothing. Apparently "vibrance" is one of the culprits and switching to the light or dark themes can help a lot. But yes, it's destroying battery compared to Safari for me. Which is a shame, as it's already my default on Windows.
Sounds like you should definitely file a bug.