Firefox Profilemaker
ffprofile.com
Firefox Profilemaker
1–10 of 89 posts
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#2I wish Firefox exposed a better UI for it's profiles. It seems like a really powerful feature that is much less useful than it might be due to poor ergonomics...
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#3I wish Firefox exposed a better UI for it's profiles. It seems like a really powerful feature that is much less useful than it might be due to poor ergonomics...
I feel that it has become less useful since containerised tabs were introduced. One of the use cases for profiles were using a separate browsing profile.
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#4I wish Firefox exposed a better UI for it's profiles. It seems like a really powerful feature that is much less useful than it might be due to poor ergonomics...
That's something that I like about experiments in "Container Tabs", where you get the power of separate profiles, but the ability to mix-and-match them in the same browser window and opening a profile can be as simple as opening a new tab.
I understand though why Mozilla seems to be having such a hard time converging on a UX for Container Tabs that makes everyone happy and it may be impossible to ever surface 100% of the power of profiles to the average user. But -ProfileManager is so long in the tooth and so clearly predates modern niceties that it would be great for better UI/UX out of the box today.
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#5I wish Firefox exposed a better UI for it's profiles. It seems like a really powerful feature that is much less useful than it might be due to poor ergonomics...
I feel that it has become less useful since containerised tabs were introduced. One of the use cases for profiles were using a separate browsing profile.
Agreed, but some of this stuff is for global browser behavior, while container tabs only isolate cookies/localstorage for sites.
Profiles should be easy to use, like any other application: When you logout of one profile and into another, everything changes.
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#6I feel the strong need to point out some of these settings will break Firefox in subtle and hard to understand ways. There’s a reason you “void the warranty” when tweaking the about:config preferences. No rule against it, but just watch out. (Mozilla employee)
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#7I wish Firefox exposed a better UI for it's profiles. It seems like a really powerful feature that is much less useful than it might be due to poor ergonomics...
True, but it got better with about:profiles (enter this in the address bar in firefox)
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#8I feel the strong need to point out some of these settings will break Firefox in subtle and hard to understand ways. There’s a reason you “void the warranty” when tweaking the about:config preferences. No rule against it, but just watch out. (Mozilla employee)
I won't ask for a complete audit, but is there one example from the wizard that could break stuff, that is NOT called out by the wizard itself?
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#9I wish Firefox exposed a better UI for it's profiles. It seems like a really powerful feature that is much less useful than it might be due to poor ergonomics...
That's something that I like about experiments in "Container Tabs", where you get the power of separate profiles, but the ability to mix-and-match them in the same browser window and opening a profile can be as simple as opening a new tab. I understand though why Mozilla seems to be having such a hard time converging on a UX for Container Tabs that makes everyone happy and it may be impossible to ever surface 100% of…
I don’t understand why Firefox removed the tab exposé feature they had. Clicking a button gave you a look at all your open tabs allowing you to then drag them into groups. Only your active group was displayed but you could always switch to another group when browsing in a different context.
Combine that experience with the current Containers sandboxing feature and that would be a dream.
Re: Firefox Profilemaker
#10>Disable malware scan
>The malware scan sends an unique identifier for each downloaded file to Google.
AFAIK that's not how safebrowsing works. it checks the hash against a local database, and it only sends the hash to google if there's a match.