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

Firefox 65.0 released

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 422 posts

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#331

Post by bwat49 »

ambrop7 wrote: post #285
xiii1408 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardware acceleration is disabled by default because many graphics drivers suck and will break the browser if hardware acceleration is turned on. You can just go into the settings and turn it on (and then off, if you have problems). Chromium disables hardware acceleration by default for a wide swatch of graphics drivers too (including all Nvidia GPUs).

On my current Linux system with NVidia drivers, HW acceleration is enabled according to chrome://gpu (there are many accelerations and some are disabled, but many are enabled including Canvas and Compositing). Regardless of all, Chromium works just great, including smooth scrolling and WebGL, and Firefox doesn't (laggy scrolling, slower WebGL than in Chromium). I don't think the problem is with drivers but with Firef…

you're correct, it's definitely just nouveau that's blacklisted, not the proprietary nvidia driver.

Chromium also has hw accel enabled by default for intel drivers, which is by far the most used gpu driver on linux (and is pretty stable in my experience). Firefox doesn't even have it enabled for intel

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#332

Post by jhasse »

shmerl wrote: post #224
jhasse wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think WebRender has anything to do with accelerated video decoding. Here's the bug btw: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1210727

WebRender seems to be a prerequisite for it: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=563206 > The GPU->GPU copy is only usable if you also have hardware accelerated composition. I thought WebRender is implementing such compositor.

It is, but there was also another one in Firefox (you could enable it on Linux by setting layers.acceleration.force-enabled to true).

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#333

Post by satysin »

asadotzler wrote: post #271
satysin wrote: post #266

I would love to switch to Firefox but it still lacks - * Per-site JavaScript controls (which Chrome has) * Pinch to zoom (on macOS) * Customisable keyboard shortcuts for Add-ons (which Chrome has) * No elastic scroll (bounce effect) (which Chrome has) I stick with Chrome as it works how I want it to although I find myself using Safari now and then but Safari's extensions are pretty crap in comparison to Chromes.

Customizable keyboard shortcuts for extensions just landed in nightly last week. Expect it soon.

Well god damn! I had no idea. Thank you for replying :)

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#334

Post by remir »

numbsafari wrote: post #32

I wish Mozilla started to compete with Google on ChromeOS. Just make it the browser and leverage containers to keep things locked down. There’s a total business here and Mozilla could make it happen, without the entanglements of the ads business. Real missed opportunity to help promote open standards at the services level as well.

Yeah, I've been saying that for years, but I think it's too late for that. Now that ChromeOS supports Android and Linux apps, I don't see how Mozilla could seriously compete against that. Chrome OS is also heavily tied to Google's services, which are quite good.

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#335

Post by jeena »

skykooler wrote: post #323

> Firefox will now warn you when closing a window (regardless of whether you have automatic session restore enabled for restart). Excellent! The number of times I've accidentally hit ctrl+q instead of ctrl+w and then had to relaunch firefox and restore my session - this will be a welcome relief.

This stopped happening to me once I moved to Dvorak.

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#336

Post by vardump »

satysin wrote: post #266

I would love to switch to Firefox but it still lacks - * Per-site JavaScript controls (which Chrome has) * Pinch to zoom (on macOS) * Customisable keyboard shortcuts for Add-ons (which Chrome has) * No elastic scroll (bounce effect) (which Chrome has) I stick with Chrome as it works how I want it to although I find myself using Safari now and then but Safari's extensions are pretty crap in comparison to Chromes.

> * Pinch to zoom (on macOS)

And Windows!

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#337

Post by bscphil »

zaarn wrote: post #97
ekianjo wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have they ever tried crowdfunding campaigns? I don't think so. Wikipedia seems to be doing fine with it. At least they should experiment with some ideas in that line and see what works.

And then people will complain that Mozilla is nagging them for money. I doubt anyone likes the nag screen that Wikipedia pops down about 15 seconds into reading a page and it covering almost half the screen. Wikipedia has sufficient marketshare to survive despite that. The ads that mozilla shows are fairly privacy-friendly, much more than any other ads you'd find on most websites. That's an improvement. If you don't…

>And then people will complain that Mozilla is nagging them for money. I doubt anyone likes the nag screen that Wikipedia pops down about 15 seconds into reading a page and it covering almost half the screen.

Users may not like nag screens, but I doubt they like the shitty ads Mozilla shows on the new tab page by default either. As long as the screen is easy to dismiss I don't see the problem.

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#338

Post by jfk13 »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #213
x0x0 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would suggest you consider this: with Microsoft moving Edge to chromium, there are now only 3 engines standing: Chromium, webkit, and gecko. Therefore Firefox is important to deny Google enormous control over the browser and therefore the internet. Firefox desperately needs a revenue stream that is independent from Google. Although Google has not done so yet -- it's imo very valuable to Google to preserve the illus…

Does the Mozilla foundation accept private donations? Even if they do, they clearly don't push it enough. I have no idea if it would bring in enough revenue, but it would presumably help? I'd much prefer a Wikipedia-esque donation request on the new tab page than any of Mozilla's other partnerships.

> Does the Mozilla foundation accept private donations?

Try https://donate.mozilla.org/

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#339

Post by bscphil »

acdha wrote: post #80
NamTaf wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the statement "It was not a paid placement or advertisement." is blatantly false. they simply say whether it was paid, not whether it was paid to a specific entity.

Read the statement more carefully: > This snippet was an experiment to provide more value to Firefox users through offers provided by a partner. It was not a paid placement or advertisement. We are continually looking for more ways to say thanks for using Firefox. In a similar vein, earlier this month we offered Firefox users a free opportunity to enjoy a live concert from Phosphorescent. It could be that they are kn…

> This snippet was an experiment to provide more value to Firefox users through offers provided by a partner. It was not a paid placement or advertisement.

I don't know about legal liability, but you don't really need to look further than this to know that Mozilla lied because these two statements are already inconsistent. "Offers provided by a partner" are advertisements. The quid pro quo in this case wasn't money, but rather a link on booking.com to download Firefox.

Re: Firefox 65.0 released

#340

Post by xnyan »

ryacko wrote: post #330
cpeterso wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You like the "Temporary Containers" extension. It automatically creates a new container for every site that doesn't already have an assigned container. The temporary container (cookies, etc) get deleted 30 minutes after you close the last tab for the container's site. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...

I use Sandboxie with a browser instance without cookies or cache. It automatically deletes files after closure. Only the browser is allowed internet access.

For specific services like my primary email, I have an isolated Firefox instance keep the cookies for that service only. I don't use that instance for anything but that service. Is there anything I'm giving them (besides what information you give by using the service at all of course)in keeping the cookie? Just want to be aware of any risk I may have overlooked.
Post reply on HN