Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users • Hacker News Board

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#381

Post by bepvte » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:43 AM UTC

microcolonel wrote: post #153

ljm wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why it’s so unfortunate and frustrating that people are depending so much on Chromium/Blink. Electron, various browsers that are just skins over the embedded framework... We were still dealing with legacy IE6 (and IE 7/8 by that point also) in 2013! Almost a decade since we got Firefox and the first version of Chrome. The web has empirically suffered through homogeneity and the lack of strong competitors in t…

> This is why it’s so unfortunate and frustrating that people are depending so much on Chromium/Blink Chromium is generally fine, until Google packages it as Chrome. The issues are not inherent to Chromium, they're failures of principle at Google. I know people like the idea, in concept, of engine diversity on the web, but the alternatives are terrible. Anyone who says that Firefox runs anywhere near as well as Chrom…

By default, google disables hardware acceleration for chrome on a large percentage of linux. As well, Ive never had it work well with open source graphics drivers or new products like wayland. And the desktop integration comes nowhere near firefox

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#382

Post by goombastic » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:43 AM UTC

Between pihole, firefox and addons, I see no ads. The way the ad industry is going, they will at some point prevent people from blinking.

A big thank you to the developers at pihole, mozilla and the plugin devs.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#383

Post by rkagerer » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:45 AM UTC

What a jerk move. I hope enough users are outraged by this to force them to rethink it.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#384

Post by RonanTheGrey » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:45 AM UTC

latortuga wrote: post #376

sergiotapia wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did give Firefox a _serious_ exclusive try for the past two months. It's terrible for heavy websites. Clickup, PivotalTracker, JIRA, Zeplin - the browser just chokes on these sites and get janky. On Chrome they are butter smooth. I don't know what to do. I want to use anything other than Chrome, but I also want a sane workday and not have the browser jank my day up constantly. I would use Brave but they don't have…

This has got to be some bullshit shilling. I use all those sites all day every damn day with no problem in Firefox whatsoever.

Agree, those are my regulars and I solidly use Firefox for daily browsing and have never had those issues on those sites.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#385

Post by 4mitkumar » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:48 AM UTC

esturk wrote: post #311

ravenstine wrote: post #269

Slightly off topic, I'm finding it very disingenuous that people in this thread(and any other threads that come up about Firefox) have actually had significant performance issues with Firefox. No bugs that are noteworthy, sans that fiasco with the expired certificate that disabled addons briefly. I've been using Firefox since "quantum" on both my MacBooks(one of which is old AF) and on Linux. I've yet to have problem…

My issue with Firefox is essentially one bug where they refuse to fix. In private mode, previously closed tabs are, for some reasons, restorable. This doesn't happen for Safari or Chrome.

Wouldn't getting able to restore a recently closed tab even in private mode be somewhat similar to having your browsing history being kept, even if for that particular browsing session?

I prefer this behaviour of limiting the browsing history per tab per session instead of the way Chrome implements it

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#386

Post by bepvte » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:48 AM UTC

fencepost wrote: post #350

ravenstine wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you make that happen? I can't seem to reproduce it.

I believe this is within the same Private Browsing session, so if you're closing the window (default behavior with the last tab I think) you may not be seeing it.

I actually use this feature regularly... I consider a private browsing session gone when its window is gone, typically. Either way, nothing is saved to disk

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#387

Post by keypusher » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:48 AM UTC

finder83 wrote: post #375

johannkokos wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many tabs do you consider to be too many tabs? Most of the time I open up to 10 tabs, and Firefox is performing fine. But I have also seen people opening 40 tabs.

More like 40. I usually try to run < 10, but sometimes it gets out of hand...I tend to have multiple "tasks" of research going on at the same time. Like if I start researching at home at night I'll sometimes leave it open through a whole workday until I can return to it at night. Then multiple things at work, etc. So yeah...probably my browsing habits that may need to change.

You should try the Tree Style Tabs add-on for Firefox. You may need to tweak some of the settings a bit, but once you experience the power of this extension I guarantee you really won’t ever go back to Chrome.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#388

Post by alexanderdmitri » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:49 AM UTC

microcolonel wrote: post #153

ljm wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why it’s so unfortunate and frustrating that people are depending so much on Chromium/Blink. Electron, various browsers that are just skins over the embedded framework... We were still dealing with legacy IE6 (and IE 7/8 by that point also) in 2013! Almost a decade since we got Firefox and the first version of Chrome. The web has empirically suffered through homogeneity and the lack of strong competitors in t…

> This is why it’s so unfortunate and frustrating that people are depending so much on Chromium/Blink Chromium is generally fine, until Google packages it as Chrome. The issues are not inherent to Chromium, they're failures of principle at Google. I know people like the idea, in concept, of engine diversity on the web, but the alternatives are terrible. Anyone who says that Firefox runs anywhere near as well as Chrom…

Firefox runs great on linux in my recent experience.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#389

Post by CmdrKrool » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:49 AM UTC

mbrumlow wrote: post #71

junar wrote: post #23

I found this post highly editorialized. Here's the actual response if you want to understand the context, instead of simply seeing bits and pieces with a journalist's spin. https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/chrom... Also, the headline seems mostly incorrect. The gist of it, as I understand, is that Chrome is enforcing a migration from the webRequest API to a new declarativeNetRequest API. The lat…

And if those features happen to never be implemented? I really think it is a bad practice to force adoption of a new API that can't fulfill the same functions as the previous one. Nobody would be here talking about this if they just made the new API without breaking add blocking (useful add blocking), and then forced people to move. Even more so given that it looks really bad when your main goal is to serve people ad…

> I really think it is a bad practice to force adoption of a new API that can't fulfill the same functions as the previous one.

I agree, which incidentally is the reason I switched from Firefox to Chromium a couple years back as Mozilla dropped XUL extensions for their own development convenience, toward an ideal of cross-browser extension compatibility, and in hoping to win over Chrome users by making Firefox more alike in both looks and performance.

How many of those motivations have changed, and do we know that Mozilla aren't actually going to follow suit with a similar restructuring of APIs some time after such changes have settled into and been normalized in Chrome?

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#390

Post by hannasanarion » Thu, May 30, 2019, 2:50 AM UTC

ravenstine wrote: post #269

Slightly off topic, I'm finding it very disingenuous that people in this thread(and any other threads that come up about Firefox) have actually had significant performance issues with Firefox. No bugs that are noteworthy, sans that fiasco with the expired certificate that disabled addons briefly. I've been using Firefox since "quantum" on both my MacBooks(one of which is old AF) and on Linux. I've yet to have problem…

Firefox has several experience-breaking bugs for me.

One where on websites that don't explicitly set their form background to white, which is the default on most browsers, Firefox paints them the color of the user's desktop theme, even when the theme is dark. Black text on black background. This bug had been known about for almost 20 years and is marked "won't fix" because the devs still assert that universal user theming of websites is just around the corner. The bug manifests on mozilla.com

Another is that hard refresh sometimes flat out doesn't work. I'm a developer who occasionally makes changes to frontend code, and sometimes Firefox just decided that it's just going to cache everything and ignore what I tell it to do. Ctrl-refresh, shift-refresh, clear cache, all do nothing, I have to killall firefox and restart the browser to get my updated web page to show.