331–340 of 468 posts
I just had f.lux turn on night mode after upgrading. Firefox 70 does not handle this well. Some elements on most sites (including HN) randomly flash in and out of nigh mode colors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it only support passwords? I actually use 1Password for quite a bit of information. (Credit cards, bank accounts, email accounts, servers, and random memberships)
I will always use a 3rd party password solution since it prevents browser lock-in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> One thing that Safari is incredibly good at (and its' engineers are proud of) is the ability to reduce resource consumption for non-active tabs and windows to nearly zero. I understand this is rare, but I just have a very very hard time understanding what is so hard about this. Page not visible? Just stop it. Stop the layout engine, stop the javascript VM. If there was a transfer in progress, let it finish, a page…
How can the browser distinguish between useful background Javascript (e.g. web based chat) and harmful background Javascript (e.g. advertising)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The javascript engine and rendering engines are what are generally affected by being backgrounded. So yes, generally the media library will continue receiving the combined video/audio stream and not bother rendering the video frames
Does HTML video need to catch up based on the most recent keyframe? If they don't render while backgrounded, how do they do that without being noticeable?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> this means that my battery is going to last 4-5x longer with Safari Well it might last 4-5x longer if you run safari in the background, since that is what you tested. But wouldn't the real test be running both browsers as the active window and comparing those results? One thing that Safari is incredibly good at (and its' engineers are proud of) is the ability to reduce resource consumption for non-active tabs and w…
> One thing that Safari is incredibly good at (and its' engineers are proud of) is the ability to reduce resource consumption for non-active tabs and windows to nearly zero. I understand this is rare, but I just have a very very hard time understanding what is so hard about this. Page not visible? Just stop it. Stop the layout engine, stop the javascript VM. If there was a transfer in progress, let it finish, a page…
This is so easy and I, a software developer with no actual experience in that area, know the obvious solution that eludes that hundreds of developers with actual experience in the area. Meanwhile, I take umbrage when my product manager tells me that implementing the next feature will be easy and I'm exaggerating how complicated it is."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The performance is what has kept me on Chrome on Mac. Going to re-install FF now and give it a whirl. Thanks for this info!
You can also use Brave browser, it's basically Chrome with the ad tracking removed. With that, almost no reason to switch to another browser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox still doesn't render native OS elements like select boxes and right-click menus, so I have little faith overflow scrolling will ever be fixed.
Yeah... Firefox is probably the biggest example of why you shouldn't reinvent the wheel in terms of cross-platform GUI. It just looks and feels so out of place, whether it's macOS or some niche setup like running it under KDE. If you're in Gnome or Windows it can look fine, but I still question much of the iconography and general layout. Any time you bring it up, though, you get batted away and beaten over the head w…
> In the Firefox UI, you’ll then be able to generate a secure password like so: That's great. But what if I now want to log in to the same site from my iPhone?
I am not a Firefox user but know that matching Webkit performance on macOS is going to be very hard. So just fired a test on my Macbook Air - Safari 13 vs Firefox 70. Opened top 10 links from techmeme. Both windows in background. Firefox 70: Energy use 30-200; CPU 20-25%; Threads 82 Safari 13: Energy use 0.1-5; CPU 2-5%; Threads 11 If this is to celebrate I can only imagine what the things looked like before this rel…
I just can't imagine Firefox will ever be performant as Safari. One is written for a single platform developed at the same company that develops the hardware and OS (I'm not trying to belittle the Safari team--it's kind of amazing what they do). The other is developed separately, must equally support at least 2 other OSes and has an expectation for supporting older setups. My problem is that Safari won't work for me…
Firefox has (for now at least) a huge leg up in terms of content blockers. IDK if that's enough to even out the energy consumption and performance, but it can't hurt.