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

Firefox 70

hacks.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 468 posts

Re: Firefox 70

#381

Post by dwaite »

roca wrote: post #308
dwaite wrote: post #236

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

Youtube uses the Media Source Extensions API, which means that JS is responsible for fetching compressed video data and feeding it into the decoder, so it can implement adaptive streaming. Pause JS for more than a few seconds and the video will stop playing.

Yes, and this is likely why Youtube now periodically pauses in the background on current macOS/Safari.

Re: Firefox 70

#382

Post by ivanjaros »

Since they censored Dissenter, they are dead to me. They can be the best web browser ever made, but it will never touch the sillicon of my hard drives ever again. With Goolag, at least I know where they stand and I know what to expect from them. Mozilla betrayed my trust and I am not fan of second chances.

Re: Firefox 70

#383

Post by bkor »

fpgaminer wrote: post #43
danlugo92 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would this bring it up to par with safari's power consumption?

I don't know about other usages, but energy consumption while using YouTube is important to me (usually have something playing while I work) so I just did a quick measurement. Safari 13.0.2 versus Firefox 70.0 versus Chrome 77.0 Playing the same YouTube video at the same quality (1080p) and watching Energy Impact in Activity Monitor while the video played, I saw averages of: Safari used 20, Firefox used 45, Chrome us…

See https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-red...

More work is planned to reduce the energy usage for scrolling and full screen video. Though I guess for your example you don't watch things fullscreen.

Re: Firefox 70

#384

Post by jfk13 »

sings wrote: post #330
tyre wrote: post #32

> Firefox 70 introduces three new properties related to text decoration/underline: > text-decoration-thickness: sets the thickness of lines added via text-decoration. > text-underline-offset: sets the distance between a text decoration and the text it is set on. Bear in mind that this only works on underlines. > text-decoration-skip-ink: sets whether underlines and overlines are drawn if they cross descenders and asc…

I wonder if the default values for offset and thickness will respect those declared in the font. And also whether sub-pixel values are allowed? I don’t know how many fonts declare these values, but it would be a shame not to use information that provides values tailored to the font in use.

Firefox has always* respected the underline position/thickness in the font. This is why in an example like

    data:text/html,Times Arial
the Times and Arial elements get different underlines.

(Safari and Chrome don't do this, they ignore the font's properties and use an arbitrary underline of their own -- which differs between the two, Chrome's being somewhat thicker.)

* "Always" may not be strictly true, but it's certainly been a long time.

Re: Firefox 70

#385

Post by Vinnl »

frereubu wrote: post #255
frenchyatwork wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of these cases though, were coverage doesn't really matter. The fall-back is fairly reasonable.

That's true, but if I used all CSS properties with this amount of coverage it would cause a lot of extra work for very little gain. If this is something that really gets your goat, and you use Firefox, perhaps it's worth it to scratch the itch, but otherwise pretty useless currently.

But if you'd otherwise use border-bottom hacks, this is a good reason to stop doing those and just have Chrome users live with the not-terrible default underline until Chrome supports those properties as well.

Re: Firefox 70

#386

Post by lucasverra »

kemenaran wrote: post #3

Not mentioned in this article (although it's in the Release Notes [1]): the amazing work done regarding the macOS compositor. This should give pretty noticeable speed and battery improvements on Retina Macbooks. [1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/70.0/releasenotes/#new

i am very very eager to test and use this. FF is my main driver but it's a heat machine on my mac 10.11.6. I wonder if i gain something to upgrade my macOS (4g ram :()

Re: Firefox 70

#387

Post by Kbelicius »

alexis_fr wrote: post #363
gamblor956 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A donation to a Christian charity would have been fine. There are thousands of them in the US and around the world. No, Eich specifically made a donation to a political campaign for CA's Prop 8 that used blood-libel-level lies to cast homosexuals as pedophiles and sexual predators and use that as a justification to deny them the right to marry. And this was the state of the Prop 8 campaign at the time he made the don…

So Mozilla thinks that laws proposed to voters are so immoral that we should purge people over them. “He had it coming to him”, they’ll say, justifying the purge, for defending that a child need two parents of different sex because kids are enriched by both viewpoints, which is as perfectly valid as an opinion as saying that speech should be censored aggressively when not agreeing with other viewpoints. Both are opin…

> So Mozilla thinks that laws proposed to voters are so immoral that we should purge people over them.

He wasn't purged by Mozilla, he quit. He did quit because of the pressure put on him because of his donation but the idea that he was purged by Mozilla is at least an exaggeration if not an outright lie.

> “He had it coming to him”, they’ll say, justifying the purge, for defending that a child need two parents of different sex because kids are enriched by both viewpoints, which is as perfectly valid as an opinion as saying that speech should be censored aggressively when not agreeing with other viewpoints.

Bad ideas should be purged. Don't you agree with that?

> I’m for democracy. Mozilla isn’t supporting equal democracy... for Christians.

How so?

> In my opinion it is more complex than that, Mozilla probably have little opinions about this problem but buckles under specific powerful group pressures and agrees to implement their purge, without due process and fair trial.

The man quit... should have Mozilla rejected his resignation and forced him to participate in some kind of "due process"? What do you have in mind for this process?

Re: Firefox 70

#388

Post by mackrevinack »

theodorejb wrote: post #17

Wow, blown away by how much better the new password manager is! If they add support for custom fields on each login, this could almost completely replace my need for a 3rd party solution.

personally im trying to move away from keeping everything in one basket but maybe there is some benefit to having a password manager built in vs a 3rd party extension? less attack area?

earlier in this year I switched from bitwarden (which I would still recommend) to keepass because I wanted to fill desktop passwords... but there is the added benefit that you actually don't need a browser extension if you don't want to. instead ive been using the autotype feature that can be run from a hotkey.

Re: Firefox 70

#389

Post by Khaine »

pcwalton wrote: post #267
dwaite wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, CoreAnimation was first released a year before FireFox 1.0.

For many years CA wasn't hosted in the window server; it was rendered locally within the app via GL 1.x, which is worse than what Firefox was doing. And window server rendering didn't result in large energy consumption gains until Retina Displays came around.

Retina came about in 2012. That was 7 years ago!

Re: Firefox 70

#390

Post by tom-khagai »

doesnt_know wrote: post #359

Links for the password manager, "Firefox Lockwise" go through adjust, which appears to be a tracking/analytics/marketing platform. This is both through their website and by clicking through the Firefox UI menu. I guess it's harder to walk the walk yourself when the desires to track usage and analytics come from within your own teams. Check the links yourself over at: https://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/lockwise/ An…

To be fair, it's common practice to measure marketing campaign effectiveness. Mozilla doesn't hide that they share data to "Measure and support our marketing"

"Campaign and Referral Data: This helps Mozilla understand the effectiveness of our marketing campaigns."

"On iOS and Android: Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor, which has its own privacy policy. Mobile campaign data includes a Google advertising ID, IP address, timestamp, country, language/locale, operating system, and app version. Read the documentation."

Src: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/

Post reply on HN