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

Firefox 84.0

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 328 posts

Re: Firefox 84.0

#61

Post by nathell »

hannob wrote: post #53
jefftk wrote: post #9

And for developers: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Rel... The biggest change from my perspective is "Firefox now ensures that localhost URLs — such as http://localhost/ and http://dev.localhost/ — refer to the local host's loopback interface (e.g. http://127.0.0.1 ). As a result, resources loaded from localhost are now assumed to have been delivered securely (see Secure contexts), and also w…

If I understand this correctly this doesn't change that much. It means you can now safely use localhost, but you could achieve the same before by using 127.0.0.1.

Not if your app extracts some info out of the domain, e.g., tenant slug.

Re: Firefox 84.0

#62

Post by nmg »

CJefferson wrote: post #51

Is anyone else worried Firefox on Android is becoming increasingly unusable? How well supported is it my Mozilla I wonder. I often find pages render as blank pages until I refresh, and scrolling will often hang for multiple seconds. I was playing "Jackbox Games" (which is played via the web and PC), and I found those of us on Firefox found the text boxes were broken. Just downloading PDFs was broken for several weeks…

I agree, the current iteration of Firefox on Android feels half baked, and it makes me sad. I wish they'd make it a first class citizen

Re: Firefox 84.0

#63

Post by rlkf »

CarelessExpert wrote: post #32
eska wrote: post #24

Mozilla FAQ: > Will switching to a different browser allow me to use Flash? >No. Adobe and other browsers will also end support Flash at the end of 2020. Even if you install an older version of Firefox, the Flash plugin itself will stop loading Flash content after January 12, 2021. See Adobe’s Flash Player End of Life information page for more details Adobe: > Since Adobe will no longer be supporting Flash Player aft…

Doesn't concern me. Flash has been on an EOL track for a long time now, and I'm actually pretty happy they're being this aggressive about killing it, as otherwise it could linger on indefinitely, causing security bugs across the web. Why do you find it disturbing?

Not GP, but I think what they find disturbing is that Adobe could block a plugin running on their computer, either by the plugin being timebombed, or by it checking in with a mothership.

Re: Firefox 84.0

#64

Post by generalk »

eska wrote: post #24

Mozilla FAQ: > Will switching to a different browser allow me to use Flash? >No. Adobe and other browsers will also end support Flash at the end of 2020. Even if you install an older version of Firefox, the Flash plugin itself will stop loading Flash content after January 12, 2021. See Adobe’s Flash Player End of Life information page for more details Adobe: > Since Adobe will no longer be supporting Flash Player aft…

I don't have a horse in the Flash race -- it had a ton of issues but also enabled many content creators to deliver over the web in a way straight HTML/JS was incapable of -- and yes, Flash had its time and that time is now over, but yeah. Agree. Disturbing.

Flash games and animations were a treat of the early/mid-2000s web, and many folks got their start as creators there. Adobe hasn't just stopped distributing a player/plugin for Flash content, they're blocking the existing players from playing existing content. Even if you were an archivist there's nothing to do.

So yeah, this is disturbing. I can go to my city's library and browse microfiche if I want. I can install a Gopher or a Usenet client and connect to those widely-unused protocols that still serve content. But Adobe's reaching back and making all Flash content completely unplayable, even with players that should support it.

Wow.

Re: Firefox 84.0

#65

Post by mdoms »

And still no proper support for pinch to zoom or proper scrolling with touchscreen laptops or Windows touchpads. Every release I hope they will resolve this extremely basic feature. Every release I'm disappointed. Every other browser just works - I don't know if it's native functionality or if they put in the work - but Firefox is just absolutely rubbish here.

Re: Firefox 84.0

#66

Post by foepys »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #44
chinhodado wrote: post #11

I love Firefox, I use it everyday, I can't imagine using a browser without Tree Style Tab, or all the things that I can do in about:config. At the same time, I can't shake off the dreadful feeling that it will eventually die one day. The market share keeps falling year by year. What is the most realistic future for Firefox?

Firefox is way too valuable as a hedge against Google hegemony to let die. If they ever lose the Google search money hose and become threatened I do expect a Google competitor to realize that and step in with some funding. Microsoft basing Edge on Chromium was a really stupid move on their part for this reason, and I suspect they are starting to realize it. That being said, I only expect it to be maintained at a hedg…

Isn't the reason why many applications and libraries use Chromium due to Gecko's too Firefox-centric APIs?

I read a post here on HN a few months (years?) ago where a developer was really trying to use Gecko for their own application and got frustrated so much that they gave up and switched to Chromium.

Re: Firefox 84.0

#67

Post by CarelessExpert »

rlkf wrote: post #63
CarelessExpert wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't concern me. Flash has been on an EOL track for a long time now, and I'm actually pretty happy they're being this aggressive about killing it, as otherwise it could linger on indefinitely, causing security bugs across the web. Why do you find it disturbing?

Not GP, but I think what they find disturbing is that Adobe could block a plugin running on their computer, either by the plugin being timebombed, or by it checking in with a mothership.

Welcome to the world of proprietary software. Flash was always a closed source product controlled by Adobe. I don't find that disturbing because it's incredibly common in the closed source world.

Hell, this is precisely what Gatekeeper does on macos, in that it reaches out to the cloud to decide if you should be allowed to run software on your machine.

It's even justified on the same basis: enhancing security.

Re: Firefox 84.0

#68

Post by nerdponx »

jefftk wrote: post #9

And for developers: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Rel... The biggest change from my perspective is "Firefox now ensures that localhost URLs — such as http://localhost/ and http://dev.localhost/ — refer to the local host's loopback interface (e.g. http://127.0.0.1 ). As a result, resources loaded from localhost are now assumed to have been delivered securely (see Secure contexts), and also w…

Am I incompetent if I thought all browsers all did this already by default? Or was this typically enforced at the OS/networking-stack level, and now Firefox is adding an additional guarantee that it will happen directly in the browser, even if the networking stack would say otherwise?

Re: Firefox 84.0

#69

Post by nerdponx »

macspoofing wrote: post #37
jefftk wrote: post #9

And for developers: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Rel... The biggest change from my perspective is "Firefox now ensures that localhost URLs — such as http://localhost/ and http://dev.localhost/ — refer to the local host's loopback interface (e.g. http://127.0.0.1 ). As a result, resources loaded from localhost are now assumed to have been delivered securely (see Secure contexts), and also w…

>This is great for local development. Not just. There is a niche for mixed web/native apps whereby the page is loaded from the web, but interacts (at least in part) with a locally hosted web-server.

Or even just browser apps that are easy/encouraged to run locally, like Jupyter Notebook.

Re: Firefox 84.0

#70

Post by tenacious_tuna »

AshamedCaptain wrote: post #54
antouank wrote: post #4

> Additionally we'll ship an accelerated rendering pipeline for Linux/GNOME/X11 users for the first time, ever!

Wait... GNOME only?

Yeah, that seems odd. I wonder if the update doesn't help/involve Weyland people, and if GNOME is an X11 holdout? I haven't been paying enough attention to know.
Post reply on HN