Love Firefox. Just wish they would cut Pocket out.
Is it hard to ignore?
Firefox 91
181–190 of 232 posts
Re: Firefox 91
#182> HTTPS-First Policy: Firefox Private Browsing windows now attempt to make all connections to websites secure, and fall back to insecure connections only when websites do not support it. Hmmmm ... Does this mean "HTTPS Everywhere" is no longer needed?[1] And, of course, it freaks out with the previously saved self-signed cert installed on my WiFi router. ... sigh [1]: https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
> Firefox Private Browsing windows now attempt to make all connections to websites secure Ah yes, I don't want anyone to eavesdrop on my pr0n! Edit: to clarify, I find it weird that this has been limited to Private Browsing, when most people don't even use it for anything but adult websites. The feature is good and should be available for regular browsing too.
I had the same thought. Best guess, they're doing it as a large scale canary.
That way they can roll it out to all Firefox users, and if something breaks, users can always fall back to non-private mode until it's fixed.
Re: Firefox 91
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have traffic that you are okay with people watching? Because I personally have exactly zero traffic that I want my ISP to know about (and then resell that info to ad companies, ex. https://www.infoworld.com/article/2608352/internet-privacy-a... ).
I agree wholeheartedly - that's why I found puzzling that the functionality has been limited to "porn-mode". Judging by the downvotes though, I should have stated it better.
Oh, yes now I can see what you meant. Forgot that private mode was called porn mode, especially since in my brain it's more like "safe mode" to run without extensions or cookies:)
Re: Firefox 91
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the contrary - HN articles about Firefox are always overrun by positively breathless supporters of Firefox and nothing is different here today. The real negativity can be seen in the market that largely rejected this garbage browser.
Or the fact that Google and Microsoft used their monopoly power and dark patterns to do it. Google asked every Firefox user to 'upgrade' to Chrome on all their properties, didn't work as hard to ensure Firefox compatibility leading to worse performance, and bundled Chrome with all kinds of stuff like Adobe Flash updates for Firefox to trick users into installing it (I uninstalled it from my Mom's PC 4 times). Microso…
And yet, people find their way to install all sorts of other programs like Chrome, Discord, Slack or Steam even though Microsoft includes some competing programs by default in the start menu.
Re: Firefox 91
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
Constantly dinking with the UI and constantly making broadly unpopular, if not harmful (re. cliqz and hiding it) changes against any and all criticism. Mozilla at some point decided they know better than their users what their users want. ...their market share stats show they were wrong.
Google, Microsoft, Apple, Samsung, etc pushing their browsers through their platforms would be the main reason. Most people don't care about the UI changes. Yes it was a little jarring at first. I've been using the new ui for a while now and likely wouldn't want to go back (I tried the ui hot fix for a bit, but ended up removing it and going with the default).
Most people don't care about the specific UI changes. But they feel frustrated and helpless when they have to relearn what they knew suddenly with no benefit to them.
Things like lower contrast aren't just about taste or getting used to it.
Re: Firefox 91
#186So much negativity. Just here to report that I am a happy Firefox user, no complaints here. Thank you Mozilla for making a browser that respects me.
Yes! I always open the HN comments for Firefox release notes, knowing I'll read a long list of negativity (and much is fair)... but somehow I'm still a happy, thankful user since (almost) day #1. Thank you FF team!
> a long list of negativity
I am a Firefox user since Firefox 4 (2011). The thing is, that negativity was not there prior to 2017.
I'm guessing they are making the assumption that if they keep approximating towards a Chrome clone, that it will somehow reduce the friction of new users joining. This a colossal strategy mistake from corporate/product people.
They cannot compete with Chrome/Edge on a massively unleveled playing field. They either have some giant corporate deal to come pre installed on devices other than linux distros or they accept that it will be a niche browser that wins users over by having killer features privacy/foss ethos etc.
The decision of removing things that were previously customizable or remove features because only a few hundreds of thousands of people use, is alienating users. In the discussions I always read Mozilla staff arguing that this is a vocal minority but the reality is that irrespective of which statistics you look at they lost a huge chunk of marketshare last year.
The way they are refusing to engage with the community on this matter is creating a lot of frustration. WONTFIX is pretty much a meme in Bugzilla at this point.
Firefox needs to refocus on being Firefox instead of half-trying to compete with other browsers. We need browser diversity and we absolutely need non chromium browsers in particular. I hope they will turn this around and engage with the community and user voice.
Re: Firefox 91
#187So much negativity. Just here to report that I am a happy Firefox user, no complaints here. Thank you Mozilla for making a browser that respects me.
Agreed, i’m also a happy FF user… The satisfied users don’t post comments as much i assume. Haters gonna hate, that’s just how it is.
> Haters gonna hate
This is true for many UI changes, but I'm not convinced it applies here. This blog post points out many specific deficiencies in Proton: https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/firefox-89.html
Re: Firefox 91
#188It just updated, and I couldn't believe my eyes. The background colors on web pages: gone. Everything was high-contrast. The lack of background colors delineating sections of pages was disorienting. And many of the FF preference menus were actually unreadable. So what happened?
>Firefox now automatically enables High Contrast Mode when "Increase Contrast" is checked on MacOS
>Firefox automatically detects if you are using a High Contrast theme and displays everything in your high contrast color scheme. This overrides all other other browser or web page settings, and it affects the Firefox interface itself (all menus, windows, and dialog boxes) and the content of any web page you visit.
Yes, I have some "Increase contrast" enabled on Mac OS because the Mac OS dark-mode theme is too low contrast.
But I didn't ask for all my web pages to displayed like that. Yikes.
I eventually found that I could override changing colors in the advanced colors menu.
Re: Firefox 91
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Try that on Edge now. It's basically impossible from the settings." Not that hard: https://imgur.com/a/yVBOnjY clean new tab page: https://imgur.com/a/YdLyWrt
It is not new tab but what pages are open on restart. This is where you customize new tab https://imgur.com/a/Jzpq7Rs This gives empty page https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/empty-new-tab-page... Via https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftedge/forum/all/...
[deleted]
Re: Firefox 91
#190Shame, nothing about performance yet. When you run a Zoom or Google Meet call on Firefox it uses 40x the battery of Safari.
Is that a literal 40x? I haven't used the web version of zoom in a long time and my Thinkpad is always plugged in but I'm genuinely curious about your data. What OS? Plugins?
MacOS on MBP. Yes, already opened bug reports on the issue.
I joined the same 2-person Zoom call from all 3 browsers on my MBP just now... If you have more people call in, like 10 or more on the call... that's when Firefox really melts your computer and you the energy usage skyrocket.