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

Firefox 94

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 340 posts

Re: Firefox 94

#111

Post by y7 »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #80
hoseja wrote: post #10

>On Windows, there will now be fewer interruptions because Firefox won’t prompt you for updates. Instead, a background agent will download and install updates even if Firefox is closed. How considerate of them, I felt I didn't have enough auto-updating background agents yet.

IMO this is the correct behavior. Programs should never bother the user with prompts or interruptions of any sort unless absolutely necessary. "Do you want to install this security-critical update to your computer's largest attack surface?" does not rise to that level. The answer is obviously yes, so just do it and don't bother the user. There's probably an advanced setting buried somewhere if you _really_ want to tu…

> but why would you?

Because updates can introduce breaking changes. And potentially new security vulnerabilities.

Re: Firefox 94

#112

Post by [deleted] »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #80
hoseja wrote: post #10

>On Windows, there will now be fewer interruptions because Firefox won’t prompt you for updates. Instead, a background agent will download and install updates even if Firefox is closed. How considerate of them, I felt I didn't have enough auto-updating background agents yet.

IMO this is the correct behavior. Programs should never bother the user with prompts or interruptions of any sort unless absolutely necessary. "Do you want to install this security-critical update to your computer's largest attack surface?" does not rise to that level. The answer is obviously yes, so just do it and don't bother the user. There's probably an advanced setting buried somewhere if you _really_ want to tu…

[deleted]

Re: Firefox 94

#113

Post by ellipsis_12 »

SwiftyBug wrote: post #17

> Firefox no longer warns you by default when you exit the browser or close a window using a menu, button, or three-key command. Why would anyone want this? On macOS it is infuriantingly easy to press CMD + Q by accident. Why would you not want to confirm that you actually want to close ALL your tabs?

For now at least it's possible to disable the CMD+Q shortcut entirely by setting the option "browser.quitShortcut.disabled" to true in about:config. This disables the keyboard shortcut and makes it so that the only way to quit is to select the Quit option from the File menu which is hard to do by accident.

Signed: a fellow Mac user who pressed CMD+Q by accident one too many times.

Re: Firefox 94

#114

Post by FriedrichN »

ranger_danger wrote: post #76
marcodiego wrote: post #14

Firefox: the last remaining mostly independent, maintained and reasonably popular browser. Even if it were inferior in any aspect to other options, I'd still use it for the above mentioned reasons.

So independent all their funding is provided by Google.

Not all, some funding is.

>Last year, more than 400,000 individuals gave to Mozilla to protect and improve the health of the Internet. The Mozilla Foundation also receives support in the form of grants from other like-minded major foundations, including the Knight, MacArthur, Bill & Melinda Gates, and Ford foundations.

Re: Firefox 94

#115

Post by Archelaos »

I am wondering what it would take to seriously fork Firefox (like the MySQL/MariaDB fork), if there is so much discontent with Firefox in the HN community?

Re: Firefox 94

#116

Post by signal11 »

hoseja wrote: post #10

>On Windows, there will now be fewer interruptions because Firefox won’t prompt you for updates. Instead, a background agent will download and install updates even if Firefox is closed. How considerate of them, I felt I didn't have enough auto-updating background agents yet.

Firefox has had a Mozilla Maintenance Service[1] (essentially a daemon) on Windows since 2012 or so.

I'm guessing they are improving it so the UX for updates involves even less effort for users.

[1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Windows_Service_Silent_Update

Re: Firefox 94

#117

Post by huhtenberg »

jitl wrote: post #88
sebiw wrote: post #5

> With 94, you’ll find a selection of six fun seasonal Colorways (available for a limited time only). For a limited time only? What the heck? Feels like Starbucks. Otherwise great release of course.

To be competitive with Chrome and Safari, Firefox needs the following table stakes: - Excellent performance and reliability. Quantum delivered a lot of performance wins, and work continues at a rapid rate on reliability. Unfortunately, to be competitive on performance and reliability given Mozilla's funding required dropping XUL :( - A simplified, modern UI. It's fair to argue about specifics here like "tabs as butto…

It is dead trivial to out-compete Chrome by focusing on power users and their needs for privacy-respecting software that doesn't ship with pointless UI changes every second release.

Re: Firefox 94

#118

Post by legrande »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #80
hoseja wrote: post #10

>On Windows, there will now be fewer interruptions because Firefox won’t prompt you for updates. Instead, a background agent will download and install updates even if Firefox is closed. How considerate of them, I felt I didn't have enough auto-updating background agents yet.

IMO this is the correct behavior. Programs should never bother the user with prompts or interruptions of any sort unless absolutely necessary. "Do you want to install this security-critical update to your computer's largest attack surface?" does not rise to that level. The answer is obviously yes, so just do it and don't bother the user. There's probably an advanced setting buried somewhere if you _really_ want to tu…

> There's probably an advanced setting buried somewhere if you _really_ want to turn that behavior off, but why would you?

You can create a policy for it

    {
    "policies": {
    "DisableAppUpdate": true
      }
    }
Create a JSON file called `policies.json` and paste the above code into it. Then place that JSON file in a folder called `distribution`. Then make sure to place the `distribution` folder in the application folder of the browser.

Not sure why you want to do that, as updates are essential for security. Apparently it's for 'enterprise organizations' who probably want to limit the chatiness of their network and reduce latency.

You could also install Firefox ESR which doesn't ping Mozilla for updates nearly every 10 seconds.

Re: Firefox 94

#119

Post by artificialLimbs »

denton-scratch wrote: post #59

> Instead, a background agent will download and install updates even if Firefox is closed. I hope that can be disabled. If I kill Firefox, I want it to be completely dead. I deplore background "download agents". > Plus, closing devtools now reclaims more memory than ever before. Perhaps reducing devtools memory usage might have been more useful; more than once it has brought my machine to a standstill, and forced me…

You close Firefox?

Gods, just might as well restart the computer while you're at it.

Re: Firefox 94

#120

Post by Taywee »

bogwog wrote: post #99
apocalyptic0n3 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the flip side, this has always been an infuriating default for me. If I hit CMD+Q, that means I want the program to quit. Not prompt me or make me hold it down or use a different command. CMD+Q = Quit on Mac. Overriding that behavior is annoying and one of the first things I disable on nearly every program I install.

Do you also use CMD+W to close tabs/modal windows? Because I do, and it's very easy to accidentally press Q instead of W. Losing dozens of tabs because of that is so damn infuriating that it ruins my entire day when it happens.

When you do that, open your browser, and either hit the hamburger menu on the right and go to History or Alt and go to History, and then click "Restore Previous Session".

It's not perfect (sites lose unsaved state usually), but I know that pain and it's not so bad when you know you can just recall all the tabs.

Post reply on HN