Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 94

mozilla.org

181–190 of 340 posts

Re: Firefox 94

#181

I recently switched from Chrome back to Firefox after the news about Google forcing people to stay logged-in to Chrome for tracking purposes. I’ve switched in the past but always ended up switching back for one reason or another. This time I’ve actually been very happy with it and don’t think I’ll switch back soon. Better in Firefox: * Ctrl+Tab cycles through tabs in recently-used order. Just like Cmd+Tab. This featu…

I switched to Firefox from Chrome on mobile because Chrome forced me to use tab groups which I do not wish to use.

Re: Firefox 94

#182
post #99

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.

I recommend having “Startup: Restore previous session” checked in your settings.

Re: Firefox 94

#183
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Applications that feel entitled to resources after you tell them to go away lead me to move them into a VM just to contain all the crap and sprawl and bullshit. The number of apps in this category just keeps on growing. I'm starting to feel like I should just run Qubes.

I'm also planning to make the switch. Do you know anyone who's tried Qubes? The finicky hardware requirements are intimidating.

I've used Qubes at home and at work for about a year now. I like it.

It definitely requires thinking differently and sometimes simple things are less simple, but overall I feel it's worth it. It's rewarding to feel that you're in control.

Some things I like:

- Having password manager in a Qube(/VM) that cannot access the internet (and the VMs that can, are of course isolated from the password VM).

- Logging out of your bank, and when they tell you to "clear your cache and cookies", you do one better and actually destroy the whole OS, because you opened the browser in a disposable VM.

- Needing to attach the microphone (or camera) to a VM before it can be used.

- Ability to have specific VMs' network go through a VPN/Tor.

edit: oh yeah, and consider trying Qubes 4.1 release candidate, which could possibly have better hardware compatibility.

Re: Firefox 94

#184
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thats news to me.... you sure some extension you installed isn't adding them?

> Firefox Suggest sends Mozilla search terms and information about engagement with Firefox Suggest, some of which may be shared with partners to provide and improve the suggested content. https://blog.mozilla.org/data/2021/09/15/data-and-firefox-su... > To deliver smarter contextual suggestions, Firefox will need to send Mozilla new data, specifically, what you type into the search bar, city-level location data to kn…

For anybody who needs clarification, this is opt-in only at the moment. From the second link:

> As always, we believe people should be in control of their web experience, so Firefox Suggest will be a customizable feature.

> We’ll begin offering smarter contextual suggestions to a percentage of people in the U.S. as an opt-in experience.

Re: Firefox 94

#185
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more intrigued by Brave every day My long term question is - will there end up being one browser implementation of the virtual machine? Browser rendering engines are basically that these days, a big virtual machine for web apps. Is there value having a separate implementation? Some languages that run inside a virtual machine only have a single implementation. Is that bad? Would it be bad if Mozilla used the interne…

Every time this discussion appears on HN, the argument is that Gecko needs to exist because otherwise Blink will dominate, and Blink is overwhelmingly controlled by Google. But I think that's the wrong solution, it just means that we need to decouple Blink from Google and put it in the hands of a neutral, nonprofit third-party. This is arguably what the Mozilla Foundation should have been.

Both Gecko and KHTML were already in the hands of neutral, nonprofit third parties from the start. But Apple wanted control to be entirely in their hands, so they forked WebKit from KHTML, and Google wanted control in their hands, so they forked Blink from WebKit.

Re: Firefox 94

#186

> 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?

Why is there so much argument among power users about a default setting that you can easily change?

Re: Firefox 94

#187
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.

I think the sweet spot would be for minor updates that fix security issues, but for MAJOR version updates, no tell me what you're doing. How sure are you that I didn't intentionally install an older version to figure out a bug on an older variant of the browser.

Re: Firefox 94

#188
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

P.S.: it would be nice if down-voters had the guts to say why they disagreed. But then, perhaps that's a bit too close for comfort if you work for Mozilla.

Assuming everybody who disagrees with you is some sort of Mozilla inside agent is really getting off on a bad foot, and sabotages any hope of productive discussion before it even starts. Don't assume bad faith in everybody who doesn't think the same way that you do.

What I think is irrelevant, I can echo my disgust here out of frustration, but I know that in the grand scheme of things it will amount to nought.

Bad faith or just plain stupidity, you cannot escape the fact that Firefox is on a fast slippery slope to obivlion and that Mozilla personnel have done nothing to arrest the process in recent years.

Why not? What's driving them to continually implement features and policies that clearly turn users off using Firefox?

"Don't assume bad faith in everybody who doesn't think the same way that you do."

I usually don't, in fact I always welcome a solid debate but there comes a time when things go so wrong or turn so bizarre that one has to look to offtrack ideas for an explanation.

If you've a better rational reason (or perhaps inside knowledge) for why Mozilla continually shoots itself in the foot then many of us would like to hear it.

Edit: I usually use the Firefox fork Palemoon to get around many of Firefox's most egregious features but I'd prefer not to do that as it increases my vulnerability to browser fingerprinting,etc., as such, I have to take additional remedial action such as spoofing the user agent for a more common one - and frankly it's a damn pain having to do so.

You ought to be able to at least understand why many of us are so annoyed when essentially the last independent browser manufacturer is seemingly (willingly) attempting suicide .

Re: Firefox 94

#189

It has made me really sad that I have had to quite using Firefox, as I've enjoyed the technical improvements they have been making, but the new ads in the address bar thing is just non negotiable, I will not be a part of that.

>... I will not be a part of that. So instead of not being a part of it by simply disabling it (or never enabling it to begin with, as it's currently opt-in), you're abandoning the browser altogether?

Yeah, search the preferences for the word “Sponsored” and uncheck anything you don’t want to see.

Re: Firefox 94

#190
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> It is dead trivial to out-compete Chrome by focusing on power users

If that was true I would expect power-user browsers with unchanging UIs to have a larger market share than they do.

https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worl...

Post reply on HN