91–100 of 136 posts
tree style tabs and container-locked windows. that will make firefox perfect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I haven't seen similar functionality in any [other] browsers Brave has been advertising their new containers but I haven't tried them yet. https://brave.com/blog/containers/ Given Google's hostility toward non-chromium browsers, it's on my check-it-out list
Brave containers are great. They also have vertical tabs built in which is my preferred tab layout and is missing from Chrome
Edit: this is addressed in another comment thread, no need to respond here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has been one of my use cases for the Multi-Account Containers extension for some time now. It's actually such a motivating use case that one of Firefox explorations into a "simpler" focused UX alternative to the Multi-Account Container extension is called "Facebook Container" and does only that, isolate Facebook, specifically into its own Container. As noted, it can't defeat all forms of device fingerprinting, b…
Yeah, one of the ways I was sure the Facebook Container works is that although I pay for Youtube Premium and so ordinarily my Youtube doesn't have adverts etc inside the Facebook Container since it has no idea who I am, a Youtube video has adverts. Facebook is so toxic now that I can't imagine allowing that to contaminate everything else. I saw today an advert which has been carefully designed to rage bait idiots, so…
If you want actual anonymity you need to use something like the Tor Browser (which does lots of tricks to try to block fingerprinting as well as using a unique Tor circuit for every website you access).
I should not have to: - Install add-ons like "Temporary Containers" - And if some people do they should certainly not have to deal with a bloated container list with temp container names - Just let me select how I want this "containers" feature - like "open all links in unique temp containers" (unless I select otherwise or set otherwise for certain websites, then go to that container), maybe let me select a sub rule…
Oh this seems very useful, I hope we'll get it on Chrome sometime. At the moment I have to use profiles to achieve the same thing
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> site-specific container assignments This is (or was, before I switched to Vivaldi) the killer feature of Firefox containers for me. I could banish certain tracking-heavy sites to their own containers so that they could only track where I've been on their own properties and not across the whole web. (Without having to remember to switch to their containers beforehand.) So I guess if I go back to Firefox, I'll still…
For me, this is almost an anti-feature. I still use it for a few sites, but the real killer feature of containers is that it becomes a breeze to use the same service with different accounts & identities, without logging in and out, and no shared state. Pinning a site to a container breaks that.
I’ve been using Firefox Containers for years through Mozilla’s Multi-Account Containers extension.[1] Now that container management is available directly in Firefox, I’d prefer to use the native implementation if possible. Mozilla notes that the extension still adds some functionality: > “Installing the Multi-Account Containers extension developed by Mozilla provides a few benefits on top of the native container func…
> Now that container management is available directly in Firefox, I’d prefer to use the native implementation if possible. It's been available for years in stable, including the management page on the settings, if you enable them in about:config (privacy.userContext.enabled and privacy.userContext.ui.enabled). Plenty of us have been using them for a long long time without extensions. Based on the list of features, th…
This would be my definition of not available as a native user-accessible feature versus what they are launching now.