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

Firefox 28 Release Notes

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 164 posts

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#151

Post by blueskin_ »

enscr wrote: post #20

Eagerly waiting to ditch Chrome & its forced notifications. Perhaps with Australis (Firefox 29), the UI would be at par. Edit : Chrome feels subtle, lighter & perceptually faster (specifically : tabs, scrollbars). Although after updating Firefox today, I can notice that there's improvement in Firefox.

Australis is a huge step backwards for firefox.

If you want chrome (or opera, which is little more than a chrome clone these days), you know where to find it. Firefox is supposed to be the customisable browser that gives the user the freedom to have what they want and not what Big Google decides they do.

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#152

Post by gcp »

voltagex_ wrote: post #144
mrinterweb wrote: post #100

From what I can tell about the exploits found at Pwn2Own, there were a total of 4 critical. Looks like FF28 addresses all 4. That was a very quick turnaround. The fact that FF runs in a single process seems to be a major security issue since the web views are not sandboxed. I know Mozilla is working on their multiprocess project Electrolysis https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis that is experimental in FF 30. Hopeful…

Unfortunately the bug reports are still 'secret' - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=982906

The autoupdaters are still throttled so not everyone is on Firefox 28 yet.

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#153

Post by CGudapati »

blueskin_ wrote: post #149

Last version before they ruin their UI with Australis. Best way to delay the pain (and that of their general too-frequent breakage) is to switch to the ESR version: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all/ , which should give enough time for addon writers to undo the australis damage.

Come on. It's not that bad. I know design is a subjective thing, but calling it a disaster is a bit too much, IMO.

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#154

Post by blueskin_ »

CGudapati wrote: post #153
blueskin_ wrote: post #149

Last version before they ruin their UI with Australis. Best way to delay the pain (and that of their general too-frequent breakage) is to switch to the ESR version: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all/ , which should give enough time for addon writers to undo the australis damage.

Come on. It's not that bad. I know design is a subjective thing, but calling it a disaster is a bit too much, IMO.

I wouldn't care if they made it an option so people could choose "I want a chrome clone that doesn't violate my privacy" and get the chrome-ified UI, or choose either the 'Firefox menu' Office 2007-ish one, or the classic interface. Instead, they removed just about every customisability-related feature they could.

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#155

Post by SquareWheel »

blueskin_ wrote: post #149

Last version before they ruin their UI with Australis. Best way to delay the pain (and that of their general too-frequent breakage) is to switch to the ESR version: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all/ , which should give enough time for addon writers to undo the australis damage.

Spent 45 minutes playing with it after reading your comment and I absolutely love the new UI. Everything is so much more fluid and intuitive. The dev tools especially.

It might turn off some Firefox users but I really dig it.

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#156

Post by blueskin_ »

SquareWheel wrote: post #155
blueskin_ wrote: post #149

Last version before they ruin their UI with Australis. Best way to delay the pain (and that of their general too-frequent breakage) is to switch to the ESR version: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all/ , which should give enough time for addon writers to undo the australis damage.

Spent 45 minutes playing with it after reading your comment and I absolutely love the new UI. Everything is so much more fluid and intuitive. The dev tools especially. It might turn off some Firefox users but I really dig it.

Improved dev tools are a separate issue to removing every customisability option they could (small icons, status bar, the fscking ability to reorder toolbar items...)

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#157

Post by mercurial »

blueskin_ wrote: post #150
mrinterweb wrote: post #100

From what I can tell about the exploits found at Pwn2Own, there were a total of 4 critical. Looks like FF28 addresses all 4. That was a very quick turnaround. The fact that FF runs in a single process seems to be a major security issue since the web views are not sandboxed. I know Mozilla is working on their multiprocess project Electrolysis https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis that is experimental in FF 30. Hopeful…

Running in a single process (not strictly true; addons are in another) has a lot of performance benefits though. I can get Firefox up to ~1.2GB with a few hundred tabs; Chrome uses that much memory for about 20. Also, splitting process is bogosecurity like "I run SSH on a non-22 port". I thought the general consensus here is that security by obscurity is bad.

> I thought the general consensus here is that security by obscurity is bad.

How is running web views in separate processes "security by obscurity"? I agree that there is nothing inherently secure about it, though it has other benefits, but it doesn't increase obscurity as such (you could argue that the need for well-defined message-passing semantics leads to more decoupled code, decreasing 'obscurity').

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#158

Post by benjamincburns »

hobohacker wrote: post #111
wbond wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem intent on arguing about something I have never contested. I just made the (implied) observation that anyone deploying nginx shouldn't even bother enabling spdy in 1.4 (stable) because effectively nothing will use it anymore. It was something that people who use "stable" software were able to benefit from starting in May 2013, but it is now no longer and won't be again until nginx reaches 1.6. That is, unless…

Er, I thought I was agreeing with you. What do you think I'm arguing? To be clear, I view these two statements as grounded in the same logic, although perhaps one is more strongly worded than the other: Yours - "So unless someone has the resources to test and deploy unstable web servers, it effectively means you shouldn't bother with spdy at this point." Mine - "I think it's a fair assessment that supporting experime…

As an outside observer, it seems like this kind of pattern happens pretty regularly on HN. It's always kind of funny. There seems to be two distinct flavors:

Pattern 1:

    > Statement
    >> Counterstatement!
    >>> You're saying the same thing.
    >>>> I am? Oh. I *am*. Whoops!
Pattern 2:

    > Statement
    >> Agree with tone of disagreement.
    >>> Disagree on disagreement, while offering up facts to somehow agree *harder*
    >>>> Rebuttal, optional restatement of disagreement, optional statement(s) further
    >>>> reinforcing the common point on which we just can't agree to agree

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#159

Post by ris »

mrinterweb wrote: post #145
ris wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The fact that FF runs in a single process seems to be a major security issue since the web views are not sandboxed." Only to people who don't really understand security. This whole "multi process" "sandboxed" meme started by chrome guys has really got out of hand.

I suppose I was mislead by the mozilla wiki link I posted which states at the top "The goal of the project is to run web content in a separate process from Firefox itself. The two major advantages of this model are security and performance. Security would improve because the content processes could be sandboxed"

The effect is overstated & overrepeated, especially with facilities like e.g. ptrace being available to processes on linux

Re: Firefox 28 Release Notes

#160

Post by mraleph »

gsnedders wrote: post #130
Avshalom wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Octane was written by Google. So it's either: -representative of things Google knows it's faster at -representative of things Google thinks should be fast and prioritizes... and is thus faster. or a little of column A little of column b in a feedback loop.

Octane is the continuation of V8 benchmark (and contains all of the V8 benchmark tests) — V8 (the JS engine) was specifically designed to provide good performance on those tests (this is why V8 had a generational GC from launch, for example; though somewhat amusing last I checked Carakan (Opera/Presto's last JS engine) was quickest at splay, primarily a GC benchmark, despite having a very naïve GC!). The tests new in…

hint: Splay is a benchmark that penalizes generational GCs. If you have a fast mark-sweep GC with an aggressive growth policy you are going to totally rock it.
Post reply on HN