Live data from Hacker News

Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

discourse.mozilla.org

11–20 of 220 posts

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#11

That's not true. It's more that Mozilla white lists only very few of the addons for the mobile browser. The fork Iceraven whitelists/allow all (?) of the addons (not all work fully, so the whitelist has a purpose): https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser

Yes, I thought it was odd, since I certainly use ublock origin right now. It is the reason I stick with Firefox on Android in the first place.

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#12
This sucks because it also means no one is making add-ons for mobile, it's more of an accident that we even have ublock. There's use cases that the Firefox team will not work on for decades that could be filled by add-ons if they just told people to go wild, absolute top of the list being text reflow to prevent having to scroll sideways to read long text. Opera is still the only browser that does it for some reason years on, but it gets worse every update.

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#13
post #2

Mozilla doesn't seem to have a clue why people prefer firefox. It's not because of privacy or security, though that's nice. It's certainly not because it behaves similarly to chrome. It was always the extensibility. The power of plugins that allowed adblocking to be invented on firefox. They threw that away in the name of security and supposed clean code. Clean code doesn't get you users.

Yeah, when they did the big performance rewrite(quantum?) and killed pentadactyl (vim mode), I was really upset. I remember using Firefox 52-esr for as long as I could to keep my workflow the same.

In my mind, that was peak Firefox. Yes performance wasn't great, but I didn't care. It was good enough and I mostly browsed with JavaScript disabled.

The new vim mode plugins can't compete with the old plugins because they are much more restricted in what they can do.

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#14
post #5
post #2

Mozilla doesn't seem to have a clue why people prefer firefox. It's not because of privacy or security, though that's nice. It's certainly not because it behaves similarly to chrome. It was always the extensibility. The power of plugins that allowed adblocking to be invented on firefox. They threw that away in the name of security and supposed clean code. Clean code doesn't get you users.

I'm a decade-long user and am perfectly fine with modern Firefox (plus uBlock), both on the desktop and on Android. In fact, I don't want to go back to the before-times. Speak for yourself.

Don't worry, he's speaking for the majority of long term firefox users. You're the exception. I started using Firefox when it was Gecko/Phoenix in 2002, then Firebird, then Firefox. I started using it because it was so customizable. I stopped using it at version 37 in 2015 because that was when Mozilla destroyed the browser by removing user freedoms to install their own add-ons without Mozilla's approval. And no, using Nightly (alpha renamed aurora renamed nightly) is not an option because it is extremely crashy on non-standard OS/Distros.

Since 2015 Firefox has become rapidly less capable and rapidly more 'secure' for non-technical users. It's just not what I or the original userbase want. But like with all things Mozilla (including the original employees and CEO) we've been replaced. There's plenty of users who just want Chrome that's not labeled Chrome and Firefox modern gives it to them.

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#15
I use iceraven to get around some of these limitations. Addons that I needed(privacy redirect) work great: https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser.

From the github link : The ability to attempt to install a much longer list of add-ons than Mozilla's Fenix version of Firefox accepts. Currently the browser queries this AMO collection Most of them will not work, because they depend on code that Mozilla is still working on writing in android-components, but you may attempt to install them. If you don't see an add-on you want, you can request it.

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#16
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a decade-long user and am perfectly fine with modern Firefox (plus uBlock), both on the desktop and on Android. In fact, I don't want to go back to the before-times. Speak for yourself.

Speaking for myself, I wish I could run more addons in Firefox for Android than just uBlock Origin. (I'm a 15+ year user, I started using it when I discovered I could run it off a flash drive on locked-down shared computers.)

Ditto... For example. They allow NoScript, but they blocked Custom Style Script, Tampermonkey/Violentmonkey, Old Reddit Redirect all of which I used for small tweaks to common sites with poor non-JS CSS defaults to make NoScript more usable.

They also blocked about:config (fixed by using F-Droid Fennec). I also lost functionality that I had relied on (not going to turn this into a rant on that - and that's probably due to the rewrite, but it's still unfortunate).

Here are the addons I'm still miss post change. There's been no modifications to the list since. "View Source" "Tampermonkey" "Old Reddit Redirect" "Custom Style Script" "Android PDF.js" "uMatrix" "Alt Text Viewer"

The only one they had an adequate replacement for was "Dark Mode" - "Dark Reader" does basically same job with slightly less convenient UI. "Dark Reader" is also an extremely crude alternative for custom CSS.

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#17

That's not true. It's more that Mozilla white lists only very few of the addons for the mobile browser. The fork Iceraven whitelists/allow all (?) of the addons (not all work fully, so the whitelist has a purpose): https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser

"the whitelist has a purpose" doesn't really capture what's going on, though. It's more like they whitelisted some of the most popular extensions and then just stopped completely with no intention of continuing.

With the much more limited plugin API (and simple html plug-in config pages) of the new browsers you'd think it would be easier to build and vet secure, cross platform add-ons.

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#18

That's not true. It's more that Mozilla white lists only very few of the addons for the mobile browser. The fork Iceraven whitelists/allow all (?) of the addons (not all work fully, so the whitelist has a purpose): https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser

Yes, I thought it was odd, since I certainly use ublock origin right now. It is the reason I stick with Firefox on Android in the first place.

Same, but it would be nice if all the plugins worked instead of the few that are whitelisted.

Re: Add-on support in new Firefox for Android (2021)

#19
post #2

Mozilla doesn't seem to have a clue why people prefer firefox. It's not because of privacy or security, though that's nice. It's certainly not because it behaves similarly to chrome. It was always the extensibility. The power of plugins that allowed adblocking to be invented on firefox. They threw that away in the name of security and supposed clean code. Clean code doesn't get you users.

Mozilla lost the plot the day they decided chasing Chrome was more important than appealing to their actual userbase. That was about the time they started incrementing version numbers every six weeks and rendered the numbers meaningless.
Post reply on HN