Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 68.0

mozilla.org

121–130 of 282 posts

Re: Firefox 68.0

#121
post #32

I'll be downvoted to Hell for this, but I don't care. With each subsequent release of Firefox, I'm consistently happy that I've moved to Pale Moon. The nonsense they're adding and the problems that Mozilla has to "fix" seem more often than not to be brought on themselves with the rapid-release and the move away from being Firefox to being "almost Chrome". The move to multi-process (which has introduced memory leaks),…

This reads far better without the first sentence.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#122
post #79
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uBlock Origin is the only reason I use Firefox on Android. Mozilla broke extensions on desktop Firefox before and lost many users. Can't help but wonder what the hell are their product managers thinking? How can I recommend Firefox if they keep breaking it with little regard for users? Is there another browser that supports uBlock Origin for Android? I'm not talking about biased half baked built-in ad blockers, I wan…

Kiwi Browser (Chromium-based) runs Nano Adblocker and uBlock Origin with full support (like on Firefox)

Thanks! I'm investigating it and sadly it seems a bit stale with last commit made 5 months ago: https://github.com/kiwibrowser/android

For browsers this seems like a bit too long without updates. I can imagine maintaining such project is demanding but hopefully the project can gain more attention now with the new version of Firefox breaking extensions on Android.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#123
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me the writing has been on the wall ever since the community said "Hey these webextensions can't do nearly as many things as the old ones" and Mozilla's response to that was "Go fuck yourselves." So now I have to do what I do on my desktop: Chromium for casual browsing and an old non-crippled version of Firefox for getting things done. Thankfully I only buy phones I can root and block ads system-wide. From Firefox…

> Mozilla's response to that was "Go fuck yourselves." Do you have a source for that or are you just making things up? My observation was that Mozilla consistently responded to complaints from extension authors by implemented new apis for their webextension implementation to allow extensions to be ported. That's pretty far away from "Go Fuck Yourselves." > Mozilla introduced many new WebExtensions APIs in Firefox 57…

Then why can extensions still not customize the UI, even for something as simple as putting the tabs below the address and bookmarks bar?

Re: Firefox 68.0

#124

This marks the last Android release with extensions/add-on support. There will not be a 69 release of this edition of Firefox for Android ("Fennec"). The new remake of the mobile browser ("Fenix") does not have extensions support and it is on an indefinite and easily ignorable backlog. It is explicitly not being worked on this quarter. At the end of this quarter is the scheduled release of Firefox 69. Unless there's…

I don't understand why this comment is currently ranked so highly. It is based on pure conjecture, goes against what Mozilla has publicly stated, and assumes Mozilla is working in bad faith to deceptively drop add-on support.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#125

This marks the last Android release with extensions/add-on support. There will not be a 69 release of this edition of Firefox for Android ("Fennec"). The new remake of the mobile browser ("Fenix") does not have extensions support and it is on an indefinite and easily ignorable backlog. It is explicitly not being worked on this quarter. At the end of this quarter is the scheduled release of Firefox 69. Unless there's…

The amount of FUD in this post is astounding. Here's relevant github issue: https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/662#issuecomm...

Re: Firefox 68.0

#126

There are two things keeping me using Chrome. 1) Videostreams are way smoother using Chrome, at least on Linux. 2) I've enabled Emacs Input in Gnome. When I enter something in the address bar, both Firefox and Chrome show suggestions for websites below. In Chrome I can type Ctrl+n / Ctrl+p to navigate between the suggestions, because it respects my keyboard schema. In Firefox this opens new browser windows :( and I'v…

>Videostreams are way smoother using Chrome, at least on Linux.

This is also the reason I use Chromium. I'd switch to Firefox as soon as it supports VA-API on GNU/Linux.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#127
post #115

This marks the last Android release with extensions/add-on support. There will not be a 69 release of this edition of Firefox for Android ("Fennec"). The new remake of the mobile browser ("Fenix") does not have extensions support and it is on an indefinite and easily ignorable backlog. It is explicitly not being worked on this quarter. At the end of this quarter is the scheduled release of Firefox 69. Unless there's…

This is a lot of FUD. Making a browser is hard, and making a modular browser is harder. It's clearly on their list of things to do, but it's behind all the other "making a browser" things.

[deleted]

Re: Firefox 68.0

#128

This marks the last Android release with extensions/add-on support. There will not be a 69 release of this edition of Firefox for Android ("Fennec"). The new remake of the mobile browser ("Fenix") does not have extensions support and it is on an indefinite and easily ignorable backlog. It is explicitly not being worked on this quarter. At the end of this quarter is the scheduled release of Firefox 69. Unless there's…

"Fenix MVP will not replace Fennec" (MVP meaning "Minimum Viable Product").

https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/662#issuecomm...

I'm sure Fennec users will not be migrated to Fenix until extensions are supported. This would be a big fuck up and Mozilla is aware of this.

Linked bugs about the user agent seem irrelevant to this issue.

Everything will be okay. You can sleep on both ears.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#129
post #120

This marks the last Android release with extensions/add-on support. There will not be a 69 release of this edition of Firefox for Android ("Fennec"). The new remake of the mobile browser ("Fenix") does not have extensions support and it is on an indefinite and easily ignorable backlog. It is explicitly not being worked on this quarter. At the end of this quarter is the scheduled release of Firefox 69. Unless there's…

And the other point of view: > We're certainly aware of how significant ad blocking extensions are. This release required a great quantity of features with only a six month timeline until now. > We already support a very limited set of the WebExtensions API to offer features like Reader Mode. Rest assured that more features will land in the coming months. Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20298143 This rea…

> This reads like FUD to me. The dev team know how important extensions are to their users.

Just because they know how important it is doesn't mean they care.

I'm sure Google also knew how important ad blocking was to many Chrome users when they decided to remove that functionality from their browser, too.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#130
post #71

This marks the last Android release with extensions/add-on support. There will not be a 69 release of this edition of Firefox for Android ("Fennec"). The new remake of the mobile browser ("Fenix") does not have extensions support and it is on an indefinite and easily ignorable backlog. It is explicitly not being worked on this quarter. At the end of this quarter is the scheduled release of Firefox 69. Unless there's…

uBlock Origin is the only reason I use Firefox on Android. Mozilla broke extensions on desktop Firefox before and lost many users. Can't help but wonder what the hell are their product managers thinking? How can I recommend Firefox if they keep breaking it with little regard for users? Is there another browser that supports uBlock Origin for Android? I'm not talking about biased half baked built-in ad blockers, I wan…

I was skeptical of the move to Firefox Quantum originally because of the extension-breaking, but after it happened, I can see the motivation: after upgrading, Firefox got a lot faster and less prone to memory leaks for me, at least on macOS. As I understand it, the performance improvements in the new Quantum engine were incompatible with the way the old extension API worked, so a new one needed to be introduced. To me the tradeoff was worth it, because the increasing sluggishness of FF compared to Chrome, pre-Quantum, was making it harder to stick with.
Post reply on HN