131–140 of 282 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Well, no. I don't want to use a browser that is developed by an advertising company ... on an operating system developed by the exact same advertising company?
If there was a viable competitor, I would consider using it. There isn't.
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…
Did they "break" - ie some bug caused a problem - or did they change the framework add-ons used after giving months of notice? Most users use no add-ons, and wouldn't notice the change, and many of those who do were aware of this ahead of time even if the add-on developers were slow to wake up to the reality.
[1]: https://github.com/Cookie-AutoDelete/Cookie-AutoDelete/issue...
[2]: https://www.ghacks.net/2017/12/01/noscripts-rating-drops-aft...
I love Firefox. First thing I install on any new computer. Super happy they keep pushing the web forward. Not a fan of the chromium quasi monopoly (not that the folks behind it are bad, just that any monoculture is problematic). Thanks for pushing the web forward!
> Thanks for pushing the web forward! Making a browser that breaks extensions used by millions of people (Vimperator comes to mind) and making extension development harder is not pushing the web forward.
Reality is, most popular add ons got ported very quickly, and the subsequent speed and reliability improvements for Firefox that would not have been possible while keeping the old extensions around have more than validated their decision.
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…
I originally commented there and expressed how they were underestimating the importance of ad blocking. One of the issues I pointed to as evidence (https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/96) has since been re-prioritized to Q3.
They seem to have heard the message.
Not sure if placebo but firefox nightly 70 is a looot more snappier than 69. Now I regret chrome almost not at all. Thanks for the hard work to all involved.
> Local files can no longer access other files in the same directory. What impact will this have on web development without a web server? It sounds like you won't be able to load CSS or JS.
As of today's upgrade opening file:///home/skx/bookmarks.html no longer loads the JS/data. Breaking the system:
https://github.com/skx/bookmarks.public
Adding a local webserver is fine, but it's a complication I'd managed to avoid.
For reference this is the error I get:
> Cross-Origin Request Blocked:
> The Same Origin Policy disallows reading the remote resource at
> file:////home/skx/bookmarks.data.
> (Reason: CORS request not http).
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…
Did they "break" - ie some bug caused a problem - or did they change the framework add-ons used after giving months of notice? Most users use no add-ons, and wouldn't notice the change, and many of those who do were aware of this ahead of time even if the add-on developers were slow to wake up to the reality.
48 months.. 2 years of notice
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a shame it hasn't made it over to Mac yet - graphics card options are a lot more limited there so you'd figure it would be easier to support. But I suppose it's a much smaller market share.
There is a known severe performance issue on MacBooks with retina screens and integrated Intel graphics which this is suppose to be the solution to. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to have driven macOS to be a priority for the rollout.