Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 69.0 Released

mozilla.org

131–140 of 331 posts

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#131

> macOS users on dual-graphics-card machines (like MacBook Pro) will switch back to the low-power GPU more aggressively, saving battery life. macOS user base can now consider FF as a viable browser alternative.

Does anyone know the technical reason that the OS can't handle that itself?

Not using OSX, but I have some ideas.

An app tells an OS it gonna use OpenGL to 3D render stuff. Generally, the OS doesn’t know whether it’s a competitive 3D shooter where each FPS really matters, or a web browser which only uses OpenGL to render a few textured quads. If the OS will default to slower integrated GPU, users will be unhappy, they want 3D performance. So the OSes typically power up the faster GPU in such cases.

On dual-GPU Windows laptop, nVidia partially solves this in their drivers, they have very long list of process names saying which ones are games or other 3D intense apps.

It usually works but very far from being 100% reliable. It requires GPU drivers to be updated regularly. For cases when it fails even with latest drivers, they have multiple methods for user to select the GPU. They implemented context menu on .exe files “Run with graphic processor” with 2 further options, for nVidia and Intel GPUs. They implemented GUI for users to customize that apps list. They also implemented a proprietary API for programmers to customize that list in code, I’m using this method in the installer of a CAD/CAM app I’ve developed.

These things cause quite a lot of complexity, both software bloat, and UI clutter. Traditionally, Apple wants the GUI to be clean. AFAIK they don’t push driver updates, and they avoid UI clutter even if it means some power users won’t get some advanced settings they might like.

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#132
post #7

> Firefox no longer loads userChrome.css or userContent.css by default improving start-up performance. Users who wish to customize Firefox by using these files can set the toolkit.legacyUserProfileCustomizations.stylesheets preference to true to restore this ability. How much of a performance improvement does this make?

> How much of a performance improvement does this make?

For a user with an SSD, perhaps not much. But there are still a lot of users out there with magnetic hard drives. Firefox has to do a decent amount of I/O at startup, and unneeded disk seeks add up for these users.

In addition, Firefox formerly checked for these files on the main thread, which is especially bad for performance. (Firefox engineer Mike Conley wrote about this at length at https://mikeconley.ca/blog/2019/05/16/a-few-words-on-main-th...)

If you read through the related bug (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1541233), you can see that folks went to some trouble to keep anything from breaking for people using these files today. The claims that this is a step toward removing the files completely is FUD.

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fantastic news for people, like me, who spend a lot of time with $10/GB hotspot data prices. I'd click a link to a 5KB news article only to find it streaming HD video of talking heads reading the article.

> 5KB news article On what site do you find "5KB news articles"? Pretty much all news sites that I know of load a gigantic amount of useless and obnoxious JavaScript, CSS, images, etc. with or without video.

NPR + rejecting cookies under their GDPR scheme makes the page a dream.

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#134
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Also they promised to open source Pocket in 2017, but seem to have zero intention of doing it. Zero intention of doing so or just have yet to do so? Did they say they were no longer considering the option?

It's been 2 years. They have no specific plans to release the server code.[1] They won't say what's been done or has to be done. [1] https://github.com/Pocket/extension-save-to-pocket/issues/75

On a software product note, "Pocket", the client-side product that does local-only interest analysis so it can get a full list of interesting articles from the server, and then locally filter out all the stuff you probably don't care about, is not "the server application that accepts volutary user submission analysis to determine what goes on the API response list with which categories".

No one ever talked about open sourcing the service that the pocket client relies on, as far as I can remember.

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From here [1]: For new users who install and download Firefox for the first time, Enhanced Tracking Protection will automatically be set on by default as part of the ‘Standard’ setting in the browser and will block known “third-party tracking cookies” according to the Disconnect list. We talk more about tracking cookies here. Enhanced Tracking Protection will be practically invisible to you and you’ll only notice tha…

This isn't really explaining the "how" to me though. The way I remember it is, as the page host I have a cookie on you. Then I drop in a 1-pixel image to a third party, and in the query string to it I write in a hashed form of the cookie I have for you. That HTTP request then itself can go through the cookie process, but for the third party. They then check their DB for both their own issued cookie and the value you…

Yeah, it doesn't seem that merely blocking third party cookies can address a scenario like this, where the main site colludes with the third party tracking site.

To avoid this, it still seems like the best approach is to use an ad blocker add-on like uBlock Origin, which will block any content from known tracking domains from being loaded. That should get rid of the third party image.

There's also uMatrix (from the maker of uBlock Origin), which can selectively block images, scripts, etc. from third party sites.

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fantastic news for people, like me, who spend a lot of time with $10/GB hotspot data prices. I'd click a link to a 5KB news article only to find it streaming HD video of talking heads reading the article.

> 5KB news article On what site do you find "5KB news articles"? Pretty much all news sites that I know of load a gigantic amount of useless and obnoxious JavaScript, CSS, images, etc. with or without video.

There is still a text only version of NPR that is exceptionally lightweight.

https://text.npr.org/

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#137

> The Block Autoplay feature is enhanced to give users the option to block any video that automatically starts playing, not just those that automatically play with sound. Good. I know a news website that was on purpose disabling sound on videos to prevent that. So not only does it autoplay, you need to click to unmute anyway to actually hear it! Why do news websites want to shove autoplaying videos on people's throat…

Glad. I do affiliate marketing, and as part of my research into this area I have to look at hundreds of landing pages with talking heads explaining how to buy cheap cialis. One notable ploy they use is autoplaying audio & video to grab your attention. Little do they realize that users instantly find the offending video and close the tab. Autoplay actually increases the churn rate.

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#138

> The Block Autoplay feature is enhanced to give users the option to block any video that automatically starts playing, not just those that automatically play with sound. Good. I know a news website that was on purpose disabling sound on videos to prevent that. So not only does it autoplay, you need to click to unmute anyway to actually hear it! Why do news websites want to shove autoplaying videos on people's throat…

Video codecs compress better than GIFs, so auto playing video elements can be used for this.

But why does a news article need video?

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#139

> The Block Autoplay feature is enhanced to give users the option to block any video that automatically starts playing, not just those that automatically play with sound. Good. I know a news website that was on purpose disabling sound on videos to prevent that. So not only does it autoplay, you need to click to unmute anyway to actually hear it! Why do news websites want to shove autoplaying videos on people's throat…

> Why do news websites want to shove autoplaying videos on people's throats so much Advertising metrics. > And why do news websites even care about doing shoving it to the small percentage of people who actually bother to disable autoplay in their browser? I believe autoplay is off by default on mobile, so it's a significant market.

[deleted]

Re: Firefox 69.0 Released

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fantastic news for people, like me, who spend a lot of time with $10/GB hotspot data prices. I'd click a link to a 5KB news article only to find it streaming HD video of talking heads reading the article.

> 5KB news article On what site do you find "5KB news articles"? Pretty much all news sites that I know of load a gigantic amount of useless and obnoxious JavaScript, CSS, images, etc. with or without video.

HN comments? It's as much "news" as the vast majority of major sites...
Post reply on HN