Very excited to see hash-source being implemented and enabled. This means you can load files from a CDN and have their integrity checked by the client so the CDN cannot trick the user.
Hope to see this land in Chrome.
Firefox 31.0
131–137 of 137 posts
Re: Firefox 31.0
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you please provide some decent examples that would convince a Firebug fan from the beginning to uninstall it? :)
For me Firebug seems ~2x as slow (eg, for a 1s operation in native tools, firebug takes 2s). Opening Firebug on my workstation causes a noticable pause in all activity on page for several seconds, while opening the native tools only takes about half a second. All of Firefox's dev tools are still a ways from being as fast and bug-free as the Webkit tools (both Chrome and Safari). I can't cite specific examples since I…
Speed is a good point, I'll give the native tools in FF 31.0 a try. Moreover, I'm curious if the built-in profiler is any good as YSlow for Firebug?
Btw, here's a discussion that I found to be interesting as well: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19180494/which-advantages...
Re: Firefox 31.0
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
I work on the desktop performance team and my job is to address performance issues. It is mistaken to suggest that we don't care about performance and responsiveness.
Can you please address why we haven't seen much progress, even after so many years? You and others involved with Firefox may choose to deny it, but a lot of people still find recent versions of Firefox to be slow and/or to suffer from stability problems. For example, just look at the discussion at Slashdot today about the Firefox 31 release: http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/07/22/1918237/firefox-31-r... Here are som…
I have never denied anything and I do not appreciate you making such accusations toward me. Having said that, I have a few remarks about this post:
1) People making vague complaints on discussion forums or social media is not going to get the right information to the right people. We can't fix problems by spending all our time scavenging (HN|reddit|slashdot|whatever) for complaints. Even if we could, they wouldn't contain enough information to act on them. It's super important for the community to help us out: If you are having performance problems, you absolutely need to be filing them at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?format=guided
2) Just like any other type of bug, we cannot do anything about people's problems unless we know what is wrong. Ideally we would have information about the user's hardware and OS, which extensions they have installed (and better yet, is it reproducible with no extensions at all), steps to reproduce and diagnostic information to help us.
about:memory and the Gecko profiler (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Performance...) are essential tools that we provide for diagnosing this stuff. If you're savvy enough to be reading HN, you're savvy enough to use those, and you should attach output from those tools to the memory/perf bugs that you file.
3) For people who are not tech savvy, we try our best to analyze telemetry information on their behalf, but for privacy reasons we only do so on the release channel if users opt in. The more users that opt in to telemetry, the better the data that we receive.
4) Finally, IMHO many people need to come to grips with the fact that modern web browsers are much more complex and capable than their pioneers were. I see lots of complaining from people who want their browser to have the same memory footprint as Netscape 2.0 and that just isn't reasonable.
Re: Firefox 31.0
#134I want to use Firefox (OS X), and with almost every release I give it a go but it's simply too slow in comparison to Chrome. I'm talking about actions you do multiple times an hour - opening a new tab, closing a tab, rearranging tabs etc. This is with no extensions in use, on a mid-2011 fully specced out macbook air. It's unfortunate but the lag is clear and I can't use it as my primary when I know a better solution…
I run it on a macbook white plastic (old). Firefox runs well. It does get tired sometimes (around 3pm). I usually go to about:memory and clean up. That or restart it.
> runs well. It does get tired sometimes
Haha, that really brightened up my morning :)
Re: Firefox 31.0
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently (this past week) got a brand new MBPr, 16G RAM, etc. FF provides a better experience Chrome, still. So, once again, anecdote and data and all that jazz.
Maybe you and others in the Firefox community don't realize this, but this isn't about counting "anecdotes" or anything like that. This is about users having bad experiences when using Firefox. Your positive experience in no way negates these bad experiences.
> Maybe you and others in the Firefox community don't realize this...
We do.
> This is about users having bad experiences when using Firefox.
Every company creates bad experiences for some users. Hell, I've had bad experiences with Apple technical support, the apparent gold-standard of customer support.
> Your positive experience in no way negates these bad experiences.
And vice-versa. So what? What's the point? If I can't share my positive experience, they can't share their negative ones?
Maybe you think comments like "My experience was bad" is helpful and worthwhile. Maybe. But only if the inverse is true.
So, don't complain when people share anecdotes you don't like. Either accept them, or don't.
Re: Firefox 31.0
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Features/Application_Reput... * 47% improvement in malware detection with the current implementation * 87% improvement in malware detection possible when the feature is complete I can see why that trade-off was made.
> I can see why that trade-off was made. But why not allow users to make their own choice and disable the privacy compromise easily?
They already do? There's a switch in the preferences.
Re: Firefox 31.0
#137http://monica-at-mozilla.blogspot.it/2014/07/download-files-...
"What happens when you download malware? Firefox checks URLs associated with the download against a local Safe Browsing blocklist. If the binary is signed, Firefox checks the verified signature against a local allowlist of known good publishers. If no match is found, Firefox 32 and later queries the Safe Browsing service with download metadata (NB: this happens only on Windows, because signature verification APIs to suppress remote lookups are only available on Windows). In case malware is detected, the Download Manager will block access to the downloaded file and remove it from disk, displaying an error in the Downloads Panel below.
How can I turn this feature off? This feature respects the existing Safe Browsing preference for malware detection, so if you’ve already turned that off, there’s nothing further to do. Below is a screenshot of the new, beautiful in-content preferences (Preferences > Security) with all Safe Browsing integration turned off. I strongly recommend against turning off malware detection, but if you decide to do so, keep in mind that phishing detection also relies on Safe Browsing."