Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

discourse.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 220 posts

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

#141

Post by throwaway0x7E6 »

dblohm7 wrote: post #130
throwaway0x7E6 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they know it. that's why they've killed XUL. that's why they're going even further by enforcing an inferior extension standard from their supposed competitor. that's why they've killed off the extensions and about:config for the android version. that's why you can't even use a private extension on desktop without jumping through the hoops. that's why usercss (toolkit.legacyUserProfileCustomizations.stylesheets - lega…

No. > that's why they've killed XUL We couldn't deliver a multiprocess browser without doing it. > about:config for the android version I completely supported this and continue to do so. GeckoView on Android works completely differently than desktop Firefox, and about:config's semantics are not identical between the two. A few of us were interested in offering an alternative that gave users a way to make adjustments…

>We couldn't deliver a multiprocess browser without doing it.

even if the management understood that advanced extensions were a major factor for choosing Firefox over the alternatives and were willing to dedicate enough time/people/money to tackling the issue?

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

#142

Post by dblohm7 »

throwaway0x7E6 wrote: post #141
dblohm7 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. > that's why they've killed XUL We couldn't deliver a multiprocess browser without doing it. > about:config for the android version I completely supported this and continue to do so. GeckoView on Android works completely differently than desktop Firefox, and about:config's semantics are not identical between the two. A few of us were interested in offering an alternative that gave users a way to make adjustments…

>We couldn't deliver a multiprocess browser without doing it. even if the management understood that advanced extensions were a major factor for choosing Firefox over the alternatives and were willing to dedicate enough time/people/money to tackling the issue?

Yes. It was an intractable problem.

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

#143

Post by OkayPhysicist »

sillystuff wrote: post #122
slightwinder wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was always the extensibility. Going by the numbers, that's far from the truth. Majority of user never used addons, not even adblockers. Even the most popular addons are only used by a small minority of users. I'm also a big addon-user and complain what firefox has lost over time. But we should also admit that we are a minority, and addons are simply not the major selling point for a mainstream product's success.

> Majority of user never used addons Do they get those numbers via telemetry or from the server-side? If the former, those stats may be skewed by the overlap between the users who use several extensions and those who disable all telemetry. In a mozilla bug report where they discuss removing user.js, they point to telemetry that indicates that no one uses this functionality. I'd argue that the Venn diagram between use…

I suspect that this actually explains a lot of Mozilla's decision making that seems utterly disconnected from their userbase. They don't seem to realize that compared to Chrome, their userbase is disproportionately tech savvy enough to reject telemetry. They talk about the importance of privacy and security and whatnot, but then make all their decisions based around the behavior of the people that don't care about their privacy.

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

#144

Post by xigoi »

sbernecchia wrote: post #49
nick__m wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use this ! When this was released I switch back from IceRaven to Firefox as I prefer a browser that receives timely updates.

then you could try fennec from f-droid, which enables custom extensions and about:config, but unlike iceraven is compiled from firefox stable release, so it is updated shortly after a new firefox stable release.

Last time I used Fennec, it had the same extension whitelist as Firefox. Did that change?

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

#145

Post by jacooper »

moonshinefe wrote: post #42

I like using Firefox on Android because uBlock origin makes mobile browsing at least tolerable and it lets me use the "desktop mode" view on certain sites so e.g. I can listen to youtube playlists even if the phone is locked without paying for a premium service (for what I consider basic functionality). Surprised to hear literally the sole reason I use it on mobile is also neglected. Do they think they're going to ou…

Brave exists, its both faster and more stable than Firefox on android, and has the same ad block functionality.

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

#146

Post by krzyk »

yoasif_ wrote: post #71
pessimizer wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even worse in what regard? Did you reply to the right comment? Chrome imitates Chrome far better than Firefox does. I just don't think they can catch up at this point. edit: maybe you meant addons? Chrome has more addons, with more users, updated more often. Chrome fails at ublock because it wants to, but as long as you're not messing with Google's core business, Chrome is (of course) going to be better off than the…

More addons on mobile?

Chrome has any addons on mobile?

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

#147

Post by jacooper »

yoasif_ wrote: post #68
thinkingemote wrote: post #25

I was writing an extension for Firefox mobile to improve HN a bit to make it work nicer on mobile. Then whoops Firefox no longer does extensions really. * Such a wasted missed opportunity for the mobile web. FF could and still might be able to recognise the utility. (* Yes I can install it via developer mode I think, but it was for you too)

FWIW, people that want to run extensions can either use Fennec (the F-Droid fork, not the old Firefox for Android) or Nightly versions. There are developers targeting this stuff - I wrote about some here: https://www.quippd.com/writing/2022/01/26/most-wanted-add-on...

Or you can just use Kiwi browser, which supports full Chrome extensions.

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

#149

Post by capitainenemo »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #28
TrianguloY wrote: post #22

Fenix is basically a whole new browser, and that means that all features need to be implemented again (which takes a lot of time, and I don't think Firefox developers have much of it). Lots of Fennec features are still missing (view source code, save as pdf, install general addons, the whole about:config...). Why they changed is a mystery, maybe the old browser had a core privacy bug or something that couldn't be fix…

Another fun missing feature is the ability to delete cookies for a site.

Another missing cool feature from old Firefox for mobile was ability to remove a site url from suggest and history just by long touching on it, which seems to have entirely purged it from the places db.

In fact, the new one doesn't remove things from suggest even if you remove it from your browser history manually, which is also really only convenient to do if you accessed it recently. If you don't want things spamming up suggest, the only option is to use private browsing or wipe your entire history.

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

#150

Post by throwaway0x7E6 »

dblohm7 wrote: post #142
throwaway0x7E6 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We couldn't deliver a multiprocess browser without doing it. even if the management understood that advanced extensions were a major factor for choosing Firefox over the alternatives and were willing to dedicate enough time/people/money to tackling the issue?

Yes. It was an intractable problem.

well, shit. I concede that particular point then.

my presumption of malice was primarily based on what followed - crippled android addons, forced addon signing on non-Nightly, upcoming adoption of manifest v3. put together, the poweruser experience we had in 2015 is better than the one we have now. and unlike XUL, the only explanation I see for all of these is either malice or stupidity.

Post reply on HN