Firefox 91 • Hacker News Board

Re: Firefox 91

#171

Post by alpaca128 » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 4:47 PM UTC

FiveOhThree wrote: post #94

jseigj43 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If UI changes needed everyone's approval, we would still be looking like a 1990's browser.

True, but if you're running a beta test and the feedback is negative, you can't be surprised that people don't feel "respected" when you decide to push the change anyway.

Every UI change has negative feedback to some degree because a part of the user base just doesn't like change.

Overall FF is just as usable as the decade before in my opinion. And I kind of like the new tab design. The old super rounded tabs looked great for a while but it was time for a change.

I'm not a designer, but in my experience it helps to change up user interfaces now and then. However I wish we as users had more control over that. Color themes are not enough.

Re: Firefox 91

#172

Post by JohnTHaller » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 4:52 PM UTC

wayneftw wrote: post #169

brink wrote: post #28

So much negativity. Just here to report that I am a happy Firefox user, no complaints here. Thank you Mozilla for making a browser that respects me.

On the contrary - HN articles about Firefox are always overrun by positively breathless supporters of Firefox and nothing is different here today. The real negativity can be seen in the market that largely rejected this garbage browser.

Or the fact that Google and Microsoft used their monopoly power and dark patterns to do it. Google asked every Firefox user to 'upgrade' to Chrome on all their properties, didn't work as hard to ensure Firefox compatibility leading to worse performance, and bundled Chrome with all kinds of stuff like Adobe Flash updates for Firefox to trick users into installing it (I uninstalled it from my Mom's PC 4 times). Microsoft resets default browser preferences or 'suggests' you switch to Edge for better insert random thing here pretty regularly as well. Mozilla has no such monopoly position to leverage.

Re: Firefox 91

#173

Post by beeboop » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 4:54 PM UTC

brink wrote: post #28

So much negativity. Just here to report that I am a happy Firefox user, no complaints here. Thank you Mozilla for making a browser that respects me.

Same. Works perfect for me. It uses way more battery life on my M1 Macbook Air than Safari, which I wish wasn't the case. But I refuse to use Chrome because of Google's awful privacy track record.

Re: Firefox 91

#174

Post by warabe » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 4:57 PM UTC

brink wrote: post #28

So much negativity. Just here to report that I am a happy Firefox user, no complaints here. Thank you Mozilla for making a browser that respects me.

This, 100%

uBlock works best in Firefox, and that is enough reason to keep using Firefox.

Re: Firefox 91

#175

Post by afterburner » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

warabe wrote: post #174

brink wrote: post #28

So much negativity. Just here to report that I am a happy Firefox user, no complaints here. Thank you Mozilla for making a browser that respects me.

This, 100% uBlock works best in Firefox, and that is enough reason to keep using Firefox.

Why, what happens to uBlock on chrome?

Re: Firefox 91

#176

Post by wintermutestwin » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

5e92cb50239222b wrote: post #165

wintermutestwin wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Changing menu item names and locations is just stupid. A month later and I am still looking for "Undo Close Tab." Was it really that important to change the name to "Reopen Closed Tab?"

Just learn the shortcuts. It's ctrl+shift+t. I've been using it for 16+ years and have no idea how it's called now, or how it was called before. ctrl+shift+n to reopen the last window.

If the shortcut isn't listed next to the menu option, I'm never going to learn it unless I need to use it constantly. The top level menu items show the shortcuts but the context menu items don't! Inconsistent!

The funny thing is that I just tried to find the "shortcuts" list for Firefox and is is nowhere to be found in their menu or in Preferences! Do I need to find it on some webpage?!?

Re: Firefox 91

#177

Post by warabe » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 5:00 PM UTC

afterburner wrote: post #175

warabe wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, 100% uBlock works best in Firefox, and that is enough reason to keep using Firefox.

Why, what happens to uBlock on chrome?

please refer to the following article by gorhill. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

Re: Firefox 91

#178

Post by GNOMES » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 5:00 PM UTC

sanatgersappa wrote: post #97

shell0x wrote: post #33

My favorite thing about Firefox is the "Multi-Account Containers" extension. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account... It's really handy when having a private Microsoft account as well as an enterprise account. If I don't use this, my MS sessions get all mixed up.

My fav feature is the Temporary Containers extension. Using that, I never run out of my quota of "free" articles on news sites that keep count.

... that is a brilliant use case for that.

Re: Firefox 91

#179

Post by jffry » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 5:36 PM UTC

viseztrance wrote: post #101

ddek wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the ability to disable proton was removed a while ago. Or maybe in this release. I'm on FF-developer, which is ahead a bit.

For what is worth, I have disabled it in firefox 90 in about:config.

I did as well; Firefox 91 no longer has that option. You'll be Proton-ified if you upgrade.

Re: Firefox 91

#180

Post by Dylan16807 » Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 5:42 PM UTC

q3k wrote: post #22

nanis wrote: post #4

> HTTPS-First Policy: Firefox Private Browsing windows now attempt to make all connections to websites secure, and fall back to insecure connections only when websites do not support it. Hmmmm ... Does this mean "HTTPS Everywhere" is no longer needed?[1] And, of course, it freaks out with the previously saved self-signed cert installed on my WiFi router. ... sigh [1]: https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere

I hope it's not. The assumption that whatever is being served on :443 is HTTPS with the same content as what is being served on :80 HTTP is wrong. It might practically be true >99% of the time, but some websites will still break for no good reason.

TLS is a good reason.