Live data from Hacker News

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

discourse.mozilla.org

201–210 of 220 posts

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

#201
post #192

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…

> I can listen to youtube playlists even if the phone is locked without paying for a premium service (for what I consider basic functionality). "Video Background Play Fix" extension is available for FF on Android.

… and to circle back to the original topic: Even though "Video Background Play Fix" is a plain simple page script that doesn't even have any UI nor uses any other special Webextension APIs it still took quite a while for it to be finally whitelisted.

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

#202

That's not true. It's more that Mozilla white lists only very few of the addons for the mobile browser. The fork Iceraven whitelists/allow all (?) of the addons (not all work fully, so the whitelist has a purpose): https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser

> "not all work fully, so the whitelist has a purpose"

Fennec only supported a limited (perhaps slightly larger than what is currently supported) subset of the Webextension API, too, and yet there were no artificial restrictions on add-on installation.

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

#203
post #96

I've closely been following Mobile Firefox development over the past year - this browser is dead, like totally dead. Bug reports pile up, nothing is really fixed, a ton of commits about telemetry, some commits here and there changing certain UI elements, some refactoring, almost nothing else. Go check its revision history all you want: https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/commits/main Mozilla has seemingly totally…

That's because actual browser development doesn't happen there - that's at https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/ . Rereading your comment, you're referring more specifically to mobile; I suppose you might have a point there, but when almost everything is in mozilla-central, I'm not sure what you expect to see there (well, extensions, but beyond that) other than UI work.

There are still loads of things that used to work before the rewrite and now don't, plus a number of bugs introduced during the rewrite, and progress in that area is positively glacial.

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

#204
post #13
post #2

Mozilla doesn't seem to have a clue why people prefer firefox. It's not because of privacy or security, though that's nice. It's certainly not because it behaves similarly to chrome. It was always the extensibility. The power of plugins that allowed adblocking to be invented on firefox. They threw that away in the name of security and supposed clean code. Clean code doesn't get you users.

Yeah, when they did the big performance rewrite(quantum?) and killed pentadactyl (vim mode), I was really upset. I remember using Firefox 52-esr for as long as I could to keep my workflow the same. In my mind, that was peak Firefox. Yes performance wasn't great, but I didn't care. It was good enough and I mostly browsed with JavaScript disabled. The new vim mode plugins can't compete with the old plugins because they…

Download managers/mass downloaders have been similarly rendered impotent (can't download to outside of the Downloads folders without individually prompting for each and every download [1], can't intelligently handle naming conflicts between new downloads and existing files [2], etc. etc.)

And somewhat ironically, while I already had it installed for quite a while, I only really started seriously using and valuing DownThemAll after Firefox 57 had already come out.

[1] Eventually they relented somewhat and said that they would accept an API extension whereby an extension could download to the last downloaded-to location (even outside of the Downloads folder) without having to explicitly prompt the user again – but until now it was never actually implemented (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342563).

[2] You can only choose between "automatically rename" or "overwrite", and you can only choose in advance (!) when you don't actually have the necessary information to make that decision (especially seeing as Webextensions can't read any local files, so they have absolutely no idea what sort of filename conflicts could potentially exist). There's no "skip" option, and while there's a "prompt" option (however well/badly implemented that might be), Firefox doesn't even support it.

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

#205
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a decade-long user and am perfectly fine with modern Firefox (plus uBlock), both on the desktop and on Android. In fact, I don't want to go back to the before-times. Speak for yourself.

Don't worry, he's speaking for the majority of long term firefox users. You're the exception. I started using Firefox when it was Gecko/Phoenix in 2002, then Firebird, then Firefox. I started using it because it was so customizable. I stopped using it at version 37 in 2015 because that was when Mozilla destroyed the browser by removing user freedoms to install their own add-ons without Mozilla's approval. And no, usi…

I think you got this backwards. Firefox has 362 million users [0], while the uBlock Origin addon has 5,438,169 users [1], which is 1.5% of all users. If you use Firefox addons at all you're probably in a tiny minority of its users.

https://earthweb.com/how-many-people-use-firefox/

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/ublock-origin...

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

#206
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mozilla lost the plot the day they decided chasing Chrome was more important than appealing to their actual userbase. That was about the time they started incrementing version numbers every six weeks and rendered the numbers meaningless.

Or you know, we just wanted to offer the closest thing we could get to continuous delivery of desktop software?

Which is a great justification for releasing updates every six weeks. Destroying the paradigm of "integer release = major revision" instead of "Firefox 5.102" is what makes it a pointless dick-measuring contest with Chrome. One you lost, by the way.

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

#207

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.

But you did.[1]

[1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis#Add-ons_Schedule

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

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but what's the tablet market for Android these days?

There's quite a few chrome books that run android apps. I think it's even default these days...

Chromebooks can run the linux version of firefox, so I don't think many people would be using the android version on them

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

#209
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This pretty much feels to me what is happening to Mozilla as an organization from an outsider perspective. Engineering is no longer as important as the evangelism and management is making strange decisions that lack focus on what the target audience really is.

My 2 cents: One of the reasons why I left is that there was no longer any symbiotic relationship between product management and engineering. Product makes unilateral decisions, throws them over the wall, and engineering is expected to quit whining and just do what they're told.

> My 2 cents: One of the reasons why I left is that there was no longer any symbiotic relationship between product management and engineering. Product makes unilateral decisions, throws them over the wall, and engineering is expected to quit whining and just do what they're told.

Ex-Mozilla PM here, I completely understand what you mean by this and I generally agree. I'll go a step further and say that as a PM I often didn't have a choice, either, decisions were being made above me and I often found out from the engineers that they'd been told to do something different than what I'd just expended significant effort on documentation to support doing. A primary reason why I left is that I felt like my wings were clipped as PM, and that I was unable to effectively build symbiosis with engineering. I'm more technical than most PMs at Mozilla were and had a better relationship (I think) with engineering than most of the PMs did, but it was a fundamentally untenable situation to be in, where I ended up just being a middle-man, which is not what a PM is supposed to be, and it doesn't create good products or user experiences.

Somewhat ironically, I think that Mozilla needs a stronger Product organization to succeed, but that wasn't happening. If PMs are doing their job right, they are there to advocate for the users/customers and ensure that the direction of the product aligns with how people are using it. At Mozilla, it felt to me like there was a very heavy top-down approach and with some exceptions, most product features or projects were focused on enabling alternative revenue pathways without regard to how this alienates existing users. Very little of what I was asked to work on had any chance of moving the needle on market share, which was and is the fundamental issue for Mozilla existentially.

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

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's quite a few chrome books that run android apps. I think it's even default these days...

Chromebooks can run the linux version of firefox, so I don't think many people would be using the android version on them

No idea... I feel like the android one might be a better fit, interface-wise for a chromebook with a tablet mode and touch screen and limited file system access like the one a friend of mine has, but it's also true I don't own a chromebook so I don't know which people prefer to use.
Post reply on HN