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

Firefox 68.0

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 282 posts

Re: Firefox 68.0

#221

Post by callahad »

feanaro wrote: post #211
callahad wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We did make a statement mostly to that effect on the dev-platform list back in April: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.platform... It got picked up by a handful of news outlets, but there's just a lot of news these days, so it's easy to miss things.

Honestly, it seems a bit weird to say that, on the one hand, you've made a statement to mostly that effect but then in another comment say that Mozilla can't commit to anything. Plainly speaking, is it a possibility that Firefox on Android will lose extension support for some time in the future?

Support for add-ons will not be removed from Firefox for Android ("Fennec"). However, Fennec will eventually get discontinued (but not in the next year), because its code is honestly a mess.

So the question is whether or not Fennec's replacement will support add-ons when Fennec finally hits End of Life. And I know this sucks as an answer, but we're not yet ready to make public commitments on that front. That's not because we have bad news hidden up our sleeves, it's just... we're still working and designing and figuring this stuff out.

If you want to know more about the architectural mess we got ourselves into, and how we're extricating ourselves from it, I highly recommend reading through this internal presentation on the topic: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MzU9q2wCwojC0kb1eVfm...

Re: Firefox 68.0

#222

Post by snlnspc »

stonogo wrote: post #189
callahad wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi. I work for Mozilla. Firefox for Android is not dead. You are free to continue using it. It will continue to support add-ons, and it will receive regular security updates and bugfixes for at least the next year. We are focusing all new feature development in Firefox Preview, but we're continuing to support Firefox for Android as an Extended Support Release while we build Preview. And, for what it's worth, we do un…

> It will continue to support add-ons, and it will receive regular security updates and bugfixes for at least the next year. This is indeed what "dead" looks like.

Rip in so, so many pieces

Re: Firefox 68.0

#223

Post by snlnspc »

jackewiehose wrote: post #194
callahad wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't make any specific commitment, but there's a lot of time between now and Firefox for Android going EOL (and we haven't committed to specific timing for that, either.) However, we do have concrete plans for supporting adblocking as a built-in feature in the near future ( https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/96 ), which should make Preview more palatable to folks who rely on add-ons for that, even if o…

> However, we do have concrete plans for supporting adblocking as a built-in feature in the near future reading this almost makes me cry because that is the same bullshit google is telling us with chrome. Firefox is not supposed to block ads! Firefox only has to provide an interface for addons so they can do whatever(!!!) they want (for example blocking ads or installing malware on your system). Please don't sacrific…

I can't agree with this more. I have already moved off of Firefox on the desktop. If this is the destination of Firefox mobile, there is absolutely no use case for it.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#224

Post by iokanuon »

_njyk wrote: post #198
iokanuon wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just for show. [1] >No. The browser is not fully open source like open in open source. It is a common myth and misconception about Kiwi Browser. >Damn, 1 commit and nothing else but keeps updating and releasing apks? Looked into the issues and scarcely seen replies. >I think this repo is just to show that "hey, I provided the so-called source code (even though not fully open-source as said above) so trust me…

The way you share quotes sounds like you personally have a problem with the browser :D Kiwi was started as a fun+independent project, then more and more people asked access to some source to be able to develop their own hacks (new tab page, extensions, bottom toolbar, import/export bookmarks, AMP, etc) and they are shared when the devs ask politely. At the end of the day, if you use Samsung, Kiwi, Fennec or Yandex, w…

Sorry, I've just copied the first two replies.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#225

Post by mncolinlee »

kevin_b_er wrote: post #169
snek wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a lot of FUD. Making a browser is hard, and making a modular browser is harder. It's clearly on their list of things to do, but it's behind all the other "making a browser" things.

They've made no commitment to extensions, but clearly are targeting this new replacement browser for version 69 in a few months. What they haven't done is given a clear statement. Nothing about if their replacement is going to drop extension support. But every response from Mozilla has been a sidestep and that I cannot overlook.

Fenix a.k.a Firefox Preview will not be Fennec 69. There are a lot of decisions the project hasn't made yet, but that one's official. It's an easy decision, too, given that Fenix won't have full feature-parity in three months and maintaining backwards compatibility to super old app versions is not worth it. The expectation is that users will want to migrate to the new store entry in the coming year or two.

As Ricky would say, "It doesn't take rocket appliances."

Re: Firefox 68.0

#226

Post by Causality1 »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #203
dralley wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what UserChrome.css is for.

I don't know why this guy was downvoted, he's correct. I even have a pretty decent UserChrome.css to better integrate Tree Style Tab, https://www.reddit.com/r/FirefoxCSS/comments/ao3ydl/configur...

Which is handy but not relevant to my question of "why can't an extension do this" with the implied "so I don't have to fiddle with copy-pasting text off the internet into configuration files I'm not entirely familiar with using." Not to mention that by default Firefox 69 disables loading of userchrome.css and you can bet your britches they're doing that in future anticipation of removing the feature entirely just like they did with everything else they've stripped out.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#227

Post by silversconfused »

coldpie wrote: post #117
skrause wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, no. I don't want to use a browser that is developed by an advertising company ... on an operating system developed by the exact same advertising company?

If there was a viable competitor, I would consider using it. There isn't.

postmarketos is beginning to support cellular capabilities. You may not have to wait a whole lot longer.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#228

Post by silversconfused »

jsgo wrote: post #186
ulfw wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is. You just don't want to spend the money or use the phones/tablets from said competitor.

I'm personally a big fan of iOS, but coldpie's (and others in this thread) needs seem to be in third party browser capability that doesn't exist in iOS so with that, I wouldn't recommend it to them. I don't think it is a matter of spending money on competitor's devices so much as competitor's devices don't meet their needs.

It'd be acceptable if we could run code on it, as root, like we actually own it.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#229

Post by mncolinlee »

jackewiehose wrote: post #194
callahad wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't make any specific commitment, but there's a lot of time between now and Firefox for Android going EOL (and we haven't committed to specific timing for that, either.) However, we do have concrete plans for supporting adblocking as a built-in feature in the near future ( https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/96 ), which should make Preview more palatable to folks who rely on add-ons for that, even if o…

> However, we do have concrete plans for supporting adblocking as a built-in feature in the near future reading this almost makes me cry because that is the same bullshit google is telling us with chrome. Firefox is not supposed to block ads! Firefox only has to provide an interface for addons so they can do whatever(!!!) they want (for example blocking ads or installing malware on your system). Please don't sacrific…

Most users will only use an ad blocker that is built-in. You should consider how elitist it is to confine ad blockers to users who know and trust certain extensions vetted by their community, but not the remaining extensions which have been a minefield.

Having a built-in ad blocker doesn't hinder an app from also accepting extensions which block ads.

Re: Firefox 68.0

#230

Post by aflag »

callahad wrote: post #215
aflag wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if Firefox 69 is not coming to Android it means it has already EOLed, doesn't it?

Not exactly. I understand "EOL" to mean that all support has ended. An EOL'd project is dead, and if anything breaks no one is going to fix it for you. That is not the case for Firefox for Android. Instead, think of Firefox for Android as a Long-Term Support (LTS) release, like you might see with projects like Ubuntu, Node, or Django. There are no new features coming to Firefox for Android, but we will keep the 68 br…

One year is a very short time. The fact is that we can't rely on having support to all our add-ons and browser experience in the near future (next 2-3 years) means we have to start thinking about what to switch to. Also, I wouldn't feel comfortable recommending firefox anymore for that same reason. When the time comes to decide whether to switch to fenix or chrome, fenix will need to really impress. It's a bold move from mozilla.

Anyway, I use firefox on Android because of the ad blocker and to avoid AMP. If the new firefox works similarly in that regard, then I might end up switching to that instead.

Post reply on HN