Firefox 29 • Hacker News Board

Re: Firefox 29

#261

Post by lern_too_spel » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 4:53 PM UTC

nullc wrote: post #217

ajanuary wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With an omnibar everything you type in your url bar gets sent to the search provider. Lots of people don't like that (I'm personally okay with it, so I use Chrome).

Are you also okay with it giving it to every party the search provider gives it to? Business partners (?), employees snooping, government agencies (with or without lawful process), hackers who've compromised the provider's business? Are the people who's sites you're using also okay with you passing URLs on their sites to your search provider? Do you ever accidentally paste confidential text in the wrong field? Becaus…

You could make the same criticism about hosted email. Do you run your own email server and communicate only with other PGP users?

Re: Firefox 29

#262

Post by k2enemy » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 4:54 PM UTC

hbt wrote: post #212

If you want a highly customizable browser, Firefox is it. Chrome is in its infancy when it comes to customization and they often make decisions that prevent power users from taking advantage of their browsing experience. For example, they've disabled custom stylesheets in recent releases despite a clear indication that people were sharing themes, they have very old bugs that don't get resolved (like the stupid white…

> There isn't a feature in Chromium or Google Chrome that Firefox doesn't deliver.

Applescript support. This prevents me from using Firefox.

Re: Firefox 29

#263

Post by kemayo » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 4:54 PM UTC

jamesbritt wrote: post #257

dilap wrote: post #63

I love Firefox -- for what it's done, what it represents, and what it helps guard against. I have fond memories of those early versions of Firefox (nee Firebird) that busted open the IE monopoly, and where hands-down the best browser going at the time. But it's never felt very good on the Mac to me, and it still doesn't. Here's a few early thoughts on this release, from the perspective of a happy Safari user, w/ a pr…

I have fond memories of those early versions of Firefox (nee Firebird) that busted open the IE monopoly, Monopoly? Before Firefox/Firebird there was Netscape Navigator, which was to be the "Mosaic killer" (hence "Mozilla"). IE was never the only browser around, even on Windows.

Monopolies don't require that there be only one choice... just that one choice is vastly dominant. And at its peak, IE had something over 90% of the market. [1]

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Internet-explorer-usage-da...

Re: Firefox 29

#264

Post by dale-cooper » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 4:55 PM UTC

I really want to like firefox, but it is just so much slower/unresponsive than chrome. Is this something specific to my setup? I tried this new version out on a clean profile and compared it to chrome: http://fixme.se/pub/chrome_vs_ff.flv

I searched a bit and found this bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=924411 Nothing seems to have happened though, and google maps is far from the only example..

Re: Firefox 29

#265

Post by nikolak » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 4:55 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #243

nikolak wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox uses less memory only on startup and when I have few tabs open. As soon as I start opening more tabs and browsing longer the memory usage is much larger on FF and the whole UI becomes less responsive and so do pages. Even on startup it isn't that better compared to chrome. Chrome 11 extensions 1 tab: ~300MB FF 2 extensions 1 tab: ~200MB It's not FF 29, it's 28 - but I doubt the memory management improved much…

That surprises me even more, since Chrome has a lot more overhead per tab (often a whole process per tab), so I expected Firefox to have a bigger advantage the more tabs you have open. Edit: I just tried opening about 24 tabs of webcomics in each, and Chrome jumped to over 1GB of RAM while FF is about 600MB.

I don't know if it's just the tab count or longer browsing sessions/history (I usually have my browser open for days without closing it) or whatever, so don't quote me on that.

But FF is definitely uses more memory than chrome and with few other resource hungry applications running it becomes practically unusable on my low end laptop.

Re: Firefox 29

#266

Post by pbhjpbhj » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 4:56 PM UTC

e1dwqscdasd wrote: post #224

Firefox RIP 29.04.2014 Sorry but i try and this is shit, chrome,opera look better Digg Killed Digg

Why's it matter what it looks like, it's literally a few tabs and an address bar to wrap around your webpages. Does it function well?

Re: Firefox 29

#267

Post by collyw » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 5:01 PM UTC

ghshephard wrote: post #117

dilap wrote: post #63

I love Firefox -- for what it's done, what it represents, and what it helps guard against. I have fond memories of those early versions of Firefox (nee Firebird) that busted open the IE monopoly, and where hands-down the best browser going at the time. But it's never felt very good on the Mac to me, and it still doesn't. Here's a few early thoughts on this release, from the perspective of a happy Safari user, w/ a pr…

"Separate address and search bars is old-fashioned" Chrome is almost unusable for me because I can no longer type the names of internal websites and have them come up. That single change in its behavior drives me back to Firefox.

yeah, it hacked me off when every time I mistyped a 127.0.0.1 address, that t would send the information to the borg when using Chrome.

Re: Firefox 29

#268

Post by mblakele » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 5:02 PM UTC

k2enemy wrote: post #262

hbt wrote: post #212

If you want a highly customizable browser, Firefox is it. Chrome is in its infancy when it comes to customization and they often make decisions that prevent power users from taking advantage of their browsing experience. For example, they've disabled custom stylesheets in recent releases despite a clear indication that people were sharing themes, they have very old bugs that don't get resolved (like the stupid white…

> There isn't a feature in Chromium or Google Chrome that Firefox doesn't deliver. Applescript support. This prevents me from using Firefox.

That sounds interesting. What sort of things do you do with AppleScript and the browser?

Re: Firefox 29

#269

Post by maxerickson » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 5:02 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #234

maxerickson wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do I have to install an add on to get narrow tabs? This is like the 3rd or 4th time that minimum tab width settings have been changed. I understand the motivation to change the experience for the typical user. I don't understand the constant churn in what is customizable. If I customized the location of the reload/stop button last time it was moved, is the thought really that I won't want to this time? I guess there…

You could use the Custom Tab Width extension https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/custom-tab-wi... Or, you could make a UserChrome.css file in your profile directory and put this in it (edited): /* * Do not remove the @namespace line -- it's required for correct functioning */ @namespace url("http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul"); /* set default namespace to XUL */ .tabbrowser-tab:…

As it turns out, I have that, I didn't consider that I was in safe mode when I posted the complaint.

Re: Firefox 29

#270

Post by randallsquared » Tue, Apr 29, 2014, 5:02 PM UTC

With all the UI hate, I guess I'm lucky that F29 didn't break Side-Tabs, my favorite addon ever. It does look weird, though, to have the nicely rendered foldertab graphic for only one tab, and with nothing around it to continue the metaphor.