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

Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 446 posts

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#371

Post by KGIII »

dingdingdang wrote: post #258
typon wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here I am just enjoying my Opera. Built-in ad blocker, built-in WhatsApp Web, great UI, ultra fast, supports all modern web technologies.

Enjoying the Chinese consortium that owns Opera too? I am not even joking here, given China's recent track record with WeChat I would think twice before using Opera to handle all your https (banking..etc.) traffic. Of course Chrome (US) suffers from somewhat similar issues. Firefox really has unique position in the market in that it's fully Open Source and has non-profit driven org behind it.

I am not a Chinese dissident, so Opera being owned by a Chinese company doesn't concern me. China has absolutely no interest in my activities.

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#372

Post by crispinb »

jorvi wrote: post #342
tapoxi wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using Firefox Nightly (57) for a while on a 2013 MBP running Sierra. Firefox definitely feels significantly faster than it used to, and the new UI is great. But this comes at the cost of battery life. I moved back to Chrome because it was constantly chewing CPU.

But Chrome is also guilty of absolutely guzzling battery. I always try other browsers on macOS but in the end keep switching back to Safari because it easily gets me ~2-3h more battery life. This means that on 10h average battery life you'd pay a ~20-33% battery life premium just to run a different browser. At that point, finding replacement Safari extensions is well worth the bother. What I don't understand: why is…

I switch to Safari when on battery. But the cost is pretty high - it's the only browser I have on my mac that I find actively unreliable, and the feeble range of available extensions makes it seem crippled compared to Firefox or Chrome

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#373

Post by [deleted] »

KGIII wrote: post #371
dingdingdang wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enjoying the Chinese consortium that owns Opera too? I am not even joking here, given China's recent track record with WeChat I would think twice before using Opera to handle all your https (banking..etc.) traffic. Of course Chrome (US) suffers from somewhat similar issues. Firefox really has unique position in the market in that it's fully Open Source and has non-profit driven org behind it.

I am not a Chinese dissident, so Opera being owned by a Chinese company doesn't concern me. China has absolutely no interest in my activities.

[deleted]

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#374

Post by shmerl »

gorhill wrote: post #363
shmerl wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is uBlock Origin functionally similar? I'm using a number of custom filters in AdBlock Plus.

uBO understands ABP filter syntax -- with a few exceptions. For more details, I created a feature comparison table in the wiki: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/About-%22uBlock-is-in...

It worked nicely. Is there some way to toggle uBO by middle clicking on the add-on button in Firefox toolbar? That used to work for ABP in the past.

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#375

Post by baby »

callahad wrote: post #199
baby wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They def. don't care about Tree Style Tabs which is the reason number one a lot of people use Firefox.

There are functioning development builds of TST as a WebExtension. This is what it looked like last month: https://i.imgur.com/IBx8F6L.png Not sure how that translates to "not caring." Edit: Oh, hey, look, the WebExtension version has been published: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta...

1) It’s been constantly broken and re-fixed for years versions after versions

2) they do not reply to his requests or bugfiles

3) they could have made it a default in Firefox

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#376

Post by mikeytown2 »

Using a Core2 Duo E7500 (Q1'09) and this is a noticeable improvement; but I still find chrome faster in that the GUI doesn't stall. Firefox locks up when typing into a new tab's address bar. Still using Firefox (55) as the daily driver even though I have to kill it about 8 times a day. FF 57 does fix the need to kill Firefox but then a couple of the plugins I use are not supported anymore.

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#377

Post by glandium »

CrystalGamma wrote: post #351
Brakenshire wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pocket is now owned by Mozilla, and is going to be open sourced. What separates that from any other functionality built into the browser, for instance Firefox Sync or Autocomplete?

That is news to me, and https://getpocket.com/about doesn't mention Mozilla at all … do you have a link to some official announcement?

https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/02/27/mozilla-acquires-po...

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#378

Post by callahad »

baby wrote: post #375
callahad wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are functioning development builds of TST as a WebExtension. This is what it looked like last month: https://i.imgur.com/IBx8F6L.png Not sure how that translates to "not caring." Edit: Oh, hey, look, the WebExtension version has been published: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta...

1) It’s been constantly broken and re-fixed for years versions after versions 2) they do not reply to his requests or bugfiles 3) they could have made it a default in Firefox

And yet here it is, available and working as a WebExtension more than a month before legacy add-ons go away. The process may look opaque, but as far as results, I'm really not sure what more you want?

We moved to WebExtensions specifically to fix the problem of constant breakage. Sure, it adds a layer of abstraction, but there's finally an explicit interface that we can commit to supporting. The legacy APIs were a monkeypatching free-for-all that prevented us from landing even minor improvements or refactors for fear of potentially breaking some add-on somewhere. Now that we have that interface, we can refactor without breaking add-ons.

Re: Firefox Quantum Lands in Beta, Developer Edition

#379

Post by callahad »

mderazon wrote: post #345
callahad wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

about:profiles -> launch in new browser More info about profiles at https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/profile-manager-create-...

Didn't know about this. It's still not nearly as convenient as Chrome. Hard to switch profiles, hard to distinguish which window is which profile.

I agree that the UX isn't anywhere as seamless as Chrome's, though I've seen add-ons that attempt to fill that niche. Hopefully we'll revisit it once containers are done.

Personally, I'm on Linux most of the time, so I just bind a hotkey to `firefox --ProfileManager --new-instance` and I'm off to the races. On Windows, I tend to add shortcuts to the taskbar for each profile.

Nevertheless, the capability is there. :)

Post reply on HN