Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 57.0 Released

mozilla.org

401–410 of 836 posts

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#401
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I would add to this, if it is possible, integration with keychain

This was possible until today and FF57 with the "Keychain Services Integration" plugin -- but it can't be ported to WebExtensions. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/keychain-serv... I will miss it and I'm not sure what to do next.

This to me sounds like something Firefox itself should do, not an extension author...

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#402
post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're interested, I explained above https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15696184 why the switch was necessary. As a Firefox user (and dev) I believe that breaking some extensions today in a clean manner that will let us maintain compatibility in the future is way prefereable than randomly breaking extensions with every single version of Firefox, as this has been happening forever. Plus this break has set us free…

I was a software guy long before I was a web guy, so I completely understand the desire to clean up internals. Unfortunately, as a user, the bottom line is still that if I update I will receive very little benefit and lose a lot of very useful functionality. It's not just the odd extension for me, it's things I use every day that are the most important reason I've stuck with Firefox. I accept that I'm probably in a m…

I can understand your point of view. I believe that better security, performance and privacy is worth the partial (and hopefully mostly momentary) loss of customization, but YMMV.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 m using Chrome + uBO + uMatrix + uBlock Protector while NoScript 10 gets released.

Slightly confused here: what's the point of "using Chrome instead" when FF supports all of the addons you're using 'in the mean time' already? Just use FF with those addons until NoScript gets its official release in tandem with the official FF release?

Every major FF release always come with major bugs followed by a minor release fixing them a couple of days later, plus it comes with headaches discovering "Whats New" or for me "What should i disable next" or "What feature they delete", usually i tolerated those changes because i had NoScript by my side and now that NoScript disappear the line between Chrome and FF its pretty thin therefore meanwhile everything settle, m using an already tuned Chrome.

tl;dr FF without NoScript is basically Chrome, without NoScript Firefox is meaningless to me, it's the only thing that has kept me on Firefox.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sync my black/whitelists through Firefox Sync It's technically possible, although UX is terrible. Go to uMatrix settings, make sure to "enable cloud storage" option is set in the "settings" tab, then manually upload and download rules in the "my rules" tab. No automatic sync (won't be implemented[1]) and, no merges at the moment (button's broken[2]). [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/issues/467 [2] https://git…

> No automatic sync By design. Losing all rules because of sync snafu out of control of uMatrix is the absolute worst case. Importing/merging manually will prevent such disaster.

Well, if it would be incremental (passing changelists of rule additions and deletions rather than state snapshots), then any serious data loss should be very unlikely. And if deletion log records would contain the deleted records and prunned only after a short while, things could be even rolled back.

As I get it, it would require significant changes to the code, though.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#405
post #387

Judging by the comments, I could be in a minority, but to me this version feels slower. There is a noticeable lag before first paint of the page. This is specially visible if you have a fast site. I was able to click through links on the site with no lag, now there is a small, but noticeable lag. Also, where did the "Restore tabs" button go from the homepage? EDIT: Also, it looks like my fans are running more often,…

[deleted]

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#406
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well... new renderer and JS engine are faster and use less memory, which means less CPU cycles are used for the same thing and less information is stored in RAM, there are improvements for Windows and Linux hardware acceleration. This all summed-up means reduction of power consumption.

The new style system is faster, but partly due to parallelizing, which doesn't necessarily mean fewer CPU cycles (though _can_ mean more time spent in CPU sleep state). I don't know why you think 57 uses less memory than 56 for the "renderer and JS engine". I don't think it does. In fact, the data shows that it actually uses a bit more than 56, though this obviously depends on workload. (Disclaimer: I work on the Fir…

In theory, race to idle might save it. In practice, my fellow web app devs will throw more crap on the web page until things are slow again and only then push back on feature creep from management.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#407

If you'd like to disable pocket, here are instructions: https://help.getpocket.com/article/1025-disabling-pocket-in-...

Unfortunately that doesn't disable the "Recommended by Pocket" crap on the New Tab Window. I have Firefox installed on 8 different machines and the option to remove "Recommended by Pocket" in the New Tab Preferences only appears in half of them. If you're missing the option then you can open about:config and set "browser.newtabpage.activity-stream.feeds.section.topstories" to false to get rid of it. I also blew away…

[deleted]

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#408
post #65

I just upgraded. It completely changes the chrome of the browser on OSX and it is _absolutely hideous_. There are a lots of unnecessary animations that I find very jarring. I don't know if there's a way to change it back yet. UPDATE: There is a "Customize Firefox" button which allows modifying the theme, which fixes the colors, but not the shape of the tabs or the animations. UPDATE: In about:config, you can disable…

I think the look is a great improvement.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#409
post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say that the most sensible choice in the absence of any payment, considering FF sensibility and message, (i.e. according to me) DDG would be the most sensible default. (edit : clarify)

When has any proof ever been given that they’re any more privacy conscious than any other search engine?

They're not an ad agency, which is a good enough answer for me.

Re: Firefox 57.0 Released

#410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As someone who's written Firefox extensions that are no longer available due to the switch, I'm disappointed that this had to happen. But as a Firefox user, I'm much happier having Quantum and Electrolysis (e10s), and if the tradeoff is between those two directly, I'd choose Quantum + Electrolysis over those extensions." Well, I'm a Firefox user, not an extension developer, and Pentadactyl happened to be one of the…

> Well, I'm a Firefox user, not an extension developer, and Pentadactyl happened to be one of the extensions that made using Firefox bearable. Now that it's permanently broken, Pentadactyl was all-but-abandoned for years before Vimperator was broken. It's been almost four years since it saw a release - which was for Firefox 24.0-30[0]. Its website still links at least three links to code.google.com on the front page!…

Despite there being no official releases in years and being abandoned by its official developers, Pentadactyl was kept afloat by its users, from whom you could still get fixes and releases through google code and google groups. I also fixed some things for myself, based on help from the community. Despite all this, it did finally completely break recently (before FF 57), and I just had to not update FF for a while until I found an alternative. I used PaleMoon for a while, but now I'm switching to Qutebrowser.

"it's hard to justify holding an entire browser back just to maintain compatibility with an extension that has been abandoned by its own maintainers"

Pentadactyl was far from the only extension that Firefox decided to break. Many other extensions were affected.

As far as Pentadactyl itself went, the reason its maintainers abandoned it was because Firefox kept breaking compatibility with it over, and over, and over, and over. They understandably got frustrated by that and moved on to other things.

Then, when Firefox put their foot down and announced that they'd be changing the browser so that Pentadactyl will never again be able to work on it, no matter what its developers did, a lot of people didn't see the point of putting more effort in to. It survived only because of the dedication and help of the remaining community. Now there's nothing even they can do. Not with Firefox anyway. So we're moving on to something else.

Post reply on HN