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

"Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

developer.chrome.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 490 posts

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#401

Post by [deleted] »

yborg wrote: post #229
Sophira wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you certain? The last I heard about it from Vivaldi[0], they were only going to keep the MV2 code around so long as it's in the upstream codebase: > We will keep Manifest v2 for as long as it’s still available in Chromium. We expect to drop support in June 2025, but we may maintain it longer or be forced to drop support for it sooner, depending on the precise nature of the changes to the code. Note that June 2025…

Vivaldi team does not respond to any comments asking about ongoing v2 manifest support; safe to assume it's gone as soon as it's out of Chromium upstream. Given Tetzchner's continual messaging on how important user privacy is to Vivaldi it seems like a strange decision, but I don't know how much effort would be required to maintain the support. They're a small team, so it would be understandable if they would just sa…

[deleted]

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#402

Post by [deleted] »

QuantumGood wrote: post #222

"browsers using the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy will be exempt from any browser changes until June 2025" To extend ManifestV2 in Chrome, add the text below to a text file, saving and running it as a .reg will create and add a value of 2 to "ExtensionManifestV2Availability" in the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Google\Chrome key (When you open/run a .reg file, it updates your registry, usually preceed…

[deleted]

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#403

Post by nehal3m »

ysabri wrote: post #395
aydyn wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those things are anything close to killer features much less reasons to switch. Verticle tabs, seriously?

It is all a gimmick but as long as people are switching to a chromium based browser and not Firefox I'm happy. With that said, I don't know how anyone would trust a small team to build them a secure and safe browser. Chrome is so battle tested at this point and Google puts a lot of resources in maintaining it, they stand to lose a lot more given their scale.

And so you throw in your lot with the strongest warlord on the block, and then they turn your shelter into a prison.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#404

Post by dikei »

aydyn wrote: post #385
andmalc wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MS Edge, Arc, and Sidekick have features Chrome doesn't such as split screen, side panels, and vertical tabs. Likewise for Firefox forks such as Zen.

None of those things are anything close to killer features much less reasons to switch. Verticle tabs, seriously?

> Verticle tabs, seriously

Yes, I use Edge due to its vertical tabs

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#405

Post by teruakohatu »

contravariant wrote: post #328
zb3 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not when you want to install GrapheneOS using the web-based installer, because Mozilla refuses to implement WebUSB

Sounds like a reasonable trade-off. I imagine they couldn't figure out what an appropriate warning window would look like for that kind of protocol.

Chrome supports WebUSB. The bowser asks if you want to connect a device and presents a list of supported devices. It works amazingly well.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#406

Post by Izkata »

ethagnawl wrote: post #368
bijection wrote: post #206

I've finally switched (back) to firefox today. I switched from firefox to chrome for their superior devtools a few years back, but hopefully firefox has had time to catch up. Everything old is new again!

I was going to make a joke about giving Firebug a look but (TIL) Firefox's Devtools actually subsumed Firebug a few years back. That's pretty cool and a nice note for that project to end on. https://getfirebug.com

They make it sound nice, but the last release of Firebug was after that page says they were unified, and only about half a year before Firefox Quantum removed XUL, which would have killed Firebug anyway. I was still using Firebug because its console was still better than the built-in devtools.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#407

Post by sebazzz »

EasyMark wrote: post #139
freedomben wrote: post #17

Notably, Firefox is not removing v2 support (at least for now as of March 2024) > Firefox, however, has no plans to deprecate MV2 and will continue to support MV2 extensions for the foreseeable future. And even if we re-evaluate this decision at some point down the road, we anticipate providing a notice of at least 12 months for developers to adjust accordingly and not feel rushed. [1] [1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/a…

To my knowledge the “big” chrome engine alternatives aren’t either. I know that Vivaldi and Brave plan on keeping around v2 as long as it is economically feasible

That is easy talking as long as it is still a config flag, then after a compile-time flag. Once the internal APIs for MV2 or where MV2 get removed or changed it becomes very difficult to maintain. Never mind the possible security issues you introduce, but won’t get so quickly discovered.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#408

Post by mrkramer »

sys_64738 wrote: post #325
chlorion wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, the MV3 version requires zero permissions and in theory should be faster. These are real benefits that for some reason nobody will admit exist. Saying anything positive about MV3 or the lite extension seems to get you downvoted without explanation though, which is a nice example of how absurd this site is when it comes to anything related to Google. Sometimes I think downvoting should require leaving a comment a…

Which GOOG team are you on?

He is on Extensions team. lol

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#409

Post by mrkramer »

pyre wrote: post #253
chlorion wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, the MV3 version requires zero permissions and in theory should be faster. These are real benefits that for some reason nobody will admit exist. Saying anything positive about MV3 or the lite extension seems to get you downvoted without explanation though, which is a nice example of how absurd this site is when it comes to anything related to Google. Sometimes I think downvoting should require leaving a comment a…

Sounds like the real issue is "we are replacing X with Y" and there are use-cases for both X and Y to co-exist.

They should let them co-exist but probably they figured out it is just easier to kill V2 extensions all together. What a shame.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#410

Post by lucianbr »

pkasting wrote: post #344
freedomben wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was kind of both, depending on the timeline. Early on it was word of mouth, then Google saw they had momentum and they capitalized on it with the banners and aggressive marketing.

So many replies in this sub thread opining authoritatively. Share your source. Did you have access to the data on Chrome's user growth and which marketing campaigns were the sources of which users? From my perspective, all of you are saying a lot of things as if you know them to be true, but you have no idea whether they're true or not; really, you just find them to be plausible.

Is this really something particular to this thread? I feel like most comments on HN are "opining authoritatively".
Post reply on HN