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

Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 111 posts

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#81

Post by Nicksil »

mav3rick wrote: post #77
spinningslate wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in case anyone from Mozilla is listening, this could well be existential for you. Right now, your pro-privacy stance is a principal factor in users choosing Firefox over Chrome. Follow Google - and all its shady practices - and you will lose a large chunk of those users. Many of them, to use current terminology, are "key influencers": technically savvy people who advise family and friends what to do. Lose them an…

This tech people influencing friends and family lore has been disproven many times. No non tech user is using duck duck go.

Where are you getting this information? Plenty of "tech" people influence their friends and family with respect to what software/hardware to consider. My entire immediate family uses DuckDuckGo as their search. All of their (Mozilla) browsers have DDG set as the default. Not a complaint from anybody; DDG does a damn fine job.

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#82

Post by Rebelgecko »

clairity wrote: post #35
Iolaum wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your choice can well be firefox and chrome as a fallback when a website doesn't work and you care enough to bother opening chrome for it. Chrome has already ditched adblockers on mobile, firefox with adblockers and reader mode is a MUCH better mobile web experience.

do you really need the fallback? i've yet to need chrome for anything, since i rarely use google products other than maps. i've found the use of google captcha on governmental, financial, and some commercial sites frustrating though. i'll abandon a site that has google captcha if usage is anything less than critical.

Like you alluded to, some websites perform much better in Chrome (in particular Google's own websites, but there's some other offenders like roll20.net).

There's an FF extension called Buster made someone here on HN that helps workaround Google's current generation of captchas. It doesn't work 100% of the time, but the success rate is still higher than doing it myself.

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#83

Post by roca »

flukus wrote: post #80
jcranmer wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been known since around 2010 or 2011 that the full extension system was too powerful for effective maintenance of Gecko. Going through XPCOM for everything prevents effective optimization within the codebase, and generally ensures that the APIs have to become less ergonomic compared to modern C++ (or JS, for that matter). Furthermore, multiprocess content tabs was heavily delayed because turning it on would brea…

Pretty much as soon as they added multi processor support they had to start throttling background tabs anyway, same as chrome. It's not at all clear that going multi process was a win. And years after they change their are still a bunch of things extensions did that don't work anymore. I was never a huge fan of XUL or any non-native UI, but it did it's job for years and it's replacement doesn't. And due to their foll…

Multiprocess was and is a huge win for performance, stability and security. In the post-Spectre world it's essential.

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#84

Post by mav3rick »

Nicksil wrote: post #81
mav3rick wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This tech people influencing friends and family lore has been disproven many times. No non tech user is using duck duck go.

Where are you getting this information? Plenty of "tech" people influence their friends and family with respect to what software/hardware to consider. My entire immediate family uses DuckDuckGo as their search. All of their (Mozilla) browsers have DDG set as the default. Not a complaint from anybody; DDG does a damn fine job.

One data point doesn't change the fact that HN hasn't mass converted the world to use DDG. They may also be telling you they use DDG while they use !g or Google.

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#85

Post by SirensOfTitan »

Mozilla really needs to get that if they compete with Google on Google’s terms, they’re rapidly heading toward extinction.

Mozilla ought to be the browser for a private and usable web, but it seems they have occasional sneezes where you question what they’re doing (this, pocket in recent memory).

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#86

Post by clairity »

ferzul wrote: post #49
clairity wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

do you really need the fallback? i've yet to need chrome for anything, since i rarely use google products other than maps. i've found the use of google captcha on governmental, financial, and some commercial sites frustrating though. i'll abandon a site that has google captcha if usage is anything less than critical.

linkedin doesn't work for me on firefox, so i rarely even attempt to use it. but if someone a care about wants to link to me, i have to use chromium for that.

that's odd. does the whole site not load, or just certain features don't work?

i use firefox with all kinds of privacy/blocking extensions and can access linkedin just fine (as long as first-party javascript can execute).

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#87

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

hajile wrote: post #19
Jonnax wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A rewrite that is faster than Chrome for Android.

It may be faster than Chrome on Android, but it's certainly not faster than Firefox on Android with adblockers. Not loading/parsing multi-megabytes of Javascript and images is huge. Loads of ads these days incorporate entire JS framework toolchains resulting in a binary bigger than the page they're being injected into. Eliminating a few ads and the rest of your browser could be a lot less efficient and still perform…

In my experience and limited testing, even with warmed-up caches, Chrome (without Adblocker) was faster than Firefox (with or without Adblocker), sadly.

I still use Firefox due to the security benefits of ad blocking, but I don't find the experience particularly enjoyable (although, thinking of it, it may have either significantly improved in the past ~half a year, or I just don't notice because of a more powerful CPU in my new phone).

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#88

Post by echelon »

SirensOfTitan wrote: post #85

Mozilla really needs to get that if they compete with Google on Google’s terms, they’re rapidly heading toward extinction. Mozilla ought to be the browser for a private and usable web, but it seems they have occasional sneezes where you question what they’re doing (this, pocket in recent memory).

I'm extremely worried that once Google disables ad blockers in Chrome, websites will wholesale block any and all non-Chrome browsers. Be it through user agent sniffing, feature detection, or fingerprinting, Firefox simply won't work anymore.

The future of the web where Google is in complete control is straight up nightmare fuel. Microsoft in the early 2000s never scared me as much as the future we're headed into does.

This won't be IE versus Netscape since websites are no longer served as plain old HTML. They're messy, thick, and impenetrable javascript blobs--not documents. We're not arguing about websites simply not rendering correctly in the less popular browser. This is a battle for the absolute control over information distribution.

What do we do to prevent what's happening?

Google already shot down XHTML, which was rich with semantics. That was a web written for documents and tools that could query those documents for meaning.

Whatever Google has become needs to be dismantled. The ad company can't be the browser company and phone company. It's a perverse alignment of incentives.

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#89

Post by Endy »

danShumway wrote: post #2

> In the absence of a true standard for browser extensions, maintaining compatibility with Chrome is important for Firefox developers and users. About as close as Mozilla can come to outright saying, "Chrome is big enough and we're small enough that what they do _is_ the standard." Still, it's encouraging to see that they're not removing the blocking API for now. I kind of hope this does push a few adblocker extensio…

What they should be saying is, "No, what Google is doing is Wrong with a capital WRONG and we're not going to accept their wishes in closing off what's left of the open Web."

But then they'd have to give up all their Google funding. And they're way too cowardly and corporate to do that.

Re: Mozilla’s Manifest v3 FAQ

#90

Post by Endy »

apazzolini wrote: post #29
Nicksil wrote: post #22

> We have no immediate plans to remove blocking webRequest > immediate We know exactly what this kind of talk means. Don't blow smoke up our ass, Mozilla, just give it to use straight: We'll have `blocking webRequest` for as long as Google allows it.

I switched from Chrome to Firefox a couple of months ago when the Chrome adblocking changes were announced. I'll happily find something other than Firefox if it goes down the same route.

Try out Pale Moon or Waterfox.
Post reply on HN