|
More good news: Mozilla and Google have renewed their search agreement for another three years. Most of Mozilla's revenue comes from Google, and there was a lot of FUD bouncing around in the media that Google wouldn't renew their contract because they were somehow "competitors" now.
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 02:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 16:59 |
|
|
Wouldn't necessarily call that good news per se. Seems to me like the best thing for Firefox would be if they lost all the bullshit funding to spend on management and side ventures and just went back to making a single good product.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 04:35
|
|
|
They need funding to operate, they're still making Firefox and pushing forward on web standards, I don't know what more you could want.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 05:29
|
|
|
edit: n/m
withak fucked around with this message at 06:36 on Dec 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 06:25
|
|
|
Dominoes posted:Is there a known issue with Firefox crashes on Eyefinity/multi-monitor setups? I upgraded to a 3-monitor Eyefinity view about two weeks ago, and Firefox has been crashing about 5 times a day since. Hard freeze, and requires a ctrl+alt+delete to fix. It will usually restore the tabs after. Have you tried turning off hardware graphics acceleration? (about :config -> layers.acceleration.disabled = true).
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 15:25
|
|
|
Is Ghostery still worth using? I just read somewhere that it was bought by some ad company.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2011 06:27
|
|
|
Ghostery works, but the problem I have with it is that it can be too heavy on the blocking. If it's by an ad company, I can tell you it does a great job of blocking excessive amounts of things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostery Seems it was bought out, but the stats collection is strictly opt-in. At home, I use Ghostery, AdBlock Plus, AdBlock Plus Pop-up Addon, and NoScript. It's often initially excessive, but it makes the internet a lot less.. noisy. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 11:45 on Dec 22, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2011 11:43
|
|
|
This was caused by my userchrome.css. Nevermind, sorry for the spam. Hey! fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Dec 22, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2011 21:40
|
|
|
Is Webmail Notifier working for people, with regards to pop-ups or highlighted icon?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2011 08:46
|
|
|
Scalding Coffee posted:Is Webmail Notifier working for people, with regards to pop-ups or highlighted icon? I don't use the popups, but both highlighted icon and sound are working fine for me on 9.0.1.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2011 09:34
|
|
|
Okay, this is a little odd. I just got a big 19 meg Aurora update, and now bare images are shown centred against a grey background, instead of left-top justified against a default white background. I haven't changed any addons (though TMP updated at the same time). Anyone know if there's a way to change this back to the old default?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 01:28
|
|
|
Bieeardo posted:Okay, this is a little odd. I just got a big 19 meg Aurora update, and now bare images are shown centred against a grey background, instead of left-top justified against a default white background. I haven't changed any addons (though TMP updated at the same time). Anyone know if there's a way to change this back to the old default?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 01:53
|
|
|
Blah. I found that addon, but hoped I wouldn't have to resort to something like that. Oh well, thanks anyway!
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 02:01
|
|
|
Bieeardo posted:Blah. I found that addon, but hoped I wouldn't have to resort to something like that. Oh well, thanks anyway! Why is it such a big deal? I like the new look, I dont see why it's that big of a deal..
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 05:37
|
|
|
It's not a big deal, but I do think the grey is ugly and somewhat distracting, and I'd rather see images in the context of a default blank webpage background. I'm just disappointed that I need an addon to override their colour choice. Edit: Overriding page backgrounds in Options 'fixes' it, but it also 'fixes' every other webpage with a custom background. Oh well, was worth a shot. I'll adjust. Bieeanshee fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Dec 25, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 15:08
|
|
|
Any add-ons where I can see mail alerts, as Webmail is not working?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 18:25
|
|
|
Alereon posted:More good news: Mozilla and Google have renewed their search agreement for another three years. Most of Mozilla's revenue comes from Google, and there was a lot of FUD bouncing around in the media that Google wouldn't renew their contract because they were somehow "competitors" now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2011 18:49
|
|
|
Grey Area posted:This article claims that Google is now paying three times as much ($300 million/year) due to a bidding war with Microsoft Bing. I wonder what they'll do with all the extra money. Probably plough it into more mockups they'll never fully implement, fix bugs that affect 0.0001% of users, talk about the open web and such. Honestly though, I hope they employ a few more developers to sort out some of the endemic problems in Firefox, problems the current hierarchy does not solve in reasonable time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
Don't forget they'll also spend most of the money on releasing ports of FF for every single lovely Android device.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 05:16
|
|
|
Well each big first number in version numbers does cost 100 million so
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 08:30
|
|
|
.plistopher reeves posted:Why is it such a big deal? I like the new look, I dont see why it's that big of a deal.. Nope, that's a bullshit argument. Making changes to established functionality requires justification. I doubt there is any justification forthcoming except that some rear end in a top hat at Mozilla wanted it that way. The fact that there is no option to change it back is just the cherry on top.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 10:02
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:Don't forget they'll also spend most of the money on releasing ports of FF for every single lovely Android device. Well at least that's starting to look like it could maybe pay off, at least on the nightlies where they switched from XUL to a native interface. It's just about as fast as the stock browser now, if not faster at times. It's come a long way from the alphas that took 20+ seconds to load and had godawful text rendering. Once they get addons back in I'm definitely switching over from Dolphin.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 11:02
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:Don't forget they'll also spend most of the money on releasing ports of FF for every single lovely Android device. Except they dont. There's one android version that works on every single lovely Android device. And there'd be one for every single lovely iOS device too if apple would allow other browsers on their phones.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 14:05
|
|
|
Mac Firefox is such a resource hog, they should get that disaster together before making an iOS version. Also, plenty of alternative browsers are on the App Store, Opera for example.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 14:40
|
|
|
Installed Nightly on my HTC Desire (Gingerbread 2.3.3), but it won't display any sites or even the Add-on Manager. The progress indicator rotates like it's loading them but other than that 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 15:00
|
|
|
NOTinuyasha posted:Also, plenty of alternative browsers are on the App Store, Opera for example.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 15:13
|
|
|
Is that similar to what the Fire does? What makes it lovely?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 16:02
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Opera Mini (which is not Opera) gets around the browser ban by doing all the browsing and rendering on their servers then sending content to your device, which is a pretty lovely kludge. What about dolphin/icab/atomic etc.? Do they do the same thing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 16:09
|
|
|
Dodoman posted:What about dolphin/icab/atomic etc.? Do they do the same thing? All "alternative" browsers on iOS are just re-skins of Safari. Not even full Safari (with the iOS 4.3+ Nitro JavaScript engine), but just the pre-4.3 Safari engine. At least, that is how it was before (I don't know if Apple changed that). It's similar to how there are dozens of browsers for Windows that just use the IE engine. Opera Mini is the only "true" alternative browser on iOS. The "fake" alternative browsers on iOS aren't bad, either. Some may not notice the JavaScript performance difference, and the alternative browsers (such as Dolphin, Atomic, iCab, etc) offer features like user agent changing (appear as Desktop browser), file downloads, etc. Some even have the cross-platform bookmark sync. I use Dolphin quite a bit on my iPhone. I use it to get to Desktop-only sites, and I can save my bookmarks there and then load them on my Android devices. JavaScript performance has never been an issue. Firefox on iOS would need to use the Safari engine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 16:33
|
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:Nope, that's a bullshit argument. Making changes to established functionality requires justification. I doubt there is any justification forthcoming except that some rear end in a top hat at Mozilla wanted it that way. The fact that there is no option to change it back is just the cherry on top. Bullshit, this is a much nicer way to present images and is in agreement with the way most graphics professionals prefer to work. And not every change requires an option to be reverted. It's not like centering an image on the page prevents you from doing anything that you did when the image is aligned on the top left. (I agree they should let you change the background color without loving with normal web pages, but that will probably be implemented quickly, and before the version hits the main release.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 17:33
|
|
|
TwoKnives posted:Is that similar to what the Fire does? What makes it lovely? Alereon fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Dec 27, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2011 20:37
|
|
|
So I have a question. I kept having flash crashing and huge memory issues back when I was using Firefox 7, right? Well I since then downgraded back to version 3.6.25, which fixed those issues. What I was wondering is if firefox 9, or even 8, managed to fix those issues. Or really, if it would be wise for me to go ahead and update to the current version instead of staying at 3.6. I am using a 64 bit computer. So if I do update, I'll be using waterfox's 64 bit version.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 01:22
|
|
|
Interestingly enough, I've been having way more issues with Flash around the time that 8 or 9 rolled out. I'm just kinda riding it out since at least now that Flash is a separate process at least I don't have to deal with all of Firefox dying.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 01:44
|
|
|
That sounds a lot better actually. I still get issues with... Well actually I get issues with my video driver crashing every now and then, but I'm convinced it's firefox doing it. But that's for later. Flash being a seperate process, and reducing the amount of crashes sounds really loving good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 01:59
|
|
|
Sprite141 posted:What I was wondering is if firefox 9, or even 8, managed to fix those issues. You'll have to try them to see. Unless you know exactly what the problem you were having was, we can't know if it's fixed. 8 & 9 work fine for most people, but so did 7. Sprite141 posted:Flash being a seperate process, and reducing the amount of crashes sounds really loving good. It is really good, but you've already got it. It's been out since Firefox 3.6.4. Sprite141 posted:Well actually I get issues with my video driver crashing every now and then, but I'm convinced it's firefox doing it. It's not (directly, at least). If it's even possible for Firefox to crash the video driver, that's a flaw in the video driver. But if your driver/video card can't handle something Firefox is doing, you can disable video acceleration in Firefox.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 02:10
|
|
|
Zhentar posted:It is really good, but you've already got it. It's been out since Firefox 3.6.4. quote:It's not (directly, at least). If it's even possible for Firefox to crash the video driver, that's a flaw in the video driver. But if your driver/video card can't handle something Firefox is doing, you can disable video acceleration in Firefox. I don't know why it is happening, but sometimes after returning from hybernation, and even fewer times without, the video drivers will crash as soon as I try to play a video from youtube or something. But I'll worry about that later. For now I'll download waterfox and see how that works for me. Though I do have to ask, is there anything important missing from the regular version to waterfox's 64 bit version? I assume there isn't, and I'm already installing it, but I don't see how it could hurt to ask.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 15:51
|
|
|
I'm really hoping we get some focus on memory usage going forwards, this is ridiculous: I am currently rendering a timeline in Premier and simultaneously transcoding some video for a DVD burn prep in Encore. Firefox somehow needs nearly as much RAM as both of those combined to display 1 window with 12 tabs in it. gently caress me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 17:52
|
|
|
Sprite141 posted:I'm actually using 3.6.25 now, so I don't have it. But if that's the case, why was flash causing 7 to crash all the time? Oh well, doesn't matter now. There's a really obvious answer here my friend.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 18:01
|
|
|
rolleyes posted:I'm really hoping we get some focus on memory usage going forwards, this is ridiculous: There already has been a lot of focus on memory usage; there have been some pretty significant improvements made since Firefox 4, and there are a lot more improvements in the works. That said, Firefox needs more memory for 12 tabs than a video transcoder needs because 12 web pages are a poo poo-ton more complex than video encoding/decoding. Take a look at about :memory and you can see the kind of memory it takes to maintain the current state of many dozens of scripts running on those 12 web pages, to interpret megabytes of javascript code and make it run quickly, or to take complex HTML and CSS and transform it to what you actually see on the screen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 18:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 16:59 |
|
|
mobn posted:There's a really obvious answer here my friend. For flash crashing firefox 7? I'm sorry, but I don't see it. If it was a separate process it should have only crashed that process, not all of firefox. rolleyes posted:I'm really hoping we get some focus on memory usage going forwards, this is ridiculous: Did you try creating a new profile? Which reminds me that I might have to do that now that I'm using waterfox. It was using over 1 million k for a while there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 18:50
|
|