Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Escape no longer stops animated gifs (or forces network connections closed on the active tab). WONTFIX

Since browsing SA with no way to stop gifs can be a giant pain, here's the workaround to go exactly back to the old behavior:
1. Add SuperStop for a hotkey-based full stop, by default bound to shift+esc (a terrible bind because that's also the windows minimize hotkey)
2. Use Customizable Shortcuts to rebind the lovely new stop to some other key and SuperStop to plain escape.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Hogburto posted:

So Firefox on Windows can decode h.264, but only on using the h.264 decoder that comes installed with Windows 7/8? Using FFDShow or CoreAVC or whatever is a no-go?
They can't afford to pay the license fees to distribute a decoder. Using an open source decoder makes no difference, you still have to pay.


You have paid your MPEG-LA licensing fees for the copy of FFDShow you installed on your computer, right?

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


HalloKitty posted:

I have literally just this page open, and my usage is only roughly half:
Ditch flash. I don't get to 500 even after multiple hours of dozens of tabs and panorama groups.


Jippa posted:

Using the latest version of ff can I change the refresh button back to it's old size (spergy I know)?
Right-click on the bar and select customize. Any object between the address bar and the stop & reload buttons will keep them full size and not sucked into the bar. Or you can reposition them on the left side of the address bar to break up the combined forward back button thing as well.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Pilsner posted:

Well, what is the point of Firefox? It's free and made by a non-profit organization, as far as I can gather. There are no ads and no real point to it other than open source pride. I don't see why the Mozilla devs should be happy that Grandma now thinks that Firefox out of the box feels as simple as IE. Everything causes more work for the developers, so that point doesn't hold water.
The mozilla foundation makes money from the use of firefox, mainly via google search kickbacks. The more people that use it, the more they can afford to employ their coders and administration. So yes, they are happy that grandma can use firefox, especially since grandma is more likely to stick to the out of the box homepage that gives them money.

If you're the type of ubernerd who's been using firefox since it was called phoenix, you are supposed to know about about :config. Your issue of knowing enough to about missing options, but not enough to look at the documentation, is unfortunate but not one of their priorities.


Since it's open source, I could fork it to make Firefox: Pilsner Edition just for you. You'd have to hire me though.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


No trouble with google here, are you by any chance using a keyword bookmark?

I had a thing happening where google was making me do a captcha to prove I wasn't a robot every once in a while, because "unusual searches" were coming from my IP. Turned out to be the very very old keyword bookmarks I had for google.

Seconded, I don't use the highlighting but the most important thing it does is keep the text you're searching for across multiple tabs. You know, because if I'm searching for a word in one tab there's maybe a chance that I'll want to find the same word in another tab. That was a real what the gently caress moment when suddenly crtl+g stopped working just from switching tabs.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Freakazoid_ posted:

Firefox seems to have trouble loading gifs sometimes on these forums since 43.0.4. Weather it's one gif or a few, the page will freeze as I'm scrolling, sometimes for just a second or for half a minute, before returning to normal.
Same. They're really long and annoying freezes too, but CPU use doesn't go up or anything.


Nalin posted:

I have definitely noticed that freezing. I've seen comments that it is fixed in nightly, so you'll have to wait until Firefox 45. It still occurs for me in Firefox 44 beta.

Firefox 45 is not something I'm looking forward to. I still have one extension that's unsigned, NextImage. Been carrying this old thing along since like firefox version 4, manually hacking the RDF file to support ever-higher version numbers.

So what's a replacement extension which:
- is signed
- increments/decrements a url by one with a keyboard shortcut (rebindable to shift+left/right)
- doesn't need UI or anything else
- doesn't try to auto-build image galleries or do anything "smart", just move on to the next page of a SA thread with a key press



edit: though I did see that v45 ESR will restore the ability to use unsigned extensions. so maybe I'll just move over to ESR and stop upgrading. They're say they're gonna get rid of panorama / tab groups sometime soon, but I like tab groups.

Klyith fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Jan 15, 2016

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


On a tablet with 2g of ram, I might just suck it up and go with Edgelord.

Kerbtree posted:

Doesn't SALR have navigation keys?
There's also bookmarklets that will do increments.
I'm not into SALR, and I occasionally look at other websites with pages besides SA. But I found a good extension that can do exactly what I'm after: URL Flipper. I just needed to change my search to "url increment" rather than "next page" to find it. Works well, recommended if anyone else is looking for this kind of thing.


Bookmarklets would be a fine answer, but how do you put a bookmarklet on a keybind? (I think I might want to use that even though I no longer need it for the next page thing: one of my favorite things to deal with our web 2.0 nightmare world is the "zap stylesheets" bookmarklet.)

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


NoScript is definitely getting more fiddly as more and more of the web moves to CDNs and other systems that aren't just whitelisting the main site that you are viewing. But for anyone that does 95% of their browsing on the same websites all the time it still has a way lower initial barrier to entry than umatrix.


Anyways I have zero issues with noscript and vine after whitelisting the TLD. Personally I'd look at the video / html5 video part of firefox rather than the javascript part for that issue.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Sir Unimaginative posted:

a functional... well, Web
highly overrated i m h o



Noscript has a far easier UI for trial-and-error discovery of what bits a site needs to operate. The default behavior of blacklisting everything isn't great for anyone who wants things to just work rather than having to click stuff every time they look at a new site. But making it work is as easy as temp allowing all if you have no patience. I really don't feel like delving into umatrix if that's a thing the programmer of ublock considers for advanced users only.

What I'm saying is works for me. But I've been using 2 browsers for years just to avoid flash and other "rich web" bullshit for years and years now so I'm just an internet luddite.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


lightinwater posted:

Compulsory addon signing seems more prescient, though I guess this is more about testing of Addons as it bypasses addon signing for the payload

Avenging Dentist posted:

You literally won't be able to disable addon signing in Firefox 46, and this poo poo is why.



Google cache, but it seems to me that the addon was signed? Mozilla doesn't have the staff to do real security testing of all the stuff coming in, is the problem. The forced signing system is just gonna make that worse. There will be more submissions in the pipe to look at, and the bad actors will concentrate on getting malware through the signing process.

Centralized security only works if the authority is close to flawless, and I just don't see Mozilla having the resources.

lightinwater posted:

I guess we've all been waiting for this as Firefox's addon capabilities seem too powerful for their own good.

To which their long-term solution is to get rid of those capabilities entirely and reduce firefox down to a bad copy of chrome, because that is gonna get them market share back for some reason. Ugh.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


So this particular attack took advantage of being able to load an unsigned addon, but I think anyone who believes further attacks will be impossible after that hole is blocked off is nuts. Addons are an attack vector, and signing doesn't stop that. It just shifts the method from "fool lots of dumb people into clicking yes to load malware" to "fool one mozilla employee and infect thousands of people who didn't make any mistakes themselves". I personally think the change to required signed is bad, because they're effectively taking responsibility for the security of not only the browser but also every addon they sign.


But, you know, do that instead of fixing the problem where a badware addon could be silently & invisibly installed without the user's knowledge.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


~Coxy posted:

That site has the notice:


I don't think that's true, is it?

the block filter doesn't change anything about how firefox handles cookies, which by default is accepting them

it's just rear end-covering since the EU law says sites have to notify you

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Revitalized posted:

So ever since I got these larger 27" monitors with 1440p resolution, fullscreen youtube has gotten choppy on any resolution lower than 1440p. This only seems to occur with Firefox because the video is still smooth on Chrome. Any ideas? (non-fullscreen youtube on Firefox still runs fine)

Almost certainly hardware acceleration is not working for some reason.

make sure that options -> advanced -> general, use hardware acceleration is checked

then about :support -> scroll down to graphics -> look for anything blocked because of driver version, make sure that "Supports Hardware H264 Decoding" is yes

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Jippa posted:

Noscript is popping up telling me it's blocking cross site scripting on a number of different trusted sites. Should I be taking more action because of this?

most people in this thread will tell you that you should switch to uMatrix in blacklist mode rather than noscript in whitelist mode

but if you don't want to, you need to either
1) whitelist more sites. As more of the web moves to CDNs and other complex hosting, noscript isn't as good because it has assumptions from web 1.0
2) turn off the notifications



(I still use noscript rather than umatrix because I am ok with large parts of the internet being broken.)

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


hooah posted:

I would like to go directly to https://www.facebook.com/?sk=h_chr (the chronological feed) when I start typing facebook in the address bar. I've selected facebook.com and deleted everything that wasn't the desired URL or the mobile version and removed everything from my history, but still, as soon as I get to "fa", Firefox helpfully suggests facebook.com. I've made sure to turn off search suggestions and restarted Firefox. Is there anything else I can do?

bookmark the url and pick an option:
- add a bookmark keyword so you can just type "fa" and hit enter
- type "* fa" to restrict location bar suggestions to bookmarks only
- change the browser.urlbar.default.behavior preference to always show bookmarks only

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


hooah posted:

How real-life dangerous is this vulnerability due to the way Firefox's extensions aren't sandboxed (Ars article) for people who don't just install every add-on they find?
not hugely dangerous, but these are the new lines of attack that are gonna be employed in the signed addon world. practice safe browsing and things haven't really changed.

Alereon posted:

Not at all, since you have to install a malicious extension.
The more likely attack is where some site or malvertising tries to get you to install the bad addon via the usual click here tricks, or even silently installs the (signed!) baddon using a second exploit. Also there's the continuing possibility of trusted addons going bad or being suborned.

Who could have predicted this coming?!?

Klyith fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Apr 6, 2016

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


astral posted:

I thought something seemed odd lately. I, too, was one of the fans of that feature, and had used it since I started using Firefox. Apparently it broke some session storage things and could cause crashes.

refs: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=606655
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fr...dev/3mnR3ZTGSFU

Is there an addon that closely replaces it yet?

I like cookie controller. It's just a simple UI for managing your exceptions list.


Personally, I never used the "ask me every time" even back when it worked, because there are a billion domains on the internet that will try to make cookies. Trying to decide on all of them is kinda futile. I find that the sane way to deal with it is to default to "keep until close" and whitelist sites that I want to keep logins or shopping carts or whatev they're cookie-ing.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


astral posted:

That's a little better! It looks like three are menu versions and three are button versions of the same thing - something they could have designed much more simply. It looks like two of the three remaining wouldn't be necessary for my use case, so in practice it would be far simpler than it appears at first glance.

yeah I guess it's a keep-every-option-anyone-has-ever-said-they-use type addon. ie, the same thing we complain about when mainstream mozilla development "streamlines" a feature we like.

as I use it, it's a single button / sub-menu popup in my hamburger main menu, no more.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Da Mott Man posted:

youtube-dl (not an addon for firefox, but the best downloader for any internet video/music)

^^^ this right here. Especially now that they have a windows .exe version, so you don't have to install python on windows (which is probably a bit beyond the average user).

Youtube doesn't really want people to download videos. They change stuff all the time to break compatibility, and their old-style easily downloadable flv & mp4 formats have been cut way back. All of the extension & web based things rely on those limited formats, and they frequently go out of date.

youtube-dl can grab the high-res video or whatever other format you want, and it's updated quickly.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Ryuga Death posted:

Is there any way to make having the menu bar on for Firefox not cause the youtube player to freak out and not work in theater mode? Here's a couple of pictures to show what I mean:




With the menu bar on in FF, the youtube player won't properly expand the video to the correct size.

With the menu bar disabled, it works just fine as shown here:




Just upgraded to windows 10 today, this wasn't an issue in windows 7. Thanks for any help.

The only problem is that the menu bar is cutting off *just* enough vertical height that youtube's layout CSS is shrinking the video. If you can't see somewhere around the top of the views number in expanded theater, it shrinks back to smaller. If you took the window in that second pic and dragged it shorter-taller you could make the video bounce between sizes.

edit: just checked, you need ~870 vertical pixels to keep youtube videos big.

Things you could try include:
press crtl+minus for negative zoom
not using the menu bar all the time (just press alt when you need it)
putting your taskbar on the left instead of bottom (I started doing this with Win7's fatter taskbar and widescreen monitors. iz nice)
getting an extension or using userchrome.css to shrink the titlebars

Klyith fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Jul 18, 2016

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Got 48, and am trying out e10s by force-enabling it. Still too many extensions that I really like get turned off by it, and I'm not optimistic over some of them getting updated.

Some things feel odd too, the UI is super-responsive but content is slower and sometimes the mismatch is a bit jarring. For example you open a new tab, the tab bar moves immediately but there's enough time that it's just blank to recognize it's there. Tab thumbnails kinda bounce around weirdly in the tab groups window. But other than that it's pretty spiffy. Now to wait another 8-12 months for v50 where multi-process is always on, and our extensions are all hosed. *sigh*

Reicere posted:

FF48 killed my bookmarklets, again.
Gurl ner erny fvzcyr yvxr fb wninfpevcg:erfvmrGb(1280,1024);zbirGb(0,0);

Mozilla previously disabled those in normal bookmarks, but I was able to keep them alive by running from the about :whatever pages(most recently newtab).
I think this has to do with a change to how CSP is handled. Does anyone know of a fix or alternative?

My bookmarklets are all still intact, but they're all standard bookmarklet things like deleting all images or style sheets, URL replacement, and the like. Moving and resizing the main window is definitely something that most people would prefer to not ever be controlled by JS.

The best fix would be to use either an extension, or a separate windows utility. There are a couple extensions that can do it, including Web Developer (though that has a bunch of other stuff you may not need). Alternately, an extremely simple autohotkey script will do this for you.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


my only suggestion would be to try "list-style-image" instead of "image". Like so:
code:
#titlebar-close:hover > .toolbarbutton-icon {
    list-style-image: url("chrome://browser/skin/caption-buttons.svg#close-white") !important;
}
I have no real idea what or why this is, but I have several image overrides in my userchrome that all use "list-style-image". They're all cribbed from internet instructions made by people who know what they're doing.



edit also try that same thing for the ID (but without hover). making this:
code:
#toggle-button--tabgroupsschubio-tabgroups-show > .toolbarbutton-icon {
    list-style-image: url("chrome://simplified-tabgroups/content/icons/togglebutton/icon-inverted-32.png") !important; }
this makes sense to me since it's the icon that has an image attached that you want to change.

Klyith fucked around with this message at 07:04 on Aug 18, 2016

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


dis astranagant posted:

Is there an extension somewhere that lets you specify download folders for individual sites?

the browser itself is supposed to remember by site if you have "always ask me where to download" turned on, but it isn't 100% reliable.

I use "save link in folder", which isn't by site, but gives you a easy list of folders. Good if you have less than a dozen entries.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


syntaxfunction posted:

Is there a theme for Firefox to make it feel a little closer to the Windows 10 feel? A big part is that if you open Explorer, or Music or Skype or whatever else they have a colour scheme that fits in, especially with their title bar being the colour I picked for the system theme. Firefox just sits there being grey, and the parts that would be white on most other programs is greyish off white. It doesn't look bad and if there's no answer then it's not going to bug me, but it'd be neat if there was something to make it feel more "native".

In userchrome.css, add:

code:
/* titlebar skinned by windows color */
#main-window:not([customizing]){
    -moz-appearance: -moz-win-glass !important;
    background-color: transparent !important;
}

.titlebar-button {
background-color: transparent !important;
transition: background-color 0.2s ease;
}
.titlebar-button > .toolbarbutton-icon {
list-style-image: none;
}
.titlebar-button:hover {
background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.15) !important;
}
#titlebar-close:hover {
background-color: #E81123 !important;
}
#titlebar-close:hover > .toolbarbutton-icon {
list-style-image: url("chrome://browser/skin/caption-buttons.svg#close-white") !important;
}
The above is based on stuff I found here and here and somewhere in mozillazine forums that I don't have a link for. (The code is my own edit based on other examples getting messed up when changing titlebar size. I think it should be a bit more universal, but if mine doesn't work for you, try the other ones.)

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Mad Doctor Cthulhu posted:

I got a weird issue: starting with Firefox 48 I noticed that occasionally when I'm surfing, I get pictures that do this.

http://imgur.com/a/Tr57E

Black bars where it looks like some of the picture isn't loading at all. The only website so far I've seen it happening is eBay where the entire webpage gets black bars that persist until I shut down and kill the Firefox process. I thought it was just a fluke of my home machine, but it's on two different machines (one a i5 machine with a R9 380 4GB card, the other a HP laptop with 2GB of memory and Intel video card) and on Firefox that are running two wholly different Sync accounts. I tried turning off hardware acceleration but that has resulted in nothing.

Any ideas?

are you using electrolysis / multi-process? (to check, got to about :support and look for Multiprocess Windows, it will be 0/1 if off and 1/1 if on.)

I tried out multi-process by forcing it on, but found I was getting visual problems with text rendering. Like distorted and blurry cleartext stuff. I think that it's not 100% fully cooked yet which is pretty disappointing with how many versions it's been available by now. I bet they aren't getting good feedback because all their power-users have addons that are blocking it.


you can turn off e10s in about :config by setting "browser.tabs.remote.autostart" to false.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Mad Doctor Cthulhu posted:

Multiprocess Windows is set to 0/1 (disabled due to add-ons). However, about :config has two entries for browser.tabs.remote.autostart with 'browser.tabs.remote.autostart.2' set to true while the original is set to false. The add-ons I have instaleld that are part of the experimental set are uBlock Origin and Video Downloadhelper. Interesting.

I'm going to try playing around a bit with these and see if those two entries are causing the error. I know Firefox is set up to update the add-ons automatically and have been previous to Firefox 48, so maybe one of those is causing the error or creating the 'autostart.2' entry to boot. I'll do some more research. Thanks for the help!

The duplicate entries are due to the weird rollout method they're doing for e10s, where they're turning it on only on a random assortment of users at first. If about :support says 0/1 then multiprocess is off and isn't causing your issue. Rather than continue digging at that, I'd suggest checking video drivers, memtest86, and other normal troubleshooting.


Geemer posted:

That list is pretty except for Greasemonkey and uBlock Origin, though.

Just as a point of comparison when I forced it on, only 2 of my 20+ addons had problems (and the problems were nothing more than being non-functional, not "crashed browser and summoned satan"). They were from 2011 and 2010 respectively. And that second one has other "open with" addons that it was obviously made obsolete by, which work fine.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


I could swear there was a nearly identical story about excessive writes from a different program, with the same "your SSD will die" scare line, and the end result was that a lot of supposed writes just hit the cache over and over before being written. What the windows storage driver considers a write, and what's actually going on in the SSD, are potentially not the same.


Kassad posted:

I remember seeing an article by someone who stress-tested a bunch of SSDs for months, to see how much he could write on them before they died. Most of them lasted a good deal longer than the manufacturers said they would.

Yeah that's the TR endurance test: your SSD will probably last for hundreds of terrabytes written and even after that you should be more afraid of a manufacturer's kill switch than a natural death.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


bronin posted:

I went back to Firefox after a couple of months of using Chrome. One thing I noticed is that pages with lots of animated gifs tax the CPU heavily. Opening 2 or 3 pages of the SA gif thread cause the CPU to be at 100% load. Firefox then becomes unresponsive. This never happened with Chrome.

Are you using an old or ESR version of firefox? For a while they had a problem with their rendering engine where gifs that started off-screen would try to "catch up" when scrolled into view, causing the browser to lock for a while at 100% load. It was really annoying.

Other than that, if you're on a machine with limited CPU power then chrome is probably better. Chrome's image & video system is much more optimized than FF's, at the cost of higher memory use. On my old junky C2D laptop FF can't do 720p youtubes without frame dropping, chrome is generally ok (and VLC doesn't even peg the CPU).

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Nalin posted:

Nah, it's an actual problem. I'm on 51 beta right now and I see it. Just open up an SA subforum with animating tags and look at the CPU load. It will probably be using a full core just to animate the stupid gifs.

I can look at an entire page of gifs and still be under 20% total utilization, so most of one core on my 4x cpu. And it doesn't even push the CPU multiplier all the way up in cpuz (bounces around between x28 and x32 of the maximum x34).

Are you actually getting slowdown from looking at a bunch of gifs, or are you just watching the windows performance monitor and tsk-tsking?


Also if multi-threading is turned on, I would not be at all surprised by additional CPU load.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


dud root posted:

Anyway to make a search term (search as you type) persist across tabs? I want to change tab and hit F3

Findbar Tweak extension

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Read posted:

and because there are privacy issues (eg: tracking every webpage you visit) with the Chrome version of Stylish after the addon was bought out - and it's unclear whether or not the changes will come to the Firefox version as well.

So far no, the firefox version hasn't even been updated since mid-2016. Also mozilla only allows a lot of that stuff as opt-in, not opt-out.

(Though I don't know where they'd fall on this "we're not sending tracking data, it's loading new styles" method of selling your web history.)

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Welp that one dude makes two of the extensions that are on my list of things that make use firefox. When they get rid of webextensions entirely I'll lose at least 3 or 4 others that I really like, probably.

If the only extensions that still work are the same ublock / greasemonkey / stylish combo that other browsers have, why exactly am I sticking with with this one? Extensions + configurability + UI are the reason I started using FF back when it was still phoenix. Now all browsers have basically the same UI, firefox is taking away user options more often than adding them, and my extensions are gonna be trash.

Looks like v52 will get an ESR version, so I guess I'll move to that for a while and use the time to decide between palemoon, reduced-function FF, or moving to vivaldi full time.


Desuwa posted:

I'm probably among the most cynical about this because I'm one of the Opera 12 refugees.

Have you been following vivaldi? That's now my secondary browser, but I can imagine it becoming my first choice if the future of firefox continues to be pessimistic.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


spit on my clit posted:

Am I supposed to be on Firefox 51.0.1 (32 bit)? Last I checked the "about firefox" only said 51.0.1, not including the 32 bit thing. am i just being paranoid?

51.0.1 is the current version, yes.

I'm using x64 and don't have anything specifically calling that out in about firefox myself. Possibly they just now consider the x64 version to be at par with 32 so they've stopped distinguishing them. (the x64 were marked as experimental for a long-rear end time)

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Icept posted:

Why the gently caress is Mozilla so concerned with how people modify the UI?

They're not specifically trying to block people from modifying the UI, but they're ditching the old extension system for webextensions, which is the same system / API that chrome built and now edge uses as well. Webextensions are more sandboxed and can't do the same stuff XUL can because they don't have the same access to the guts of the program. Some of the stuff that's going away is stuff that made CTR and other UI extensions possible (or at least way easier to write).

Why are they doing this?
* Malicious firefox extensions can do nastier things than webextensions can. Personally I don't think this is a great justification, webextensions can still be nearly arbitrarily bad if they get through.
* By using chrome's API they can piggyback on code that google's paying for.
* Firefox is losing market share, so maybe they're looking to avoid the day when extensions are only actively developed for chrome.


Other than the extensions API changeover, UI mods have always felt "under threat" just because it's the fastest moving target for most extension writers. Mozilla doesn't do it on purpose but every time they do UI makeovers it requires lots of update work for the extensions. (I do think they have a real problem with doing FOTM poo poo to the UI, like how they integrated Tab Groups because Exposť was hot, then ripped it out again when nobody cared. This is a known problem with open source software.)


Desuwa posted:

In the sense that it will get rid of Firefox, jank and all, yes.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


anatoliy pltkrvkay posted:

Every Chrome user I see looks like this and I don't know how they live:



Not at all just chrome users. It's the browser equivalent of the "desktop covered with icons" thing.




Meanwhile, on a different issue: I've been noticing that multithreading is producing small but ugly errors with text rendering -- loving up the antialiasing just a tiny bit with darker pixels. It's pretty random; even on the same line of text some letters will be grunged and some will be clean, so it's not like the old issues with scrolling they used to have a few years ago.

Anything that forces a redraw like switching tabs fixes it. Also, selecting the text and then deselecting cleans it up, as with this before and after:


Now, I do have e10s force-enabled (due to addons) so I'm not totally cheesed about it. I'll probably go back to disabled for the interim. But I'm kinda suspicious that this is a pure e10s problem, and nothing to do with the addons.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Desuwa posted:

some on point words

It's worth remembering how firefox got to be the dominant browser: netscape turned into an awful shitpile, and microsoft decided the only work they were gonna do on IE was trying to proprietary extensions to web standards. Firefox was good yes, but without the other two being actively terrible there would never have been that kind of movement by the general user base. Most people don't care about software and don't like changing it, they want to use the same thing as they used yesterday.

So, firefox ain't gonna get back to #1 unless google screws the pooch in some huge way. Which just doesn't seem likely. Google monetizes the whole internet, it's in their best interest for users to have as good an interface to the web as possible. The only place where interests run counter is advertising. That could be a future wedge, but I wouldn't bet on it.


Basically the question is, what is the purpose of Firefox? If the goal is to be the revenue source for the Mozilla Foundation to be the huge hundred-millions operation it is now, then obviously <10% market share is a slow death sentence. But if the goals are stuff the Mozilla mission statement is full of, open standards and web decentralization, Firefox is doing a fine job. It's the thing that keeps everyone else honest. And so the goal should be efficient use of coder time and serving the users they have, not yet another component being replaced with a all-new-from-scratch miracle.

(Fresh new from-scratch engines are always blazing fast, because they don't have any of the exceptions and compatibility patches and bug fixes that made the old one slow.)

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


fishmech posted:

Trying to do proprietary extensions was far more of a latter-day Netscape thing.
what was activex then?

Anyways yes there was the vista delay thing for IE7, and also the DOJ & EU suits made them slow work down a ton in the 5-6 era. But it's not like IE7 was particularly great vs firefox either, so your "but actually" is pretty poo poo. The point was that MS dropped the ball and firefox picked it up.

There's not much hope for a repeat where both google and ms poo poo the bed and everyone goes back to firefox. If nothing else, android phones will keep chrome relevant and push people vaguely in the google direction.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


spit on my clit posted:

Upon going to Imgur, all of my tabs stopped loading what was on them, only displaying a loading symbol. I could not exit Firefox through the big red X, i had to click the X on all the tabs multiple times. Did that piece of poo poo website just overload firefox, or has it been overtaken by some virus?

I've been having really weird poo poo happen with imgur sometimes, like when mousing over their dynamic dropdowns it produces a bunch of radiating crap that looks like busted GPU artifacts (my gpu is fine). I think their css is just hosed.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Xander77 posted:

1. For some reason, youtube videos went back to autoplaying (as far as I know, that's the default youtube setting, no matter what browser of computer you're on), with ads. I have ublock and youtube center on (I also have ublock on chrome, doesn't help with ads there anymore either). Anything that can replace them?

You don't need to replace them, just wait for filter maintainers or the main dev to update when they figure out what to block.

But in the long term, you may just have to accept ads on youtube at some point. If youtube finds a way to make ads that are served from the same source and are part of the same media stream as the video you want to see, that will be almost impossible to block. I think it's just a CPU issue for them: if they had enough processing power to re-encapsulate every video on the fly, they could do it right now. Re-encapsulation doesn't take a ton of CPU power, but they serve a lot of video. It'll happen some time.

Accept it, get a youtube red subscription, or start watching stuff that doesn't monetize with video ads.

Can't help you with the autoplay thing, hasn't happened to me.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/
Download firefox for another platform
Windows 64-bit

it's linked right there on the main firefox page

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply