8 ms·

Dear Mozilla developers! I've been using Firefox since v1.0. And I want you to know that by ditching the old plugin architecture you are alienating your faithfu

Dear Mozilla developers! I've been using Firefox since v1.0. And I want you to know that by ditching the old plugin architecture you are alienating your faithful users, myself included. I'm sorry, but I decided to stick with Firefox 55 for now, possibly switching to Palemoon later. I need my old extensions to work: Status4Evar, EdgeWise and Classic Theme Restorer. I can't stand the current FF UI and I will not give up on this.

51Cards 9y ago
One more voice for the above. I will be stopping at Firefox 56 until I decide what works best for me. I rely on several plugins daily that are about to be made obsolete. Likewise I revert Firefox back to a very classic UI interface that is very compact and familiar. I have avoided Chrome all these years because I can't stand its UI. Now I'm also about to loose the ability to make FF feel familiar along with many of my required productivity add-ons. I'll ride out FF 56 until I decide where to go next but honestly the many times in the past it has felt FF has ignored the requests of long term users, coupled with lack of differentiation from Chrome, I'm not sure I have much reason to stick around. Kudos to the team for all the hard work improving the FF core. But you're about to abandon that which kept long term users like myself here through all those rough years. Makes me sad.
romanovcode 9y ago
I don't agree. Yes it's a change but it serves a good purpose - to standardize the extension development and making sure that 1 extension can be running on multiples browsers e.g. Firefox, Opera, Edge, etc..
- drdaeman 9y ago
  WebExtensions is the lowest common denominator. Yes, it's a good purpose to have a standard base. It's bad, though, that nothing besides the blessed parts are officially customizable anymore. Previously, extensions had messed up with anything they wanted (they could override most of the browser's core). That had allowed third parties to do incredible things that weren't ever considered by the browser developers. With WEs, though, the only things that browser developers had specifically thought about are possible. All for user's convenience, so they can switch to Chrome, Edge or Opera.
  - cookiecaper 9y ago
    It's the same thing as plugins, unsigned drivers, etc. etc. If the platform gives unfettered control, that is nice in that it gives power users flexibility, but it comes at the cost of seriously jeopardizing the experience of non-power-users who don't understand the intricacies of the software. They expect the platform to protect them by default. This applies to the whole package -- security, performance, and overall experience. Vendors have learned that if they fail to provide this protection, the average user will blame them directly, not the extension that makes memory usage bloat 6x. The solution is to enforce stringent controls, including limiting modifiable parts of the experience to some well-defined areas.
  - JBiserkov 9y ago
    >All for user's convenience, so they can switch to Chrome, Edge or Opera. Nah, it's the other way(s) around - it's for [longterm] developer convenience; so users don't have to switch to another browser because an add-on they need isn't available in FF.
    - drdaeman 9y ago
      This too, but to the lesser extent. That's because Firefox had much more powerful extension system than other browsers.
    - 51Cards 9y ago
      Unfortunately I don't think so. The only draw keeping FF alive for years has been its extension system. They gave up the unique UI flexibility, now they are giving up the flexible extensions. When Google makes it so easy to find and install Chrome everywhere, and sync it with your mobile device, now that the extensions world will be on "par" FF is even less distinct than it was and thus less reason to use it. This is the beginning of Firefox's final dive. In a few more releases I really won't have any concrete reason to recommend FF over Chrome anymore (and no, 99% of users outside of this forum don't care about memory usage and keeping 100 tabs open at the same time)
- kirillkh 9y ago
  Then they should bring back the old UI we came to love. I want my blue title bar on Windows, my menu bar, my status bar, my square tabs, etc, etc. Also, I can't imagine living without EdgeWise, so they would have to incorporate that, as well. Other people use different sets of features, which are also not supported in the new plugin model. How can Mozilla ever hope to plug all these holes (pun intended)?
  - mintplant 9y ago
    > I want my blue title bar on Windows, my menu bar, my status bar, my square tabs, etc, etc. So like this [0]? The title bar isn't blue, but neither is any other title bar on Windows 10. To achieve this on Nightly I opened the Customize view, switched the theme to "Light", checked the "Title bar" checkbox, and enabled "Menu bar" under the "Toolbars" dropdown. Tabs have squared edges by default. [0] https://vgy.me/KvNgxS.png https://vgy.me/KvNgxS.png
    - kirillkh 9y ago
      No, like this: https://vgy.me/VBLBYH.jpg https://vgy.me/VBLBYH.jpg And when the FF window is not focused, the title bar is grey. Like it's supposed to be. It's not part of a plugin, though, I had to patch something manually (I never remember what and have to re-google it every time).
  - kronos29296 9y ago
    You get square tabs in 57 i think.
  - clouddrover 9y ago
    > my square tabs Square tabs have been back for a while now. The Compact Light and Compact Dark themes are included in Firefox by default. Set the theme in Add-ons Manager -> Appearance. I use Compact Light.
drdaeman 9y ago
Actually, it still does support legacy extensions and probably will do for a while. There are `browser/features/*.xpi` files in the browser install directory. Even in 57, they're all "legacy" extensions, and the only WebExtension there is `screenshots@mozilla.org.xpi` (even then, still a "legacy" install.rdf-type file, with embedded WE). And I've just copied the legacy `https-everywhere@eff.org.xpi` non-WE addon there - and it worked ;) I'm sure they're going to plug this "hole" shut, but it's still there. As well as patching omni.ja.
- kirillkh 9y ago
  If it keeps working in FF 57 and won't break after every minor update, I might upgrade. I was actually thinking that providing some kind of officially unsupported backdoor for determined users like us might be a way out of this situation.
  - drdaeman 9y ago
    The internal APIs will eventually change (break). They already did on major releases - one can find lots of "does not work on Firefox NN+ anymore, please update" comments all over AMO. (By design, this should be significantly rarer occasion with the WebExtensions) Now there is no requirement to keep them stable even across the patch-level releases. Whenever things would break faster or at the same pace is unknown.
    - kirillkh 9y ago
      I know it's not a good way out, but it's something we could at least in theory work with.
  - majewsky 9y ago
    I'm not involved in FF development, but I find it exceedingly unlikely that this will keep working for much longer than a few releases after 57. The whole purpose of all of this is to rip out all the XUL baggage to decrease maintenance cost and make it easier for the developers to focus on actual features and fixing bugs that actual people encounter (as opposed to keeping legacy code paths working where no one has a clue if they are even used anymore).
ramshanker 9y ago
>>alienating your faithful users, myself included.<< I wonder what the telemetry says about those plugins. If it shows a minority, than Mozilla many not give it a thought at all.
- throwaway2048 9y ago
  Telemetry isnt the whole story, especially if it is being interpreted by somebody looking to justify decisions.
- yakult 9y ago
  The telemetry probably shows that all the power users opted out of telemetry.
  - krzyk 9y ago
    It's the other way around I think, telemetry isn't (wasn't?) on by default and I enabled it on purpose. And I'm a power user, that's why I don't use chrome (1k tabs here).
devcpp 9y ago
Sadly, I don't think the devs have much of a voice anymore. Corporate and upper management have taken over, as shown by the various SJW and usability debacles. I'm always concerned of this happening to other large-scale independent FOSS projects. Special interests tend to take over without some benevolent dictator.
- kirillkh 9y ago
  The devs still have a voice in the sense that they can always quit and fork. Or, in case of Firefox, join the Palemoon team.
  - dblohm7 9y ago
    Joining Palemoon is highly unlikely - there's bad blood between the two communities.
SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
I'm going to be switching to the extended support release[1] (based on Firefox 52 but with security patches through June 18th 2018). I don't mind WebExtensions, and cross-browser compatibility is a nice goal, but a half-baked system that breaks the most important distinguishing feature of Firefox (extensions that can modify any part of the browser) is ridiculous. [1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all/
- Elhana 9y ago
  I'm already on ESR, but my reason is I need java plugin for my company OEBS (it supports web start, but it takes ages for our admins to patch anything). At the same time, keeping legacy plugins working is a big bonus, I love Classic theme restorer. Still undecided what to do after june 2018. I guess I'll just try firefox and chrome side by side and move to chrome if there is no real difference. It is probably more convinient to migrate to chrome, since it is on the phone by default too.
klondike_ 9y ago
The main problem with legacy extensions is that they won't work with multiprocess firefox by design. Multiprocess is the only way forward, because of the enormous speed and stability benefits. Unfortunately Mozilla has rushed the transition, and there hasn't been enough time to add important APIs and for developers to update their extensions. Firefox 57 is on the verge of being released, and there are still many addons which aren't webextension compatible.
- kirillkh 9y ago
  Isn't v55 already multiprocess? How are these extensions working right now?
  - johnny22 9y ago
    many of the apis were shimmed in such a way so that they'd work, but could still slow down the browser. Those shims will disappear.
  - zanny 9y ago
    If you have any legacy extensions installed multiprocess is disabled. If you don't have any, it is turned on.
    - scott_karana 9y ago
      Not correct. Some legacy plugins work fine: the add-ins store relied on user testing and flagging to confirm which still worked. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/SDK/Guides/Multiprocess_Firefox_and_the_SDK https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/SDK/Guides/Multi...
maxerickson 9y ago
I've been using Firefox since ~Phoenix 0.1 and I don't care at all about the legacy plugins. It would be interesting to see what percentage of their long time users use more than 1 or 2 add ons (I have 4 installed and only really use 2 of them).
- throwaway2048 9y ago
  How many of those users really care about firefox and dont just use it for inertia reasons? (already installed, etc) Frankly if they arnt using extensions they are going to have a vastly better user experience on chrome, and google has infinity manpower to always ensure thats the case. So what is firefox gaining by becomming a crappier chrome? Why the hell wouldnt I just use chrome at that point, because I feel so great about mozilla, who regularly brushes me off when i try to take advantage of things unique to firefox?
  - kronos29296 9y ago
    I use mozilla nowadays on my low end laptop because chrome chokes on it most of the time (just plain hangs and stops working with more than 10 tabs which is all the time for me). FF 55 is much snappier with most of my important extensions and doesn't choke as much. So I moved from chrome to FF after 55. Hope they continue to make it better. P.S FF is now not a crappier version of Chrome but Chrome is crappier if you don't have powerful hardware or RAM (mine's hardly 2 GB and everything sucks a lot though its only 4 years old)
- wvenable 9y ago
  In my case, the critical extension for me is Tab Mix plus (770k users) for multi-row tabs. It's really hard to use a browser without this feature because I've been using it for so long. The real question is for me is how many users haven't moved onto Chrome -- which is obviously faster and more stable -- because of 1 or 2 add-ons.
- contras1970 9y ago
  i've used ff since the phoenix days (0.6? do not remember). this particular laptop now has 55.0.2 with Cookie Monster, HTTPS Everywhere, NoScript, Policeman, Show my Password, Tab Mix Plus. some other extensions are installed but not used.
dbolgheroni 9y ago
I rely mainly on one add-on: Vimperator. It's a big big productivity enhancer and it's the main reason for sticking with Firefox for so long. Even in a period when Firefox was slower and buggier than the alternatives. It's sad they will deprecate the old extension interface and make Vimperator a no-no. I understand the reasons behind WebExtensions, specially those related to security, and reckon the benefits of the multiprocess paradigm, but the flexibility of the old extensions API was a big advantage in my pov. No, Vimperator won't be ported (I wish it could), because WebExtensions is a much more limited API. And no, Vimium and VimFx doesn't come even close to it. They are not alternatives.
- NotOscarWilde 9y ago
  I hate to add so little to the discussion, but I am on the exact same boat, and I am quite anxious about the upcoming change. If there is anything to make either Mozilla hear this use case more, or contribute anywhere to make Vimperator a possibility for the future, I would be happy to do my part.
- weaksauce 9y ago
  fwiw they seem to be actively trying to support vimperator like webextensions in this bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215061 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215061 What does vimperator do that vimium and vimfx can't?
  - kronos29296 9y ago
    Though I haven't used it, it seems to radically make firefox into something like Qutebrowser. Not just the key bindings but also the UI which is not possible under new api for Web extensions while Vimium and vimfx only give vim key bindings in the browser (Not the full experience for those who are used to vimperator).
zanny 9y ago
I've been using Firefox since 1.5, and I understand completely why they have to drop their legacy extensions framework to modernize the browser. In recent years I found myself using Chromium more and more because of its responsiveness. Firefox 57 is really close to where it needs to be to let me drop all my use cases of Chromium I have now. Yes, it means 4 of the ~12 extensions I've used for years stop working. Most of those have a web extension version being worked on or aren't worth the competitive disadvantage of supporting a 15 year old addon API. I've seen plenty of my favorite software projects have to make "hard breaks" to modernize. KDE broke everything with Qt5 / Plasma 5, but the payoff is now they are the premier high DPI Linux desktop. Python broke everything with 3, but features enabled by the changes have made Python 3 the best scripting language ever in my book. Firefox would be doomed to a slow death with its legacy extensions API the same way PHP and Perl languished for years with the inability to push a major version. A slow death is not a downfall anyone wants.
- catdog 9y ago
  The issue is not that things break, the issue is that the WebExtensions API is missing a lot of features so a lot of addons can't be ported.
  - JohnBooty 9y ago
    It's missing functionality because the old API allowed deep, deep hooks into FF's internals. Per Mozilla, aside from security problems and other nightmares, these deep hooks allowed developers to write plugins that were incompatible with a multiprocess browser architecture where each tab/window can have its own sandbox and remain responsive even if other tabs go down. And that is one of the killer features that has caused FF to bleed massive amounts of user share to Chrome in the last decade: Chrome almost always "felt fast" in situations where FF ground to an embarassing halt because something was happening in another tab/window that was causing the entire browser to become unresponsive. I don't know what precisely is missing from the new WebExtensions API but I have to imagine that Mozilla will work to expand its capabilities as much as possible over time...
    - 9y ago
JohnBooty 9y ago
While we're throwing anecdotal statements around... Dear Mozilla developers! I've been using Firefox as my daily driver nearly non-stop since it was Phoenix and I'm totally cool with you dropping the legacy stuff.
- joneil 9y ago
  I'm the same. Been using since Phoenix 0.3 and am stoked about these changes, and the thought that Rust, and the major perf and safety improvements that come with it, are beginning to find their way into Gecko. Amazing work from a team that many had dismissed as irrelevant. Prove them wrong!
- rnhmjoj 9y ago
  I'm totally cool with dropping legacy stuff that has a proper replacement.
  - Sylos 9y ago
    Then you must hate all of your software. It's impossible to always continue in the direction that happened to be chosen more than a decade ago. At some point, you will run into problems, which in the case of Firefox were severe problems in performance, security, maintainability and complexity as well as stability of the extension API. You can't fix all of these problems without breaking things, without doing things differently. And yes, it is to some degree subjective whether this is worth it, but at the end of the day, you, as someone who uses lots of extensions and complex extensions, are only a very small fraction of the Firefox user base. Most users have no extensions or just the obligatory ad blocker. They don't benefit at all from keeping onto the old architecture with all of its problems, which they are suffering under. And then, yeah, Mozilla has to at some point piss you off in order to help the majority of their user base. It's not like all other browsers had such a complex extension API and Mozilla is just being lazy by dropping it.
- chrismorgan 9y ago
  Dear Firefox developers, I’ve been using Firefox as my standard browser since 0.9.3 (except for a year or so when it was run-a-browser-from-a-USB-disk-or-use-IE and Firefox was just too terribly slow, so I used Chrome—by the next year Firefox had fixed its game and I could switch back), and for the last few years Nightly has been my standard browser. I get why you’re dropping the legacy stuff and I’m looking forward to what’s possible after it’s gone. When the announcement came out in November last year that WebExtensions would be the only way come 57, I was intensely sceptical that it’d be ready within a year (no one was using it at that time) and prepared for a deal of pain: I’d just have to live with it, come November. (It’s not like I have any better options in mainstream browsers; they’re all hopeless with even only twenty tabs.) Well. You’ve proven me wrong, and I’m delighted. I was able to replace all my legacy extensions with WebExtensions ones with minimal loss of functionality (I miss the ability to style the chrome with Stylish, not that I was actually using it for anything other than shaving half pixels off here and there on my high-DPI screen). My Dad (also a programmer) is still grumbling about some status bar thing that broke a short while ago, but we went through his extensions and came to the conclusion that it’s really not that bad—the extensions that stop working at 57 were ones he didn’t use, or ones where there are already good alternatives available or a clear plan for the changeover. (The fact that in several cases I did have to swap out one extension for another was a mild nuisance, but as a Nightly user I’m doing this a few months before everyone will have to, so I expected it.) All in all, I’m happy with how things have gone and impressed at how well the migration is going. All that I really want now is to be able to hide the horizontal tab strip in favour of my vertical tab bar. And it looks like https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447 is almost there. (It’d also be good if file: URLs didn’t mess with said vertical tab bar something awful, but as I haven’t filed any bugs about that yet or investigated to find existing reports I’m not allowed to complain.) Good job!
JohnTHaller 9y ago
Dear niche community using legacy extensions: We're sorry, but legacy extensions are holding back Firefox development in every way meaningful to the vast majority of users. In order to continue to exist as a viable option for an open web, Firefox must move forward. - (What I imagine they'd say) Of the extensions you listed, the largest (Classic Theme Restorer) is only used by 333,000 people while the smallest (Edgewise) is only used by 218 people.
- lucb1e 9y ago
  > only used by 333,000 people doesn't sound like an "only" to me.
  - JohnTHaller 9y ago
    Firefox has 80 million daily active users, so that's an 'only' in context. Keeping XUL around and all of its messiness to support a small niche of users at the expense of what most users want is part of why Firefox has lost so many users to less customizable, (arguably) less capable competing browsers.
    - throwaway2048 9y ago
      There are a boatload of assumptions in that statement that are pretty unwarrented. The vast majority of why chrome is popular is because google.com and youtube.com push it nonstop, not any other imagined reasons.
    - Grue3 9y ago
      You're forgetting that people who want to use the features older versions had but not anymore are likely the same people who have been using Firefox for a long time. These are the same people who drive Firefox adoption by being experienced long-time users giving advice to the young'uns. If you lose that core user base, you'll lose the rest of 80 million to Google/Microsoft ads in no time.
      - Max_Mustermann 9y ago
Sir_Cmpwn 9y ago
I completely left Firefox over this and other bullshit.
michel-slm 9y ago
I used to do that until I discovered the Compact theme (which is now installed by default, previously only available on the developer edition without installing an add-on).
- endemic 9y ago
  Love the compact theme. Glad it made its way into the release channel.
jccalhoun 9y ago
I've been using firefox since the very early days and I am excited about ditching the old plugin architecture. Oh, and good news, the ui you dislike is going away.
clouddrover 9y ago
> I can't stand the current FF UI and I will not give up on this. Then the simple way forward is to make your own browser, isn't it? Use an embeddable engine which does all the hard work for you and focus on making the UI the way you insist it must be. It really could be a single developer project. So why not just do that?

51Cards 9y ago

One more voice for the above. I will be stopping at Firefox 56 until I decide what works best for me. I rely on several plugins daily that are about to be made obsolete. Likewise I revert Firefox back to a very classic UI interface that is very compact and familiar. I have avoided Chrome all these years because I can't stand its UI. Now I'm also about to loose the ability to make FF feel familiar along with many of my required productivity add-ons. I'll ride out FF 56 until I decide where to go next but honestly the many times in the past it has felt FF has ignored the requests of long term users, coupled with lack of differentiation from Chrome, I'm not sure I have much reason to stick around. Kudos to the team for all the hard work improving the FF core. But you're about to abandon that which kept long term users like myself here through all those rough years. Makes me sad.

romanovcode 9y ago

I don't agree. Yes it's a change but it serves a good purpose - to standardize the extension development and making sure that 1 extension can be running on multiples browsers e.g. Firefox, Opera, Edge, etc..

drdaeman 9y ago
WebExtensions is the lowest common denominator. Yes, it's a good purpose to have a standard base. It's bad, though, that nothing besides the blessed parts are officially customizable anymore. Previously, extensions had messed up with anything they wanted (they could override most of the browser's core). That had allowed third parties to do incredible things that weren't ever considered by the browser developers. With WEs, though, the only things that browser developers had specifically thought about are possible. All for user's convenience, so they can switch to Chrome, Edge or Opera.
- cookiecaper 9y ago
  It's the same thing as plugins, unsigned drivers, etc. etc. If the platform gives unfettered control, that is nice in that it gives power users flexibility, but it comes at the cost of seriously jeopardizing the experience of non-power-users who don't understand the intricacies of the software. They expect the platform to protect them by default. This applies to the whole package -- security, performance, and overall experience. Vendors have learned that if they fail to provide this protection, the average user will blame them directly, not the extension that makes memory usage bloat 6x. The solution is to enforce stringent controls, including limiting modifiable parts of the experience to some well-defined areas.
- JBiserkov 9y ago
  >All for user's convenience, so they can switch to Chrome, Edge or Opera. Nah, it's the other way(s) around - it's for [longterm] developer convenience; so users don't have to switch to another browser because an add-on they need isn't available in FF.
  - drdaeman 9y ago
    This too, but to the lesser extent. That's because Firefox had much more powerful extension system than other browsers.
  - 51Cards 9y ago
    Unfortunately I don't think so. The only draw keeping FF alive for years has been its extension system. They gave up the unique UI flexibility, now they are giving up the flexible extensions. When Google makes it so easy to find and install Chrome everywhere, and sync it with your mobile device, now that the extensions world will be on "par" FF is even less distinct than it was and thus less reason to use it. This is the beginning of Firefox's final dive. In a few more releases I really won't have any concrete reason to recommend FF over Chrome anymore (and no, 99% of users outside of this forum don't care about memory usage and keeping 100 tabs open at the same time)
kirillkh 9y ago
Then they should bring back the old UI we came to love. I want my blue title bar on Windows, my menu bar, my status bar, my square tabs, etc, etc. Also, I can't imagine living without EdgeWise, so they would have to incorporate that, as well. Other people use different sets of features, which are also not supported in the new plugin model. How can Mozilla ever hope to plug all these holes (pun intended)?
- mintplant 9y ago
  > I want my blue title bar on Windows, my menu bar, my status bar, my square tabs, etc, etc. So like this [0]? The title bar isn't blue, but neither is any other title bar on Windows 10. To achieve this on Nightly I opened the Customize view, switched the theme to "Light", checked the "Title bar" checkbox, and enabled "Menu bar" under the "Toolbars" dropdown. Tabs have squared edges by default. [0] https://vgy.me/KvNgxS.png https://vgy.me/KvNgxS.png
  - kirillkh 9y ago
    No, like this: https://vgy.me/VBLBYH.jpg https://vgy.me/VBLBYH.jpg And when the FF window is not focused, the title bar is grey. Like it's supposed to be. It's not part of a plugin, though, I had to patch something manually (I never remember what and have to re-google it every time).
- kronos29296 9y ago
  You get square tabs in 57 i think.
- clouddrover 9y ago
  > my square tabs Square tabs have been back for a while now. The Compact Light and Compact Dark themes are included in Firefox by default. Set the theme in Add-ons Manager -> Appearance. I use Compact Light.

drdaeman 9y ago

Actually, it still does support legacy extensions and probably will do for a while. There are `browser/features/*.xpi` files in the browser install directory. Even in 57, they're all "legacy" extensions, and the only WebExtension there is `screenshots@mozilla.org.xpi` (even then, still a "legacy" install.rdf-type file, with embedded WE). And I've just copied the legacy `https-everywhere@eff.org.xpi` non-WE addon there - and it worked ;) I'm sure they're going to plug this "hole" shut, but it's still there. As well as patching omni.ja.

kirillkh 9y ago
If it keeps working in FF 57 and won't break after every minor update, I might upgrade. I was actually thinking that providing some kind of officially unsupported backdoor for determined users like us might be a way out of this situation.
- drdaeman 9y ago
  The internal APIs will eventually change (break). They already did on major releases - one can find lots of "does not work on Firefox NN+ anymore, please update" comments all over AMO. (By design, this should be significantly rarer occasion with the WebExtensions) Now there is no requirement to keep them stable even across the patch-level releases. Whenever things would break faster or at the same pace is unknown.
  - kirillkh 9y ago
    I know it's not a good way out, but it's something we could at least in theory work with.
- majewsky 9y ago
  I'm not involved in FF development, but I find it exceedingly unlikely that this will keep working for much longer than a few releases after 57. The whole purpose of all of this is to rip out all the XUL baggage to decrease maintenance cost and make it easier for the developers to focus on actual features and fixing bugs that actual people encounter (as opposed to keeping legacy code paths working where no one has a clue if they are even used anymore).

ramshanker 9y ago

>>alienating your faithful users, myself included.<< I wonder what the telemetry says about those plugins. If it shows a minority, than Mozilla many not give it a thought at all.

throwaway2048 9y ago
Telemetry isnt the whole story, especially if it is being interpreted by somebody looking to justify decisions.
yakult 9y ago
The telemetry probably shows that all the power users opted out of telemetry.
- krzyk 9y ago
  It's the other way around I think, telemetry isn't (wasn't?) on by default and I enabled it on purpose. And I'm a power user, that's why I don't use chrome (1k tabs here).

devcpp 9y ago

Sadly, I don't think the devs have much of a voice anymore. Corporate and upper management have taken over, as shown by the various SJW and usability debacles. I'm always concerned of this happening to other large-scale independent FOSS projects. Special interests tend to take over without some benevolent dictator.

kirillkh 9y ago
The devs still have a voice in the sense that they can always quit and fork. Or, in case of Firefox, join the Palemoon team.
- dblohm7 9y ago
  Joining Palemoon is highly unlikely - there's bad blood between the two communities.

SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago

I'm going to be switching to the extended support release[1] (based on Firefox 52 but with security patches through June 18th 2018). I don't mind WebExtensions, and cross-browser compatibility is a nice goal, but a half-baked system that breaks the most important distinguishing feature of Firefox (extensions that can modify any part of the browser) is ridiculous. [1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all/

Elhana 9y ago
I'm already on ESR, but my reason is I need java plugin for my company OEBS (it supports web start, but it takes ages for our admins to patch anything). At the same time, keeping legacy plugins working is a big bonus, I love Classic theme restorer. Still undecided what to do after june 2018. I guess I'll just try firefox and chrome side by side and move to chrome if there is no real difference. It is probably more convinient to migrate to chrome, since it is on the phone by default too.

klondike_ 9y ago

The main problem with legacy extensions is that they won't work with multiprocess firefox by design. Multiprocess is the only way forward, because of the enormous speed and stability benefits. Unfortunately Mozilla has rushed the transition, and there hasn't been enough time to add important APIs and for developers to update their extensions. Firefox 57 is on the verge of being released, and there are still many addons which aren't webextension compatible.

kirillkh 9y ago
Isn't v55 already multiprocess? How are these extensions working right now?
- johnny22 9y ago
  many of the apis were shimmed in such a way so that they'd work, but could still slow down the browser. Those shims will disappear.
- zanny 9y ago
  If you have any legacy extensions installed multiprocess is disabled. If you don't have any, it is turned on.
  - scott_karana 9y ago
    Not correct. Some legacy plugins work fine: the add-ins store relied on user testing and flagging to confirm which still worked. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/SDK/Guides/Multiprocess_Firefox_and_the_SDK https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/SDK/Guides/Multi...

maxerickson 9y ago

I've been using Firefox since ~Phoenix 0.1 and I don't care at all about the legacy plugins. It would be interesting to see what percentage of their long time users use more than 1 or 2 add ons (I have 4 installed and only really use 2 of them).

throwaway2048 9y ago
How many of those users really care about firefox and dont just use it for inertia reasons? (already installed, etc) Frankly if they arnt using extensions they are going to have a vastly better user experience on chrome, and google has infinity manpower to always ensure thats the case. So what is firefox gaining by becomming a crappier chrome? Why the hell wouldnt I just use chrome at that point, because I feel so great about mozilla, who regularly brushes me off when i try to take advantage of things unique to firefox?
- kronos29296 9y ago
  I use mozilla nowadays on my low end laptop because chrome chokes on it most of the time (just plain hangs and stops working with more than 10 tabs which is all the time for me). FF 55 is much snappier with most of my important extensions and doesn't choke as much. So I moved from chrome to FF after 55. Hope they continue to make it better. P.S FF is now not a crappier version of Chrome but Chrome is crappier if you don't have powerful hardware or RAM (mine's hardly 2 GB and everything sucks a lot though its only 4 years old)
wvenable 9y ago
In my case, the critical extension for me is Tab Mix plus (770k users) for multi-row tabs. It's really hard to use a browser without this feature because I've been using it for so long. The real question is for me is how many users haven't moved onto Chrome -- which is obviously faster and more stable -- because of 1 or 2 add-ons.
contras1970 9y ago
i've used ff since the phoenix days (0.6? do not remember). this particular laptop now has 55.0.2 with Cookie Monster, HTTPS Everywhere, NoScript, Policeman, Show my Password, Tab Mix Plus. some other extensions are installed but not used.

dbolgheroni 9y ago

I rely mainly on one add-on: Vimperator. It's a big big productivity enhancer and it's the main reason for sticking with Firefox for so long. Even in a period when Firefox was slower and buggier than the alternatives. It's sad they will deprecate the old extension interface and make Vimperator a no-no. I understand the reasons behind WebExtensions, specially those related to security, and reckon the benefits of the multiprocess paradigm, but the flexibility of the old extensions API was a big advantage in my pov. No, Vimperator won't be ported (I wish it could), because WebExtensions is a much more limited API. And no, Vimium and VimFx doesn't come even close to it. They are not alternatives.

NotOscarWilde 9y ago
I hate to add so little to the discussion, but I am on the exact same boat, and I am quite anxious about the upcoming change. If there is anything to make either Mozilla hear this use case more, or contribute anywhere to make Vimperator a possibility for the future, I would be happy to do my part.
weaksauce 9y ago
fwiw they seem to be actively trying to support vimperator like webextensions in this bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215061 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215061 What does vimperator do that vimium and vimfx can't?
- kronos29296 9y ago
  Though I haven't used it, it seems to radically make firefox into something like Qutebrowser. Not just the key bindings but also the UI which is not possible under new api for Web extensions while Vimium and vimfx only give vim key bindings in the browser (Not the full experience for those who are used to vimperator).

zanny 9y ago

I've been using Firefox since 1.5, and I understand completely why they have to drop their legacy extensions framework to modernize the browser. In recent years I found myself using Chromium more and more because of its responsiveness. Firefox 57 is really close to where it needs to be to let me drop all my use cases of Chromium I have now. Yes, it means 4 of the ~12 extensions I've used for years stop working. Most of those have a web extension version being worked on or aren't worth the competitive disadvantage of supporting a 15 year old addon API. I've seen plenty of my favorite software projects have to make "hard breaks" to modernize. KDE broke everything with Qt5 / Plasma 5, but the payoff is now they are the premier high DPI Linux desktop. Python broke everything with 3, but features enabled by the changes have made Python 3 the best scripting language ever in my book. Firefox would be doomed to a slow death with its legacy extensions API the same way PHP and Perl languished for years with the inability to push a major version. A slow death is not a downfall anyone wants.

catdog 9y ago
The issue is not that things break, the issue is that the WebExtensions API is missing a lot of features so a lot of addons can't be ported.
- JohnBooty 9y ago
  It's missing functionality because the old API allowed deep, deep hooks into FF's internals. Per Mozilla, aside from security problems and other nightmares, these deep hooks allowed developers to write plugins that were incompatible with a multiprocess browser architecture where each tab/window can have its own sandbox and remain responsive even if other tabs go down. And that is one of the killer features that has caused FF to bleed massive amounts of user share to Chrome in the last decade: Chrome almost always "felt fast" in situations where FF ground to an embarassing halt because something was happening in another tab/window that was causing the entire browser to become unresponsive. I don't know what precisely is missing from the new WebExtensions API but I have to imagine that Mozilla will work to expand its capabilities as much as possible over time...
  - 9y ago

JohnBooty 9y ago

While we're throwing anecdotal statements around... Dear Mozilla developers! I've been using Firefox as my daily driver nearly non-stop since it was Phoenix and I'm totally cool with you dropping the legacy stuff.

joneil 9y ago
I'm the same. Been using since Phoenix 0.3 and am stoked about these changes, and the thought that Rust, and the major perf and safety improvements that come with it, are beginning to find their way into Gecko. Amazing work from a team that many had dismissed as irrelevant. Prove them wrong!
rnhmjoj 9y ago
I'm totally cool with dropping legacy stuff that has a proper replacement.
- Sylos 9y ago
  Then you must hate all of your software. It's impossible to always continue in the direction that happened to be chosen more than a decade ago. At some point, you will run into problems, which in the case of Firefox were severe problems in performance, security, maintainability and complexity as well as stability of the extension API. You can't fix all of these problems without breaking things, without doing things differently. And yes, it is to some degree subjective whether this is worth it, but at the end of the day, you, as someone who uses lots of extensions and complex extensions, are only a very small fraction of the Firefox user base. Most users have no extensions or just the obligatory ad blocker. They don't benefit at all from keeping onto the old architecture with all of its problems, which they are suffering under. And then, yeah, Mozilla has to at some point piss you off in order to help the majority of their user base. It's not like all other browsers had such a complex extension API and Mozilla is just being lazy by dropping it.
chrismorgan 9y ago
Dear Firefox developers, I’ve been using Firefox as my standard browser since 0.9.3 (except for a year or so when it was run-a-browser-from-a-USB-disk-or-use-IE and Firefox was just too terribly slow, so I used Chrome—by the next year Firefox had fixed its game and I could switch back), and for the last few years Nightly has been my standard browser. I get why you’re dropping the legacy stuff and I’m looking forward to what’s possible after it’s gone. When the announcement came out in November last year that WebExtensions would be the only way come 57, I was intensely sceptical that it’d be ready within a year (no one was using it at that time) and prepared for a deal of pain: I’d just have to live with it, come November. (It’s not like I have any better options in mainstream browsers; they’re all hopeless with even only twenty tabs.) Well. You’ve proven me wrong, and I’m delighted. I was able to replace all my legacy extensions with WebExtensions ones with minimal loss of functionality (I miss the ability to style the chrome with Stylish, not that I was actually using it for anything other than shaving half pixels off here and there on my high-DPI screen). My Dad (also a programmer) is still grumbling about some status bar thing that broke a short while ago, but we went through his extensions and came to the conclusion that it’s really not that bad—the extensions that stop working at 57 were ones he didn’t use, or ones where there are already good alternatives available or a clear plan for the changeover. (The fact that in several cases I did have to swap out one extension for another was a mild nuisance, but as a Nightly user I’m doing this a few months before everyone will have to, so I expected it.) All in all, I’m happy with how things have gone and impressed at how well the migration is going. All that I really want now is to be able to hide the horizontal tab strip in favour of my vertical tab bar. And it looks like https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447 is almost there. (It’d also be good if file: URLs didn’t mess with said vertical tab bar something awful, but as I haven’t filed any bugs about that yet or investigated to find existing reports I’m not allowed to complain.) Good job!

JohnTHaller 9y ago

Dear niche community using legacy extensions: We're sorry, but legacy extensions are holding back Firefox development in every way meaningful to the vast majority of users. In order to continue to exist as a viable option for an open web, Firefox must move forward. - (What I imagine they'd say) Of the extensions you listed, the largest (Classic Theme Restorer) is only used by 333,000 people while the smallest (Edgewise) is only used by 218 people.

lucb1e 9y ago
> only used by 333,000 people doesn't sound like an "only" to me.
- JohnTHaller 9y ago
  Firefox has 80 million daily active users, so that's an 'only' in context. Keeping XUL around and all of its messiness to support a small niche of users at the expense of what most users want is part of why Firefox has lost so many users to less customizable, (arguably) less capable competing browsers.
  - throwaway2048 9y ago
    There are a boatload of assumptions in that statement that are pretty unwarrented. The vast majority of why chrome is popular is because google.com and youtube.com push it nonstop, not any other imagined reasons.
  - Grue3 9y ago
    You're forgetting that people who want to use the features older versions had but not anymore are likely the same people who have been using Firefox for a long time. These are the same people who drive Firefox adoption by being experienced long-time users giving advice to the young'uns. If you lose that core user base, you'll lose the rest of 80 million to Google/Microsoft ads in no time.
    - Max_Mustermann 9y ago

Sir_Cmpwn 9y ago

I completely left Firefox over this and other bullshit.

michel-slm 9y ago

I used to do that until I discovered the Compact theme (which is now installed by default, previously only available on the developer edition without installing an add-on).

endemic 9y ago
Love the compact theme. Glad it made its way into the release channel.

jccalhoun 9y ago

I've been using firefox since the very early days and I am excited about ditching the old plugin architecture. Oh, and good news, the ui you dislike is going away.

clouddrover 9y ago

> I can't stand the current FF UI and I will not give up on this. Then the simple way forward is to make your own browser, isn't it? Use an embeddable engine which does all the hard work for you and focus on making the UI the way you insist it must be. It really could be a single developer project. So why not just do that?