14 ms·

Firefox 56: Last Stop Before Quantum

156 points by DiabloD3 9y ago

maxpert 9y ago
Nice to see FF picking up momentum again. I don't want to use Chrome because I don't trust Google with my data (using Chromium right now). Can't wait to switch back, once it's GA.
- Diederich 9y ago
  Honest question: does Chrome share any data with Google, assuming you turn the right switches off?
  - DarkCrusader2 9y ago
    > assuming you turn the right switches off That's the problem. I shouldn't have to find the switches in the first place. Plus they constantly keep shuffling the settings around(on other google apps and android too) and I can never find the ones I am looking for.
    - milcron 9y ago
      Take a look at https://iridiumbrowser.de/ https://iridiumbrowser.de/ > Before Iridium Browser, we had to decide if we wanted to have cutting edge technologies like sandboxed processes, WebRTC, WebUSB … , or if we wanted to use a browser that respects our privacy. So we decided to use the power of free software and build a browser that can do both. We analysed the code of Chromium and stripped out the functionality which exposes data to others in a way we don‘t like. See most important changes here: https://github.com/iridium-browser/tracker/wiki/Differences-between-Iridium-and-Chromium https://github.com/iridium-browser/tracker/wiki/Differences-...
- DavideNL 9y ago
  Chromium also sends data back to Google... unless you use Ungoogled-chromium, but the latter has the issue of not being up to date (= missing recent security updates).
  - deltaprotocol 9y ago
    Or Inox https://github.com/gcarq/inox-patchset https://github.com/gcarq/inox-patchset
- mozoldie 9y ago
  I would love to see some evidence for this. The privacy policy contradicts you, hence I would treat this as FUD in absence of actual evidence: https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/index.html#server-log https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/index.html#ser... (Just make sure you don't sign chromium into your google account. If you sign into your firefox account in firefox, then data is also uploaded, albeit in an encrypted format.)
pricechild 9y ago
I've been following https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/web/Firefox56AddonWorry https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/web/Firefox56AddonW... It's surprised me the amount some people rely on addons for their workflow and the amount of effort they will be going through to resist this change come 57. For my usage, I've found Firefox Klar/Focus (which I believe already include the speed improvements from 57+?) on Android and have been extremely impressed.
- hadrien01 9y ago
  Unfortunately that's also where I'll stop during at least a few months after Firefox 57 is released. Quantum is ultra fast, but my extensions are more important. Greasemonkey and Stylish, for example, have equivalent WebExtensions, but they're not as polished. Same with DownThemAll. I think WebExtensions should have matured a bit longer, with Quantum, electrolysis, and Photon being made available for all with the old extensions.
  - cyphar 9y ago
    You can't have your cake and eat it too. I'm fairly sure that if the Firefox developer team could support XUL with the new internals, they would (just look at the insane backlash for a source of motivation). But they didn't, and there must be a reason. Likely it's due to how integrated XUL is with the internals of Firefox and that couldn't gel with the Rust rewrites.
    - oblio 9y ago
      It's because of the killer combo of increased sandboxing, multi-process architecture and performance constraints. I think they couldn't keep everything together with the degree of access old plugins had to Firefox internals. So at some point they had to rip off the band aid.
      - mook 9y ago
        They did have the choice to not ship the increased sandboxing, multi-process architecture and performance constraints until three months after the new extension APIs were ready. They didn't because they thought the trade-off wasn't worth it.
wyldfire 9y ago
> Firefox Quantum’s new engine uses 30% less memory than Chrome This is a pretty appealing claim. I'm ashamed to admit that one thing that might keep me on Chrome is the trove of passwords in my sync'd up account. But I'll definitely give Quantum a test drive.
- tmzt 9y ago
  You can export passwords from Google: https://www.ghacks.net/2017/07/10/google-chrome-password-export-and-import/ https://www.ghacks.net/2017/07/10/google-chrome-password-exp... It may also be possible through the data portability site. You can also see them by going to https://passwords.google.com https://passwords.google.com
  - Vinnl 9y ago
    And also good to know is that Firefox can do syncing just fine.
- akerro 9y ago
  > Firefox Quantum’s new engine uses 30% less memory than Chrome This is probably because 70% of addons go away, there are no replacements of very low quality replacements for most of addons I use daily.
  - mtgx 9y ago
    I think they compared both browsers with zero add-ons.
- dchuk 9y ago
  I was like that a few months back, but then I started using 1password to centralize all my passwords (and for security obviously). Makes switching browsers much easier, especially because (I think) Firefox doesn't use OSX's Keychain.
- FruityFaiz 9y ago
  Same here, I have both Firefox nightly and safari but I tend to use safari more still...
atonse 9y ago
Is there a long term plan from Mozilla to implement declarative and built-in (native-speed) content blockers like Safari? Would love to not have to use an extension to do this.
- Vinnl 9y ago
  That's actually there in Private Browsing (and I think you can enable it for regular browsing using about:config? But you'll have to search for that yourself), and Firefox Focus includes that by default as well I think. I believe they're not including it for regular Firefox by default because they don't want to piss off the content industry as long as there aren't enough viable alternative business models.
- JoshMnem 9y ago
  It's already in Firefox Developer Edition. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/
  - atonse 9y ago
    I have developer edition. I don't see it. Is it just like Safari's where you can get extensions that provide content blocking lists?
    - mozoldie 9y ago
      IIRC there's an option to enable tracking protection in normal browsing on desktop. It's enabled by default in private browsing. (I can't check right now though - it's possible it's just an about:config option too.) Firefox iOS (on iOS 11+) definitively offers those options, on Android it's private browsing only by default and I don't think there's an option to enable it in normal browsing.
      - jamesgeck0 9y ago
        In Firefox Developer edition on macOS there's no obvious way to add new blocklist sources in the UI. You can switch between two provided by Disconnect.me, and that's it.
binaryapparatus 9y ago
I will badly miss vimperator. Yeah 56.0 works smoothly but without ability to use keyboard only that's hollow victory for me. Typing this in vim after viewing hackers news in w3m shows how desperate I am.
- sametmax 9y ago
  It's so niche i don't think they will bother.
- Vinnl 9y ago
  I'm not sure what features of Vimperator you're using, but if it's only about being able to navigate through your keyboard only, try Vimium-FF: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/vimium-ff/?src=search https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/vimium-ff/?sr...
  - binaryapparatus 9y ago
    I will take a look, thanks. I am using basic set of open, tabnew, follow, bmark. Proper follow hint is very important. Also the ability to redefine keys since I use colemak. I was briefly trying chrome and cVim did seem promising but I prefer firefox. Edit: I had to try it immediately and it looks very promising, thanks. Covers all the basic stuff I need.
    - kej 9y ago
      >Proper follow hint is very important. Depending on what you mean by this, be sure to check the advanced settings for vimium-ff. It will let you choose which characters to use for the hints, or there's a buried option to use the link text instead.
  - always_good 9y ago
    There are all sorts of issues with Vimium. For instance, doesn't work on non-website pages, often have to cmd-w when x doesn't work completely defeating the extension to begin with. No d vs D to close prev/next tab, or p vs P. No temporary pass-thru, just whitelists. Anyone who thinks Vimium is anywhere nearly as polished as Vimperator probably never used the latter much. Though not sure if it's to do with API limits vs general lack of polish. But since Chrome never had a single solution as good as Pentadactyl/Vimperator, must be an API thing which means we're a bit screwed.
PhantomGremlin 9y ago
NoScript is identified as a "legacy" extension. But it's the only one I use or care about. Hopefully it will be rewritten to work properly? To me, NoScript is sine qua non. It's the primary differentiating factor between Firefox and other browsers.
- binaryapparatus 9y ago
  There is javascript.enabled key in about:config that _seems_ to be working as expected but setting it manually every time is a chore.
  - moosingin3space 9y ago
    NoScript isn't about bluntly disabling JavaScript. It's a set of tools for managing what scripts can do and what scripts run.
- ReidZB 9y ago
  It's being migrated: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2017/08/01/noscripts-migration-to-webextensions-apis/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2017/08/01/noscripts-migrati... There's also uMatrix as a replacement.
  - wtallis 9y ago
    uMatrix isn't a replacement for NoScript. uMatrix lets you do some javascript blocking, but has none of the other features of NoScript. Several of those features are not available from anything other than NoScript. Eg. I haven't seen any other content blocker implement anything like NoScript's surrogate scripts feature.
    - SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
      NoScript also isn't a superset of the capabilities of uMatrix. Both can do things the other can't.
- moosingin3space 9y ago
51Cards 9y ago
Tab Mix Plus, DownloadThemAll, RightToClick, Status-4-Evar... all regularly used by me, none migrated yet. Not to mention the loss of Classic Theme Restorer's control over the UI highly disappoints me. I really really dislike being locked into the "Chrome Style" UI. I've disliked it since Chrome was released.
- actionscripted 9y ago
  I'm using Nightly (v58a) and you can customize the UI a lot more than in the current release (v56). You can move back/forward and refresh, auto-hide certain buttons like downloads, add items to the "overflow" menu, toggle full/compact mode, toggle title bar, toggle a "grab" space...there are a lot of options. They've also added proper support for light and dark icons for plugins. So now buttons like 1Password don't stand out with a dark theme. To me it feels like a return to the level of customization I'd gotten used to in older versions of Firefox. And FWIW, this is what mine looks like: https://i.imgur.com/seJZeg6.png https://i.imgur.com/seJZeg6.png
  - kirillkh 9y ago
    Is it now possible to make the title bar blue when the window is active and grey when it's not? The lack of this feature (that once used to be the norm) is one of the most painful things for me.
  - plopz 9y ago
    Is it possible to make it look like this? https://i.imgur.com/sA8za0B.png https://i.imgur.com/sA8za0B.png
    - jd3 9y ago
      no
  - jd3 9y ago
    What you just described is literally nothing like the level of low-level customization that past releases of the Mozilla Suite/Firefox had to offer. Not only can extensions no longer modify any of the browser XUL/chrome://, you can't even install Complete Themes that previous let you control the layout of every single browser css element. It's like Mozilla is deliberately committing corporate suicide with these hasty feature removals.
onewhonknocks 9y ago
I need to be able to use Tab Groups, so I won't be going to 57+.
- leeoniya 9y ago
  https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/6rpglw/firefox_57_tab_groups/ https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/6rpglw/firefox_57_...
- analogic 9y ago
  In case anyone listening, plz no quantum till replacement for: tab groups, hiding horizontal tab bar when using tree style/tab center, and hiding window title bar under MATE, that as far as I can tell is only possible with hide caption title bar plus addon. Pretty sure all being worked on and excited for >>speed>> but I'm scarred this transition gonna be really annoying.
  - StavrosK 9y ago
    I feel your pain, but I think your position of "please don't release new versions until you have compatibility with the plugins I, specifically, use" might be a tad unreasonable.
    - analogic 9y ago
      how so?
      - cisanti 9y ago
        Because I you're not the only one using the browser?
- baby 9y ago
  Tree Style Tabs have become amazingly slow, this upgrade is a downgrade for me :/
DavideNL 9y ago
I wish they would finally fix the annoying pinch-to-zoom which doesn't work properly like in Safari and Chrome... (If you zoom on a site with text and images in Firefox the page layout gets messed up which makes it impossible to read...)
- digi_owl 9y ago
  Best i can tell, they have basically hooked that up to the text scaling rather than anything like what you find on phones.
saberworks 9y ago
Frustrated by the new "screenshots" tool. The "save" button automatically uploads your screenshot up to mozilla servers. The "download" button saves it to your computer. It seems completely backwards. The "save" button should save it to my computer (there's no reason call something a "download" when it's already local). The "download" button should be replaced with an "upload & share" button that sends it to mozilla's servers. Also somewhere it claimed it could screenshot the entire page, but I can't figure out how to actually do that. I'm also might not upgrade to quantum because I will lose my status bar (status 4 evar addon). I don't understand how people browse the web but can't see where links are taking them. Showing me where the link points when I hover the mouse over it is something so fundamental to browsing I just can't figure out why it was ever removed. I think by default it eventually shows up in a tiny popup but it doesn't show the full link and the delay is infuriating.
- romanovcode 9y ago
  Hopefully someone from Mozilla reads this and takes notes. I completely agree with you on this one.
  - gcp 9y ago
    File a bug.
  - digi_owl 9y ago
    I would not get my hopes up on the second part. Mozilla seems to be living in a "we know better" bubble these days, alongside Gnome and certain other big name FOSS projects...
- rtpg 9y ago
  was super shocked when the button uploaded to the servers. The straightforward way most people use screenshots nowadays is to paste in Slack/Messenger/Google doc. Seems like a no-brainer for the default to be "copy to clipboard", but instead it's "upload to servers with no indication of this on the first click".
- StevePerkins 9y ago
AdmiralAsshat 9y ago
>In most cases, the upgrade to Firefox Quantum will be painless. Most popular add-ons will update to the new APIs before the release of Firefox Quantum, and Firefox will suggest replacements inside about:addons for those that don’t. Suggestion WebExtension replacements is brilliant. There's already multiple crowd-sourced lists on Reddit's r/Firefox basically for this purpose.
rollcat 9y ago
Hangouts calls still not working :( Very stupid reason to keep Chromium around...
- kibwen 9y ago
  Firefox can't do anything about that, it's Google's decision to only support Hangouts in Chrome.
k__ 9y ago
The Quantum performance is amazing. But I cant get my nightly to remember my logins.
- zakk 9y ago
  > The Quantum performance is amazing. Agreed! I am astonished, and I switched back to FF after many, many years. > But I cant get my nightly to remember my logins. Quantum is in beta now, did you try that?
  - k__ 9y ago
    Isnt it part of FF nightly?
    - zakk 9y ago
      No, it has been in Beta for a week or so. Edit: and clearly it remains in nightly.
      - schwarze_pest 9y ago
        Of course it's in nightly.
- schwarze_pest 9y ago
  > But I cant get my nightly to remember my logins. Do you mean 'restore previous session'? It was moved from the start page to library and now to the hamburger menu. :/
  - k__ 9y ago
    I don't know really. I found a config option that said something like "delete cookies when firefox is closed" I changed this to "No", but somehow it didn't stay.
kirillkh 9y ago
Since there are so many of us who decided to stick with Firefox 56... wouldn't it be nice if Mozilla declared 56 as ESR release, so that when the time comes we were not forced to downgrade to the much slower FF 52? Also, I've seen it mentioned that you can't even downgrade without losing all your settings.
CurtMonash 9y ago
My big concern is add-ons. The whole reason I use Firefox is the availability of add-ons such as NoScript and Cookie Culler. I'm guessing NoScript will work with Quantum, but Cookie Culler hasn't been updated since last year. Roomy Bookmarks is also a major quality-of-life factor; it allows me to have a well-stocked bookmarks bar. And it definitely won't work with Quantum. That alone will give me strong pause about updating.
- earenndil 9y ago
  > cookie culler What about cookie autodelete?

156 points by DiabloD3 9y ago

Nice to see FF picking up momentum again. I don't want to use Chrome because I don't trust Google with my data (using Chromium right now). Can't wait to switch back, once it's GA.

Diederich 9y ago
Honest question: does Chrome share any data with Google, assuming you turn the right switches off?
- DarkCrusader2 9y ago
  > assuming you turn the right switches off That's the problem. I shouldn't have to find the switches in the first place. Plus they constantly keep shuffling the settings around(on other google apps and android too) and I can never find the ones I am looking for.
  - milcron 9y ago
    Take a look at https://iridiumbrowser.de/ https://iridiumbrowser.de/ > Before Iridium Browser, we had to decide if we wanted to have cutting edge technologies like sandboxed processes, WebRTC, WebUSB … , or if we wanted to use a browser that respects our privacy. So we decided to use the power of free software and build a browser that can do both. We analysed the code of Chromium and stripped out the functionality which exposes data to others in a way we don‘t like. See most important changes here: https://github.com/iridium-browser/tracker/wiki/Differences-between-Iridium-and-Chromium https://github.com/iridium-browser/tracker/wiki/Differences-...
DavideNL 9y ago
Chromium also sends data back to Google... unless you use Ungoogled-chromium, but the latter has the issue of not being up to date (= missing recent security updates).
- deltaprotocol 9y ago
  Or Inox https://github.com/gcarq/inox-patchset https://github.com/gcarq/inox-patchset
mozoldie 9y ago
I would love to see some evidence for this. The privacy policy contradicts you, hence I would treat this as FUD in absence of actual evidence: https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/index.html#server-log https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/index.html#ser... (Just make sure you don't sign chromium into your google account. If you sign into your firefox account in firefox, then data is also uploaded, albeit in an encrypted format.)

pricechild 9y ago

I've been following https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/web/Firefox56AddonWorry https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/web/Firefox56AddonW... It's surprised me the amount some people rely on addons for their workflow and the amount of effort they will be going through to resist this change come 57. For my usage, I've found Firefox Klar/Focus (which I believe already include the speed improvements from 57+?) on Android and have been extremely impressed.

hadrien01 9y ago
Unfortunately that's also where I'll stop during at least a few months after Firefox 57 is released. Quantum is ultra fast, but my extensions are more important. Greasemonkey and Stylish, for example, have equivalent WebExtensions, but they're not as polished. Same with DownThemAll. I think WebExtensions should have matured a bit longer, with Quantum, electrolysis, and Photon being made available for all with the old extensions.
- cyphar 9y ago
  You can't have your cake and eat it too. I'm fairly sure that if the Firefox developer team could support XUL with the new internals, they would (just look at the insane backlash for a source of motivation). But they didn't, and there must be a reason. Likely it's due to how integrated XUL is with the internals of Firefox and that couldn't gel with the Rust rewrites.
  - oblio 9y ago
    It's because of the killer combo of increased sandboxing, multi-process architecture and performance constraints. I think they couldn't keep everything together with the degree of access old plugins had to Firefox internals. So at some point they had to rip off the band aid.
    - mook 9y ago
      They did have the choice to not ship the increased sandboxing, multi-process architecture and performance constraints until three months after the new extension APIs were ready. They didn't because they thought the trade-off wasn't worth it.

wyldfire 9y ago

> Firefox Quantum’s new engine uses 30% less memory than Chrome This is a pretty appealing claim. I'm ashamed to admit that one thing that might keep me on Chrome is the trove of passwords in my sync'd up account. But I'll definitely give Quantum a test drive.

tmzt 9y ago
You can export passwords from Google: https://www.ghacks.net/2017/07/10/google-chrome-password-export-and-import/ https://www.ghacks.net/2017/07/10/google-chrome-password-exp... It may also be possible through the data portability site. You can also see them by going to https://passwords.google.com https://passwords.google.com
- Vinnl 9y ago
  And also good to know is that Firefox can do syncing just fine.
akerro 9y ago
> Firefox Quantum’s new engine uses 30% less memory than Chrome This is probably because 70% of addons go away, there are no replacements of very low quality replacements for most of addons I use daily.
- mtgx 9y ago
  I think they compared both browsers with zero add-ons.
dchuk 9y ago
I was like that a few months back, but then I started using 1password to centralize all my passwords (and for security obviously). Makes switching browsers much easier, especially because (I think) Firefox doesn't use OSX's Keychain.
FruityFaiz 9y ago
Same here, I have both Firefox nightly and safari but I tend to use safari more still...

atonse 9y ago

Is there a long term plan from Mozilla to implement declarative and built-in (native-speed) content blockers like Safari? Would love to not have to use an extension to do this.

Vinnl 9y ago
That's actually there in Private Browsing (and I think you can enable it for regular browsing using about:config? But you'll have to search for that yourself), and Firefox Focus includes that by default as well I think. I believe they're not including it for regular Firefox by default because they don't want to piss off the content industry as long as there aren't enough viable alternative business models.
JoshMnem 9y ago
It's already in Firefox Developer Edition. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/
- atonse 9y ago
  I have developer edition. I don't see it. Is it just like Safari's where you can get extensions that provide content blocking lists?
  - mozoldie 9y ago
    IIRC there's an option to enable tracking protection in normal browsing on desktop. It's enabled by default in private browsing. (I can't check right now though - it's possible it's just an about:config option too.) Firefox iOS (on iOS 11+) definitively offers those options, on Android it's private browsing only by default and I don't think there's an option to enable it in normal browsing.
    - jamesgeck0 9y ago
      In Firefox Developer edition on macOS there's no obvious way to add new blocklist sources in the UI. You can switch between two provided by Disconnect.me, and that's it.

binaryapparatus 9y ago

I will badly miss vimperator. Yeah 56.0 works smoothly but without ability to use keyboard only that's hollow victory for me. Typing this in vim after viewing hackers news in w3m shows how desperate I am.

sametmax 9y ago
It's so niche i don't think they will bother.
Vinnl 9y ago
I'm not sure what features of Vimperator you're using, but if it's only about being able to navigate through your keyboard only, try Vimium-FF: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/vimium-ff/?src=search https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/vimium-ff/?sr...
- binaryapparatus 9y ago
  I will take a look, thanks. I am using basic set of open, tabnew, follow, bmark. Proper follow hint is very important. Also the ability to redefine keys since I use colemak. I was briefly trying chrome and cVim did seem promising but I prefer firefox. Edit: I had to try it immediately and it looks very promising, thanks. Covers all the basic stuff I need.
  - kej 9y ago
    >Proper follow hint is very important. Depending on what you mean by this, be sure to check the advanced settings for vimium-ff. It will let you choose which characters to use for the hints, or there's a buried option to use the link text instead.
- always_good 9y ago
  There are all sorts of issues with Vimium. For instance, doesn't work on non-website pages, often have to cmd-w when x doesn't work completely defeating the extension to begin with. No d vs D to close prev/next tab, or p vs P. No temporary pass-thru, just whitelists. Anyone who thinks Vimium is anywhere nearly as polished as Vimperator probably never used the latter much. Though not sure if it's to do with API limits vs general lack of polish. But since Chrome never had a single solution as good as Pentadactyl/Vimperator, must be an API thing which means we're a bit screwed.

PhantomGremlin 9y ago

NoScript is identified as a "legacy" extension. But it's the only one I use or care about. Hopefully it will be rewritten to work properly? To me, NoScript is sine qua non. It's the primary differentiating factor between Firefox and other browsers.

binaryapparatus 9y ago
There is javascript.enabled key in about:config that _seems_ to be working as expected but setting it manually every time is a chore.
- moosingin3space 9y ago
  NoScript isn't about bluntly disabling JavaScript. It's a set of tools for managing what scripts can do and what scripts run.
ReidZB 9y ago
It's being migrated: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2017/08/01/noscripts-migration-to-webextensions-apis/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2017/08/01/noscripts-migrati... There's also uMatrix as a replacement.
- wtallis 9y ago
  uMatrix isn't a replacement for NoScript. uMatrix lets you do some javascript blocking, but has none of the other features of NoScript. Several of those features are not available from anything other than NoScript. Eg. I haven't seen any other content blocker implement anything like NoScript's surrogate scripts feature.
  - SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
    NoScript also isn't a superset of the capabilities of uMatrix. Both can do things the other can't.
moosingin3space 9y ago

51Cards 9y ago

Tab Mix Plus, DownloadThemAll, RightToClick, Status-4-Evar... all regularly used by me, none migrated yet. Not to mention the loss of Classic Theme Restorer's control over the UI highly disappoints me. I really really dislike being locked into the "Chrome Style" UI. I've disliked it since Chrome was released.

actionscripted 9y ago
I'm using Nightly (v58a) and you can customize the UI a lot more than in the current release (v56). You can move back/forward and refresh, auto-hide certain buttons like downloads, add items to the "overflow" menu, toggle full/compact mode, toggle title bar, toggle a "grab" space...there are a lot of options. They've also added proper support for light and dark icons for plugins. So now buttons like 1Password don't stand out with a dark theme. To me it feels like a return to the level of customization I'd gotten used to in older versions of Firefox. And FWIW, this is what mine looks like: https://i.imgur.com/seJZeg6.png https://i.imgur.com/seJZeg6.png
- kirillkh 9y ago
  Is it now possible to make the title bar blue when the window is active and grey when it's not? The lack of this feature (that once used to be the norm) is one of the most painful things for me.
- plopz 9y ago
  Is it possible to make it look like this? https://i.imgur.com/sA8za0B.png https://i.imgur.com/sA8za0B.png
  - jd3 9y ago
    no
- jd3 9y ago
  What you just described is literally nothing like the level of low-level customization that past releases of the Mozilla Suite/Firefox had to offer. Not only can extensions no longer modify any of the browser XUL/chrome://, you can't even install Complete Themes that previous let you control the layout of every single browser css element. It's like Mozilla is deliberately committing corporate suicide with these hasty feature removals.

onewhonknocks 9y ago

I need to be able to use Tab Groups, so I won't be going to 57+.

leeoniya 9y ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/6rpglw/firefox_57_tab_groups/ https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/6rpglw/firefox_57_...
analogic 9y ago
In case anyone listening, plz no quantum till replacement for: tab groups, hiding horizontal tab bar when using tree style/tab center, and hiding window title bar under MATE, that as far as I can tell is only possible with hide caption title bar plus addon. Pretty sure all being worked on and excited for >>speed>> but I'm scarred this transition gonna be really annoying.
- StavrosK 9y ago
  I feel your pain, but I think your position of "please don't release new versions until you have compatibility with the plugins I, specifically, use" might be a tad unreasonable.
  - analogic 9y ago
    how so?
    - cisanti 9y ago
      Because I you're not the only one using the browser?
baby 9y ago
Tree Style Tabs have become amazingly slow, this upgrade is a downgrade for me :/

DavideNL 9y ago

I wish they would finally fix the annoying pinch-to-zoom which doesn't work properly like in Safari and Chrome... (If you zoom on a site with text and images in Firefox the page layout gets messed up which makes it impossible to read...)

digi_owl 9y ago
Best i can tell, they have basically hooked that up to the text scaling rather than anything like what you find on phones.

saberworks 9y ago

Frustrated by the new "screenshots" tool. The "save" button automatically uploads your screenshot up to mozilla servers. The "download" button saves it to your computer. It seems completely backwards. The "save" button should save it to my computer (there's no reason call something a "download" when it's already local). The "download" button should be replaced with an "upload & share" button that sends it to mozilla's servers. Also somewhere it claimed it could screenshot the entire page, but I can't figure out how to actually do that. I'm also might not upgrade to quantum because I will lose my status bar (status 4 evar addon). I don't understand how people browse the web but can't see where links are taking them. Showing me where the link points when I hover the mouse over it is something so fundamental to browsing I just can't figure out why it was ever removed. I think by default it eventually shows up in a tiny popup but it doesn't show the full link and the delay is infuriating.

romanovcode 9y ago
Hopefully someone from Mozilla reads this and takes notes. I completely agree with you on this one.
- gcp 9y ago
  File a bug.
- digi_owl 9y ago
  I would not get my hopes up on the second part. Mozilla seems to be living in a "we know better" bubble these days, alongside Gnome and certain other big name FOSS projects...
rtpg 9y ago
was super shocked when the button uploaded to the servers. The straightforward way most people use screenshots nowadays is to paste in Slack/Messenger/Google doc. Seems like a no-brainer for the default to be "copy to clipboard", but instead it's "upload to servers with no indication of this on the first click".
StevePerkins 9y ago

AdmiralAsshat 9y ago

>In most cases, the upgrade to Firefox Quantum will be painless. Most popular add-ons will update to the new APIs before the release of Firefox Quantum, and Firefox will suggest replacements inside about:addons for those that don’t. Suggestion WebExtension replacements is brilliant. There's already multiple crowd-sourced lists on Reddit's r/Firefox basically for this purpose.

rollcat 9y ago

Hangouts calls still not working :( Very stupid reason to keep Chromium around...

kibwen 9y ago
Firefox can't do anything about that, it's Google's decision to only support Hangouts in Chrome.

k__ 9y ago

The Quantum performance is amazing. But I cant get my nightly to remember my logins.

zakk 9y ago
> The Quantum performance is amazing. Agreed! I am astonished, and I switched back to FF after many, many years. > But I cant get my nightly to remember my logins. Quantum is in beta now, did you try that?
- k__ 9y ago
  Isnt it part of FF nightly?
  - zakk 9y ago
    No, it has been in Beta for a week or so. Edit: and clearly it remains in nightly.
    - schwarze_pest 9y ago
      Of course it's in nightly.
schwarze_pest 9y ago
> But I cant get my nightly to remember my logins. Do you mean 'restore previous session'? It was moved from the start page to library and now to the hamburger menu. :/
- k__ 9y ago
  I don't know really. I found a config option that said something like "delete cookies when firefox is closed" I changed this to "No", but somehow it didn't stay.

kirillkh 9y ago

Since there are so many of us who decided to stick with Firefox 56... wouldn't it be nice if Mozilla declared 56 as ESR release, so that when the time comes we were not forced to downgrade to the much slower FF 52? Also, I've seen it mentioned that you can't even downgrade without losing all your settings.

CurtMonash 9y ago

My big concern is add-ons. The whole reason I use Firefox is the availability of add-ons such as NoScript and Cookie Culler. I'm guessing NoScript will work with Quantum, but Cookie Culler hasn't been updated since last year. Roomy Bookmarks is also a major quality-of-life factor; it allows me to have a well-stocked bookmarks bar. And it definitely won't work with Quantum. That alone will give me strong pause about updating.

earenndil 9y ago
> cookie culler What about cookie autodelete?