4 ms·
Firefox has both profiles and containers. However, the UX for Firefox's profiles feature is godawful. Lately though, I find I prefer not to trust the applicat
by BeefWellington 5y ago
Firefox has both profiles and containers.
However, the UX for Firefox's profiles feature is godawful.
Lately though, I find I prefer not to trust the application to manage this and just launch separate profiles in their own separate app namespaces using things like firecracker, firejail, or similar (depending on need).
- easrng 5y agoabout:profiles isn't that bad. There's no reference to it in the UI though.
- BeefWellington 5y agoIt's gotten better but I wouldn't say it isn't bad. A big part of the problem is not having an easy way to access it. Similarly, -ProfileManager has existed for ages and that experience is also bad. If I have to go to the lengths of about:profiles or using the -ProfileManager or -P command-line switches, why not just sandbox the entire thing? It definitely needs a useability upgrade.
- jatone 5y agoi refuse to use it given how bad the ux is. which is unfortunate because its a killer feature and why I can't recommend firefox over chrome. basic ux.
- charcircuit 5y ago>A big part of the problem is not having an easy way to access it. I've never had any issues typing "about:profiles" into the URL bar. It even autocompletes.