3 ms·

"FireFox Containers are a killer feature for me ..." They are a killer idea but their implementation is disappointing. In no particular order ... - You can't

by rsync 4y ago

"FireFox Containers are a killer feature for me ..." They are a killer idea but their implementation is disappointing. In no particular order ... - You can't clear history for a particular container space [1] - Containers are only tabs - so you can't, for instance, create a window and have all future tabs created in that window inherit that container - No "private" (or "burner") container that saves nothing outside of each individual tab No, I am not interested in solving these basic, first-order use-cases with some rando extension from joey75 @ gitlabusercontent.downloads.tv. [1] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1170863 https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1170863

ravenstine 4y ago
Though I absolutely agree that the implementation is disappointing, most concerns about history pretty much disappear if you disable history globally. Having lived without history in my browser for years now, I ponder whether that should be the default because I haven't missed it one bit. > Containers are only tabs - so you can't, for instance, create a window and have all future tabs created in that window inherit that container True, but if that's something you want, you can do that without the multi-account container tabs. Just create a new profile that's separate from the default one. The drawback to that is you have to reinstall any extensions you use because they won't be shared.
- sfink 4y ago
  In my opinion, history access is a major advantage of Firefox over Chrome. There are many sites that I don't bother to bookmark because I know typing a substring into the location bar will bring it up as a suggestion faster than I would be able to choose it from a bookmark menu. Plus, it displays a bunch of related URLs which are surprisingly often useful. I definitely would not want to default to disabling it. It's my browser, and letting it remember where I've been enables it to be much more useful to me.
41b696ef1113 4y ago
The "burner" container is 100% what I want. There are only a handful of sites for which I want to be able to maintain history.
- kaba0 4y ago
  I use temporary containers in combination with incognito mode — I often like having history.
sfink 4y ago
What's the difference between a burner container and a private window (Ctrl+Shift+P)? I suspect it would be fairly straightforward to make an extension that set a per-window default container, but I agree that it should be built in functionality. (Whether that default should override site-specific container rules, I'm not sure... I kind of want both options, but I guess that's where it starts getting complex.) I'm annoyed by the lack of integration between container and history. I never really want to clear history for a non-private window, but I do want to be able to restrict what I see by container when it makes sense and not restrict when it doesn't. My main grievance: searching for open tabs (either by prefixing the location bar entry with "% " or by choosing the Open Tabs option from the dropdown that appears when you start entering something) should match across all tabs, at least in the context of a freshly-opened new tab. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1479858 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1479858

by rsync 4y ago

ravenstine 4y ago

Though I absolutely agree that the implementation is disappointing, most concerns about history pretty much disappear if you disable history globally. Having lived without history in my browser for years now, I ponder whether that should be the default because I haven't missed it one bit. > Containers are only tabs - so you can't, for instance, create a window and have all future tabs created in that window inherit that container True, but if that's something you want, you can do that without the multi-account container tabs. Just create a new profile that's separate from the default one. The drawback to that is you have to reinstall any extensions you use because they won't be shared.

sfink 4y ago
In my opinion, history access is a major advantage of Firefox over Chrome. There are many sites that I don't bother to bookmark because I know typing a substring into the location bar will bring it up as a suggestion faster than I would be able to choose it from a bookmark menu. Plus, it displays a bunch of related URLs which are surprisingly often useful. I definitely would not want to default to disabling it. It's my browser, and letting it remember where I've been enables it to be much more useful to me.

41b696ef1113 4y ago

The "burner" container is 100% what I want. There are only a handful of sites for which I want to be able to maintain history.

kaba0 4y ago
I use temporary containers in combination with incognito mode — I often like having history.

sfink 4y ago

What's the difference between a burner container and a private window (Ctrl+Shift+P)? I suspect it would be fairly straightforward to make an extension that set a per-window default container, but I agree that it should be built in functionality. (Whether that default should override site-specific container rules, I'm not sure... I kind of want both options, but I guess that's where it starts getting complex.) I'm annoyed by the lack of integration between container and history. I never really want to clear history for a non-private window, but I do want to be able to restrict what I see by container when it makes sense and not restrict when it doesn't. My main grievance: searching for open tabs (either by prefixing the location bar entry with "% " or by choosing the Open Tabs option from the dropdown that appears when you start entering something) should match across all tabs, at least in the context of a freshly-opened new tab. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1479858 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1479858