7 ms·

Some reasons to continue using firefox: 1. Containers! This is one of the biggest reasons to stick with Firefox. Along with the multi-account containers extens

by msravi 4y ago

Some reasons to continue using firefox: 1. Containers! This is one of the biggest reasons to stick with Firefox. Along with the multi-account containers extension, you can restrict opening of specific domains to specific containers. Gives a huge privacy boost. 2. uBlock (origin) 3. uMatrix

ManlyBread 4y ago
4. On Android it has support for plugins. I have been using Firefox Mobile + uBlock Origin for years without any issues.
colordrops 4y ago
Agreed, containers are great. I love them and wish they were a standard feature across browsers. Still some room for improvement though. It would be nice if the containers acted like an entirely different instance of a browser, with different settings, history, extensions, etc. With the current design it's still possible to accidently leaked details across containers by visiting something in the wrong one if you havent set up exclusive browsing for a particular site, and history is shared across containers. Would be nice to be able to export container settings as well as a lot of work can go into setting them up.
- rroot 4y ago
  You get this functionality by using Firefox profiles. It's a separate browser instance with completely separated history, extension, ... It doesn't work like containers though, you can't open a new tab in a new profile.
  - commoner 4y ago
    If you use Firefox profiles regularly, you might enjoy the Profile Switcher for Firefox add-on, which provides a Chrome-like interface for loading and managing profiles in Firefox: - Add-on: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/profile-switcher/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/profile-switc... - Source: https://github.com/null-dev/firefox-profile-switcher https://github.com/null-dev/firefox-profile-switcher
    - _odey 4y ago
      Please access this link and generate interest around Firefox natively implementing the same UI/UX for Profiles as Chrome has right now: https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/shortcut-for-different-profiles/idi-p/707 https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/shortcut-for-different-... Also there's this bug report: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1542189 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1542189 Hopefully someone will listen to feedback, this time...
      - happymellon 4y ago
        I've stated this so many times for decades now. Profile support is something that I would literally pay towards funding support but there isnt a good way of setting up a bounty which I'll pay £100 into each month until the bounty is large enough to motivate someone to do it.
      - hendersoon 4y ago
        Considering Thunderbird still doesn't support a multi-line message list after 19 years[1], if you need that feature I suggest using the addon linked earlier because Mozilla does not move quickly. 1: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213945 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213945
  - colordrops 4y ago
    I have 10 different containers set up - profiles are too clunky for this.
thrwawy74 4y ago
Temporary Containers is the best extension for Firefox. Every new tab is its own separate container. I configured it so Ctrl + clicking a link will open a tab in the same container, should I need this for "traditional browsing" where I want to share a session/cookies. Security by isolation - by default. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... PS: There's also a neat one called Proxy Containers to assign separate containers to a different proxy.
- nsonha 4y ago
  > assign separate containers to a different proxy what VPN provider can you use with this extension?
  - nextaccountic 4y ago
    mozilla vpn https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/mozilla-vpn/multi-account-containers-add-on-on-mozilla-vpn/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/mozilla-vpn/multi-accou... which is a rebranded mullvad. mullvad is pretty cool (doesn't require any private info for creating an account or paying, and they recently disabled recurring payments so they don't need to store credit card info, even though this has a financial hit to the company https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/6/20/were-removing-the-option-to-create-new-subscriptions/ https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/6/20/were-removing-the-opti...)
  - dizhn 4y ago
    I am using it with my own wireguard instance.
    - bjord 4y ago
      how are you binding only specific containers to wireguard?
      - dizhn 4y ago
        I think I should have said "my own proxy" rather than wireguard. I just happen to access it via wireguard. Though I did want to point out that any vpn proxy would work. The Multi Account Containers extension has an Advanced proxy settings at the bottom when you go in to Manager Containers. I have a go based socks proxy running on docker somewhere. I enter the details for that there. Syntax is socks://ip:port . I have two socks implementations installed. I A/B test them sometimes but they seem to be basically equivalent in terms of performance. https://github.com/net-byte/socks5-server https://github.com/net-byte/socks5-server https://github.com/ocassio/go-socks5-proxy https://github.com/ocassio/go-socks5-proxy (old but works fine) Note: If you're using a chromium based browser you can use the excellent SwitchyOmega plugin to do this much easier and with more functionality. No containers of course.
jerrygoyal 4y ago
Never used uMatrix but looks like it's a content blocker like uBO. any reason for using both instead of just uBO?
- vladvasiliu 4y ago
  My understanding is that uMatrix is a bit different. By default, it will block just about all third-party requests. It can sometimes be a pain to manage, in particular for sites with many redirects and an absurd number of domains. I'm thinking Azure/Office365. It's not a full replacement for uBO either because it won't attempt to do anything fancy to block ads specifically. However, uMatrix is no longer maintained. Its GitHub page [0] says the project has been archived. I'm still using it, don't know whether there are any risks in doing so. [0] https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix
- Semaphor 4y ago
  Simple and straightforward blocking/permitting of cookies, css, images, media, scripts, xhr, frames, and others per domain. You can theoretically do the same thing with uBo, but it’s far more involved and not a thing you want to do all the time.
- DavideNL 4y ago
  uMatrix has not been in Development for a long time (Developer did not have the time and decided to focus on uBlock Origin.)
- msravi 4y ago
  Not everyone will like it, but uMatrix comes with more fine-grained control, and the defaults are set to block all third-party and cross-site loads, including static content hosted on other domains. So a lot of sites will break by default, and you've to go enable anything that you actually want. uBlock on the other hand will only block the (list) filters you've enabled.
  - coryrc 4y ago
    uBlock Origin has an advanced mode (Dynamic filtering) that allows most of the config uMatrix allowed. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering
mikae1 4y ago
Sidebery[0] and Tree Style Tab[1] are excellent reasons to stay with Firefox (or any of its derivatives). > Containers! This is one of the biggest reasons to stick with Firefox. Too bad you still can't chose what add-ons that should run in a certain container. In that sense it is more limited than profiles in Firefox (or Chrome). Speaking of containers, Temporary Containers[2] is a cool add-on too. Not recommended[3] though... [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sidebery/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sidebery/ [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/versions/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta... [2] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... [3] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-program https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-...
- hank_z 4y ago
  Can I ask how you use Sidebery and Tree Style Tab? I found that they both create a panel on the left side of screen and will stay there forever, which reduces the space for web content. The left panel also makes my small laptop screen look even smaller.
  - ayushnix 4y ago
    Sidebery and Tree Style Tabs make sense when used on a display with decent screen real estate when the viewport width is significantly higher than viewport height. I usually have more than 250 tabs open at a time which would be impossible to navigate without these vertical tree tab extensions.
  - PetitPrince 4y ago
    It's supposed to replace the tab bar. Unfortunately there's no API to do that and you have to rely on a custom userChrome.css. Re loss of screen space: yes. However the reasoning is that losing some horizontal space is not as bad as loosing vertical space.
  - littlecranky67 4y ago
    To be fair, modern web design often maxes out at 1920p of screen width, often even narrower. You just lose whitespace.
darknavi 4y ago
4. Help dilute the Chromium monopoly
- EbNar 4y ago
  [dead]
  - atoav 4y ago
    Surely the same argument wouldn't apply to Chrome which is owned by a monopolist megacorp.
    - iakov 4y ago
      At least they don't pretend to be some champions of internet freedom or something.
      - e-v 4y ago
        So it makes them better?
        EbNar 4y ago
coryrc 4y ago
uMatrix is deprecated, you can get most of its features via uBO: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering
- OJFord 4y ago
  Unfortunately the nuTensor fork is also now inactive & archived.
  - Semaphor 4y ago
    I think this was because gorhill decided to release a uMatrix fix. uMatrix is not getting development, but is also essentially "done".
    - OJFord 4y ago
      Oh nice, I didn't notice that. I certainly don't have a problem with it being 'done', I just had 'move to nuTensor' on my mental to-do list just for the potential security/API fixes, ensuring it remains available etc.
- jdrek1 4y ago
  That may be true but uMatrix' UX is unmatched - the matrix UI allows for granular control while achieving the same in uBO is significantly harder.
kristiandupont 4y ago
4. Picture-in-picture I am on a laptop so I don't have an extra screen to put video on, but every now and then I will have something playing in the background. It's nice to be able to have a small view of it in the corner while working.
- ajvs 4y ago
  This is a big one I don't see mentioned often. Chrome requires a separate extension for PiP, it doesn't support multiple PiP windows, you can't freely resize them, there's less controls on the pop-up, etc.
  - s_ting765 4y ago
    I'm confused. I use this feature almost everyday on Chromium and never had to use an extension for it. You can move and resize the PIP window.
zagrebian 4y ago
4. about:config
dailykoder 4y ago
X. Just to keep the browser competition alive. We can't let google win, even if they kind-of have already. It's important to have a choice
koheripbal 4y ago
I have a simpler method, which is to simply have different profiles open via command line shortcut. One per monitor with different extensions and security setting, which I use for different accounts.
berry_sortoro 4y ago
vs4vijay 4y ago
why uBlock and uMatrix both? Aren't they mutually exclusive?

by msravi 4y ago

ManlyBread 4y ago

4. On Android it has support for plugins. I have been using Firefox Mobile + uBlock Origin for years without any issues.

colordrops 4y ago

Agreed, containers are great. I love them and wish they were a standard feature across browsers. Still some room for improvement though. It would be nice if the containers acted like an entirely different instance of a browser, with different settings, history, extensions, etc. With the current design it's still possible to accidently leaked details across containers by visiting something in the wrong one if you havent set up exclusive browsing for a particular site, and history is shared across containers. Would be nice to be able to export container settings as well as a lot of work can go into setting them up.

rroot 4y ago
You get this functionality by using Firefox profiles. It's a separate browser instance with completely separated history, extension, ... It doesn't work like containers though, you can't open a new tab in a new profile.
- commoner 4y ago
  If you use Firefox profiles regularly, you might enjoy the Profile Switcher for Firefox add-on, which provides a Chrome-like interface for loading and managing profiles in Firefox: - Add-on: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/profile-switcher/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/profile-switc... - Source: https://github.com/null-dev/firefox-profile-switcher https://github.com/null-dev/firefox-profile-switcher
  - _odey 4y ago
    Please access this link and generate interest around Firefox natively implementing the same UI/UX for Profiles as Chrome has right now: https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/shortcut-for-different-profiles/idi-p/707 https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/shortcut-for-different-... Also there's this bug report: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1542189 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1542189 Hopefully someone will listen to feedback, this time...
    - happymellon 4y ago
      I've stated this so many times for decades now. Profile support is something that I would literally pay towards funding support but there isnt a good way of setting up a bounty which I'll pay £100 into each month until the bounty is large enough to motivate someone to do it.
    - hendersoon 4y ago
      Considering Thunderbird still doesn't support a multi-line message list after 19 years[1], if you need that feature I suggest using the addon linked earlier because Mozilla does not move quickly. 1: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213945 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213945
- colordrops 4y ago
  I have 10 different containers set up - profiles are too clunky for this.

thrwawy74 4y ago

Temporary Containers is the best extension for Firefox. Every new tab is its own separate container. I configured it so Ctrl + clicking a link will open a tab in the same container, should I need this for "traditional browsing" where I want to share a session/cookies. Security by isolation - by default. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... PS: There's also a neat one called Proxy Containers to assign separate containers to a different proxy.

nsonha 4y ago
> assign separate containers to a different proxy what VPN provider can you use with this extension?
- nextaccountic 4y ago
  mozilla vpn https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/mozilla-vpn/multi-account-containers-add-on-on-mozilla-vpn/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/mozilla-vpn/multi-accou... which is a rebranded mullvad. mullvad is pretty cool (doesn't require any private info for creating an account or paying, and they recently disabled recurring payments so they don't need to store credit card info, even though this has a financial hit to the company https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/6/20/were-removing-the-option-to-create-new-subscriptions/ https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/6/20/were-removing-the-opti...)
- dizhn 4y ago
  I am using it with my own wireguard instance.
  - bjord 4y ago
    how are you binding only specific containers to wireguard?
    - dizhn 4y ago
      I think I should have said "my own proxy" rather than wireguard. I just happen to access it via wireguard. Though I did want to point out that any vpn proxy would work. The Multi Account Containers extension has an Advanced proxy settings at the bottom when you go in to Manager Containers. I have a go based socks proxy running on docker somewhere. I enter the details for that there. Syntax is socks://ip:port . I have two socks implementations installed. I A/B test them sometimes but they seem to be basically equivalent in terms of performance. https://github.com/net-byte/socks5-server https://github.com/net-byte/socks5-server https://github.com/ocassio/go-socks5-proxy https://github.com/ocassio/go-socks5-proxy (old but works fine) Note: If you're using a chromium based browser you can use the excellent SwitchyOmega plugin to do this much easier and with more functionality. No containers of course.

jerrygoyal 4y ago

Never used uMatrix but looks like it's a content blocker like uBO. any reason for using both instead of just uBO?

vladvasiliu 4y ago
My understanding is that uMatrix is a bit different. By default, it will block just about all third-party requests. It can sometimes be a pain to manage, in particular for sites with many redirects and an absurd number of domains. I'm thinking Azure/Office365. It's not a full replacement for uBO either because it won't attempt to do anything fancy to block ads specifically. However, uMatrix is no longer maintained. Its GitHub page [0] says the project has been archived. I'm still using it, don't know whether there are any risks in doing so. [0] https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix
Semaphor 4y ago
Simple and straightforward blocking/permitting of cookies, css, images, media, scripts, xhr, frames, and others per domain. You can theoretically do the same thing with uBo, but it’s far more involved and not a thing you want to do all the time.
DavideNL 4y ago
uMatrix has not been in Development for a long time (Developer did not have the time and decided to focus on uBlock Origin.)
msravi 4y ago
Not everyone will like it, but uMatrix comes with more fine-grained control, and the defaults are set to block all third-party and cross-site loads, including static content hosted on other domains. So a lot of sites will break by default, and you've to go enable anything that you actually want. uBlock on the other hand will only block the (list) filters you've enabled.
- coryrc 4y ago
  uBlock Origin has an advanced mode (Dynamic filtering) that allows most of the config uMatrix allowed. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering

mikae1 4y ago

Sidebery[0] and Tree Style Tab[1] are excellent reasons to stay with Firefox (or any of its derivatives). > Containers! This is one of the biggest reasons to stick with Firefox. Too bad you still can't chose what add-ons that should run in a certain container. In that sense it is more limited than profiles in Firefox (or Chrome). Speaking of containers, Temporary Containers[2] is a cool add-on too. Not recommended[3] though... [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sidebery/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sidebery/ [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/versions/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta... [2] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... [3] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-program https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-...

hank_z 4y ago
Can I ask how you use Sidebery and Tree Style Tab? I found that they both create a panel on the left side of screen and will stay there forever, which reduces the space for web content. The left panel also makes my small laptop screen look even smaller.
- ayushnix 4y ago
  Sidebery and Tree Style Tabs make sense when used on a display with decent screen real estate when the viewport width is significantly higher than viewport height. I usually have more than 250 tabs open at a time which would be impossible to navigate without these vertical tree tab extensions.
- PetitPrince 4y ago
  It's supposed to replace the tab bar. Unfortunately there's no API to do that and you have to rely on a custom userChrome.css. Re loss of screen space: yes. However the reasoning is that losing some horizontal space is not as bad as loosing vertical space.
- littlecranky67 4y ago
  To be fair, modern web design often maxes out at 1920p of screen width, often even narrower. You just lose whitespace.

darknavi 4y ago

4. Help dilute the Chromium monopoly

EbNar 4y ago
[dead]
- atoav 4y ago
  Surely the same argument wouldn't apply to Chrome which is owned by a monopolist megacorp.
  - iakov 4y ago
    At least they don't pretend to be some champions of internet freedom or something.
    - e-v 4y ago
      So it makes them better?
      - EbNar 4y ago

coryrc 4y ago

uMatrix is deprecated, you can get most of its features via uBO: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering

OJFord 4y ago
Unfortunately the nuTensor fork is also now inactive & archived.
- Semaphor 4y ago
  I think this was because gorhill decided to release a uMatrix fix. uMatrix is not getting development, but is also essentially "done".
  - OJFord 4y ago
    Oh nice, I didn't notice that. I certainly don't have a problem with it being 'done', I just had 'move to nuTensor' on my mental to-do list just for the potential security/API fixes, ensuring it remains available etc.
jdrek1 4y ago
That may be true but uMatrix' UX is unmatched - the matrix UI allows for granular control while achieving the same in uBO is significantly harder.

kristiandupont 4y ago

4. Picture-in-picture I am on a laptop so I don't have an extra screen to put video on, but every now and then I will have something playing in the background. It's nice to be able to have a small view of it in the corner while working.

ajvs 4y ago
This is a big one I don't see mentioned often. Chrome requires a separate extension for PiP, it doesn't support multiple PiP windows, you can't freely resize them, there's less controls on the pop-up, etc.
- s_ting765 4y ago
  I'm confused. I use this feature almost everyday on Chromium and never had to use an extension for it. You can move and resize the PIP window.

zagrebian 4y ago

4. about:config

dailykoder 4y ago

X. Just to keep the browser competition alive. We can't let google win, even if they kind-of have already. It's important to have a choice

koheripbal 4y ago

I have a simpler method, which is to simply have different profiles open via command line shortcut. One per monitor with different extensions and security setting, which I use for different accounts.

berry_sortoro 4y ago

vs4vijay 4y ago

why uBlock and uMatrix both? Aren't they mutually exclusive?