Sylos

51 ms·

541.
by Sylos 9y ago
Firefox includes Tracking Protection, which, as it says on the tin, blocks trackers, not ads. But many, many ads have trackers built in, so it practically also blocks most ads. This is default-enabled in Private Browsing. To enable it in no
542.
by Sylos 9y ago
Relevant bug report: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1283299 Experimental Nightly build with the Client-Side Decorations that you want enabled: https://github.com/stransky/gecko-dev/tr
543.
by Sylos 9y ago
WebExtensions were specifically announced alongside Electrolysis. This is not Mozilla's fault.
544.
by Sylos 9y ago
Their privacy statement is pretty clear. That's a legally binding document and lying in that will get you pretty high fines even in the US.
545.
by Sylos 9y ago
Not really anymore. Mozilla has been doing a lot here in recent months, too. The foundation for most of these performance improvements is the recent introduction of multiprocess, which also allowed them to introduce sandboxing in many more
546.
by Sylos 9y ago
Well, Firefox has existed since before tabs were a thing in browsers, so can't have been always, but yeah, wouldn't surprise me, if this was relatively quickly added after the introduction of tabs. These kind of hidden features do
547.
by Sylos 9y ago
Containers are different from Profiles. Containers only separate Cookies and login data, to make you look towards the internet like multiple people. Profiles on the other hand separate everything, as if you had two completely independent Fi
548.
by Sylos 9y ago
There's a Light theme, a Normal theme and a Dark theme. Dark is the default for the Developer Edition, which is what you're thinking of. But Normal is the default for Stable. Light is almost the same as Normal, but with a few more
549.
by Sylos 9y ago
That is still the case. Firefox for iOS is also just a WebKit wrapper. Mozilla mainly released it for the people that use Firefox on the desktop and want to sync their stuff.
550.
by Sylos 9y ago
NoScript should be released either today/tomorrow or soon. The dev was planning to have it ready for 57, but I don't know how far exactly he got. It won't be quite full-featured yet, though. He's planning that for Firefo
551.
by Sylos 9y ago
I can understand your point of view, but I do think it is very much necessary to cut things off completely. Otherwise you'd have tons of extensions that could be rewritten as WebExtensions but aren't, because it's less work i
552.
by Sylos 9y ago
They unfortunately sort of had to rush it. They needed to deprecate legacy extensions, because the majority of those are multiprocess-incompatible and they needed multiprocess to stop the bleeding of users. It's really quite visible, m
553.
by Sylos 9y ago
Most legacy extensions should already be broken on Nightly, are they not? They've refactored tons of code under the hood, basically all the changes that they've wanted to do for years but couldn't do, because it would have br
554.
by Sylos 9y ago
> I have to say though, having chrome that is virtually indistinguishable from a webpage is a phisher's dream. That's not terribly hard to do today either. That's why browsers implemented those obnoxious fullscreen animati
555.
by Sylos 9y ago
I don't know for sure, but I heavily doubt it, as it would open up so many potential security holes. The standard way to access files for extensions seems to be with Native Messaging: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US
556.
by Sylos 9y ago
Yeah, Android Firefox uses the native Android UI toolkit. A long time ago, they had it in XUL, which allowed for some really nice customization and just in general a more conform behaviour with the desktop browser, but performance back then
557.
by Sylos 9y ago
I don't fully understand this, but I think this is a lot more complicated than it might seem. Because well, you'd first of all need to set up a separate Gecko instance to render the UI, which isn't fundamentally different fro
558.
by Sylos 9y ago
> Mozilla will flip the switch on a completely new browser with the release of Firefox 57 It's not a completely new browser. It's still Firefox with some components swapped out, a lot of cruft taken out (due to cutting support
559.
by Sylos 9y ago
Are you aware of about:profiles? Type that into Firefox's URL-bar and it'll give you a somewhat less awkward profile manager. You can also bookmark that to make it easily accessible...
560.
by Sylos 9y ago
Pressing and releasing the Windows-Key will open up the menu and then he types in "Chr" to search for Chrome. Took me a moment, too...
561.
by Sylos 9y ago
Some people do perceive smooth scrolling as annoying, but for the most part what he's referring to was because of JavaScript ScrollEventHandlers being run in between the user moving their mouse wheel and the page actually scrolling. Th
562.
by Sylos 9y ago
Really not sure then. Maybe try toggling some of the tracker blocking in the settings and see if that changes anything. It does show the button for me on the Android version...
563.
by Sylos 9y ago
Can you not collapse them at all or do you mean that they uncollapse after a refresh? The latter might have to do with HN storing this collapse-state in a Cookie/localstorage/similar and Firefox Focus throwing these sorts of thing
564.
by Sylos 9y ago
Don't think you can block JavaScript with Firefox Focus (which is a different browser from Firefox). At least, I can't do it on the Android version. The iOS version might be different...
565.
by Sylos 9y ago
Make up even more ridiculous excuses for why this is clearly for the better of all of us and could not have been handled better.
566.
by Sylos 9y ago
Reading the comments here makes me feel like Google's PR team made its round. The performance benefit in this has to be miniscule, the number of unmaintained webpages which are irrevocably broken by this has to be huge and the time per
567.
by Sylos 9y ago
No, it's not to serve users. Users don't want broken webpages either. It's to make their own browser look faster at the expense of webpage authors. Because users will blame webpage authors for their webpage being broken. Woul
568.
by Sylos 9y ago
It does, but it also makes it trivial for Mozilla to notice that this is happening and then they can weed that extension out before it gets published.
569.
by Sylos 9y ago
Which is your personal opinion. Your personal opinion is not more important than the needs of a significant portion of users. The proper question here has to be what pisses off more users and to what degree does it piss them off: Having to
570.
by Sylos 9y ago
That's hardly going to help average users.

More ›