Firefox Tabs will be kill

>>58693997
It takes that and removing plugin compatibility to kill the browser. Firefox will die this year.

>>58694006
What's the alternative? I've used Firefox since I discovered there were browser others than IE.

>>58694015
I could tell you about a couple good alternatives, but then nu/g/ would complain about muh botnets.

So are there any other browsers with similar UIs and extension ecosystems?

>bookmarks and history in a pop-out sidebar (this is fucking critical. i'm not going to change tabs to open a bookmark or three in a new tab.)
>relatively compact compared to pigfat chrome
>cross platform
>equivalents to really basic shit like tree style tabs, self destructing cookies, noscript, stylish, etc

File: Sad Holo.jpg (87KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1920x1080px

I don't know, but going back to Chrome on Chromium is really tempting. I was using it since it came out, but switching to Debian made me consider FF and while it has been good, its downfall is only assured.

>>58694033
Tell us

>>58693997
who gives a fuck, the only things that matter are ublock, umatrix, htttps everywhere and self destructing cookies

>>58694033
you mean muh poorly maintained amateur furfag forks and muh using 16gb of RAM for 2 tabs

>browsers
>good

fuck this brb setting up GNU/womb

>>58694073
umatrix already does what self destructing cookies can do and https everywhere is going to be deprecated soon as browsers make HTTPS connections default.

>>58694073
Can I store dozens of tabs with those in separate, named groups?

>>58694104
>umatrix already does what self destructing cookies can do
not exactly. SDC is way comfier to use

>>58694104
not really SDC still does things umatrix can't

>>58694104
Not exactly.

https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/issues/563

Also there's the ease of use thing, for people that just want to selectively remember site preferences while discarding extraneous shit like youtube/google/4chan cookies without digging through a screen of "minimul design" tinfoil legos.

>>58694105
that's what bookmarks are for you inefficient mongoloid

what is this about?

>>58694164
>reload tab each time
>may lose data each time

lol no

>>58694178
then download the page, you're not gonna read that shit anyways you mong, you're the browser's equivalent of digital hoarders

>>58694197
Hold on let me download this forum thread I'm following, i'll get updates either way hue hue

>inb4 use site-specific thread watchers
Why use a fragmented mess of similar solutions when you can use a unified one?

There is zero excuse for removing this functionality from the browser. Mozilla just said "lol, we can't code, so we dunno how this works, and we need to make room in our time budget to work on making firefox more like chr....USER EXPERIENCE. make it an addon gaiz, do our work for us, it's not like we're paid more than you (we are)"

>>58694221
And you can't have a bookmark for the forum thread?
You're autistic as fuck, fork your own firefox if it's so easy or just use regular tabs if you don't like it, faggot.
I sure as hell won't miss useless addons for adhd ridden faggots like you.

>>58694221
How is this different than just refreshing the page? Or using a bookmark? I'm trying to find the function that this has that those don't.

>>58694280
Bookmarks are literally a dated solution. It's worse. It's for faggots from the 90s who have 512mb of RAM at most.

This is 2017, we can keep our webpages loaded and view them without reloading them (so reloading is only for updates). Firefox only removed the feature because they were fucking lazy

>>58694294
Then maintain your own fork if it's so easy, and keep it safe as well with all that vulnerable XUL trash.
You're just autistic and probably addicted to shitposting seeing as you need to know what's going on in a forum at all times.
99% of people don't need your XUL trash addon to ease their autism.

What should I use instead?
Bookmarks? Different sessions?

>>58694015
Chrome

>>58694934
I'd rather stop browsing the net. Besides, I have less than 32 GB of RAM.

File: 1481096021899.jpg (35KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 640x360px

Can any other browser just hurry up and make tree style tabs a thing already? That extension is one of the few things keeping me stuck to firefox

File: 1455643961681.jpg (368KB, 650x995px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 650x995px

I want to ditch firefox but there are literally no good alternatives

>chrome

BOTNET. I'm sorry but having tried it out, I just cannot live with it. I just cannot have a browser linked to my google account constantly datamine me. It's too reliant on being logged in to google services

>chrome-like browsers

Most of them lack webm/pdf/flash support, they don't auto-update and while I don't mind it on my Linux thinkpads, I don't want to compile shit on muh windows. They are basically a huge beta test that never ends.

>opera

The saddest thing about this browser is the fact that its users think it's a good browser. Oh what a fucking joke.

Now, the problem is this. All the years I've been on /g/, there's always some chrome shill posting how firefox is kill. Firefox has been kill for what, 5 years now? It's still good. The only problem is that it works on UNIX better than it works on windows. That applies to a lot and then some things but because multi monitor support sucks on linux I have to keep using windows. And that means I have to keep using Firefox even though I realise it's not a very fast browser anymore.

Is there anything that is like chrome that doesn't feature google bloat? Something like chromium that works like Firefox?

>>58695105
Why isn't chromium a good alternative?

>>58695194

Doesn't feature a PDF viewer, doesn't auto-update

>>58693997
The link doesn't work for me, what does this mean? That firefox is going to eliminate tabs and pretend it's 1982?

>>58694178
That's was tab recovery does anyway, it just stores a list of urls of open pages.

>>58693997
Pale Moon.
Qupzilla.
Pick your poison.

Firefox is becoming a Chromium with all the bad parts (no UI customizability, high memory usage, restricted add-on ecosystem) and none of the good (security, speed, responsiveness).

There isn't any good open browser anymore. What a shame.

>>58695234
Chromium has had a PDF viewer since version 47 when it was open sourced (PDFium).

If you use Linux, Chromium auto-updates as well.

>>58694960
>being an autist with 300 tabs open at once

>>58695194
>>58695234
>>58695586
So, if I use Linux are there any drawbacks to using Chromium?

>>58695711
That's me. Hi.

>>58695760
>So, if I use Linux are there any drawbacks to using Chromium?
For a regular user, no.

If you're very privacy-conscious, you should know that Chromium still makes some automatic connections to Google. For example:
- Every time it's started, it pings Google servers to check for IPv6 connectivity
- It regularly pings the WebStore for add-on updates
- Implements functionality related to Google services like Google Cloud Messaging and Google Cloud Printing

There are patches to remove these things, but personally if someone cared enough about their privacy to go this extra step, I'd recommend them to just ditch Chromium entirely (after all, it's a huge project that changes quickly so something can always slip) and use Firefox inside a snapshotted VM or Whonix.

>>58693997

What the fuck is that?

>>58693997
>"On 4 October 1999, almost 3 years after the final release in the franchise, a fictional 14th volume of the series was featured in episode 3 "...Or Just Look Like One" of the crime drama TV series Law and Order: SVU. It was used by the prosecutor (who called upon detective Monique Jeffries as a witness) as a piece of evidence used against a young man accused of rape, whose father was also being charged as an accessory for bringing the comic into the house. The Rapeman is described as a high school student that turns into the alter-ego at night to take revenge on the girls at school that wronged him, rather than the adult "gun for hire" that Keisuke is."
fucking law and order

>>58695985
GO HOME

>>58695105
There are still a thousand firefox forks, Seamonkey, Midori, Links2 if you're a luddite...

>>58694174
Some fuckface is whining his addons won't work any more.

Haha time to use Iridium.

Why is Chrome objectively the best browser? I hate the botnet, but damn it has it all. What makes it the best option for web browsing, privacy aside?

File: e-hentai.org_news.php_-_2017-01-29_02.02.24.png (8KB, 858x106px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 858x106px

>firefox 51 released
>implemented HSTS priming but too fucking stupid to follow simple protocol rules
>whoops sorry guys here's a """"fix""""
>milestone 54.0a1
I just want them to burn already.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1334074
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1328460
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/5e4a1cccae92

>>58693997
I'm out of the loop what are you sperging about?

INSTALL YANDEX

>>58693997
Tab groups helper (which relies on tab groups) is my favorite add-on. I'm not updating Firefox to 57, tbqh

File: 1461048026984.jpg (49KB, 500x442px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x442px

>>58694073
I use Beyond Australis because it's really fucking nice to not have a pointless ugly URL bar when I don't need it.

So what's going to be my alternative since he's killing BA as well?

http://fasezero.com/lastnotice.html

Since OP posted a shitty link

INSTALL PALEMEME

>>58693997
the piccy belongs in hentai

ur question has nothing to do with it.

this is why i troll.

Fuck it. Fuck it all.

What about download statusbar? I fucking need that dammit.

Anyone who has tried to port a extension knows webextensions are neutered and immature especially on Firefox. Disappointing.

I get Firefox ditching the old API so they can fix up their browser but it hurts to not have deep extensions that can at least interface with the system easily.

If they do this and don't get significant improvement in speed and security or whatever they are dead in the waters.

>>58693997
dammit I can't find this manga anywhere

if tree style tabs loses support it will be impossible for me to continue using firefox.

File: a.png (9KB, 799x60px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 799x60px

>>58699187
yours isn't much better

>>58699187
>>58699972
OP here.

http://pastebin.com/HgFaqrQu

There you have it.

File: a.png (29KB, 1030x649px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 1030x649px

>>58702161
thanks

>>58702191
I don't know what kind of setup you're running that you can't get into pastebin, but here it is.

############################

I cannot continue working on my add-ons anymore. I'm sorry, but it's time.

Some time ago, Mozilla announced WebExtensions as the future of Firefox add-ons. At the time, it was not fully clear to me what this would mean for my add-ons, I was optimistic in that they would at least keep working in some way, but over this past year it became clear that this is not the case.

>>58702204

WebExtensions are great for adding functionality to the browser, and without a doubt are versatile and easy to use. However, manipulation of the browser window's interface and functionality will be extremely limited by definition, and even if it wasn't, the implementation of such abilities is nearly impossible to achieve in WebExtensions.

Four out of five of my add-ons rely heavily on these abilities: FindBar Tweak, Beyond Australis, OmniSidebar and Puzzle Bars. From all of those, probably only FBT's Find All feature could work as a WebExtension; I wrote it following the suggestion of several users at the time, I have never used it myself, I don't think I've clicked that button a single time since; in fact I keep that feature disabled in my main profile and only really use it when someone reports a problem with it.

>>58702209

Tab Groups has a shot. I took on this project after it was decided to remove the built-in Tab Groups from Firefox, as I thought it could be a good and fun learning experience; it hasn't been, if anything it's been stressful and time-consuming. I don't really use groups outside of my development profile, with my browsing habits I only find them useful to a point, they're helpful for my development/coding workflow, but I've used them maybe twice in my main profile during normal browsing.

Palemoon is comfy desu senpai, but i'm starting gettin paranoid so lately VPN + tor is the way to go

>>58702211

Its core functionality and basic workflow probably can be made into a WebExtension, but only after an almost complete rewrite of the code (with some major work done on Firefox's side as well!), and still stripped down of at least some of its features. Many of the new groups features I've wanted to add since the beginning are impossible though, for the same reason as I mentioned above: they either don't fit the scope of what can be allowed through WebExtensions or their implementation would be far too complex to do on my own.

I have fought for keeping the current system working together with WebExtensions, not only to keep all of my add-ons alive, but also because I believe a can-do-whatever-you-want extension system like exists today is the best quality Firefox has over other browsers. Unfortunately I've failed to convince them of this, as have they failed to convince me of the benefits they expect to achieve with a WebExtensions-only system.

>>58702222

To their merit, as far as I'm concerned, everyone at Mozilla involved with WebExtensions, and even those that aren't, have discussed every fine point on the subject ad nauseum. To those I say thank you for putting up with me and sharing your in-depth views on the issue over these past few months, I appreciate that a project of this magnitude demands an incredible effort, and that the ultimate goal is only a better product for everyone. I'm sure it's no surprise to you that I don't agree with a WebExtensions-only world, but I hope that over our talks I have made clear my reasons for that, and that at no point did I bear anyone any ill-will; as I keep saying despite my skepticism, prove me wrong.

(For those who have not followed these discussions, if you care about my full opinion on the subject, you can find my posts spread out over forums and mailing lists all around.)

Still, what most prompts me to write this is how left out this all makes me feel. The category of extensions I am most interested in, which all my add-ons belong to, is discarded both in principle and by the impossibility of implementing them in an acceptable way in WebExtensions. Beyond losing what I have worked for so hard in the past few years, it's seeing all that work categorized as irrelevant and undesirable to the point that it's categorically ruled out in the new system. To be frank, I did not expect this to happen with Mozilla, ever, regardless of their motivations for adopting this strategy.

>>58702232

So let's sum up. My only available path forward is to spend the better part of a year, probably more, on the tedious and stressful task of rewriting one of my add-ons and part of another, both of which will result in only already existing functionality that brings me no gain and in which I have no personal interest, to retain maybe a third of my current user-base, in favor of a system that will exist for reasons with which I don't agree, with further development of novel features being subject to a bottleneck on Mozilla's side rather than on myself.

Adding to that, Firefox and my add-ons are not my life, by themselves they don't and will never support me by far, nor am I a Mozilla paid employee who can spend his (full-)time working on his add-ons and on Firefox itself to add the ability to support them (because I also don't expect, or even want, anyone at Mozilla to do my work for me, as that kinda defeats the point of them being my add-ons, that's the whole thing that lured me in to this add-ons world in the first place).

Oh, by the way, I already did all that. It took me a year and a half of extensive rewritting to make my add-ons e10s/multiprocess compatible, something that is being rolled out only now, all with the prospect of a long-lasting life for them. And the WebExtensions announcement was made not two months after. "Demotivating" doesn't quite cover it...

No, that's not going to happen.

>>58702237
These are the last updates to my add-ons. They will cease working with Firefox 57 next November. By then hopefully some alternatives appear. My code is up on Github, so anyone interested can fork it. If there's some need for me to do some transition work on your behalf, for instance to migrate users from my add-ons to yours, I'm only an e-mail away.

I apologize to every single one of my users for not being able to keep the promises I have made you since I started. You have all been incredibly supportive, I have the most awesome users I could have ever asked for. I only hope you understand that I don't have the availability to continue past this point. And quite frankly, seeing the add-ons I care most about being left out like this, I don't really have the will to do it either; their part in making my browser behave as awesome as it does now is what really brought me so far.

I am also happy to have been part of an amazing community. Thank you so much to everyone, at Mozilla, fellow add-on developers and everyone else, who has helped me, taught me, and made me feel included over these years. Awesome people!

For over a decade I have supported and defended Mozilla and Firefox (sometimes in weird ways). I truly hope this is a move in which they succeed, as the alternative won't be a pleasant outcome to anyone in the online world, and I wish I could be a part of it and help construct and hone it to the outstanding platform they intend it to become. It's unfortunate that we have such divergent paths, I remain pessimistic about Mozilla's current strategy, so I must make a new one for myself. Still, I wish the best of luck to everyone there; I'm still afraid you'll need it.

Onwards!

Quicksaver - Luís Miguel

So that ends the wall of text.

tl;dr
Firefox won't support some add-ons in the future.

>>58693997
hey, this is pretty cool

.. wait, it's going to stop working soon?

is Chromium axially botnet

>>58694164
Eat a dick, you fucking dumbass.

>>58693997
How can they constantly copycat Chrome and still manage to do everything 20 times worse

How in the fuck can they hemorrhage market share and still not clue up that maybe they have a shitty direction

File: 1423534648088.png (214KB, 556x388px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 556x388px

>still using Opera 12.16
>only halfway decent alternative is about to die

>>58702380
That's what happens when the remaining developers live in their comfy SJW bubble world.

>>58695105
what's wrong with Opera?

>>58702402
It died three years ago and what's now known as Opera is merely a shell of its former self.

>>58702255
>Firefox won't support some add-ons in the future.
it's only the ones that can modify how the UI works, aka, the ones keeping people on firefox

RIP firefox, the last usable web browser

>>58702414
For how long can I avoid switching to 57?

>>58702471
idk, i personally use IceCat 45.5.1 (based on Firefox ESR)
it'll be some time until this gets to 57, i don't even know what version the regular release is on

>>58702414
It's kind of baffling how those morons don't realize why people actually use Firefox over the competition.

File: sad cat.jpg (23KB, 599x416px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 599x416px

>tree style tabs is dying

>>58695258
These people who use these monstrous autism arrangements of tabs also never close thier browser

then they complain that it's slow

>>58694073
And classic theme restorer, because I don't want my desktop programs to look like crippled phone apps, randomly move interface elements around or hide them

>>58694042
>basic shit like Tree Style Tabs
TST is not basic compared to simple vertical tabs. In fact, it's only ever existed for Firefox. Stop being so entitled, goy.

>>58695234
you're a firefox user and you trust auto-updates?

>>58695243
Firefox is changing extension engines so it can use Chrome's app store horseshit, but the new engine does not support many common tasks done by current extensions, like for example anything that customizes the GUI

>>58699204
>piccy
kys

>>58702402
Opera no longer exists. It's just Chrome with a skin.

>>58703026
I close my browser at least once per session. I just want to have the info available. Obviously I don't load all my tabs on startup.

>>58703164
>I don't load my tabs on startup

Then you're using bookmarks...

>>58703026
Nice assumptions, dumbass.

>>58703194
have you even used firefox before?

>>58703194
You're dumb.

>>58703194
an unloaded tab in firefox keeps more than just the URL, it'll also remember form contents, scroll position, and probably other things

>>58703045
Well that is also dying with the new firefox addons.

Can someone just put that poor program out of its misery yet? It's sad to see it just continuously suffer and die for the last 4 years.

File: 1463962678859.gif (988KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

988KB, 250x250px

>>58693997
>hey, lets just gradually hide most of buttons and features so our browser looks sleek and clean, hide fucking everything

Im TRIGGERED

>>58702878
All may not be lost. They have an experiment in Firefox Test Pilot that adds vertical tabs.

>>58694015
Edge

>>58695711
yes? hello?

File: Democritus.png (52KB, 239x246px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 239x246px

>>58704430

>>58695711
>using software that's shittier because it being shittier can be buffered by spending a lot of money
nice

>>58703100
Yeah well, if it can't exist in my browser, it's not a browser I wanna use