>Firefox status: KEKED https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2

File: output.png (17KB, 917x594px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 917x594px

>>59116725
:^)

File: hehe.jpg (7KB, 167x144px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 167x144px

>>59116759

>>59116689
but it says theyre just unyfing their theme api, what's wrong with this

>>59116793
Nothing is wrong with it. He just has no idea what they're talking about.

>>59116793
they're unifying it by killing most of it off

hope you like those round tabs friendo :^)

>>59116759

>he updated past 47.0

Cant be responsible for every random retard

>>59116811
>we’ll provide an “experimental” section of the manifest to continue to allow direct CSS manipulation of the Firefox UI. This is similar in spirit to WebExtension Experiments, and usage will also be restricted to pre-release versions of Firefox

>restricted to pre-release versions

OK

when they break classic theme restorer, I'm dropping firefox for good.

File: ff.jpg (54KB, 480x600px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 480x600px

>>59117035

>>59116689
Who the fuck cares about any of this?


The autism in this thread is mind boggling.

>>59117109
any poweruser that actually used firefox to its full extend will care.

why do you even use firefox if you're not going to customize it? that's all this browser has going for it these days and i love firefox.

>>59117109
I care about it because when they release firefox 57 its going to break half of the addons that I use.

>>59117109
(You)

>>59117183
i'm in the same boat. are you going to switch to a fork or do you just stop updating? i'm still on the fence

>>59117200
>>59117183
>not using palememe

Firefox will be great again

Reminder that Firefox will require PulseAudio in the next version. Plain alsa won't work for audio playback :^)

>>59117340
Windows doesn't have this problem.

File: dribbble_1x.png (17KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x300px

>>59117385
Neither does macOS. :^)

>tfw there's no reason to stick with ff after webextensions
>chrome-tier extension support
>horrible security and leaks
>lagfest browser
>slowly just becoming a worse chrome

>>59116689
It sounds to me like they are going to make it easier to customize the appearance of Firefox. OP is a retarded faggot, as usual.

>>59117340
>our x interface is becoming hard to maintain
>other solutions similar to ours don't have issues with their x interfaces
>should we rewrite our x interface?
>nah let's just drop support and force users to use y instead

they are webdevs alright

>>59117035
Firefox 57.

>remove xul extensions because "small user base"
>even smaller user base for themes
>hurr we should make the experience better
Fucking dipshits

wait, there is a browser called Firefox? what's next? Freezing Lion?

>>59117499
Right? They should call the next piece of shit browser Icecat.

>>59117437
read
>>59116936

So yeah easier on NON-STABLE firefox builds.

>>59117520

HOLY SHIT, there is a browser called Icecat!

lesson: never call your browser like an animal

>>59117715
You have to go back

>>59116936
Yes, as I said, you have literally no idea what they're saying. We got that from your first post.

>>59117748
That's the first one, now go and read the mozilla blog the "What we’re doing" section

>>59117715
>>59117499
>>59117520

names suggestions for firefox forks

>Smokecheese
>L.A.Z.E.R.shark
>Flyingtoad
>Flashturtle
>Bloodsteak

>>59117861
hornyheron

>>59116936
So what you're saying CSS is in fact not going away at all you just have to make a theme. Okay then

>>59117937
Yes, but it's not going to work on the stable release just on beta or nightly (on dev too but I've heard they want to remove that one)

>>59117978
Well beta is stable as fuck so there's no reason not to use it if you want CSS themes. I don't see the point in restricting it to the dev builds but it barely matters anyway

>>59118017
Well, theme authors may see a reduced user base as a problem.

>>59118039
There are hardly any theme authors left. The article said like only 60 of the 500 or so themes even work anymore and its likely many of the themes aren't being actively maintained. Most people use the shitty lightweight themes these days so enabling CSS in lightweight themes will actually improve their usefulness

>>59116689
I use SeaMonkey, am I safe?

>>59118168
SeaMonkey is not Firefox. The devs do not care about what goes on in Firefox, they're basically just providing security updates and incorporate changes in the rendering engine and javascript engine but they don't generally add or remove features.

If it doesn't explicitly say SeaMonkey is affected then it's probably not. Mozilla is not the developer of SeaMonkey they're a sponsor.

>>59117069
To be honest though - what the fuck IS that big ass space at the top of Firefox?

>>59117215
I'm using WaterFox. See how that train rolls once 57 comes out but I'm comfortable moving to Palemoon. Love their UI

>>59118834
>tfw there's so many good palemoon themes
https://addons.palemoon.org/themes/

>>59118965
wtf i love palemoon now

>>59118564
that's firefox when is not in full screen.

>try palemoon
>half the extensions I use on FF don't work
yeah fuck that shit

>>59120543
which extensions anon? usually you can use an older version.

also https://addons.palemoon.org/incompatible/

>>59117978
>not using nightly
Why do this to yourself?

>>59120864
Less user base = less themes.

You can use the theme on nightly but still want users from stable to use it too.

feedback or donation purposes mostly.

>it's another mozilla testing the patience of their users episode

when your value offering is that your 2 competitors are the bottest of nets one can imagine and people still entertain the idea of switching says it all about the product

>>59120970
>implying firefox itself is not a botnet

http://www.ghacks.net/2017/02/12/firefox-focus-privacy-scandal/

>>59121168
I read it is a different product, still disgusting though. Don't they know who are their users?

>>59121168
>You can turn off the anonymous data collecting of Firefox Focus by tapping on the settings icon, and flipping the switch next to "send anonymous usage data" to off.
Literally not an issue.

>>59116725
enjoy your security holes