Remember back in April 2014 with Firefox 29 when Australis came

Of course it won't be "the end"
But lots of people will switch to something else, and those will be the enthusiasts

>>61818199
You're right OP, fuck market shares

File: 1486653772693.png (80KB, 1680x846px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1680x846px

>>61818199
Right OP... tis just a scratch. Nothing's happening. Mozilla STRONK!

>>61818199
firefox user here, redpill me on web extensions

Australia couldn't kill it but websico will.

>>61818199
Except that Australis didn't deprecate 95% of their add ons for no reason.

>>61818199
>redpill me on X
You can strart by going back to >>>/pol/

>>61818397
>chrome is bad, use it with a skin on top
Yeah no, I'd rather sink with ff

File: 1483294059862.jpg (80KB, 960x1600px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 960x1600px

>>61818465
you have to go back to plebbit/tumblr/safe-space

>Don't update to FF57
>No WebExtensions

Or alternatively

>Use a fork of FF that wont implement WebExtensions

>>61818521
You got it backwards you summer turd. /pol/ is your containment board, if you need to be redpilled on anything that just shows your herd behaviour, you can stay if you want but everyone already knows that you are faggot.
If you need to be redpilled on webextensions you probably don't even know what you're talking about

>>61818227

more like it'll be the retarded power users who stifle advancement because they're too autistic to accept change, and to that I say good riddance

>>61818396

no more shitty addons causing huge delay to startup or page load, no more performance issues on month old profiles requiring fresh profile restarts, etc, the only downside apart from a change in workflow for some users will be having to do userchrome tweaks rather than having an addon doing it for you

honestly, ff57 nightly is ridiculously fast at the minute, it doesn't even feel like firefox

>/g/ - Autism
>panic
Great news, OP.

File: 1496330809043.jpg (81KB, 680x697px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 680x697px

>>61818644
>being this much of a plebbitard
take all that butthurt and use it to kys

>>61818700
He's gonna stay and obviously needs to be educated. Consider it my share of public service

mozilla make too many questionable decisions, webExtensions just means that any addons that were unique to firefox are gone(self destructing cookies, downthemall, etc). my opinion of them has dropped to an all-time low with how they are handling that punycode homograph exploit thats going around, which only firefox users are currently vulnerable to, read this shit https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332714 it has some comical SJW developer responses.
>We want every script and language to be treated equally on the Internet.
literally blaming domain registars and everyone else, meanwhile chrome, firefox, safari have all resolved this, 6 months onward mozilla cant fix it because it goes against their braincancer belief system.

>>61818227
What will they switch to? Every other browser at that point will just support webextensions or will be an outdated Firefox fork.

>ublock origin
Already a webextension
>Umatrix
Hybrid is out, with the full webextension coming soon
>Greasemonkey
Use violentmonkey
>Https everywhere
Already working on webextension with test version available
>Private tab
This might be an issue, as the developer has stated he's having a lot of difficulty porting it over

Besides those add-ons, what else do people even use?

>>61819267
>Besides those add-ons, what else do people even use?
Stylish & NoScript are the only addons I use besides the ones you listed.

>>61819267
Tree Style Tab dev says it's probably impossible to port
DownThemAll dev stated that he's given up porting
NoScript says it is legacy but I think its WebExt compatible, anyway Umatrix is probably better

>>61819267
tabmixplus (for multi-row tabs)

File: 158464.png?modified=1431417020.png (108KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 640x480px

>>61819321
>noscript

uMatrix?

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/umatrix/

https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix

>>61819200
The latter

>>61819438
Any major differences between uMatrix and NoScript? I tried search but the only thing that really looks different is the UI.

File: 3772501+_5d427bace857c51742dbba6ce354c7f7.jpg (72KB, 432x585px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 432x585px

>>61818556
/thread.

>>61819582
>what is waterfox
just kys

>>61818199
>can't customize speed dial background
It's shit

>>61819321
Stylish is a botnet. Use stylrrr instead.
Umatrix is a replacement for noscript.

>>61818199
looks like cr*p

>>61818199
Why did they wait this long to actually make their browser fast? Everyone has already switched over to Chromium and it's various forks.

At least my uni still uses firefox.

>>61819994
Sure you can, just not through the UI.

>>61819556
In NoScript if you allow scripts from google.com it will be allowed on every website but with uMatrix you can allow or block scripts on a per-site basis. uMatrix also allows for controlling resources other than scripts.

>>61820288
To appease the autists who are clinging to their extremely niche addons. Ever wondered why the version that is "killing" addons is the fastest in years?

Try nightly, enable stylo and webrender. Holy shit it's fast.

>>61819267
What's so great about violentmonkey when tampermonkey and greasemonkey already exist

>>61820767
Greasemonkey will probably be deprecated, Tampermonkey is proprietary

File: Bunsen_burner_flame_types.jpg (87KB, 1668x1500px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1668x1500px

>>61819438
>>61819556

umatrix handles javascript blocking better but noscript has decent xss protection making firefox on par with chrome in that regard, stick noscript in allow javascript globally and let umatrix do the script blocking

>>61820729
>Holy shit it's fast.

yeah, they've turned up the heat (pic related)

>>61820798
How big of a difference is there between greasemonkey, tampermonkey, and violentmonkey?

>>61818199
I've switched yesterday to FF after Google's fuck-up with the engineer which was fired for the truthful memo. And just recently I installed the nightly, it's focking gud, there're absolutely no reasons to look back at Chrome.

>>61818342
Looks fine to me.

>>61820729
I felt like when chrome was first released when I tried it.

People keep saying that this is going to be the death of Firefox. I'm quite certain the opposite is true. If they even get around to merging Servo in that will be even better.

>>61821215
I'm probably going to switch back. I haven't used opera since nightly 57.

Man, my firefox still looks like shit because of that australis bullshit. Used to have everything in one bar, but now I can't do that without covering up the close window buttons for some fucking reason.
Besides, that was a cosmetic change. I use those extensions that they're going to disable.

>>61821278
I've slugged around with stable for the longest time, so you can imagine the breath of fresh air this feels like.

Hell VimFX and all my other extensions even work already so I don't give a fuck about the api changes now.

So does it still contact google analytics?

>>61820855
From what I can tell, the only feature that places greasemonkey above the other two is that you can easily disable scripts on a per domain basis.
Violentmonkey doesn't have this option, or at least I missed it if it is present.
tampermonkey is just a botnet.

>DownThemAll!
>AB+
>Flagfox
>Greasemonkey
>HTTPS Everywhere
>img2tab
>Proxtube
>Mega
Setting up the new versions or finding replacements alone will take up so much fucking time not to speak of the ones that will never get a proper alternative

>>61818227
I will probably switch to firefox, I dont give a shit about addons, I just want a nonbotnet fast browser

File: 412914.png (82KB, 958x911px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 958x911px

I need replacements for some of these add ons

>>61818199
It didn't end it no, but compare marketshare at the time of FF24 compare to FF50.
IF you wait and do the same thing for FF50 vs. FF75, you'll see the same drop in users.

>>61818396
Basically Mozilla started with Chrome's extensions API and has been adding things to allow addons like TreeStyleTabs (replacement: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-tabs/) and NoScript (ported) to exist as WebExtensions. About the only addon that is never going to work right as a WebExtension is Vimperator/Pentadactyl, and that's what Qutebrowser is for.

>>61819267
TreeStyleTabs, it's the most important extension to my workflow.
WebExtensions not only breaks it, but you've basically put any type of API improvements that will allow it work again on the backburner (ie. dead forever)

FF is dead.

>>61819345
>Tree Style Tab dev says it's probably impossible to port
He's a fag.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-tabs/

>>61823501
TreeTabs isn't a replacement for TreeSrtyleTabs, period.
>bbut it says Tree and Tabs so it MUST be the same
No.

>>61823509
>>61823501
>A known Firefox limitation prevents trees from being created automatically
>A known Firefox limitation prevents trees from being created automatically
>A known Firefox limitation prevents trees from being created automatically

>>61823516
It is. The two main issues, hiding the tab bar and opening as a child, are already solved by experimental new extension APIs. They just haven't filtered down to stable or dev edition yet.

>>61823536
>solved in an upcoming release

Firefox is dead though, have you even seen its market share over the past few years?

>>61823454
https://arewewebextensionsyet.com/#addons
Just in case.

>>61823539
>Solved by new magic code that doesn't exist yet
Fuck off

>Doesn't remove the native tabs toolbar like any proper vertical tab extension should, rearranging tabs won't affect native tabs toolbar, and flickers when switching tabs.
>Features says drag multiple tabs between windows. I don't see a way to make that happen.
>The options page on the screenshot is not the real options page.
>The options page on the screenshot is not the real options page.
>When opening tabs with the side panel open the side panel does not update the tabs properly and they either do not appear or appear at the bottom of the list.
>I dont see a way to create trees which should be the main functionality.
>When right clicking over a tab on the panel the default right click menu and the addons menu appear which is confusing and bothersome.
>The tools button display a lot of other buttons and none of them work.
>Right clicking on a tab on the panel and clicking unload, does nothing.
>Has great potential but at the moment half of the features are not working for me.

Response:
>It's a ported version from chromium, so expect things to be broken. I should mark it as experimental.

It's a shit extension for a shit browser that doesn't even work.
>bbut It MIGHT be fixed in future
I doubt it.
If it is, sure I might try FF again - but for now it's dead.

>'''''legacy''''''

So, did anyone find replacements for greasemonkey and ublock?

>>61823454
>Smart HTTPS
Firefox will default to this behavior.
>Stylish
Stylus
>Twitter night mode
There are userstyles for this
>ublock origin
That's already a webextension hybrid. It still flags as legacy due to non-webextension code for importing from older addons. It will show up as pure WebExtension as of FF57.
>private tab
I believe this is coming to the stock browser.
>Greasemonkey
Violentmonkey

>>61823969
Ublock is getting ported. Violentmonkey and Tampermonkey both work on webextension.

>>61823969
>Greasemonkey
Violentmonkey
>Ublock
Ublock origin already has a webextension version.

>>61823986
>>private tab
>I believe this is coming to the stock browser
Sauce?

>>61823986
>Firefox will default to this behavior.
Really? Source?

Is there an addon that makes the address bar and search bar the same thing?
It's the only thing keeping me from switching from chrome.

>>61824220
The address bar has been a search bar in Firefox for like ten years now. All you have to do is remove the dedicated search bar from the toolbar. No add on needed.

>>61824028
Only for manually typed urls, and doesn't work on every site.

>>61824352
>>61824028
Https everywhere is going to be ported to webextension. Smart https is redundant with that.

>>61824378
Let me know when https everwhere isn't a resource hogging pile of shit. I'll stick with Smart https until then.

>>61824404
t. Poorfag with a dual core Celeron and 2gb ram

>>61824420
>he shills for free software for free

>>61818199
and yet firefox is pretty much dead

>>61823509
Tree Tabs doesn't remove the tab bar on the top and its generally a piece of shit as compared to Piros Tree Style Tab

I hope there's a new extension for what this does:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/keyword-search/

It lets me separate the searches from the search box from it using that same search engine in the address bar it's annoying that both uses the same or does that change in firefox and both are independent again like they were years ago?

File: angievarona.jpg (82KB, 809x809px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 809x809px

>>61818199
Flaming nightfox is fucking amazing.

Anyone know if FIREFTP is gonna be compatible with firefox 57?

>>61818199
I was so upset with Australis because it killed my custom CSS and I never got it working again. I just want Firefox 3 back. I'd do anything for the internet to be the way it used to be.

>>61825227
if you have keyword.enabled set to true (default), there's no point in having the search box.

set that value to false, and then you can actually use them as independent.

>>61819144
thanks for sharing this. i'll have to seriously reconsider if i really want to put my trust in a browser which decides to not patch known bug because it might break few russian domains (actually not even break them, just show them in uglier way)

>>61819144
>chrome, firefox, safari have all resolved this
>mozilla cant fix it
>firefox have resolved this

It's like you forgot what you were even shilling for. 100 rupees were removed from your account.

Posted this in another thread.

I know Firefox power-users will go down fighting, but, as a Chrome using normie (who used FF for years prior), I'm about to switch back when this hits stable.

I've always much preferred the Chrome UI, and I won't feel the loss of XUL extensions since Chrome only has their WebExt variant anyways. And mobile Firefox supports extensions so that's actually an upgrade.

People can say what they want, and I get that it sucks to lose the only good power-user browser, but if Mozilla's goal is to appeal to normies and regain market share then this is a step in the right direction.

Any alternative for downthemall as it is definitely kill?

>>61825792
Not sure if this is a replacement, but I've heard that flashgot is being ported to webextension

Also, all your lame duck extension developers had literally years to prepare. I know the APIs have been trickling in, but they could have at least done some groundwork in all that time if they really cared. I get the idea that most of them probably just wanted to maintain their legacy code until the end of times instead of putting the work in.

File: 1485053310728.jpg (78KB, 583x580px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 583x580px

>>61819267
Rikaisama.

>>61818680

>it'll be the retarded power users who stifle advancement because they're too autistic to accept change

Right now the only advantage Firefox has over Chrome and Chromium lies in having extensions that simply cannot be developed using the WebExtensions API. Remove that, and all you have is a slower version of Chrome.

All you have left are power users and people who think that Chromium will spy on them.

>>61818556

>that won't implement WebExtensions
You mean one that WILL implement XUL and XPCOM. There's no reason why you can't have both.

Is it just me or do legacy extensions still work you /g/ents? When nightly 57 came a few days ago I thought legacy extensions would be disabled but it turns out it still works.

>>61821892
Half of those already have replacements fucking retard

>>61826799
Legacy means that there is (some) XUL/XPCOM reliant code in the add-on. Some features may not work perfectly. Currently Ublock Origin runs perfectly on 57 but is still listed as a Legacy add-on.

>>61818556
>Use a fork of FF that wont implement WebExtensions
Which one?

>>61819144
>addons that were unique
https://paste.installgentoo.com/view/8423615d

>>61828954
I believe the Waterfox dev said he planned to maintain a separate fork of Firefox from 56 onwards, so it never adopts the webextension requirement.

You could also use pale moon, or icecat.

>>61823578
what a fucking loser. even if they make it work perfectly before november you'll still find a way to spin it and shit on it.
or is it just that you don't understand the simple fact that nightly isn't stable?

>>61825027
An API to remove tab bar was recently added, treestyle tabs will be ported
https://www.ghacks.net/2017/08/02/mozilla-makes-tab-hiding-api-a-priority/

>Rikaisama is dead
And so is Firefox.

>>61818199
yeah i remember, thats when i stopped using firefox and switched to pale moon

firefox needs to give us full control of its css

>>61818199
Чтo мepтвo - yмepeть нe мoжeт.

>>61818465
go fuck yourself, millennial shithead

meh im just going to see how firefox goes with 57.

in the past week ive tried brave, vivaldi and opera. All of them seem horrible and I really wanted to like brave.

FF forever!

#back-button:-moz-lwtheme {
display: none !important}
#forward-button:-moz-lwtheme {
display: none !important}


I know it's a nightly build and may not have everything the end product will have but why prevent some of the buttons from being moved or removed from the UI

>>61830149
>triggered /pol/babby
pottery

>>61829847
only thing that will save firefox

firefox 57 is best thing ever happened to firefox in last 5 years. it's fucking fast.

webextensions are supported by chrome, opera and even edge. there will be no extension shortage don't worry.

>>61818199
Australis didn't kill addons, retard.
There is a difference between changing the UI and killing all addons.

Complaints about Australis where just from retards.
Complains about FF57 killing all addons except for maybe a few, are completely legitimate and reasonable.

Australis didn't affect my ability to browse the internet.
On the other hand, FF57 will impact it massively to the point that I will either be forced to stay on FF56 or move to chromium.

Pretty sure bazzacuda image saver is abandoned, and it's extremely important to my workflow.
Fuck mozilla.

>>61831040
Crybabies use abandoned software and get angry when it's being left behind. Just use FF 56 forever since you clearly don't give a fuck about using abandonware anyways. I don't get it.

>>61818437
>for no reason
Confirmed for not understanding why Mozilla is making the change.

>>61831140
Because they're retarded?

I can guarantee you that any reason you give me will be logically equivalent to "because they're retarded"

>>61823454
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/smart-https-revived/

>>61829847
userchrome.css

Does anyone have any alternative to the Omnilateral Panel extension?
I prize my screen real estate and that thing is fucking essential.

>>61823997
>>61824006
I don't like how Firefox is playing favoritism.

They reached out to NoScript but didn't really reach out for Ublock Origin.

>>61831428
>but didn't really reach out for Ublock Origin
Why "reach out" to someone who clearly doesn't need help?

Will version 57 remove my ability to use my 4chan scripts and other 4chan additions? I know down them all will be removed, so I likely won't update for that alone

>>61818199
you shills need to understand that there wont be a "classic theme restorer" for xul.
webext are shit and your shilling copy is bad
have fun going down, once the remaining normies using your browser move away once their extensions stop working

>>61825295
dev said fuck webext, so probably not
https://github.com/mimecuvalo/fireftp/issues/195#issuecomment-300380381
that and firessh were quite handy tools
mozilla is shit

>>61830895
>Firefox killed my add-ons so I'm moving to Chromium!
100% guaranteed anyone who says this is a shill. Your favorite add-on stopped working on Firefox, so instead of doing the logical thing and switch to a fork that still supports it(such as Waterfox or Pale Moon), you switch to a browser that never supported it in the first place? What's even the point?

>>61826438

there's a few reasons firefox is slower but the biggest issue is that it still supports legacy addons which is a roadblock for things like true multiprocess support, if it were possible to support 'legacy' style addons while being multiprocess chrome would have done it and ended the browser war straight up when they first released, instead google went with the sane option of having webextension addons that can't majorly fuck with the browser and focused on getting a browser that doesn't feel like it was straight out of the very early 00s, every conscious decision they have done since appears to support this from going to the fastest proprietary pdf viewer they could get their hands on to spending million to make a far better optimised javascript engine

outside of multiprocess support the other major source of firefox being sluggish is the fact that you have to vet every single addon to make sure it doesn't add significant delay to everything from startup times to page load times which is something I mentioned in my earlier post, even if you choose not to use an addon which contaminates your user profile and shits up the browser, which is going to be a tough sell because many useful legacy addons that 'power users' use do this, you still have the issue of the browser profile needing a refresh somewhat frequently even with minimal addon usage which is something 'power users' always blame on mozilla and something chrome users have never had to face because they've been using webextensions from day one

firefox 57 on nightly is faster than it ever has been, if the choice is between a browser with 'legacy' addons that is slow as shit and a more modern firefox I know which one I'll pick, I'm not a power user nor do I give a shit about privacy issues with telemetry yet the only things appealing about chrome seem to be a better focus on privacy and being much faster, both of these will be addressed in ff with the multiprocess rollout

I just want my tab groups to keep functioning

>>61831816
>normies
You are retarded. Normies don't even use any extension aside from AB+ and some Youtube mp3 downloaders. The """"power"""" users are the problem here.

>>61818199
I use Vivaldi, and I like Vivaldi.
It's Opera redone.
But!
It uses Blink.
Right now I'm testing this Firefox 57 and oh boy... how I hate everything about Blink. Doesn't feel right. If by version 58 Mozilla adds a decent Note feature and maybe a little more tricks from Vivaldi I'm considering making the switch.

>>61819200
Netrunner

I can't leave New Tab Tools. I can't stand the default style for Firefox, having top sites promoting Reddit and Facebook because I always hide cookies.

The difference is that australis could be worked around with addons like CTR, and webextensions can't.

>>61830315
Sick detective skills, I don't even visit /pol/.
Fuckhead.

>>61830230
Simply use Chromium or Chrome?
Also Brave is retarded.

> have an engine capable of doing anything
> have a native GUI for all OS too

> proceed to cripple the engine as much as possible (no addons, shit url bar, etc)
> proceed to make a godawful OSX Safari copycat GUI

Fucking hacks.

Anyone know the name of the new hamburger menu button? Here's the overflow button.

#PanelUI-menu-button

>>61830895
You realize Chromium also only uses WebExtensions too as they have from when they first supported extensions, right?

File: youre a mongoloid.png (26KB, 800x300px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 800x300px

>>61828977
inline disposition 2, enter selects, downthemall, tabmixplus. while TMP might actually get support since it has a large userbase, the others wont, I even emailed the authors of some of them and they pretty much say enjoy it while it lasts because the webext API doesn't support what they need to port it, and mozilla has only been pandering to the large addons.

>>61825673
>firefox have resolved this
oh have they now? because I just launched the latest Nightly on a fresh profile and it still shows the domain with the third world characters appearing as apple.com, pic related to show you a comparison since you clearly didn't read the fucking bug report. otherwise you would understand why its still not fixed. here, pic related.

every single FF/Thunderbird user is vulnerable to this method of attack if they don't show the true characters of a domain.

https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/support-ublock-origin/6746/451

As long as it ain't Blink...

>>61825385
so much this

>>61829042
icecat is a firefox esr fork, so whenever esr reaches the webextensions requirement, icecat should as well.

>>61834833
Gorhill is a fucking liar, Instart Logic is for faster browsing on web pages. It preload sites Chrome predicts you to go on.

reee

>>61835825
t. Google shill

>>61835825
LMAO, it's botnet you faggot

>>61818397
Stop shilling Brave's closed source tracking shit.

>>61819267
SmartHTTPS works fine, too.

>>61836146
Smart https is just a worse version of https everywhere though

>>61821892
>DownThemAll!
Don't know, can't help you.
>AB+
Ublock Origin
>Flagfox
Can't help you there either.
>Greasemonkey
Violentmonkey.
>HTTPS Everywhere
SmartHTTPS.
>img2tab
>Proxtube
Don't know.
>Mega
Will be on FF57 soon.

>>61818680
>no more shitty addons causing huge delay to startup or page load

Running dozens of addons is user error, honestly.

>>61836182
How so? It forces all websites to HTTPS (given the website supports it). That's all I care about. It's lighter, too. What more do you need?

>>61818396
You know how Firefox gained the fame of being slow on your mom's laptop because of shitty extensions and plugins having way too much power over the core browser? Well, they are switching to another framework for extensions so that's not an issue anymore.

Problem is, some extensions might not make the switch, due to lack of maintenance or not being able to work reliably with the new framework.

it's neither about australis or web extensions. it's about getting older and watching things you take for granted become deprecated.

>>61818680
>honestly, ff57 nightly is ridiculously fast at the minute, it doesn't even feel like firefox
Spreading misinformation?, educate yourself:

Why is people still thinking that firefox 57 is a good example against legacy addons when you can make legacy addons work WITHOUT LOOSING PERFORMANCE on firefox (nightly) 57.

Seriously the changes in performance are:
> e10s(aka multiprocess): Legacy addons can be full e10s compatible.
> APZ (Asynchronous Pan and Zoom) Legacy extensions works fine with this.
> Stylo (Aka quantum project): Mostly all extensions survived this others needed minor changes.
> Webrender: I haven't seen extensions broken for this change.

Mozilla delayed the launch of this features to the same release when they'll kill legacy addons to have a made up excuse and a bunch of users blindly defending it, and it seems to be working great

>no more shitty addons causing huge delay to startup or page load
Try Zoom page WE, its a web-extension and it makes all webs load slower and restoring sessions with lot of tabs is slower than anything I've seen on legacy extensions.

>>61820678
Cause they decide to delay multi-e10s, apz, stylo, webrender and other quantum project improvements for the day they'll disable addons, you can have all this speed and all the legacy addons on the first firefox 57 or even on the latest 56 enabling some flags.

A great marketing move to trick retarded users into thinking that deprecating legacy addons is making firefox faster.

not gonna go back to firefox. switched to chrome just because of performance
>inb4 botnet

File: Screen Shot 2017-08-10 at 22.20.43.png (104KB, 1144x456px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1144x456px

>>61818199
what a shit browser, it doesnt just fuck up extensions... it looks like its designed by people with down syndrome

I have no fucking clue about design, but I could do better than those SJWs working at mozilla

>>61825939
Ok, so you start doing some work in hopes that someday mozilla will add an api that makes your addon feasible and that works with the groundwork you have already made?

Seriously i'm still waiting for APIs requested almost 2 years ago to be added to web-extensions and i doubt they'll be ready for firefox 57.

But you know what's funny, i keep fixing my addon for firefox 57 and it still works fine albeit being legacy cause removing legacy addons is not what's making firefox 57 fast.

>>61838108
i'm pretty sure that grey border is just a window behind firefox

File: Screen Shot 2017-08-10 at 22.37.08.png (644KB, 1470x1022px) Image search: [Google]

644KB, 1470x1022px

>>61838163
its not, its a 1 point grey border those fucks put in.. every other dark themed application doesnt have this (look at vivaldi, only cuckfox)

>>61832112
> the biggest issue is that it still supports legacy addons which is a roadblock for things like true multiprocess support
wrong, only leagacy addons that uses shims, and they can be updated not to use them, are a problem with e10s.
>outside of multiprocess support the other major source of firefox being sluggish is the fact that you have to vet every single addon to make sure it doesn't add significant delay to everything from startup times to page load times
They have already stated that some web-extensions like Zoom page we slows the browser even worse than legacy addons.
>firefox 57 on nightly is faster than it ever has been
Are you retarded, nightly 57 still supports legacy addons there are some broken but mostly because they have renamed legacy APIs like mTabContainer to TabContainer and similar.

>>61831275
nice try, now show me how to customize anonymous content ie: Scrollbars and tooltips.

>>61818199
I switched to seamonkey. Firefox is dead as far as I'm concerned.

I just switched over to nighly, classic theme is no more...

is there any web extension or config entry that puts the Tab bar below the bookmark bar where it fucking belongs?

Nightly is pretty noice but how do I install Ublock origin? Don't tell me it's not yet available

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332714
> resolved WontFix
> If you think there is a problem here, complain to the .com registry who let you register https://www.xn--80ak6aa92e.com/

>Chrome fix the issue
> Reopened Priority: P3

I've seen this more times already, mozilla refusing to fix or add something until you said that chorme does it.

>>61838356
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases

File: 2017-08-11_000443.jpg (54KB, 752x282px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 752x282px

>>61838653
rly made me think..

>>61838108
>Why such distance
They added that space so you can drag around the window easily
>Ugly blue line
Entirely subjective. I like how it looks.
>Grey border
I haven't noticed this, but I'll look closer. If it's actually there then I admit it looks pretty dumb.

File: 97.jpg (200KB, 1444x710px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1444x710px

I still think there is a way to install this add on because no one is complaining about this except me
Guys plz?

is there any reason to switch from chrome to firefox on my x220 running ubuntu?

only addon I use is ublock origin which works everywhere so I don't care about any addon issues.

File: 587658675867.png (51KB, 853x957px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 853x957px

>>61839187
but you have to allow unsigned addons in the about:config

>>61839262
thank you

>>61818199
You're right, it's the alienation of the userbase and dwindling of its market share that will.

> Ctrl + f
> No mouse gestures

Am I the only one who can't browse without mouse gestures?

chrome kids BTFO
https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/support-ublock-origin/6746/452

Just announced that Mozilla is teaming up with Soros to combat "fake news". Interesting.

>>61818199
>remember when Australis came out and so many people here were panicking and saying it was the end of Firefox?
No, but I do remember them saying them saying that it was a bad idea and would hurt firefox, and it did.
>Now Firefox 57 is around the corner with WebExtensions and the exact same panic is happening all over again.
A graphical change was partially responsible for hugely harming firefox, as predicted. Now a major functionality change is happening, and the predictions are rightfully that it will be even worse.

Of course it won't kill firefox, but it will force it further down the hole of disuse than it already is.

>>61840150
>Just announced that Mozilla is combat[ing] "fake news". Interesting.

True.

https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/08/08/mozilla-information-trust-initiative-building-movement-fight-misinformation-online/

>teaming up with Soros
No explicit partnership between Mozilla and the Full Fact foundation has been announced. Mozilla is doing this independently.

>>61840297
Somehow the feels even worse.

>>61840305
What's wrong with "combatting" fake news?
Search engines have always aimed to bring the most relevant and we'll credited links to the top of the results page, while diminishing exposure to bullshit sites.
The only difference now is that these companies are actually announcing they are doing this instead of quietly doing it.

Why is this thing so fucking slow?
I switched back to regular Firefox.

>>61840324
Who decides what is fake news and what isn't?
Hint: People with agendas do.

Come back when Fireshit can play streams without lagging

>>61840350
It's a daily build, for one thing. It's not even in beta yet. Having said that, my Nightly is running faster than current release Firefox and current release Chrome (long time user).

Maybe you should try some basic troubleshooting since this is a tech board. Be more than just a consumer.

what's the advantage of webextensions anyways?

sure, sucks to lose addons in the here and now, but surely your favorite addons will be rewritten to work with the new standard.

>>61840445
>watching videos on your browser

>>61840482
yes, like DownThemAll ^^

>>61836576
I think HTTPS Everywhere also makes 3rd party connections HTTPS. Smart HTTPS only checks 1st party when you enter a site

>>61818199
Until there's a WebExtension that works as well as DTA it's a problem for me.

>>61840833
>>61842020
What does DTA actually do?

>>61842350
nice way to mass-download gnu/linux isos

>>61819200
Dillo and netsurf are good browsers that are not raped by WebKit/Blink cancer

>>61842384
Isn't BitTorrent better for that?

>>61820016
What's the difference between stylUS and stylRRR and what should I be using?

Australis DID kill firefox

>>61818342
underrated

>>61842669
I actually didn't know about stylus, so thanks for telling me about it.
Just from looking at the add-on pages stylus seems to be a better choice than stylrrr. Stylus has the source code readily available, whereas I haven't been able to find the source for stylrrr anywhere.

That being said I haven't been able to test out stylus, so I have no idea how well it works. I'll switch to it when I get back to my computer though.

>>61818199
We here in the US didn't go to ear with Australia for no reason. Those Aussies are ruthless, wiring up Kangaroos with explosives. I even took a few rounds of boomerang shrapnel myself during the AU-US war.

>>61818199
But firefox is dead.

Anyone having trouble with scripts and custom css scripts being deleted randomly?

I'm using violentmonkey and stylus

>>61818342
This^

>>61844027
Figured it out, it's a bug with the firefox options of history

If you set it to never remember, then it will fuck up everything

>>61818199
It won't but it should

>>61819321

NoScript is being ported

>>61837808

>Why is people still thinking that firefox 57 is a good example against legacy addons when you can make legacy addons work WITHOUT LOOSING PERFORMANCE on firefox (nightly) 57.

Because its not e10s or any of the current quantum projects that did legacy addons in.

Its sandboxing.

e10s just gives Firefox the ability to run in multiple processes, sandboxing (a related project but functionally separate from e10s) follows from that and has been developed concurrently with e10s. e10s compatibility just means that a legacy addon can support multiple processes, but not necessarily multiple sandboxed processes.

Firefox is the last major browser to implement sandboxing specifically because of legacy addons. The existing addon APIs would require what amounts to a major rewrite in order to fully support sandboxing...which would mean years spent essentially reinventing a new API that supports sandboxing and at the end of it all still end up breaking every legacy addon that isn't updated to support sandboxing anyways, and so here we are.

Meanwhile Chromium has an addon API that was developed for a sandboxed environment and is more importantly OPEN SOURCE. Enter WebExtensions, Mozilla doesn't have to reinvent the wheel to solve the sandboxing problem and, because it is open source, they can extend WebExtensions however they wish to cover additional needs.

Could Mozilla just do Firefox with multiprocess but no sandboxing? Sure, it would make it inferior to Chrome and Edge as far as security goes, but you'd have Firefox with multiprocess.......maybe.....check your extensions, one of them might be incompatible because its been abandoned for years.

Mozilla's timeline for this change is very, very aggressive, probably too aggressive, its not the technology that has people mad (though being chrome tech certainly makes it wonderful ammo for rhetoric) but the aggressive timeline for adoption of the new and deprecation of the old.

>>61818199
>30 versions in 3 years

Why is firefox abusing versioning system so badly? In no time they will reach fire fox 100 and that is just retarded. They should be on like 4 or 5.

>>61838356

you install it from AMO, the latest release is a hybrid webextension (its pretty much been fully ported), it runs on the latest Nightly.

>>61826064
>Rikaisama
yup, I wanted this ported over as well. it's already broken on 57, doesn't give the pop-up anymore.

>>61819267
My theme is the most important thing to me (ft deepdark), tab groups and rikaisama

>>61848389
I miss ft deep dark so fucking much oh god.
At least I still have it for thunderbird...

File: 1498404205383.png (696KB, 639x629px) Image search: [Google]

696KB, 639x629px

>>61819267
why private tab is even an extension? this shit should be in ff from the get go, fucking mozilla tard

Im using an addon that removes Australis. I can't remove web extensions.

>>61819267
>ublock
ublock isn't working anymore, help?

File: 87907583920.jpg (13KB, 352x395px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 352x395px

>>61818199
if anything is going to end FF, it's going to be their deeply embedded SJW infestation

>>61851326
Go to the GitHub and install the webextension version

File: 0y4rEms.jpg (530KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 1080x1920px

>>61850689
Does anyone know if this being implemented ir updated? I didnt know how much I needed it until I installed it yesterday

>>61851910
Thank you, done.

>>61853534
Name?

>>61853753
some girl on reddit from r/shorthairhotties

>>61853791
Long hair is better anyway

File: 1451865301315.jpg (78KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 600x600px

>>61853809
you dont believe that

>uBlock officially broke today

GORHILL PLZ

chrome version appears to kinda work tho

>>61853835
If you like short hair on women you're literally homosexual

File: 1469992545070.jpg (307KB, 682x1024px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 682x1024px

>>61853904
you make a pretty strong case, I do embrace my homosexuality by loving women with short hair

>>61853904
Given some of the discussions I've seen on the topic here, I don't think anyone should be particularly concerned with what /g/'s definition of a homosexual is.

>>61833917
>oh have they now? because I just launched the latest Nightly on a fresh profile and it still shows the domain with the third world characters appearing as apple.com, pic related to show you a comparison since you clearly didn't read the fucking bug report. otherwise you would understand why its still not fixed. here, pic related.
hey fucktard, re-read the post he quoted. specifically the last row.

>>61853859
The full webextension version is available on Mozilla's official addon page for uBlock Origin. Just scroll to the bottom and expand "dev channel" and it's there for download.

>>61854160
Thanks for that, didn't think to check there.

updated today and it seems like they disabled legacy extensions for good

>>61818199
Good blog post. Now fuck off to reddit where you belong

I just want Prism back

>>61853904
If I were gay, I wouldn't be into any woman at all.

>>61830230
Really? I'm liking Vivaldi a lot more than Chrome, Firefox and Opera.

>>61854610
It's not coming back, but there are alternatives for site-specific browsers.

http://alternativeto.net/software/prism/

extensions.legacy.enabled true

File: 1272_f5be8e37.png (30KB, 352x134px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 352x134px

>>61854610
If you're on a Mac, try Fluid. It's practically the perfect replacement.

http://fluidapp.com/

>>61854160
Thank you kind sir. I started to lose my shit when I had to use Adblock unironically.
Youtube without adblock, never again.

>>61818644
>I'm a model prole, just look at how well I've been conditioned by society and mainstream culture
Top shitpost my friend, upboated

>>61842680
This, I'm not really sure what op is thinking about here

File: Capture.png (5KB, 1578x68px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 1578x68px

Anyone have an alternative to this? Or another way to do it? I mostly use a laptop and this is needed

>Just updated and lost all my addons except UBlock/Matrix

How the fuck do I find the usercripts I was using now? please help

>>61857473

clicking left and right mouse buttons functions as a middle mouse button on some laptops, if not you could emulate this with autohotkey for windows or some other way on linux

is there a viable alternative to KeeFox?

>>61857644
The mouse buttons together do not work and using autohotkey for this seems unnecessary and superfluous

there must be a more elegant solution

>>61857906
Hold control and click on the link

>>61857939
that works for now, thanks

>>61819267
>Already working on webextension with test version available

Where the fuck is it, I can't find it on their website or github?

>>61858133
on the bottom of the firefox addons page, it's called development or something

>>61858133
https://www.eff.org/files/https-everywhere-test/index.html
Here you go anon!

File: 1491437021532.jpg (120KB, 494x462px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 494x462px

>>61858175

Thanks dad

>>61858133
>>61858172
oh sorry, I thought you were talking about ublock

File: 1497435831633.gif (301KB, 350x464px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 350x464px

>>61858219
Anon please I'm not old enough to be a dad.
I hope one day I can be a good one though

How do I disable warnings before closing multiple tabs in Nightly? I literally have the checkbox for warnings disabled yet it still warns me when I click "close other tabs"

File: 1477523805762.jpg (60KB, 800x686px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 800x686px

>>61858326

File: ff57.png (222KB, 1920x1055px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1920x1055px

Whoa, FF 57 has a centered URL bar and search bar now.

>>61858362
I didn't deserve this suffering

>>61858326
Are your history settings set to do not remember?

There is a bug related to this setting that messes up add-ons, perhaps it's related

>>61858476
nah, just tried all 3 different history settings and it doesn't alleviate the problem

sucks because apparently other tab-related options work just fine

How do I get firefox to save images from cache instead of redownloading them? When a thread 404's on 4chan alt+clicking the image saves a broken image (on some boards maybe not all)

>>61845701
legacy addons does support sandboxing, and more async api's could have been added to make things easier instead of deprecating them.

>its not the technology that has people mad
Well, at least 3 of the apis i need to port my addon are p5 one p2 and others that are not approved yet.

At least one of the non-aproved ones is going to be wontfixed and even with all those APIs I'll have to cripple down the addon in order to port it anyway.

Having APIs that works in a declarative manner instead of programmatically is simply retarded, the context menu restrictions are plainly stupid and having no low level APIs is like developing using just one finger... of the feet.

>>61845139
lol no it's not
jesus christ firefox shills are out of control

File: jap.jpg (79KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 640x640px

>>61818199
anyone know what's happening with better privacy on ff57 or if there's any alternative for getting rid of flash cookies?

>>61818227
I'm switching *to* Firefox because of this. They have caught up in performance with Chromium and are on route to surpass it.

Their web extension API is pretty much a superset of Chromium's, so it's bound to get the same add-ons and more.

>>61858377
oh god that's awful

55 Is snappy.
Maybe I will checkout 57.

Better than Chrome.

>>61818199

Firefox is dying, there's no denying that. They keep losing marketshare.

WevExtensions is simply yet another thing that will help decrease their userbase, same as bundling shit no one ever wanted like pocket (which they now bought, lol, what the fuck are they thinking ?).

Mozilla lives entirely by selling their userbase to someone who wants to be the default 'search engine', when the users leave that spot is not going to be worth shit, meanwhile the retards at the top waste tons of money on DOA projects like FirefoxOS, while leaving the ONLY THING MAKING MONEY = Firefox, to fall further behind Chrome/Chromium.

Such incompetence is fatal, there's no way back now.

File: mozilla-firefox-icon-20.png (278KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 512x512px

tfw you just swapped to nightly

>>61862871
chrome and opera adopted web extensions too so im not sure how its a negative considering it has everything the competition has now

firefox stands apartwith a open license with a non for profit organization that fights for web standards and protocols

>>61860842
>legacy addons does support sandboxing

sure, if they can work within the restrictions of the sandbox, considering how many of the addons that people rely on won't work within even the most basic restrictions, well...

File: mozilla-firefox-mac.png (124KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 512x512px

Finally I have a viable option besides the botnet.

>>61862958

>chrome and opera adopted web extensions too so im not sure how its a negative considering it has everything the competition has now

Yes but Firefox main appeal was the plethora of addons of which many do not exist on Chrome/Chromium, many of those will no longer work and won't be updated for web extensions

>firefox stands apartwith a open license with a non for profit organization that fights for web standards and protocols

Chromium is fully open source, and the whole non profit means nothing, they have already showed that they are willing to bundle shit no one wants in order to make another buck, despite claiming they make a ton of money from the sale of the default search spot which users have always accepted as a good tradeoff.

>>61838739
>They added that space so you can drag around the window easily
Which is why you put the URL bar into the titlebar so you don't have to have that wasted space. In other words, SJWs are fucking idiots.
>le hamburger menu meme
when will firefox fucking die already

File: Capture.jpg (65KB, 1613x410px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1613x410px

REEEEEEEEEEE
LATEST UPDATE BROKE

>>61824404
smart https doesn't redirect for 3rd party media; it's basically useless

>>61863285
>exhentai
gross dude, there's cartoon boobs and shit.

>>61863285
>i can't edit one cookie

>>61862871
>pocket (which they now bought, lol, what the fuck are they thinking ?).
What's wrong with this?

>The company was profitable
>now they can open source the code so they're not distributing a botnet with firefox anymore

>>61818199
>Australis didn't kill Firefox,

Yes it did

>>61858377
You can customize it, but I still don't like how it looks.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/2862

>>61836576
as far as i can tell, if the webpage won't load in HTTPS, it will just load in HTTP instead of not load outright. I want the option to not load a website if it won't load in HTTPS

>>61826438
>chromium
>the average user is going to bother with trying to install a browser that doesn't have an easy to use executable to install it

>>61862978
The message manager solved the sandbox problem for legacy extensions without including any restriction, just it was a little more bothersome to work with it.

web-ext is what's bringing restrictions.

>>61863285
REEEEEEEEEEE
i use nightly cause they said that's what cool guys do but i don't read the pushlog or know about about:config entries.

The worst thing about firefox 57 being popular is the amount of retards using an unstable build mean for feature testing and early bug reporting.

File: 423.jpg (82KB, 668x439px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 668x439px

>>61863285
it literally JUST WERKS dude

File: Untitled.png (13KB, 1052x107px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 1052x107px

>>61838108
>not downloading one of the dark themes
>autistic tantrum mode activate

Firefox market share peaked seven years ago.

>>61838356
on the addon page for it, scroll down to the bottom and look for a "development" tab. click and install.

>>61866055
How well is cookie auto delete removing local storage?

Oh right, it can't.

I hope gorhill managed to re-add this feature:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/622#issuecomment-313128143

(last 2 comments)

>>61866086
Themes are mostly dead and 57 will kill them for good. You're supposed to replace them with personas or whatever those are called but they only modify the top bar.

>>61866188
>How well is cookie auto delete removing local storage?
>Oh right, it can't.
Jesus fuck, just use this script:

// ==UserScript==
// @name         Clear storage before load
// @version      0.1
// @match        *://*/*
// @grant        none
// @run-at       document-start
// ==/UserScript==

(function() {
    'use strict';

    window.localStorage.clear();
    window.sessionStorage.clear();
})();

File: Untitled.png (89KB, 850x523px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 850x523px

Just updated Nightly but anyone know what's up with this new icon(not the blue one)? It literally looks like garbage, as in literally comprised of garbage items, and I'm wondering if they're doing the google thing of themed logos on special dates.

>>61866266
i think it's a pretty fox

>>61818199
But I actually stopped using Firefox back in 2014.

>>61866273
The one in the top left corner of the image.

Probably they didn't realize how bad it'll look when resizing it, and that's a pretty retarded error for the ux team.

>>61866488
It's fucking Hobbes from Calvin and Hobbes. It's not even a fox, but a stuffed fucking tiger.

>>61866497
Yeah, i know, but at least it won't look like shit if used for bigger icons and not for a 16x16 one.

>>61866559
Pretty sure you can change it. Luckily, since I'm running Mint, it's not really an issue for me. Any icon can be changed with like 3 clicks.

No fucking way dude, Australis was a visual change, this is a functionality one. Not even the same ballpark.

>>61818199
Lastpass update when?

>>61866777
>Lastpass
If you're using that shit, you may as well just fucking use the built-in password manager.

>the only thing I have left to care about in my pathetic life is a web browser and the internet
>even this is being taken away from me
I'm not gonna make it much longer.

>>61866818
Get a pupper.

>>61866818
lol what a loser

>>61866932
We can't all be winners, at least I have the decency to drop out and not become a leech like most seem to do.

>>61866953
>We can't all be winners
Everyone's a winner compared to you.

Guess I have to stay on the old version with my tree tabs.

>>61867070
It seems that way, no reason to dwell on it. What's your intention with these posts, if you want to make personal conversation you should leave an email address and I'll get back to you when I can, here isn't really the best place to discuss personal matters.

File: Capture.png (15KB, 130x129px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 130x129px

>open nightly
>icon changes to hobbes
dude what

>first they killed the aesthetics
>then they killed the classic theme restorer

JUST

>>61868423
I thought it was just me. Why is Mozilla so aggressive with removing the option of what they formerly offered as standard? How can I respect them after this

>>61819267
The exhentai extension.

>>61818199
firefuck focus is gay though.
what were they thinking?

>>61831106

You know that these NEETs keep talking about "workflow", which is /g/ speak for "I don't wanna!"

File: fx.png (66KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 256x256px

cute++

Do we have a replacement for cookie controller yet?

>>61870785
The webext API is still pre-alpha and local/session storage management hasn't been implemented yet, but Mozilla has stated it will be added to the API soon. They've got a lot on their plate right now

>>61871847
>force everyone to move to webextensions RIGHT NOW or get fucked
>pre-alpha