well, now that this has gone down the shitter, any alternatives??

>>62005823
Waterfox is a great alternative. It is basically Firefox but with less bloat, no telemetry spyware, and does not use google analytics. You would be doing yourself a huge favor by installing it.

Waterfox also supports the Firefox add ons.

>>62005823
Firefox

Nightly

>>62005823
Chromium, Vivaldi, Brave

I wouldn't recommend anything else honestly. Anything else either A: isn't as feature rich, B: not enough add-ons, or C: too blatantly botnet

Pale Moon

>>62005823

Iridium

>>62005875
I use waterfox on linux and it's great m8 I've been telling people about it all year round. I really like it, Palemoon just falls flat with the extension compatibility.

>>62005823
Firefox or Nightly, alternatively Waterfox (placebo).
There's nothing wrong with Firefox.

I use SeaMonkey

>>62006079
>MAH Brave
>Not recommending Waterfox.
>But everything else i dont like is a botnet.

>>62006126
damn straight. That guy makes a good browser from Firefox and its much faster and better as well.

>>62006134
>nothing wrong with a shit chrome clone
dream on space cowboy

Just came here to remind you if you're using proprietary OS you already have a botnet regardless of browser lads

>>62005823
>looking for a good UI browser with add-on capabilities and isnt a botnet
Firefox

>>62006508
>chrome clone
>faster than chrome
>not as botnet as chrome
>better adblocking than chrome
Boi, stfu.

>>62005823
>now that
Firefox has been shit for years. It's actually becoming good now, with nightly 57. The fuck are you on?
If you didn't switch to chrome/chromium years ago and came back to nightly now, you are tech illiterate.

>>62006079
>too blatantly botnet
>shills chromium and v***ldi

>>62005823
firefox

>>62005823
>that little ® on the lower right corner
It saddens me to be have been using Firefox for so many year (before it was even called that) and have to change to another browser just because the SJWs running the Mozilla Foundations decided their userbase should abide to their rules.

>>62005823
Icecat?

>>62006757
>Firefox has been shit for years. It's actually becoming good now, with nightly 57. The fuck are you on?

haven't you heard? letting political opinion determine your technological needs is the nu-/g/

>>62006104
only good suggestion in this thread

>>62006757
>>62007128
>dropping XUL
>good technical decision

Anyone else use TinCore?

>>62007211
>allowing addons to bloat the rest of the browser
>having to refresh your profile every few months
>good technical decisions

>>62007272
>gimping addon APIs
>reducing functionality for a meme like bloat
>good technical decision

File: Webbrowsers.png (134KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1200x1200px

>>62007294
>clinging onto a dying usershare
>holding back modern progress like per tab process and sandboxing
>good decisions

>>62007365
Those things are fine, but new firefox is going to irreversibly break downthemall which is why I won't use it.

>>62005823
Brave.

/thread

> firefox nightly is faster than chrome
but it isn't.

>>62007478
It is far faster. You should test for yourself

How do I get uMatrix or equivalent on Nightly?

>>62005823
why does nightly take up 1.3gb of RAM when im only using 2 fricking tabs? waterfox has this problem too

>>62008025
Click uMatrix.webext.xpi

https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/releases/tag/1.0.1b6

>>62007440
yeah downthemall is the only thing I'm going to miss, I've rarely used it the past few years as other external tools have filled that gap but it was always nice to have available

that said firefox 57 on an unstable nightly is incredibly quick, it's actually comparable to chrome now asides from js performance - which is something google had to spend millions fixing

>>62008135
>released 3 days ago
Sweet, I must have just missed it.

>>62008025
if you don't want to install from github, https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/umatrix/versions/beta

>>62008173
You should use the same method for uBlock origin's beta webext version if you haven't already, unless you don't even use it

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

>>62007467
this

>>62008161
Mozilla probably had the browser engine changes prepared a while ago and waited until the old extension API was deprecated to merge them so people wouldn't be tempted to avoid upgrading.
Ironic how SJW companies are usually underhanded.

>>62008542
or maybe it has nothing to do with that and the problems involved of trying to use dodgy compatibility shims to support old extensions that access far too much of the browser to enable true multiprocess support

>>62005823

>http://www.palemoon.org/

Pale Moon, it's a true fork of Firefox that isn't beholden to FF's release schedule (i.e. deprecation of *real* browser extensions in the coming months). No other Firefox derivative (Waterfox etc) can claim that.

Contrary to some of the claims in this thread, it's compatible with hundreds of Firefox extensions out of the box and many more with the Moon Tester extension. My understanding is Pale Moon will be the only browser able to utilize ANY XUL-based browser extensions by the end of this year.

>http://www.palemoon.org/

Download your extensions while you can, boys! Mozilla is following Google in *limiting* what you can do on the internet -- People like those behind Pale Moon and other FOSS are trying to keep the ideals of a truly free and USEFUL internet alive!

>>62006104
THIS

>>62008698
>My understanding is Pale Moon will be the only browser able to utilize ANY XUL-based browser extensions by the end of this year.

the problem is when those extension designers that have made the switch to webapis decide they don't want to maintain two different codebases so they abandon the xul versions

>>62006558
yeah we know this already
>>62007095
this

also does anyone know if icecat is going to use the new extension thing that firefox is using or not?

>>62008754
Why is that a problem? Pale Moon can support XUL and WebExtension at the same time, like firefox did up until removing XUL support

>>62008754
Most extensions won't be able to make the switch, since WebExtensions have 1/10th of the functionality.

>>62005823
>well, now that this has gone down the shitter, any alternatives??
You fuckers said the same when Australis was announced. Webextensions will be far from a problem after it's released.

opera

>>62008770
It never used Extensions it's a basic browser.

>>62009539
what
but I have things like uBlock installed on it

>>62009133
>Most extensions won't be able to make the switch, since WebExtensions have 1/10th of the functionality.
what is the reason for the switch

>>62009635
Shitty extensions bringing the whole browser performance and stability down, especially when mixed with other extensions. Also plugins, but nobody cares about those anymore so them being disabled/removed is welcome.

Chrome earned an image of being fast and stable in part thanks to the strict limit extensions had. Coincidentally, Nightly is right now the fastest Gecko's been in years.

Q U T E B R O W S E R

>>62006079
>Brave
>good UI

lol

WTF? Firefox Nightly didn't let me choose where to install it!

>>62010218
Did it get installed in your user folder like all Chromium browsers do?
I wouldn't find that weird at all. It's one of the things that made Chrome so convenient for the average user. One click install, no need for admin privileges, etc. It would also make the updater service unnecessary, so i can see the appeal.

>>62005823
Vivaldi is what I switched to. Brave seems very under-developed

>>62006586
Slower than Chrome, you're trading one botnet for another, and blocking is the same.

>>62010747
>chrome sells your browsing habits
>chrome has the most targeted ads (ubo struggles to keep up compared to other browsers)
>chrome doesnt have the same level of customization
>cant disable all tracking for privacy

>>62007467

Yup.

>>62010817
god no

>>62010747
>Firefox is a bonet
How did you learn this?

>>62006508
Actually, some people call me Maurice.

>>62010833
Probably heard it from /pol/ and doesn't know anything about config settings

why are there so many brave shills?
it's awful

>>62007128
Would you use a browser made by KKK if it was demonstrably better than alternatives?

>>62012577
I browse /pol/ and I use Firefox because it simply works better for me than the others.

tfw all anti-firefox shills are fools who fell for /pol/s fake soros meme without doing and investigation

what fucking retards

FireFox 55 is noticably faster and I'm not even using 57 yet.

It's also Foss and not a totaly monopoly like Google.

Anything else is a major compromise for performance or license.

If you believe other wise you dont belong on /g/ where technical merit and foss initiatives reign.

File: brave-botnet.jpg (169KB, 926x773px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 926x773px

>>62007467
>Brave
Keep shilling brazillian faggot.

>not using nightly
OP confirmed for using w10.

>>62011623
its the samefag brazillian from /pol/ who larps as white and despises adblock

File: goolag.jpg (85KB, 960x660px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 960x660px

>>62013061

spotted the alt-left

File: trump.eye.roll.jpg (115KB, 854x793px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 854x793px

>>62013179
>Implying he's wrong.

File: google-frontrunners.jpg (571KB, 2896x2896px) Image search: [Google]

571KB, 2896x2896px

>>62013179
#BrowserBoss

File: technology.jpg (32KB, 700x408px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 700x408px

>>62005823
You CANNOT escape the botnet.

It eventually will take over your entire life.

File: NodeMCU_DEVKIT_1.0.jpg (28KB, 450x300px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 450x300px

>>62013215
>"security princess"
>"deconstructing borders"

What did they mean by this?

>>62013231
I didn't realise that Taxi drivers were invented in 2017

File: 330px-Richard_Matthew_Stallman.jpg (27KB, 330x250px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 330x250px

>>62013231

>>62013243
Uber drivers are not taxi drivers.

>>62005875
Waterfox is identical to regular Firefox in every way.

You're a fool who has been disillusioned by lies and wishful thinking.

File: 1503218264360.jpg (60KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 625x626px

>>62010210
It looks like safari. Are you fucking retarded?

>>62013231
I remeber seeing a youtube picture that was similar.

On the left it said youtubes guidelines and tips to keep your account safe and secure by using anon information and a nickname and had a date from 2007-2015 or similar.

On the right side it showed googles aquisition and said that google required your accurate name and to link your facebook and google now.

Wish I saved it.

>>62013262
BAZINGA!

File: yosemite-safai_icon.png (116KB, 372x372px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 372x372px

>>62005823

It's a luxury only for us...

>>62013278
(((safari)))

File: stallman.gtg.jpg (552KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

552KB, 1920x1080px

>>62013313
>"freeware"

File: thenandnow.jpg (195KB, 1436x674px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1436x674px

>>62013284
Got you covered bra.

>>62013231
Actually you can escape the BotNET havent you heard what's really been going on my nigga? Over here we've got Dennis Ritchies greatest lifes work and his most shining achivement (9) www.cat-v.org a nano-modular hybrid micro-kernel written in low level C being converted into Jewish "Alef" the first language and more unix than unix so wow, sooo fucking holy to hackers everywhere. An over here we've got Apple dropping support of Open Achitecture in favor of Intel Intel Proprietary Closed source Blobs whilst they ditch the Rosetta M68K emulation layer which has been providing protection to OS X since 2001 and instead virtualise much of the x86 environment and introduce whole swathes of hitherto unknown "Bugs" into your favorite OS mix!

Meanwhile some little cunt at the central "Bank" has labelled (9) the swifts payment system and his personal cash-cow using it to launder bonds with the Russian banks using Mirror Trading and when your precious Senate intelligence committee learned about his money laundering, they simply gave him a £200 bucks fine and a slap on the wrist! LMFAO!

>>62013333
Thanks!

Very disheartening to read it again though.
I'll be sure to archive it.

File: google.handshake.png (68KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 375x375px

>>62013333
This is also the time when they made playstore/gmail/youtube/G+ accounts all co-aggregate data.

Including Gmaps GPS data and Google Now voice and even Google search.

You can now choose to exclude that but it's not set by default and I'd assume there's terms of service that still allows some data.

Disgusting desu.

File: 2017-08-21-122250_1016x985_scrot.png (154KB, 1016x985px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1016x985px

Fuck me. Vimperator's not going to update, Lazarus is already dead. The default browser setup is just not enough, I need my addon fix

>>62013688
You can replace Greasemonkey with Violentmonkey or Tampermonkey and replace HTTPS Everywhere with Smart HTTPS. uBlock Origin and NoScript are getting updated in time for 57.

>>62013688
the ctrl+q doesn't even seem working fo

>>62013741
>replace HTTPS Everywhere with Smart HTTPS
when will this meme end? Smart HTTPS only works for 1st party site as you enter one, HTTPS Everywhere is for 1st AND 3rd party connections. 3rd party requests are often plain http

>>62013804
Works on my machine™

>>62013243
the hiring requirements for Uber drivers are not particularly high

>>62013332

did anyone said it was free? Basterd?

Also, the most popular open source engine, GPLv2, eat that!

>>62013688
Last time I've checked they were talking about making a webextension version of vimperator, give it some time.

File: checkmate_botnets.png (789KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

789KB, 1366x768px

w3m is my browser of choice.
It works better than any of your stupid botnet browsers. Prove me wrong (protip: you can't)

>>62014265
w3m? Web Standards compliance? Fuck that! I'd go with Arachne, Lynx or Links and prefer to read it all in text & MIME Encoded UTF8.

>>62013688
>block site
kek
>disable ctrl-q shortcut
no comment
>greasemonkey
they are working on a webextension
>https everywhere
they are working on a webextension
>mpv-youtube-dl-binding
use 'open with', they are working on a webextension
>new tab override
you can customize the blank tab with stylus (webextension and non-botnet alternative to stylish) or directly in userchrome.css
>noscript
they are working on a webextension
>2 dictionary addons
I'd imagine you could just install some additional language packages from your distro's repo?
>self-destructing cookies
use cookie autodelete, or better yet use umatrix to block and delete cookies
>ublock origin
they have a working webextension in beta version
>user agent switcher
there are several webextension user agent switchers available
>vimperator
they are working on a webextension
>lazarus
I'm not sure if that's what you're looking for but there are several webextension auto form fillers available

>>62006079
>no botnet
>good UI

>>USE CHROMIUM
>??

>>62007478
yes it is

>>62014368
This, there will be a lot of chromefag tears once ff 57 hits stable.

i would use nightly, but i breaks all extensions

when will stable catch up to nightly 57 in terms of aesthetics?

File: 2017-08-21_13-37-21.png (11KB, 260x336px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 260x336px

>>62014353
>use umatrix to block and delete cookies
Hmm, I never thought of that before.

Wonder what those 8 google cookies are. Hopefully they aren't responsible for loading legacy captchas.

>>62014398
Still seems to work.

Now what about those 5 4chan cookies.
I assume there's only one for the site settings?

>>62008161
>>62007440
>downthemall
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/6uqpi4/download_manager_what_features_would_you_like_to/
Go bug this guy to implement the silly features you want.
If you're just using it to mass download images and such then suitable replacements already exist.

I just want a browser that looks and acts like Firefox 2 ;_;

>>62014891
You won't get it for the simple reason that web is not what it was when Firefox 2 came out.

It's the exact same thing with people whining about XUL, something designed for web of 10 years ago that just doesn't cut it anymore, with all the fancy bloated shit that websites use nowadays. It's why firefox was so fucking slow and why people were leaving it in droves for chrome.
And then half of those morons go on and threaten to switch to some spyware-tier chromium fork, completely oblivious of the fact that firefox will get a lot faster and will still have better extension API than chromium, even after killing XUL.

>>62015079
I am completely bewildered by people who say "if extension x stops working I'm going to switch to chrome".
It's also not going to work on chrome and since chrome isn't even trying to extend the api it never will.

>>62005994

Is there an alternative for Open With in the form of a webextension yet? It is annoying to pull a url to mpv's open window.

By the way, some good extensions to have on Nightly:
Cookie Autodelete
Local CDN
uBlock Origin / uMatrix (get them off the AMO channel or via github directly, the Webextension version is not yet on the addon site)
Violentmonkey
Zoom Page WE (for this that dislike standard zoom levels)

>>62015162
>alternative for Open With
IIRC it's impossible for the browser to access external apps.

>>62015162
Scripts run via Violentmonkey and Tampermonkey don't have some permissions Greasemonkey have.

>>62015162
It's pretty simple on the extension side:

function runProgram(info, tab) {
  browser.runtime.sendNativeMessage("open_link_with_prog", info.linkUrl);
}
chrome.contextMenus.create({
  id: "open_link_with",
  title: "Open link with...",
  onclick: runProgram,
  contexts: ["link"]
});

But you need to authorize firefox to use the program/script by adding something like this into .mozilla/firefox/native-messaging-hosts/open-link-with.json

{
  "name": "open_link_with_prog",
  "description": "Manifest file for open-link-with extension",
  "path": "/usr/local/bin/open_link_with.sh",
  "type": "stdio",
  "allowed_extensions": [ "extension@id" ]
}

The script then has to read the message which is 4B int with message length and json encoded string. I think there's already some extension like this.

>>62015189
>IIRC it's impossible for the browser to access external apps.

Well, damn.

>Scripts run via Violentmonkey and Tampermonkey don't have some permissions Greasemonkey have.

Greasemonkey has not yet been updated. My list is meant as an ersatz list of add-ons to ease the transition.

>>62013275
No, it's not.

Kys.

>>62009539
pleb

>>62015357
>>IIRC it's impossible for the browser to access external apps.
>Well, damn.
Bullshit. It's possible, just the capabilities are more limited. Extensions can use native messaging API to launch the application.

File: You seeing this shit.png (235KB, 450x353px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 450x353px

>>62007467

File: 1503287895697.jpg (14KB, 225x272px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 225x272px

Just started using Brave and liking it so far. 4chan acts very strange tho. with default settings whenever i hover over a reply is shows a strike through but can still select, and I cant change any settings

>>62013043
3rdreichnet when?

>>62007796
I did test it myself.

File: addons.png (14KB, 210x203px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 210x203px

>>62005823
All I need.

Now I'm prepared for when icecat catches up to firefox nightly.

>>62005823

Not sure if it's because it's summer and /pol/ or /g/ native population is this shitty

>>62013688
>mpv-youtube-dl-binding
Actually one of the few, if not the only thing that's holding me back.
I found this alternative:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/send-to-mpv-player/
but I'm not really sure about it. I'm gonna wait until Mozilla reviews it, but even then I don't like the whole native client thing. I suppose with webext it's inevitable.

>>62016472
I do:

right click on video link, copy link location, then hit a keycombination that calls

mpv "$(xsel -ob)"

Don't see why I would need an extension for something I can simply do outside the browser.

>>62007467
This

>>62007467
>we made a new browser
>it's another fucking chromium reskin

>Firefox killed Self Destructing Cookies
>the "replacent" doesn't work
>Waterfox has bugged add-on menu

Should I just swallow the bitter pill and go ESR or IceCat, anons?

>>62018076
I did the same, then I found out I don't need self destructing cookies if I have uMatrix.

>>62018076
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autodelete/

>>62007467
Brave is made by a Jew.

>>62018146
That shit doesn't work. Constantly throws popups about deleted cookies but it actually doesn't delete anything.

>>62018171
Submit an issue.

>>62018176
Is it even worth it? From what I understood the plugin just doesn't have access to LocalStorage by the way Firefox is done now?

>>62006173
Underrated comment

>>62018248
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1388428

>>62017818
There are a lot of Chromium reskins, but Brave is different. It's not made by some random peasant, but the founder of Mozilla (got kicked out by SJWs) and the founder of JavaScript. Unlike Firefox, Chrome, and whatever else, it's designed from the ground up for privacy, ad-blocking, and fingerprinting protections. They even have Tor guys working on it.

>>62005823
it has never gone down the shitter

>>62018334
It doesnt matter who is working on it if its still shit on desktop

>>62018334
>the founder of JavaScript
Why would you list that as an achievement?

>>62018334
<sarcasm>Impressive</sarcasm>

>>62015162
>>62015189
it requires an external tweak but ut's doable with this:

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

Works on nightly. I use it to launch mpv on Youtube page.

TinCore.

>>62018367
It's definitely still in an early, primitive state on Desktop, I'll agree. It's missing features and it can be a bit unstable. But it's fast, has a nice UI, good ad-blocking, etc. It's the future.

Aurora

>>62018498
>fast
Negligible to me.
>nice UI
Subjective. I'm not a fan.
>good ad-blocking
No, just no. ads still get by. ublock origin has more filters and do a better job. ubo also has more options.

>>62018810
Do you realise you can set your filters in Brave's preferences? It has lots of options out of the box like EasyLists and so on, as well as a box for custom rules.

>>62006757
Firefox has been shit since it started trying to be chrome.

>>62018860
no umatrix though

>>62018902
I heard this meme a lot but never got a full explanation. How is firefox trying to be chrome?
>inb4 UI changes
Don't talk about that.

File: brave.jpg (105KB, 727x484px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 727x484px

>>62018153
>made by a Jew
Into the oven it goes

>>62006104
Lmao on their official site
>...but it does call home to google...
Dropped