>killed all extensions that gave it more customization options/made it unique (Classic Theme Restorer, Tab Scroll Wheel, Tab Mix Plus, etc.)
>still does not feel any faster than chrome (probs still a bit slower)
>looks even more like a chrome clone than ever.
Does anybody habe a good reason to stick with FF after 57 without referring to memes like "HURR GOOGLE BOTNET"?
I couldn't find one and switched to Vivaldi which is a fucking great browser.
RIP IN PISS OLD FRIEND
i prefer it's UI to chrome's
>>62323956
Take a look at Vivaldi. It's actually fucking sexy.
>>62323933
>without referring to memes like "HURR GOOGLE BOTNET"
>The intentions of the people who creates the program doesn't matter.
As long the software is created by humans and not by completely unbiased machines i think it matters. Also nightly feels as fast or more than chrome for me but if it's not your case i respect that.
>Vivaldi
>inb4 botnet
ROFL
nice shilling kike
>>>/v/
>>62324041
Feel free to give me some examples of the Vivaldi botnet.
Here's the source code:
https://vivaldi.com/source/
Otherwise STFU, this board is 18+, kid.
>>62323976
but its not free software
>>62323933
Mobile Firefox has extensions, mobile Chrome doesn't.
>>62324330
Mozilla somehow managed to create the worst performing browser on Android. Scrolling fells sluggish compared to any other Browser I've tested.
Mobile: Brave
Desktop: Vivaldi
That's the GOAT combination, trust me on this.
>Vivaldi
Literally 100% cpu usage opening simple pages like ghacks
>>62324313
How much you paid for it? Why can i see the source?
>>62324383
Brave doesn't block all ads and doesn't have configurable filter lists like uBlock origin
I just started using Iridium last night. If you hate Chrome, you won't like it, but I needed a bit less Jew in my browsing, and it feels exactly the same.
>>62324463
Root your phone and use AdAway. Didn't see any ads in ages.
>>62324504
Also this thread was more about the Desktop since Firefox on mobile is even more of a niche than on Desktop.
>>62324313
>but its not free software
fuck off stallman
>>62325098
(((You)))
>>62323933extensions.legacy.enabled = true
>>62323956
>i prefer it is UI
Kys.
>>62324084
You need to go back.
>>62325571
This wont work for very long. Probably not even for 57 stable.
Use ESR for now.
There's always palemoon. I miss firefox being good.
>>62323933
At the very least you can customize the UI with CSS. It's literally the only thing keeping me from moving to another browser.
>>62323933
I switched to it recently and found all my extensions work... Also feels on-par with Chrome.
>>62323933
kys
>>62324313
Then why am I using it right now without having paid a single cent?
>>62324383
>vivaldi
>brave
enjoy being openly tracked kike faggot
>>62323933
Everybody uses Brave nowadays anyway.
>>62323933
Firefox performance in hardcore demanding websites (tumblr porn archives / tumblr "See More" bloat) is vastly superior to Chromes.
I primarily consume porn on tumblrs so it counts.
>>62328535
>enjoy being openly tracked kike faggot
He says, owning a cell phone. There's no such thing as privacy anymore.
>>62328523
The price you pay doesn't always come from your wallet. If you honestly haven't figured that out by now, then what the fuck are you doing here?
>>62326038
firefox was never good it was just better than all the alternatives
>>62328913
I haven't seen any mainstream alternatives that are better. Just FF forks that would likely die or become obsolete if not for the team working on FF.
Waterfox user, btw.
>>62324313
techno communists are the worst
>>62325648
tell the slow-ass extension developers to update their extensions or contribute more extension APIs to firefox if you want them to keep working
>>62328535
I read into it. They're planning on using zero-knowledge proofs which are pretty damn snazzy for retaining privacy.
>>62323933
Most of them straight from firefox addons page, others that showed being outdated - I've simply googled source code and took the latest build most of them had an update within last 5 - 10 days.
>>62329146
I need NoScript, Decentraleyes, DotVPN, DNSSEC/TLSA Validator, Flash Control (controls HTML5, too), and Random Agent Spoofer before I can jump ship.
Some of these, like NoScript and Decentraleyes will be updated soon. Others, like Flash Control, and maybe even Random Agent Spoofer (it has a lot of other options) likely have an extension equivalent. But I can't budge on DotVPN (paying member) or the DNSSEC/TLSA Validator. I'm using Waterfox until the stuff I need is completed.
>>62329207
Just use uMatrix instead of NoScript.
>>62329207
Decentraleyes work fine with 57
https://github.com/Synzvato/decentraleyes
I just did not want that botnet on my browser...
>>62323933
I think it feels on par with Chrome.
Both of them are slow with Ghostery with 16gb of ram and a 7700k for some reason.
>>62329291
How is decentraleyes botnet? It literally blocks CDNs from google, facebook, and MS, and instead load it locally.
I'm not attacking your qualification of Decentraleyes, more asking for your reasoning.
>>62324313
https://vivaldi.com/source/?lang=en
owo what's this?
>>62323933
>chrome
Chrome's UI is shit. Also it's hard as fuck to configure. And don't have some important for me extensions. Well fuck my life I guess.
>>62329383
I said free, not open source
>>62329346
>Ghostery
it's botnet, stop using it. use uBlock Origin instead.
>>62329399
I agree on all points except the extensions part, considering WebExt. But yeah, Chrome has a retarded inflexible UI compared to Firefox. It's a shame Firefox for Android is so slow because it's the best browser apart from that.
>>62323933
>looks even more like a chrome clone than ever.
What ? It looks nothing like a chrome clone.
>>62323933
FF 56 forever
>>62329383
part of the blink source, not the whole vivaldi
>>62323933
>Classic Theme Restorer, Tab Scroll Wheel, Tab Mix Plus
I have been using firefox since firefox 3.X, NEVER used any of those autistic add-ons
>>62329207
>NoScript,
Ported
>Decentraleyes,
Ported
>DotVPN,
Don't know about that use a router level VPN
>DNSSEC/TLSA Validator,
Similar extensions available
>Flash Control (controls HTML5, too),
What does it "control"?
>and Random Agent Spoofer
before I can jump ship.
Ported
>>62329146
Tampermonkey closed its source a few releases ago and is now deprecated proprietary software.
Switch to violentmonkey
>>62329354
It's just some fucking retard who's been spouting that bullshit since last week, don't listen to him.
Decentraleyes just downloads the libraries to your browser and then uses them instead of downloading them every time from CDNs.
>>62330766
FF28 forever.
>>62328553
That's weird. The more you scroll down on a Facebook feed (a hardcore demanding website), the slower Firefox gets. 57 seems to be better, though.
I have only been using it for the occasional flash got rip and on my phone where it still crashes on xvideos if I leave to many tabs open despite not running out of ram since my phone has 3gb
But it's the only mobile browser I know that has good plugin support
>>62329207
Random Agent Spoofer doesn't work anyway, outdated user agents (last updated 2016). All script injection features can be replicated without it.
>he switched to vivaldi only now
I switched to it 1 year ago, I am superior to you, faggot
Switching to vilvaldi is like switching to Opera
you're just a hipster with a weird browser and barely any benefits
>>62323933
>firefox is turning into chrome, might as well use chrome
this argument makes no sense. if they're becoming the same, why bother switching instead of staying where you are? are you even actually using firefox or is this whole thread fabricated?
firefox is free software. chrome is not. it's that simple.
>>62324084
open source isn't good enough. vivaldi is non-free
>>62324383
firefox nightly on android actually runs better than any other browser I've tried
>>62324408
cost is irrelevant, source is only one of the four freedoms. get off /g/ until you know what you're talking about
>>62323933
It feels as fast as chrome. Looks don't matter. It's still a more customizable browser.
Also pic related. Have fun chrome locking you down, tracking your every step and pushing ads every way possible without you being able to block them properly.
>>62323933
>Does anybody habe a good reason to stick with FF after 57 without referring to memes like "HURR GOOGLE BOTNET"?
I choose any of FFs shit over chromes/chromiums "OW LE SNAP :^)"
>>62323933
>update to 55
>all tabs randomly crash and go blank every 15 mins
>have to restart the entire instance to make it work
quality 2bh
>>62323956
same
>>62325613
ur dumb
>57+ were all about speed now
Mozilla are retarded. Every normie who just cared about speed left years ago. I highly doubt they'll come back now. Everybody who loved Firefox for the customization gets the finger. Also, just because you can port over Chrome extension doesn't meant that the'll be maintained. FF probably ends up with outdated Chrome Extensions. Not a good feature tbqh.
>>62333206
anyone who is still a firefox user in 2017 is so dumb, they will stay with it forever for their own delusional reasons
i literally switched to google chrome on the FIRST. DAY. of Chrome's release and never looked back again. Literally. I opened firefox again the 2nd day to see how it felt and immediately closed it again.
It was that obvious in 2008, imagine how stupid you have to be to stay with an objectively worse browser for 9 years.
9 years.
>>62333250
They all will have to accept that Firefox is dying eventually.
>>62323933
>Does anybody habe a good reason to stick with FF after 57 without referring to memes like "HURR GOOGLE BOTNET"?
- new extension api is still more powerful than chrome's
- it's marginally slower than chrome but still very fast, and it's going to get even faster. project quantum is far from done
- ui looks better than chrome's and you can customize it however you want through userChrome.css
- feature customizability thorugh about:config blows chrome out of the water
- even if all of the above were false, it's still important that we have competition among browsers because users always use where there are monopolies
>>62333318
this is the problem with the firefox users, they are exactly the same delusional group that buys into linux.
enjoy your 4% marketshare, seriously. That's about the share of people who are dumb enough to fall for empty promises and worse UX
>>62333449
nice argument
>>62324084
Enjoy being used as a fucking cow for data. Just look into that source you're providing
>>62325613
Nigga u dumb as fuck
>>62333449
Because when Internet Explorer had a massive monopoly in the past that worked out so well.
>>62334241
Firefox nightly isn't bad.
Does webextensions API allow customizing UI? Will we ever get alternative to classic theme restorer and tabs on bottom?
>>62331981
>disconnect
nice botnet, also open with has a webext ver
>>62336074
sadly it needs some fucking node local client
>>62336228
ironically webextensions remove the ability for custom new tab page addons to allow local html files to be used
>>62334241
It did until it didn't. IE 6 was good when it came out, 5.5 on Mac was even better. Then they got complacent.
Still, Google is more of a threat now than MS was then, they're a company with political influence somewhere in between Canada and the EU, without so much as a constitution
This thread:
Google : botnet
Vivaldi: botnet
Brave: botnet
Decentraleyes: botnet
Ghostery: botnet
disconnect: botnet
Basically everything: botnet
That shows how much one should care about the opinion of paranoid freetards. They probably want people to use text based browsers like Lynx...
>>62336278
4 of those are actual botnets though
>>62336278
Lynx is a botnet.
>>62336278
>Ghostery: botnet
yeah no shit https://www.lifehacker.com.au/2013/06/ad-blocking-extension-ghostery-actually-sells-data-to-advertisers/
>>62324313
Neither is Firefox. It's not free, only open-source, so what's your point?
>>62336278
But Google, Brave and ghostery ARE botnets. How misinformed are you?
>>62336336
You know that you can turn off all ads in Brave, right?
>>62336395
>you have to disable ads in your browser
what a time to be alive
>>62336412
The browser itself has no ads, you can exchange web ads with their "acceptable" ads or completely block all ads. This feature is enough to call the browser a botnet...
>>62336395
That doesn't change the fact it's a botnet. It actively builds an ad profile of the user so it's not any better than Google Chrome.
>>62336483
turn it off than, literally one mouse click.
Fuck them to try to make some money on their own and not being dependent on Google like every one else including Mozilla amiright?
>>62336564
>turn it off then
You can't, anon.
>>62336605
You can. I'm using brave on my phone. It's pretty comfy.
>>62335924
You can edit the UI with userchrome.css
>>62326038
some extensions won't work on palemoon too much different.
>>62328921
does waterfox compatible with ff extensions?
>>62332417
you can replace with umatrix, umatrix has ability to spoof browser agent.
adnauseum when?
>>62336767
never
>>62336703
Every single Firefox extension is compatible, even legacy ones. Technically, Waterfox will have more extensions than Firefox soon.
Is the vain hope of preventing Google and Microsoft from being the only major browser creators a good reason to stick with FF? You might not like Moz://a's politics but at least they care about a free web.
Think of the anti-consumer shit they do already and then imagine how much worse it would be if google and ms could collab on some freedom killing new standard
>>62336869
Firefox has plenty of good forks. Palemoon's devloper went full moralfag, but there's still waterfox, cyberfox, icecat, etc.
>>62336278
lynx < w3m < links
>>62336651
You don't understand. Nobody is talking about "allowed ads" thing. Yes you can disable that, but you literally can't remove the datamining coming from brave itself unless you compile the app yourself and remove the code because they actually build an ad profile on you since they want to add a "watch ads to get money" feature in future (which is completely retarded). And if you're going to do all this shit you might as well use Iridium or IceCat since otherwise you're literally running Chrome with a skin and no addons.
Not to mention that going for ABP instead of uBO is a heavy efficiency loss when blocking ads and scripts, and it will block less shit. And basing themselves on chromium instead of Firefox is a shit choice for privacy and features (see >>62332894). Firefox is simply better and brave was made because the guy behind it was salty since Mozilla fired him.
Mozilla cares about internet privacy and freedom. Brave only blocks ads and has no issues locking down the user and datamining. So, you literally gain nothing when using brave instead of Firefox + uBlock Origin.
>>62332864
What, is the license restrictive? The only thing that really matters is the source is auditable. If there was a real need for forking, then just clean room reverse engineer the parts you need. Don't be an autist.
>>62336808
>Every single Firefox extension is compatible, even legacy ones. Technically, Waterfox will have more extensions than Firefox soon.
I just worried if they shutdown legacy addons from their website.
Are you me OP?
>>62323933
Dude Firefox is simply very good at the moment. I don't see the problem. Extensions will migrate eventually if there's enough demand.
I've forced myself to use Chromium/Chrome for about a month and Firefox is simply better than both.
so, what's wrong with chromium?
>>62336808
>>Every single Firefox extension is compatible, even legacy ones. Technically, Waterfox will have more extensions than Firefox soon.
seems waterfox pretty good just need a time to tweak. will use for daily browser.
>>62337348
Why do Firefox derivatives feel like placebofox?
You can't use Ublock Origin on Chrome for Android, and it's the only extension I use so Firefox is what I prefer
>>62337571
>Chrome for Android
Does this have any extension support to begin with?
>>62337684
Nope which is a surprisingly bad oversight for a Google app
>>62337805
It's not an oversight, it's a feature.
>>62335924
>Will we ever get alternative to classic theme restorer
According to the developer and Mozilla? No.
And userchrome will only allow very minimal UI customization.
Is Waterfox a botnet?
>>62336875
>Palemoon's devloper went full moralfag
Please to explain
>>62324383
just for the addon fluff alone it's worth it
>>62338126
They said adnauseum was malware. Which I guess it kinda is, to some extent.
I don't use Pale Moon, but apparently it was also added to a blacklist you need to disable in about:config
>>62336321
MPL is fsf approved
>>62338126
He blacklisted Adnauseum because he personally did not like it.
>>62338328
It's a Clicker at most.
>>62337093
You should ask the ArchiveTeam about this.
(I'm half serious about this)
>>62328523
He means that it is made by a for-profit company rather than an open source indie SJW hive. Ignore him. He is typical /g/ cancer.
>and probably a pooloo
>>62323976
This was the point of this thread wasn't it?
Shill
>>62338328
>>62338406
Oh, I had heard about that. Didn't think of it as a moral objection so much, but I didn't read his statement, so what do I know...
One thing I've read that I found interesting was that the new WebExt versions of things like NoScript and UMatrix may not work the same as the old. Where the original stopped the loading of scripts completely, the new ones will load pages twice...once fully and then once with the objected-to items stripped out for your viewing pleasure... I really don't like that idea.
>>62338098
No, but it is a meme.
>and a bad one at that.
>>62338729
better than pale moon
>>62338755
Pale moon is trash lead by a cuck. Supporting tha shit is no better than supporting SJWfox.
>>62338795
In my mind, deprecating a questionable add-on isn't nearly as bad as forcing out your CEO because he made a donation to a religious organization. And you'll get called out on the Mozilla boards just for using the word 'guys'.
>>62338920
Hence why supporting Cuckfox is the same as supporting Hitler. (With equally as many jews, gays, and trannies running around their place of business.)
>>62325613
I actually prefer the Nightly UI to Chrome as well.
t. diehard Chrome user
>>62338920
Doesn't make Manchild any less of a cuck. Dont' use either.
>>62323956
its
>>62339498
did you just assume xe's pronouns?
>>62323933
>Google botnet is a meme
firefox isnt perfect but thats what waterfox is for. It removes pocket and other cancer and it also allows legacy addons to be installed out of the box.
The actual best browser.
>>62323933
Because every other browser is worse?
>>62323933
>>killed all extensions that gave it more customization options/made it unique (Classic Theme Restorer, Tab Scroll Wheel, Tab Mix Plus, etc.)
You don't need addons to customize the interface. You can modify anything in the interface with straight CSS. Addons like tab mix can be implemented in webextensions. Scrolling tabs with the scroll wheel is already the default behavior I don't know what you're even talking about.
>>62324084
The Blink engine is open but any changes made on behalf of the Vivaldi devs is non-free and can't be redistributed or modified.
There is a big difference in Open-source and FOSS.
>>62339894
>Scrolling tabs with the scroll wheel is already the default behavior
You could scroll through tabs if the mouse hovered over the tab bar.
That is not working by default, and it wont be possible to restore this functionality with web extensions. If it works for you now, than you're using a different addon that adds this, but they all will stop working once 57 hits.
https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/tab-wheel-scroll/reviews/908178/
>>62328913
>>62328921
>>62339840
This.
FF isn't the end all browser but it's better than the competition.
>>62340034
>Supported by possibly the biggest SJW organization in the world
>Performance growth lagging behind Chrome and even fucking Edge
>Removing customization
>Becoming more and more of a botnet each day
>Pocket and other native plugs cannot be removed without a hack
>better than the competition
>>62323933
you can actually enable legacy support you know
>>62339894
>You can modify anything in the interface with straight CSS
It's very limited, and will be even more so after 57.
>>62340174
>>Pocket and other native plugs cannot be removed without a hack
You can actually just delete them.
>>62340208
On Nightly, yes. Not on 57, you won't be able to. And that experimental developer mode isn't a permanent solution.
>>62340333
Nope. There is still a plug-in listed in the config files. They are there for good.
>>62340355
about:config is where everything stores settings so that can't really be helped but otherwise system addons can be completely removed. The downside is they come back with every major update becuase they weren't intended to be removed. System addons are basically considered a part of the browser and are only "addons" because they can be updated much easier than regular browser components.
>>62340409
>about:config is where everything stores settings so that can't really be helped
So, if you hammer a nail into a block of wood, it cannot be helped that there is a nail in the wood? Fuck off. They chose to design their plugs to not be removed. That is why they cannot be removed. Plenty of browsers offer complete config-level removal of shit. As you said, everything comes back, so they force it down your throat.
>B-but muh freedom fox!
...is dead and has been for a long time.
>he doesnt use opera neon
its like you want to be on the botnet
Best browser coming through
>>62341918
What browser is that?
>>62341953
Google Ultron
>>62342148
It looks like botnet in its final form.
>>62325613
>t. retard who never opens 20 tabs or more
>>62325571
DownThemAll wont work even with legacy enabled
>>62328977
>zero-knowledge proofs
tell me more
>>62323933
anyone know why it takes fucking forever to load an external link of some kind in a tab?
>>62343573
You are loading too much CP in the background.
>>62338702
Wait, what? The entire reason I have noscript installed is so websites load quicker. How does umatrix do it with webexts then?
>>62323933
that icon is gorgeous though
>>62323933
i don't get it, why don't you just use an older version of firefox?
that's what i'll be doing, i can't figure out how to get rid of the annoying as fuck title bar on chrome
>>62343573
dumb phone poster
>>62325571
how easy/hard would it be to make a patch to FF that allows addons?
>>62323933
Stop crying faggot it will come back in a few weeks.
I want to like Vivaldi but it's the slowest of all the browsers. Firefox is shit, even their fans are aware of it, and can't use chrome because for some reason it freezes randomly on my laptop. Using opera and everything just werks
>>62323933
>rest in piss in piss
>>62348138
>Vivaldi
non-free
>>62329354
>>62332071
the devs behind it were into some shady shit. Or was that ghostery?
>Tor Browser is actually modded Firefox
>Most of us use Tor
>We're all scum of the earth
Google Ultron is the best Browser, NASA uses it, and I heard that Adobe Photoshop is now included in the package so you don't have to install it seperately
>>62348285
ghostery is owned by an ads network
>>62348446
Tor is a NSA honeypot
>>62348800
The NSA does good work to keep people safe
>>62332980
>>62323956
you gotta get on that userchrome game senpai
>>62349061
>the NSA actually keeps people safe
>>62323933
>Didn't open my previous session tabs
I'll piss on it's grave
I know i'm pretty late to the thread, but i just did a benchmark test between Vivaldi and Nightly and I'm surprised at how much better vivavldi did. Granted, this is just one of the tests on broswerbench. Nightly was actually slightly quicker but this one test was a staggering loss
>>62323933
>Tab Scroll Wheel
tabs have scrolled with with the wheel for aslong as I can remember.. youre just a tablet
>>62340034
>better than the competition
See >>62340174
FF used to be the gold standard for browsers until Chrome came around.
>>62323933
It's markedly faster than Chrome, and thread pooling handles systems under 8GB RAM better rather than pure process per tab.
>>62328901
hey has it ever occurred to you that some people aren't software developers and don't care about the source code
>>62346680
Next few versions: probably trivial (that doesn't mean your addons will work unmodified, though)
As time goes on and XUL/XBL gets eradicated: very labor intensive or downright impossible
NO BOTNET OPTIONS:
palemoon
icecat
links
wget and local html load
curl and local html load
use your neighor wifi
tor
>>62346630
Go fuck off to >>>/gd/
>>62352415
>pale moon
botnet
nah, it's not. actually is the closest fork to firefox, with an attention to privacy.
>>62352645
then I'll just install ad nau-
>>62352713
ad nauseam?
more users is better
>>62352748
pale moon went full moralfag and blocked it
>>62352748
>Thinks more inclusive is better
>>62352713
>>62352769
You can install in on Pale Moon. You just need to take an additional step to allow it.
If that's too hard for you then maybe you shouoldn't be on /g/.
>>62323933
I don't even give a shit about the switch to webexts because the extensions I use have been ported. What pisses me off is the fact that they advertise themselves as the most privacy concerned browser yet they still use googles "safe browsing" list to block sites and they use google analytics on the about:addons page even if you have do not track turned on.
>>62353919
>using a browser with a developer who does things like that to begin with
>>62323933
FF 55 broke two of my addons so I stopped updating.
I thought I would be able to use 56 but no they fucking killed it earlier.