Why does some people on /g/ still insist on using Firefox. It's

>>62367011
I use waterfox did I fall for the meme?

Give it to me straight, whats the best and most secure, private browser but most of all quickest? I want to be able to watch netflix and do normie shit on it while having close to the above.

>>62367011
I get great performance, customizability, and privacy. I imagine others feel the same.
It's not the best, just the least shit option overall.

>>62367067
>great performance
wrong
>customizability
yes, and so does other browsers
>privacy
no, and sadly this is the case for the majority of browsers

>>62367110
>wrong
I get great performance, can't really tell me otherwise. Maybe you don't, but I do.
>yes, and so does other browsers
Chromium based browsers dont offer the same options. And the other firefox forks offer the same things as regular firefox
>no, and sadly this is the case for most browsers
With the right config, firefox is just as private or more private than all major browsers. Of course there are browsers made specifically for privacy but at a point you lose functionality.

>>62367011
Firefox and its predecessor Mozilla Suite were always dedicated to geeky users who actually care of their machines, not for edgy shitposters and whinebabies opening shitloads of tabs. For such users I would recommend Opera v. 12.

iridium update when?
is it dead?

>>62367011
Habit mostly, too bored to switch browsers because firefucks works
Chromium on Debian GNU/Linux is a much better and the moment Firefox makes extraordinary retarded I'm going to drop firefucks like the hot turf it is

Ironically, Firefox android version is much better than shitty Chrome botnet so this may keep me to Firefox

>>62367011
Never had any issues with it

I've been experimentingon desktop with nightly. Seems like they closed the speed gap. But I primarily use pale meme, it's quick lightweight and privacy sensitive. On Android however, I've found lightning browser to be the quickest browser that still has decent privacy settings

>>62367110
Are you retarded?

>>62367067
This.

It's only getting better too.

Saw this CLI tool for .css btw.
Thought i'd share.

https://github.com/Admicos/userfirefox

(another nice project)
https://github.com/Timvde/UserChrome-Tweaks

>>62367011
>Why does some people
Why do some people

>>62367011
I like firefox because I use adnauseam, but I will stop using it when ESR 52 is dead

>>62367067
>great performance

Oh lord.

Is there a WebExtension that adds MHTML support to Firefox? There were older extensions but they don't work with Firefox 57.

>>62369840
You're using pre-alpha, don't expect everything to work or to be ported yet.

>>62367011
Chrome annoys me with the user profiles. One day it randomly deleted all my bookmarks. So I switched to Firefox.

Also Firefox looks better than Chrome when you have scaling in Windows in your ultra resolution notebook (small panels with big resolutions).

>>62367110
>>62369207
Fucking faggots are you serious? The 20ms you might lose in rendering is so fucking negligible it's not even funny. It's like arguing that opting out of capitalization and punctuation saves you any significant amount of time.

>>62367011
Why does some people on /g/ still insist on not using Firefox. It's currently the best web browser available in both pc and mobile

>>62367011
Because you still can't do basic shit on Chrom* like making the tabs square (Classic Theme Restorer, native on 57) or moving buttons (native on all FF releases).

File: ss-2017-09-11-21-18-10.png (22KB, 987x270px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 987x270px

57 comes close to chrome in speedometer. the difference is no longer noticeable without benchmarks

File: ss-2017-09-11-21-21-25.png (28KB, 1029x273px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1029x273px

>>62370091
fixing incomplete graph

>>62370091
All while having more customizability and privacy options.

>>62367011
I insist to use what is the fastest, most stable and customizable browser on desktop right now for both linux and windows.

because i got 57 running with the layout of ff3 but in dark, how could i want more?
only thing missing now is a proper working tiled tabs webex

>>62367067
/thread

switching to firefox now

>>62367401
>For such users I would recommend Opera v. 12.
>in 2017
Opera users were superior despite being eternally cucked by proprietary code.

>>62367011
No one fucking cares
/thread

>>62367067
>great performance
literally the worst of every browser
>customizability
have fun with 57
>privacy
Pocket, Telemetry, Chrome code...
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/software/firefox-57-will-hide-search-bar-and-use-a-uni-bar-approach-like-chrome/

It's time to stop dreaming.

File: 1505163501995.jpg (106KB, 1250x520px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1250x520px

>>62371696
>literally the worst of every browser
Negligible to me.
>have fun with 57
Even 57 offers more customizabiloty than chromium based browsers. Plus they are still implementing features and expanding the api.
>Pocket, Telemetry, Chrome code...
Pocket can be disabled. Telemetry can be disabled, chrome code does not include the botnet of spying on isers and collecting data

>>62371840
>Even 57 offers more customizabiloty than chromium based browsers.
Compare Firefox 57 with Vivaldi and realize how very wrong you are.

>>62371898
example?
keep in mind 57 is pre-alpha and not complete

>>62371929
look at the Vivaldi options menu and you'll see yourself

>keep in mind 57 is pre-alpha and not complete
Nigga please. legacy extensions are gone and the rest is pretty much finalized.

>>62371965
>l-look for yourself
Nah, you provide proof.

57 is not finalized. You're talking out of your ass.

>>62371992
too lazy to look for himself but asks "proof". Probably knows that i'm right, but too scared to admit it.

>>62372155
>supposedly has vivaldi installed
>still wont post a screenshot
I dont even have vivaldi installed. Now I know I'm not missing anything since you obviously can't back up your statement.

>>62372155
Do you know how retarded you sound?

>Trump is an alien from mars. Really, go look for proof by yourself. Oh, you can't find any? That's because you're just too scared to admit I'm right.

>>62372206
A screenshot of the Vivaldi options? Are you fucking retarded? First, you could find tons of screenshots on google if you actually cared. Second, this "if I don't see it it's not true" defense is just stupid even for Firecucks/freetards. Have fun living in you little bubble, son.

File: file.png (58KB, 1455x999px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1455x999px

>>62372251
>>62372206
>>62371992
>>62371929
Vivaldi has a shitload of options right out of the box but being a Chromium clone it still shits itself with a large amount of tabs.

Posted from my Firefox Nightly.

>>62367011
name one browser that is as customizable.

>>62372362
I'm not seeing anything that can't be done with userchrome.css or an extension

>>62367011
Since g hates firefox, what browser do you recommend?

>>62372485
/pol/ hates firefox
/g/ likes firefox

File: file.png (39KB, 796x824px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 796x824px

>>62372459
Here's something that is not possible in 57.

File: je2A.jpg (197KB, 2500x1440px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 2500x1440px

>>62372459
Could maybe be done in userchrome.css != build into the browser.

>>62372556
>>62372606
Nice. Thank you for finally posting something.
Now, let's see what's possible when 57 hits stable. I have a feeling even when 57 hits stable versions after will introduce new functionality. But we'll just just have to wait and see.

File: 1n4.jpg (241KB, 2500x1440px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 2500x1440px

Look at all them options! How will firecucklets ever recover?

>>62372786
All of what's been posted is still possible in firefox stable btw

>>62372786
Scheduled themes, changing all those colors without some autistic userchrome bullshit? I don think so, son.

>>62367011
if you are too much of a newb to configure ff to perform well, you should hang yourself instead of posting here

>>62367011
Firefox is only for men.

I love Firefox, but does anyone notice that HTML5 videos from youtube and porn sites are much faster on Chrome? On Firefox I get the "spinning circle" on the video all the time.

>>62367067
>great performance
not as great as Chrome, unforunately. Mozilla spent years on other projects (Firefox OS, shit like Pocket) while Chrome was doing multiprocess browsing.
>customizability
this is gone with FF57
>and privacy
Not anymore

>>62372914
works fine for me. I prefer using mpv + youtube-dl though.

>>62372860
But you can do that in Firefox. There's a themes webextensions API. In fact, mozilla actually has an webextensions-example on github that does exactly that.

>Dynamic theme
>Checks the users time and then flips between two different themes. A "moon theme" for after 8pm and before 8am and a "sun theme" the rest of the time.
https://github.com/mdn/webextensions-examples/tree/master/dynamic-theme

File: 1498687883033.jpg (14KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 480x480px

Thought Firefox on Android was going to be a great option. It's "okay", doesn't have even half of the benefits of the desktop client, which as we all know is dying anyway.

What are some better options for Android browsers? Preferably something with lots of customization/ themes.

>>62372938
>not as great as Chrome, unforunately. Mozilla spent years on other projects (Firefox OS, shit like Pocket) while Chrome was doing multiprocess browsing.
Performance is great for me. Chrome might look better in benchmarks but in actual usage the difference is negligible for me.
>this is gone with FF57
Too some degree, yes, for now. But firefox is still working on the api and expanding what can be done while increasing speed, stability, and security.
>Not anymore
Care to elaborate? I have been able to disable what I want. I have monitored my network and nothing is connecting that I don't want to.

DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW TO UNFUCK THE TINY PIN DICK TABS ON CHROME?
I'd use Iridium if not for how awful the tab UI is.
For the time-being I'll stick to Waterfox.

>>62372517
/g/ liked* Firefox
You don't have to be a /pol/tard to recognize Firefox has gone significantly downhill in the last two years. Unfortunately Chrome sucks too so you just have to pick your poison.

>>62372983
>>62372459

Your problem with the userchrome.css defense is that not everyone is an autist who likes to search the web for some code snippets to customize the browser.
That's why Vivaldi is the clear winner with build in customization options.

>>62373029
What are you talking about? Firefox is improving. Dropping xul was needed for speed, stability, and security. They are slowly working on adding the customizibility. Even though its not has customizable as old firefox, it still offers more than most chromium based browsers. It's still too early to tell what they will allow too.

Are there really people that don't use clones of either Chrome or Firefox in [CURRENT YEAR]?

>>62373061
>normies should'nt use firefox
Sounds good to me, they ruin everything.
Unfortunately, I have a feeling once the new api is more developed it will become easier to customize firefox.

>>62373061
Everyone who isn't an autist would use the normal theme support in Firefox and not userchrome.css in the first place.

And there's much more you can do with userchrome.css than Vivaldi's few options.

>>62367011
fuck off /pol/

>>62373068
>They are slowly working on adding the customizibility.
They should have finished adding it before dropping support for the old shit. Doing what they did just betrays that they have no interest in bothering with the customizability. See also: GNOME.

Then again they also give less and less of a shit about privacy these days, despite sometimes claiming to. Too much effort for their poor developers who'd rather be implementing the latest worthless javascript meme.

>>62373443
If you want all the customizability then dont use a pre-alpha build!
How do they care less about privacy? The people who care can still use about:config

>>62367011
The Only mobile browser with extension

>>62367011
>Why does some people on /g/ still insist on using Firefox.
Mozilla is shilling hard on this board as of late

>>62373530
fuck off
firefox is the least shit option, plain and simple.

>>62373506
>How do they care less about privacy?
Opt-out telemetry provided by google, most recently. On top of the telemetry they already have. If they cared they'd be implementing things like that feature Pale Moon has where it deliberately fucks with attempts at canvas fingerprinting.

>>62367011
>offers addons on mobile
>chrome doesn't
That's why. Fuck the botnet

>>62373703
Having the option is better than nothing. Pale moon has its own issues like the dev deeming what extensions are allowed for his own personal reasons.

>>62367041
Waterfox is fine for privacy, but you still have to deal with Mozzarella's shitty """"engineering""""

>>62367401
Opera 12 is still the patrician's choice. It's just not as useful now, and Ivan has probably figured out its weaknesses.

>>62374563
Can you even browse modern web with that?

>>62374869
Probably not, but it's still GOAT.

Mozilla is completely cucked. Brave is the only real choice at this point. Vivaldi is ok as well.

>>62375969
>brave
well meme'd

>>62372556
Couldn't you just use one of those vim-like extensions and set them up to use ctrl+letter shortcuts instead of single letter shortcuts and have the same amount of customizability?

>>62375980
>firecucks try this hard to discredit Brave

>>62376133
>automatically assumes my browser
why are brave shills so desperate? anyone who has tried brave on desktop knows it is not complete.

>>62376157
What do you use then? Vivaldi?

Chrome is for trannies now. Pale Moon is cucked too. There are no alternatives to Brave at this point other than Vivaldi.

>>62376232
vivaldi
Brave is not desktop ready. limited extensions, was buggy and unsable for me when I tried it lasted week.

>>62376258
The first stable release comes out this month.

I realize it has flaws at this point, but I honestly think it's the closest thing to a de-googled and de-mozzed browser we're going to get at this point. Plus, the guy who founded it also founded Firefox so he uses all the good things from Firefox and strips it of its SJW cancer.

>>62376297
I dont give a fuck about company politics. I care about the product. And Brave just isnt there. Will it even be able to use more extensions?

>>62367522
>Chromium
I'll give it a shot. I love Firefox but they're starting to hit the skids and go Chrome-lite like the rest of the browsers.
>B-but Chromium is Chrome you cuck
Yeah, but it's un-google'd Chrome.

>>62376900
you're thinking of ungoogled chromium which is not well maintained. regular chromium still connects to google servers and there is no way to disable it. that is why ungoogled chromium was started.
honestly firefox is only getting better. they are moving in the right direction.

>>62376941
Whoops. Got my Chromium forks mixed up. I hope Firefox keeps its shit together, it's been my main browser since Opera went to Blink.

Has anyone done anything with Opera 12.15's source code?

File: loled.png (91KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1024x768px

pic related

>>62377004
There's opera source code threads sometimes. You can check the archive. Don't know how well it works on the modern web though.

>>62367110
>I get great performance
>wrong
Lmao nigga you dumb as fuck

File: google chrome the botnet.png (134KB, 700x389px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 700x389px

google chrome shills btfo
pic related, hang yourselves

>>62367011
>Why does some people on /g/ still insist on using Firefox.
all it takes to convince a shill is some shekels.
don't you think it's nice to know nice to know that the donation funds from soros are still being put to ''''good use''''?

File: wtf i hate nightly now.png (12KB, 1089x167px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 1089x167px

>Nightly
>wtf

>>62380243
B T F O

T

F

O

>>62371898
>>62371965
>Vivaldi
>can't place tab bar below address bar (unless you put both at the bottom of the window)
>tab options can't compare to tab mix plus
Nah

>>62380200
actual fake news

>>62380447
>fake
>https://wiki.mozilla.org/Main_Page/Proposals_for_WMM#Donor_Organization:_Open_Society_Institute_MENA_Grant
excuse me?
you won't earn any shekels this way

>>62367011
t. CIAnigger

>>62371840
vif ntm

>>62380524
>Grant Research for Web Made Movies, March-April 2010, Mozilla Foundation
>Due Date: No date specified
It's literally nothing. There is not even any indication that the funding actually happened.

>>62380447
Soros or not, they said in their blog post that they support fake news.

>>62380852
Why don't you link that blog post and take a screenshot of the exact part where they said that they support fake news.

File: mozillafakenews.png (10KB, 763x63px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 763x63px

>>62380946
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/09/06/mozilla-washington-post-reinventing-online-comments/

The examples of supposedly "credible" news organisations they gave actually include known and proven fake news sources.

>>62367011
Isn't everyone waiting for Brave to leave Beta?

>>62381083
Not unless they allow the same extensions as firefox and becomes more stable on desktop.

>>62380668
>It's nothing
>never happened
kek
how many layers of damage control are you on right now?

>>62381233
what damage?

>>62381048
>known and proven fake news sources
This is far off from saying "in their blog post that they support fake news". Also, none of these news-gathering organizations publish solely fake-news. There might have been cases of false stories. But in general, they are credible and their stories true.
And still Mozilla wants to empower users to assess credibility on a story-by-story basis for themselves. A "deeply reported and thoroughly fact checked story" is they key element here. Not the specific examples.

>>62381233
>A page for discussing potential donor organizations
>From 2010
>For a specific cause (Web Made Movies)
>This somehow proofs that Mozilla employs shills with money received from le Soros bogeyman

>>62370240
>Fastest

Can you please stop lying in the internet? This shit is slow as fuck.

>>62372155
>It's not my job to educate you
Gee, it almost sounds a user from another website, known for a particular group of people that may hold progressive views on identity politics...

File: out.webm (2MB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 854x480px

>>62367011
Because most people on /g/ aren't technologically incompetent as you and shill the fuck out of some botnet that could very more likely lead to our impending doom.

File: safari-logo-.jpg (32KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 200x200px

Hey guys! ... Guys?

>>62381322
MAXIMUM

>>62381380
>le Soros bogeyman
that might work on reddit, but not here, ''''friend''''.
you might want to call another '''collaborator''' to aid you in the discussion


>in b4 that wiki entry gets edited or removed

>>62367011 I'm too lazy to deal with 1k opened tabs, 2k bookmarks and many addons with site specific scrips.

>>62381571
>that might work on reddit
you would know.
So what about the rest of the post? How is a grant proposal from 2010 for WMMs proof for paid shilling?