Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Quantum-ized Firefox 57 Ready For Download

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    do you know that google is the main sponsor of firefox?
    You're several years behind the times.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/1..._search_in_us/

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by JPFSanders View Post
      And with this Firefox will lose half its loyal base. The extension debacle is a fiasco of the highest magnitude.
      As a Firefox Poweruser for many years: At first you're overestimating that, and second: That step was really needed. Taking care of all that hassle never worked and slowed development really really down. Firefox needed a hard cut, and did just that.

      Originally posted by Ropid View Post

      This would also be a good time to check out Chromium as now there won't be a big difference between what type of extensions Firefox and Chromium can run. Without the old extensions, you are now free to give other browsers an honest try. There's nothing holding you back if you find out there's something to like about the other browser. With being free to choose other stuff, hopefully losing your old extensions won't be as bad as it feels at first.
      That's not exactly right: The principle is the same now, and quite some functionality matches between Chrome and Firefox BUT (this is important) there are already quite some things Webextensions in firefox are able to do, which are not possible in Chrome. Think of webextensions as beeing a design principle, but not a fix point in implemented possibilities. Firefox Developers have decided to give extension authors some possibilities which are not present in Chrome, because Chrome Devs don't like these. For example: In Firefox extensions can offer a sidebar, but not in chrome . There are some other webextensions based APIs already implemented and some on their way into Firefox, so don't think browsers are equal. They haven't been, they won't be.

      Comment


      • #23
        I guess I'll be sticking with FF 56 for a long time as my add-ons aren't support by FF 57. I'm not willing to sacrifice privacy and usability over some improvement in performance. "Some" in the way that I don't have to wait ages for pages to load now, so further improvement is not my main wish

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post
          That step was really needed. Taking care of all that hassle never worked and slowed development really really down. Firefox needed a hard cut, and did just that.
          They did it in a pretty bad way though:

          Hey, lets break old addons with that multiprocess thing(?), then lets break them again by moving to a whole new API. And lets remove the old API before we implement the replacements!

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by AnonymousCoward View Post

            They did it in a pretty bad way though:

            Hey, lets break old addons with that multiprocess thing(?), then lets break them again by moving to a whole new API. And lets remove the old API before we implement the replacements!
            They gave several years to extension developers to adapt to multiprocess and 1 year to adapt to the WebExtension changes. It's unfortunate that some addons will not get updated, but the developers had plenty of time to update them. If they haven't, maybe those extensions were not so well maintained after all.

            Luckily the most used extensions were able to switch in time. I haven't lost any myself.

            Comment


            • #26
              Firefox gave a plenty of time to all the contributors to switch to the new API, imho.

              Comment


              • #27
                shame classic theme restorer can't be ported to Quantum .

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by Danielsan View Post
                  Firefox gave a plenty of time to all the contributors to switch to the new API, imho.
                  Considering some APis aren't even done yet (toolbar API and the ability to hide the tabbar, to name just two examples), no, they most certainly did not. Then there's APIs that they plain refuse to implement, like mouse tracking, which means gesture extensions have to resort to a really gross hack - inject tracking scripts into every page you visit.

                  Mozilla did *not* handle the transition correctly. They did not give enough time, some stuff isn't ready and there's too many API requests that have been denied.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Gusar View Post
                    Considering some APis aren't even done yet (toolbar API and the ability to hide the tabbar, to name just two examples), no, they most certainly did not. Then there's APIs that they plain refuse to implement, like mouse tracking, which means gesture extensions have to resort to a really gross hack - inject tracking scripts into every page you visit.

                    Mozilla did *not* handle the transition correctly. They did not give enough time, some stuff isn't ready and there's too many API requests that have been denied.
                    Three years is plenty times. Some API aren't handled mainly due to security concern and some functionalities will be resorted once a proper solution is found. Rome

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by EarthMind View Post
                      I guess I'll be sticking with FF 56 for a long time as my add-ons aren't support by FF 57. I'm not willing to sacrifice privacy and usability over some improvement in performance. "Some" in the way that I don't have to wait ages for pages to load now, so further improvement is not my main wish
                      It's a better idea to stick to 52ESR. That'll continue to receive security updates for much longer than 56.

                      (That's what I'm doing while I continue to find or write replacements for the extensions I need... in some cases, as native applications with an integration extension because the Firefox devs are reticent to support things like allowing a download manager arbitrary read/write access to a specified folder under the WebExtensions paradigm.)

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X