Firefox 109 Available With Unified Extensions Button, Other Small Changes

[Berniyh]

As you probably know, Falkon has built-in adblocking, so supporting uBlock is probably not a big priority. uBlock makes a legacy XUL extension that works perfectly on Pale Moon and SeaMonkey.

It's not only about adblocking, but also trackers and other unwanted side-connections. To me, adblock is more like a side-effect, tbh.
(I'm not strictly against showing ads, as long as it is a reasonable amount, but I'm against allowing connections to all sorts of third-party sites. There are some sites that include the ads within their own domain and I see those and I'm absolutely ok with that.)
Also, ublock origin provides a very handy zapper/picker mode that you can use to get rid of specific elements on a site.

For me, a browser without ublock origin support (or something similar) is not an option.

[andyprough]

It's not only about adblocking, but also trackers and other unwanted side-connections. To me, adblock is more like a side-effect, tbh.
(I'm not strictly against showing ads, as long as it is a reasonable amount, but I'm against allowing connections to all sorts of third-party sites. There are some sites that include the ads within their own domain and I see those and I'm absolutely ok with that.)
Also, ublock origin provides a very handy zapper/picker mode that you can use to get rid of specific elements on a site.

For me, a browser without ublock origin support (or something similar) is not an option.

I agree. If Falkon had something similar to uBlock I'd use it more often. It could replace Librewolf for me, since they both render similar pages well such as Tutanota's webmail.

[Berniyh]

For me it's not the only reason not to use Falkon. I tried it for some time on my gaming PC, but even there went back to Firefox for the simple reason that bookmark management is really not good in Falkon. It's not great in Firefox either, but at least I can drag&drop a bookmark into the bookmark toolbar (or a folder of it).
Falkon can't do that, you have to go through the bookmark dialog and then select the folder. That annoyed me so much that I dropped it after a while and installed Firefox.

[evil_core]

Have you tried configuring it to use portals? Just the environment variable will do.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/fir...DE_integration



Chrome isn't maxed either. I have 526 for Chromium and 515 for Firefox which isn't far off. Also some Web API are intentionally not implemented because they're deemed harmful or solely pushed by Google, which naturally affects the score, see https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/

google for 'firefox-kde-opensuse'

[middy]

google for 'firefox-kde-opensuse'

there is also firedragon: https://github.com/dr460nf1r3/firedragon-browser
to sum it up, its librewolf with a control panel and kde integration

[caligula]

Hooray! This is what matters in life. Biggest number wins

The version number is quite important for end users so that they know which is the most advanced browser. It would be much easier if everyone used Chrome. Imagine having web standards that are automatically deployed via auto-updates 24h after the publication of that standard. This is the level of agility the web 3.0 will need. It would also help if all users used the same resolution and zoom factor. Would decrease the need for UX testing quite a bit. Mobile first is helping a lot here.

I still don't understand how Firefox after so many years still doesn't support all the HTML and CSS tags and it's not maxing out the score on HTML5 test website:

It doesn't pass the acid2 & 3 tests either.

[Vistaus]

As you probably know, Falkon has built-in adblocking, so supporting uBlock is probably not a big priority. uBlock makes a legacy XUL extension that works perfectly on Pale Moon and SeaMonkey.

Yes, both Falkon and Konqueror have built-in adblocking (but the one in Falkon is a bit easier to use IMHO).

Plus Falkon has support for GPU rendering, which not all browsers on Linux have. And better text rendering than any other browser, at least IMHO.

But Falkon will support Chrome extensions in the future, so uBlock will come one day.

[Vistaus]

It's not only about adblocking, but also trackers and other unwanted side-connections. To me, adblock is more like a side-effect, tbh.
(I'm not strictly against showing ads, as long as it is a reasonable amount, but I'm against allowing connections to all sorts of third-party sites. There are some sites that include the ads within their own domain and I see those and I'm absolutely ok with that.)
Also, ublock origin provides a very handy zapper/picker mode that you can use to get rid of specific elements on a site.

For me, a browser without ublock origin support (or something similar) is not an option.

Falkon has built-in tracker blocking and you can extend that via filters. There are AdBlock Plus compatible filters that prevent tracking that you can install with one click in Falkon.

I agree that an element picker would be great, though. That's one thing I miss as well. But as a workaround, you can install AdBlock Plus in Firefox, pick all of the elements you don't want and then add the lines that were added to ABP to Falkon's adblock (if you open Falkon's main filter file in your favorite text editor, you can paste multiple lines).

But Falkon will support Chrome extensions in the future, so uBlock will come one day.

[bug77]

It's not only about adblocking, but also trackers and other unwanted side-connections. To me, adblock is more like a side-effect, tbh.
(I'm not strictly against showing ads, as long as it is a reasonable amount, but I'm against allowing connections to all sorts of third-party sites. There are some sites that include the ads within their own domain and I see those and I'm absolutely ok with that.)
Also, ublock origin provides a very handy zapper/picker mode that you can use to get rid of specific elements on a site.

For me, a browser without ublock origin support (or something similar) is not an option.

It's why I use NoScript. Ads pulled from various servers are bad enough, they slow down page loading whenever one server is unresponsive. But when JS gets pulled from random sites and executed... that just looks like a dare.

[EphemeralEft]

It would be much easier if everyone used Chrome. Imagine having web standards that are automatically deployed via auto-updates 24h after the publication of that standard. This is the level of agility the web 3.0 will need. It would also help if all users used the same resolution and zoom factor. Would decrease the need for UX testing quite a bit. Mobile first is helping a lot here.

This is Poe’s Law level of boot licking.