Firefox 115 Now Available With Intel GPU Video Decoding On Linux

[Vistaus]

Great now it just needs:

• Clear button on input type=search
• Password reveal toggle on input type=password
• Datalist support for input type=color and type=date
• Emoji picker (on Linux)

Emoji picker is already implemented in Windows, macOS, KDE, GNOME, Deepin, etc. No need for Firefox to reinvent the wheel.

[M@GOid]

Nothing special about Fedora. OpenSuse does exactly the same: They just don't enable royalty bearing formats in the official/default repositories, making you enable the multimedia repository, whatever that may be (rpmfusion / packman). To the user, multimedia doesn't work by default, but after copypasting a command and forgetting about it, it does. Which distros do not work like that?

Ubuntu. It can enable that stuff marking a option during installation.

[QwertyChouskie]

Ubuntu. It can enable that stuff marking a option during installation.

Yeah, Fedora and apparently OpenSUSE are super duper conservative/risk-adverse. Ubuntu and derivatives just give you an easy checkbox in the installer.

[timrichardson]

Yeah, Fedora and apparently OpenSUSE are super duper conservative/risk-adverse. Ubuntu and derivatives just give you an easy checkbox in the installer.

If you like Fedora, Nobara makes install of those 'restricted' codecs very easy. It also changes some other things which you may or may not like (AppArmor instead of SELinux is possibly a big one)

[QwertyChouskie]

If you like Fedora, Nobara makes install of those 'restricted' codecs very easy. It also changes some other things which you may or may not like (AppArmor instead of SELinux is possibly a big one)

I've heard good things about Nobara, and will definitely check it out, but honestly Ubuntu has always been more than sufficient since I went full-time Linux around 2015. Even Snaps are fine nowadays, though they were definitely half-baked when they first released.

[CochainComplex]

Firefox 115 introduces a new creepy feature where Mozilla has decided that some extensions will not be allowed to run on some websites "for security reasons", but doesn't tell which extensions or which sites or give any information about how they formulated their policy. They're calling it "Quarantined Domains", and it's a "backend feature". They've written an odd little blog post about it and how to disable it, but provided almost no information.

Users can disable it by creating an extensions.quarantinedDomains.enabled option in about:config and setting it to False.

Recent releases had been quite unstable for me. If I didn't hate chrome so much, I would have switched long ago. But I don't want to support the monopoly.

[Veto]

Firefox 115 introduces a new creepy feature where Mozilla has decided that some extensions will not be allowed to run on some websites "for security reasons", but doesn't tell which extensions or which sites or give any information about how they formulated their policy. They're calling it "Quarantined Domains", and it's a "backend feature". They've written an odd little blog post about it and how to disable it, but provided almost no information.

Users can disable it by creating an extensions.quarantinedDomains.enabled option in about:config and setting it to False.

Interesting! Could you possibly dig through the open source and cast some more light to it? Or should we just keep it vague and have yet another good old fun conspiracy theory going?

[QwertyChouskie]

Firefox 115 introduces a new creepy feature where Mozilla has decided that some extensions will not be allowed to run on some websites "for security reasons", but doesn't tell which extensions or which sites or give any information about how they formulated their policy. They're calling it "Quarantined Domains", and it's a "backend feature". They've written an odd little blog post about it and how to disable it, but provided almost no information.

Users can disable it by creating an extensions.quarantinedDomains.enabled option in about:config and setting it to False.

My guess is for banking sites and such. Would make sense given howany scams rely on Inspect Element and friends nowadays. It'd be nice to get some sort of official confirmation, but then again, official confirmation would give the scammers a head start to find workarounds and such.

[uid313]

Emoji picker is already implemented in Windows, macOS, KDE, GNOME, Deepin, etc. No need for Firefox to reinvent the wheel.

But in GNOME applications I can press Ctrl+[dot] to bring up the emoji picker, and on Firefox on Windows I can press WinKey+[dot] bring up the emoji picker, but on Linux I cant insert emojis with Firefox.

[Vistaus]

But in GNOME applications I can press Ctrl+[dot] to bring up the emoji picker, and on Firefox on Windows I can press WinKey+[dot] bring up the emoji picker, but on Linux I cant insert emojis with Firefox.

Then that's either a bug in the distro you're using or a bug in your Firefox build, as I can insert emojis just fine in Firefox on Linux with GNOME's, KDE's and Deepin's emoji pickers.