Sad. Firefox is not really a browser for the hacker-minded anymore. I get that, they are competing with "those guys", just like Ubuntu or elementaryOS do, so these compromises where they side with...
Sad. Firefox is not really a browser for the hacker-minded anymore. I get that, they are competing with "those guys", just like Ubuntu or elementaryOS do, so these compromises where they side with the casual user who make up the majority of their users are understandable if I empathise with them.
I'd jump ship from Firefox ASAP if I found a browser where I could replicate my experience with the many addons I use (uBlock Origin, Stylus, GreasyMonkey, Zotero, Language Switcher, DecentralEyes, Instapaper) plus Firefox Sync w/ my phone. Back some years ago I loved Xombrero, but they did not port over to the new Webkit 2. Qutebrowser was nice but I missed my addons plus there were some issues like some changes in the page state not being in sync with what commands act on / do. I am keeping an eye on Next but it is not there yet and it too won't have the addons.
First two paragraphs are a copy-paste of a comment I made about qutebrowser on HN yesterday: The adblocking/script-blocking capabilities (described in #9 and #10 in their FAQ) are extremely weak...
First two paragraphs are a copy-paste of a comment I made about qutebrowser on HN yesterday:
The adblocking/script-blocking capabilities (described in #9 and #10 in their FAQ) are extremely weak and inconvenient (and their claim about the negative impact of adblocking is outright false).
Those are probably the two most important capabilities for browser security, so the lack of them definitely means I'd never want to use it for general browsing. I'd much rather deal with weaker keybinds than sacrifice that much on the security and privacy side.
Adding a plugin API would definitely be good, but it still means all the extensions will need to be re-developed for qute, and they're unlikely to ever get anywhere close to the functionality of the ones being maintained for major browsers.
What do you think about a minimal browser would make your browsing healthier?
I can't gather how this is different from something like Pale Moon. Is this maintaining XUL and XPCOM alongside WebExtensions, or is it a binary choice? If I'm staying on Firefox or something...
I can't gather how this is different from something like Pale Moon. Is this maintaining XUL and XPCOM alongside WebExtensions, or is it a binary choice? If I'm staying on Firefox or something forked off of it, I'd rather prefer having access to new features and security patches to FF mainstream.
At the very least, PaleMoon was forked from Firefox 38 ESR, and it maintains its own fork of Gecko, Goanna. Waterfox seems to be moving more closely behind Firefox, as their codebase is newer (I...
At the very least, PaleMoon was forked from Firefox 38 ESR, and it maintains its own fork of Gecko, Goanna. Waterfox seems to be moving more closely behind Firefox, as their codebase is newer (I think they forked it from FF 56?)
Sad. Firefox is not really a browser for the hacker-minded anymore. I get that, they are competing with "those guys", just like Ubuntu or elementaryOS do, so these compromises where they side with the casual user who make up the majority of their users are understandable if I empathise with them.
I'd jump ship from Firefox ASAP if I found a browser where I could replicate my experience with the many addons I use (uBlock Origin, Stylus, GreasyMonkey, Zotero, Language Switcher, DecentralEyes, Instapaper) plus Firefox Sync w/ my phone. Back some years ago I loved Xombrero, but they did not port over to the new Webkit 2. Qutebrowser was nice but I missed my addons plus there were some issues like some changes in the page state not being in sync with what commands act on / do. I am keeping an eye on Next but it is not there yet and it too won't have the addons.
First two paragraphs are a copy-paste of a comment I made about qutebrowser on HN yesterday:
The adblocking/script-blocking capabilities (described in #9 and #10 in their FAQ) are extremely weak and inconvenient (and their claim about the negative impact of adblocking is outright false).
Those are probably the two most important capabilities for browser security, so the lack of them definitely means I'd never want to use it for general browsing. I'd much rather deal with weaker keybinds than sacrifice that much on the security and privacy side.
Adding a plugin API would definitely be good, but it still means all the extensions will need to be re-developed for qute, and they're unlikely to ever get anywhere close to the functionality of the ones being maintained for major browsers.
What do you think about a minimal browser would make your browsing healthier?
try vimb https://fanglingsu.github.io/vimb/
Waterfox?
I can't gather how this is different from something like Pale Moon. Is this maintaining XUL and XPCOM alongside WebExtensions, or is it a binary choice? If I'm staying on Firefox or something forked off of it, I'd rather prefer having access to new features and security patches to FF mainstream.
At the very least, PaleMoon was forked from Firefox 38 ESR, and it maintains its own fork of Gecko, Goanna. Waterfox seems to be moving more closely behind Firefox, as their codebase is newer (I think they forked it from FF 56?)