>>http://www.downthemall.net/the-likely-end-of-downthemall/
>Right now, it feels like I just learned my dear old friend Firefox is going to die.
Shit, it just hit me. That statement is completely right.
Does Mozilla want to commit suicide? Where did everything go wrong?
>>51472632
>Where did everything go wrong?
It went wrong when enough SJWs were hired to band together and force the CEO to step down for privately donating to an anti-gay marriage cause years ago. It's been declining every since that point
>>51472672
I don't like SJWs but to be honest I don't think I would respect and trust someone so mad about faggots to donate any amount of money to something so ridiculous like an "anti gay political campaign"
>>51473012
You mad bro? Who says he was mad? Some people just think marriage is a religious ceremony reserved for two people who can mate and produce offspring.
>>51473175
> religious
> not mad
>>51473012
People shouldn't deny someone's merits just because they hold conflicting opinions
>>51473205
>tips fedora
>>51472672
>It's been declining every since that point
It's so strange though... ever since that moment things have gotten worse and worse.
There has to have been some change at Mozilla that dumped a group of these SJW in power positions not long before that.
>>51472672
Not related to just that incident per se, but I'm surprised that considering the amount of personal info listed online these days, companies/govt/organizations don't have a enforce separation of work life and personal life.
If people are allowed to be hired and fired based on their personal preferences, it would surely backfire on the same sjw groups who are exploiting the situation right now.
>>51473696
>it would surely backfire on the same sjw groups who are exploiting the situation right now
Nope, that is what they call "victim blaming". These people literally have come out as pedophiles and gotten massive internet support for it, even called brave.
>>51473762
Jesus christ. Link?
Also, I don't mean an immediate backfire. I mean that if it was socially acceptable for companies to hire and fire based on personal preference, eventually one of these sjws will be ostracized due to some obscure choice of theirs that the company doesn't agree with. It just sets a very bad precedent.
>>51472672
No, it's been declining for far longer than that.
Actually, it started declining when Chrome came out.
Mozilla basically said "oh hey, chrome is popular, let's copy EVERY LITTLE FUCKING THING they do, down to the version numbering".
So now if you want a chrome-like browser, you would just use fucking chrome. If you want a browser like firefox used to be, you're mostly SOL.
>>51472632
no one cares about that useless shitty extension
>>51472632
The same place it goes wrong for most open sores software - the bit where the neo-hippie freetards in charge decide that the project should be a hugbox, and that talent and ability aren't relevant as long as you agree with them about everything.
just use a fork when the time comes
>>51473964
This guy know his shit. Why the fuck is the point of this new extensions API? Most extensions on Chrome are either limited shit, or a limited version of their Firefox versions.
What is the point of killing one of the features that actually puts you ahead of the competition?
>>51472632
>Shit, it just hit me
I went through same feels a couple of months or so ago. DTA! works fine on Pale Moon though, and I ditched FF immediately when I heard they were a) killing XUL, and b) becoming total keks to Google.
Haven't looked back and having the addons I need (tree-style tabs, dta!, ublock/matrix, etc) perpetually feelsgood.jpg.
Works for me. Still probably the best browser.
The recent improvements (read mode, that little speaker icon for muting) are quite nice. Their upcoming ideas are cool too (electrolysis, dumping plugin support). I just hope they won't dump XUL, cause I use that for themeing. And I hope the layout engine guys will keep adding features.
>>51474154
its basically bloatware at this point
>>51474154
XUL is going away.
>>51473287
>because opinions exist in a vacuum
You're full of shit. If someone comes to you and tells you that Hitler did nothing wrong, isn't that going to affect what you think of that person?
>>51474220
>>51474240
I just want to be able to theme with CSS still.
Why is firefox so slow these days? Even after resetting the thing back to defaults its still crap, chrome on the other hand just werks(tm) even with its botnet features.
RIP in peace.
>>51474154
>I just hope they won't dump XUL
They will.
>cause I use that for themein
They've discussed alternate ways to theme.
Maybe new APIs. Maybe extensions.
Since Mozilla seems to be turning more and more into a Chrome clone, I decided to save some time and just start using Chromium. At least now shitty websites with webkit specific css work.
>>51474375
seems to be turning Firefox*
>>51474375
What a retarded backwards logic.
>At least now shitty websites with webkit specific css work.
Which are those? You seem to be visiting pretty shitty websites.
>>51474417
Websites I pay bills through. Like an adult.
>>51473865
While not exactly in the hiring stage there have been several SJWs fired for being too SJW.
A Communication's teacher that tried to get press out of a public space by threatening physical violence for example. And a teacher that physically pushed a press photographer come to mind.
Then there's the woman who tried to get a popular YT-er fired with a DOXing smear campaign calling him a nazi to his local press and police who had her own company ruined with the resulting backlash of his fanbase.
>>51474154
They're dumping all XUL extension support including XUL "heavy" themes in the future but they don't want to remove all theme support they just want to replace it with a stable API. Something less prone to breakage and easier to use. Current themes aren't really built on any sort of API you're just directly inserting or removing elements in the browser's chrome. The browser doesn't see XUL extensions as any different from any other part of the browser and this makes them powerful but it also means they're dealing almost directly with the interface code which can change quite a lot between versions and even simple changes can easily break themes and extensions. Mozilla has finally had enough of this breaking and they're just saying "fuck all this shit we're building an API for this" and they're deprecating old extensions. They don't have any solid plans for completely removing old extensions yet though.
>>51474313
They're replacing XUL addons with ones that make use of HTML+JS+CSS.
>>51474434
Also an adult, also paying bills, also using Internet for that, never had problems.
>>51474031
Because XUL is an absolute clusterfuck pile of shit. It's like saying MS-DOS was powerful due to having no memory protection
>>51474468
Then congrats, your state hired better developers to slap together their student loan website.
>>51474453
Uh, current themes just add CSS rules, they're not modifying the DOM.
I really just want to be able to change the way tabs, buttons and stuff like that look, preferably with CSS.
>>51474298
Think about that analogy again. See how it's retarded ?
>>51474530
What the fuck are you implying mate?
I'm not a student.
>>51474554
Neither am I. Do you understand how loans work?
I'm implying the websites I pay my bills through are clearly shittier than the ones you pay yours through.
>>51473012
>you have to be emotionally agitated to support a political cause
normies out
>>51474536
You can do that without a theme
http://kb.mozillazine.org/index.php?title=UserChrome.css
>>51474622
I'm using stylish actually.
Themes use the same technology (CSS styling of XUL elements) anyway.
>>51474613
are you fine with people wanting sharia law in Europe too? or with people against certain kind of research (like stem cell) because it offend their religion?
>>51474896
>all this false equivalence
idiot
>>51474321
It's mostly bloatware with added net bowser at this point.
>>51474542
No, not really, it fits quite well. Anyones perception of you would change if you said Hitler did nothing wrong, regardless of how you say it.
>>51472632
If you don't like it, just fork it.
So what browser should I switch to now? Is Midori any good?
Firefox 30 and onwards is where it went to shit.
>>51475085
Truth belongs everywhere
/pol/ is for direct and hard core redpilling
>>51472632
there is literally no reason not to use chrome
>faster
>better UI
inb4 >muh botnet
if you care about botnets, dont use technology.
>>51475085
announcing reports is against the global rules.
Also, his statement is relevant to the conversation you huge piece of shit.
>>51475204
Better how, in that it looks like it was designed by Fisher Price?
>>51475161
Pale moon
>>51475249
Hey now, Fisher Price designs some good shit.
>>51475085
Mozillians brought their toxic identity politics into the tech world.
IMO the intersection between SJWs and tech is of utmost importance.
Every awesome new device this board drools over is a product of the capitalist meritocracy that SJWs seek to hijack because it doesn't respect their "feels" and their oppression.
>Dropping Tab Groups
>"You can use extensions like tab tree!"
>Dropping XUL
Fucking damnit
>>51475204
Just let me know how to change the tab bar into a vertical list ordered from newest to oldest and I'll switch right now.
>>51475299
They make decent laptops.
Welcome to what I'd like to call "the race to the middle". Everything must be the same and appeal to the masses.
Then they bring in some designer to give it a useless new coat of paint because "muh brand", or they add some feature that nobody asked for in order to superficially differentiate themselves after removing what made the thing good.
Welcome to the future. I hope you didn't want to get things done with your software without paying for it. But oh wait, you can't even pay for a better browser.
>>51475299
>>51475544
The only laptop I've seen survive a three year old.
>>51475530
>removing features and options in general
>"you HAVE to use an add-on, m'kay?"
>>removes XUL
>>>while adding useless shit that nobody wants
Just who the fuck is behind this? What human would have such backwards logic and lack of common sense?
>>51475334
>it doesn't respect their "feels" and their oppression.
no they just want the evil patriach white male to slave away for them. Bitches want money yo.
>>51473175
And those people are wrong. Generally people get mad when they're wrong.
>>51472632
>August 21
You're late, OP.
Is waterfox unaffected by this predicament?
>>51475986
>it just hit me
More like he's slow.
And yeah, at first you think "oh so the extensions might be a bit broken no big deal" but then you realize that they'll pretty much remove Firefox's heart, effectively killing it.
>>51475334
>every awesome new device
yeah like all of the $800 cell phones and toys that strip features with each new iteration
>modern tech
>meritocracy
It is pretty interesting how a organization can get retarded so fast. Taking away features people used exclusive to firefox, adding retarded shit no one asked for, butchering their ui to make it a chrome clone, killing powerful widely used addons soon. Seriously what the fuck are they doing.
>>51476956
>so fast
The downfall began in 2009 when Chrome came along.
Then the switch to rapid release in 2011 accelerated the downward spiral.
>>51476785
>cellphones batteries that can't last more than 2 hours
>>51477038
>Muh 4K screen
>Muh octa-core processor
The DTA developer is just being dramatic. Yes, the WebExtensions API will be more restricted, but right now Firefox extensions provide FULL UNCHECKED FILESYSTEM ACCESS AND ARBITRARY CODE EXECUTION and I can guarantee you've never personally vetted any of the extensions you're running. As soon as you install a Firefox extension it can harvest anything that the user account that ran Firefox has access to as well as install other applications, or masquerade as other applications (e.g. Replace a shortcut on your desktop that you would expect to run with Admin rights with another application, but with the same shortcut name and icon)
Firefox extensions are a security nightmare, and can seriously fuck over average users. I see people with random extensions installed all the time, and any of those extensions could be doing anything. This change is a good thing, and DownThemAll! can still work with the WebExtensions API, the developer is just a cunt.
>>51475843
you are a fucking idiot. The "Race to the middle" is only happening to browsers and phones, and there is a very legitimately reason for that: the content comes first, so the most minimalistic a browser or a phone is, the better. With everything else (like.. web pages, games, desktop environments) the opposite has happened: each one tries to have their own identity.
Firefox needs more users, yes, they need to pander to the people because Chrome hit them so hard they can't be pioneers anymore. They are more desperately than Yandex or Opera because the main feature of Firefox, the extensions isn't good enough. And while the extensions are awesome, they are on a very old platform that can't compete without broking these extensions on every new version.
>>51474004
This is why I never release any actual code anymore. I only contribute to the codebases I like.
Some kid actually started complaining about words on the documentation on one of my project's GH issues page. I knew exactly where that kind of troll issue would go, so I closed the report without even responding. Ended up deleting the project and my account when random offended sockpuppets started showing up to argue about it.
Thank god it was a pseudonymous account.
>>51474298
The /b/ I know and love.
But no, I don't think it would affect that person's competency. That is nothing to say about Brendan Eich's character. He did kind of make that thing called JavaScript, though.
>>51472632
>we want to be chrome
>we don't have the capital or the drive
>>51473997
>edgy as fuck
I'm with you in some respects. Flashgot has served its purpose most of the time, and youtube-dl in other cases.
>>51474031
This man gets it - >>51477223. It's because of this and security reasons? Ever wonder why extensions say they can read and track the websites you visit? Because they fucking could.
>>51477412
>Ever wonder why extensions say they can read and track the websites you visit? Because they fucking could.
It's worse than that. Firefox extensions can do ANYTHING that your user account can do, and you're just one privilege escalation exploit away from the extension being able to completely own your computer. Just by installing a fucking web browser extension.
Chrome extensions are a pain in the ass sometimes, but that's only because they are vastly better for the end-user in regards to security. As much of a botnet as Chrome is, Google tries their damndest to prevent anyone other than themselves from being able to fuck you over.
>>51474936
>resort to call out epic logical fallacies to win losing argument and then using an ad hominem
/g/ tards, everyone.
>>51477503
>It's worse than that. Firefox extensions can do ANYTHING that your user account can do, and you're just one privilege escalation exploit away from the extension being able to completely own your computer. Just by installing a fucking web browser extension.
While that is nice and dandy for normalfags, a lot of firefox users are used to their addons having significantly more freedom than that.
Even if they aren't aware of it, noscript is ompossible with this new and "improved" system.
The last thing I want is a more restricted browser, I don't need mommy mozilla to protect me from myself
>>51477503
First they take away the ability to set homepages because "lol viruses exploit the homepage" and now this. Firefox needs to stop babysitting retards. Let me fucking worry about my own security myself
>>51477567
>Even if they aren't aware of it, noscript is ompossible with this new and "improved" system.
uMatrix already exists for Chrome you faggot.
>>51473964
Yeah.
When Chrome was released, everything else was just so far behind. The only reason Firefox caught up at all is the fact it copied so many of Chrome's design decisions. It's just better, really.
I mean it when I say Chrome really is the superior browser. It represented a revolution for web browsers. Technologically speaking, it represents the point where browsers became an operating system.
If you look at the source code, you'll see it's literally an OS, down to the abstractions used. You'll see it's very similar to X11 window manager, with mechanism and policy separation; it's a window manager for the web. Right now, they're in the process of taking that idea even further by separating all the actual browser features from the core web functionality. You'll be able to take Chrome and literally build an equally good custom browser on top of it, just like you can build window managers for X11.
Firefox customizability is meme-tier compared to this. So you can skin your UI and move your buttons around? Try cherry-picking browser features at build time. Chrome is a pleasure to use, contribute code for, customize. It's the Linux of web browsers.
Sorry Firefox, but you've been surpassed in every way. I wouldn't write you off as dead since you've been quite thoroughly audited by now and your and Mozilla's importance as the non-profit web browser and organization are palpable, but you're just not the star you once were. You're starting to feel like a Windows, although with pure intentions. Hope you don't mind second place.
And don't come reply with /g/ memes like botnet. You'll just look stupid.
>>51477622
>Firefox needs to stop babysitting retards.
Retards pay the bills, you don't. You've probably never donated to the Mozilla foundation, you probably don't use Yahoo, and your sure as hell aren't a Firefox developer, so Mozilla gets nothing from you other than complaints.
>>51474298
Yes, but that doesn't change their competence in a work envoirment.
I know a complete bitch that does a great job extracting blood, better than anyone else I know. I still think she's full of shit but I can admit she does her job well.
>>51474443
Link to the youtuber incident?
>>51474298
Your opinion is fucking stupid and yet I don't see how should it make you any less competent at work
>>51477661
>The only reason Firefox caught up at all is the fact it copied so many of Chrome's design decisions
Fuck no. So far they've just removed features and added shit to make it a shitty Chrome clone that doesn't do what Chrome does well and soon it won't even do what Firefox used to to do very well.
Other than improved security everything else has been a downgrade. Trying and failing to copy Chrome IS what's killing Firefox.
>>51477775
>added shit to make it a shitty Chrome clone
And what do you think that is?
Everything in post-Chrome Firefox that resulted in better performance and security came from Chrome. I'm talking about things like the process/tab model, plugin and extensions APIs, synchronization (which was laughably annoying to use until it became just like Chrome's), a sudden focus on web development tools just like Chrome, etc. Even the OP itself is an example.
Why don't you name specific features they're adding or removing so that we can see what you mean?
Why don't we organize and spam firefox developers telling them not to do this retarded shit?
Is it really that hard?
>>51477952
they censor hate speech against them
>>51474434
>paying bills through a website
And you call yourself an adult? Yeah OK kid
>>51477887
>post-Chrome Firefox that resulted in better performance
>>post-Chrome Firefox
>>better performance
In what reality?
>security came from Chrome
How so?
>the process/tab model
Not even implented yet to this day. Hope they don't because it's shit in lower-end machines.
>plugin and extensions APIs
Are gonna kill Firefox.
>synchronization
Almost nobody really needs this. The reason it's so used in Chrome is because it's almost obligatory thanks to Google.
Is Chrome your religion or something? Chrome is great but you believe it's better than Firefox for entirely made up reasons.
looks like it's time to switch to pale moon
>>51477535
not him, but it wasn't actually an ad hominem, you would have had a better chance with fallacy fallacy
he was saying that because you used so many false equivalence fallacies you're point was invalid, not that your point was invalid because you're an idiot
and beyond that he was actually just calling you an idiot for using so many false equivalence fallacies
The only thing that will change is Mozilla desolving as a company. The code is open ensuring the browser will live on.
>>51478394
If that were the case, you could just fork it. You don't need Mozilla to stop existing, unless you're just anti-Mozilla.
>>51477223
It's not that bad as that as long as you exclusively use AMO to download extensions but even then there are other problems. XUL extensions are hard to audit because they can do basically every "stable" addon on AMO is reviewed twice. Once for security which can take a few weeks and a second time for stability which can take up to a few months. The second review is done by actual humans and there aren't many of them. Restricting addons by default and requiring that the extension dev explicitly declare what they're using will improve the review process and limit the scope of addons significantly making them safer. It's not entirely unlike OpenBSD's pledge() systemcall in concept.
>>51478187
>Not even implented yet to this day.
Sad. I'm not really keeping up with Firefox development. I thought they had implemented it already. Even IE has.
If I was wrong about this, then it's not really worth responding to the rest of the issues you raised. I was probably wrong about them too. Seems Firefox is slower than I anticipated. It really feels like Windows, where change is hard because you'll upset everyone in the process. Their new WebExtensions API thing is a nice example.
>Hope they don't because it's shit in lower-end machines.
It's also inherently less stable since any kind of failure will bring down your entire browser, making for a blue-screening, Windows-95 tier OS. It's also much less secure in general due to the lack of OS-level memory and code isolation and sandboxing.
If your computer is almost irrelevantly old, you do realize you can turn it off in Chrome, right? You can have it put everything in the main browser process if you want. That's about as smart though as running all programs in kernel mode, though.
>Is Chrome your religion or something?
Chrome is probably my favorite FLOSS project out there. I think I like it even more than I like Linux. I've contributed some code.
>>51478467
>XUL extensions are hard to audit because they can do basically every "stable" addon on AMO is reviewed twice.
XUL extensions are hard to audit because they can do basically anything, so on AMO every "stable" addon is reviewed twice.*
>>51477887
>Why don't you name specific features they're adding or removing so that we can see what you mean?
-Being able to disable content (i.e. images) frm the preferences window
-The add-on bar
-A good, responsive, un-intrusive UI (this was the worst thing they did in favor of Chrome likeness)
-Icons in the context menu (smal but it hurt)
-A non-retarded bookmarks icon
-A functional Downloads pop-up
-The preferences window
-A bunch of about:config entries are now missing
--adding them back manually does nothing anymore
-Soon, add-ons will be gone
+Uncooperative ugly interface
++The fucking touchscreen menu
+Hello
>>51473012
It was anti gay marriage not anti-gay that's a pretty substantial distinction.
rip
even though I use the botnet nowadays I remember getting FF when I was like 10 and how nice tabs and stuff was
>>51478187
Also,
>Are gonna kill Firefox.
Are a necessary change, given that Firefox extensions are essentially random programs you can download and run on your computer; they have access to powerful, unrestricted APIs making for much less secure extensions. This makes them untrustworthy, especially since they're going to be downloaded by people who don't know and don't care about security.
No wonder people are crying endlessly about its deprecation. It's going to kill certain plugins dead.
Firefox really should integrate something like Guile and provide a scripting framework for the browser if they want something that powerful. Don't use Javascript; that way, it's inherently separate from browser "extensions".
>>51478531
>hello
I gotta say those two are the most aggravating additions to Firefox I've ever experienced to date. Not only that, the placebo customization Firefox gives you essentially amounts to hiding the buttons; no way to actually disable stuff.
>>51478467
>It's not that bad as that as long as you exclusively use AMO to download extensions
The problem is that end-users don't know anything about that, and install random shit whenever they're prompted to do so. Intuitively, a browser extension shouldn't be able to own your entire computer just by installing it. Even most tech-savvy people wouldn't expect that type of behavior, and almost nobody understands the ramifications of installing a Firefox extension.
>>51478635
you can fully disable pocket and hello through about:config
XUL addons have overstayed their welcome honestly, they should have been gone years ago. I think the only reason Mozilla is getting so much backlash for this move is that they waited until the only people left on Firefox were hardliners.
No one denies that running everything as root/admin on an OS is a stupid idea right? Well XUL addons essentially run as the "admin" in Firefox, they have the same privileges as the browser itself and can do anything the browser can.
>>51473964
>Mozilla basically said "oh hey, chrome is popular, let's copy EVERY LITTLE FUCKING THING they do, down to the version numbering".
THIS FUCKING THING, i rember that i loved old opera, since it got nice quick, low on ram, thing with nice email client. Gi
>>51472632
>The WebExtensions API is supposed to be mostly compatible to Chrome/Safari extension APIs.
>yfw the consolidation and limitation of the internet is continuing
>>51478486
>inherently less stable
In theory. In practice...
>any kind of failure will bring down your entire browser
It happens in Chrome too and even more than it happens in Firefox.
And in Firefox if something goes wrong the browser hangs for a while then resumes work with a pop-up error message. In Chrome -the whole browser hangs just like Firefox- but the tab clears up to give you that stupid X_X face instead of resuming work. The other tabs too if they were sharing the same plugin. If you were downloading something it's as good as lost. It does all of that and it can't run a big number of tabs without making the entire system take a shit unlike Firefox because of its process-per-tab bullshit.
You keep giving shit to Firefox for not fixing its code while Chrome does the same shit. If you have contributed code I haven't seen it fix the performance issues so it must be shit.
>the placebo customization Firefox gives you essentially amounts to hiding the buttons
You're one to talk about placebos. Chrome's interface speed is no better than Firefox's, it depends on animations to give the illusion that it is. Animations that can't be turned off (I'm not sure of that to be honest) while you can turn off Firefox's and speed up the interface (another cancer that Firefox got from Chrome).
And in Firefox not only could you disable stuff in about:config, if that failed there was extension. That's gonna be gone too. Real positive influence from Chrome there.
>>51473012
>caring about X directly affects Y
go back to tumblr you cunt nigger faggot kike
>>51474896
how does jihad mcgoatfuck wanting to rape your boipuss have anything to do with how good he is at slinging kabob?
>>51478992
>And in Firefox if something goes wrong the browser hangs for a while then resumes work with a pop-up error message.
Firefox blocks my entire computer for some reason. After something like 3 minutes, I get a popup telling me that some plugin (usually Flash) isn't responding. And then it disappears before I can tell it to kill the plugin process... And blocks execution again.
> In Chrome -the whole browser hangs just like Firefox-
No way. In Chrome, the UI is never blocked. The browser still responds to input. The browser will notify me and/or automatically kill the processes associated with the tabs. Worst case scenario, I can attempt to close the tabs or kill their processes myself. When that happens, only the tabs which were sharing a process are killed; the others are unaffected and the browser stays up. The rest of my computer is taxed a bit, if anything.
Just what are you doing that you're observing Firefox behavior in Chrome? Maybe your actual OS is suspending your tabs/processes to disk and the resulting I/O is making everything slow. Virtual memory will screw up everybody's day, not just Chrome's. I recommend getting more memory and an SSD for higher performance I/O.
By the way, virtual memory performance is still vastly superior in Chrome. Firefox will have random bits of its memory suspended, potentially affecting every single tab in a virtually unpredictable manner. In Chrome, commonly-used tabs are pretty much never suspended, while those tabs you opened ages ago and forgot about are. The browser process keeps the UI responsive, so while data gets devirtualized in Chrome, you'll still have a responsive, unblocked UI. Firefox will freeze.
>Chrome's interface speed is no better than Firefox's
Chrome's interface is far more responsive than Firefox. The browser and the content are fully separate, yet seamlessly integrated.
"Speed" is a quite non-sensical attribute to measure when it comes to UI. Do you mean it requires less resources?
>>51474453
If they replace XUL with an API they just have to make it equally powerful so that everything that can be done now will still be possible in the future, otherwise you just kill one of firefox' strongest points: the fucking addons that do great shit
>>51479329
They API is going to be compatible with Chrome's extension API but Mozilla is expanding the scope so it can add and remove browser elements. They want things like vimperator and tree style tabs to work on top of the API.
>>51479394
That's good. I hope they do it right.
>>51479415
Don't worry, they won't.
>>51479258
No, I mean speed. As in responsiveness.
Try it next time you use Firefox. Go to about:config and disable animations. Be amazed.
I will try to see if my OS/PC is indeed fucking with Chrome but from mundane experience I've seen this behavior in both Windows and Linux in different PCs.
>>51479329
>>51479394
Firefox XUL extensions are flawed but without them (and adding a Chrome-like API) it'll just be a shitty version of Chrome (even if it still renders pages and handles downloads better than Chrome).
>>51479421
Yeah, we're fucked huh.
>>51479449
>As in responsiveness.
>disable animations
If one disables animations, then everything really will seem faster, snappier and more responsive.
When it comes to animation performance, my experience is just the opposite. Chrome's animations are almost always seamless and continuous, while Firefox's are always jittery and interpolated. I confess I have no idea why this happens.
>I will try to see if my OS/PC is indeed fucking with Chrome
Yeah, would be nice to get more details on this. I'm quite intrigued now.
Chrome has a main "browser" process and several "content" processes, which it creates according to a given process/tab model (which you can set via command line flags). A content process may own several tabs/windows; that may range from just tabs/windows with Javascript connections between each other to tabs/windows from the same site/origin (like, all 4chan tabs you have open) to everything in the same process (used for development/testing purposes). You're correct that PPAPI plugin processes are shared among all tabs and they're all affected if they crash.
Basically, the browser process renders the UI and does all the network & disk I/O . It communicates with content & plugin processes via the Chrome IPC mechanism. It hands them a graphical context so that they can render their content on the screen. This is seamless in terms of graphics rendering. In fact, PPAPI plugins have better support for this process model and their rendering is seamless. In Firefox, when I scroll a page with Flash, the plugin's graphics tear away from the page's.
If the browser process itself is freezing, then something must be affecting it. Can you do some testing?
>XUL
Now that I think about it, deprecating the current Firefox extensions is a mistake. They should just add parallel support for their new Chrome-compatible model if that's what they want. No need to kill off the current extensions.
Maybe their add-on store is what ultimately motivated that decision?
>>51473964
>down to the version numbering
This is so true.
But seriously, the Firefox of right now is more or less great, but the Firefox of the future is going to be garbage.
>>51474478
I guess Mozilla is doing the right thing by removing XUL but they haven't given us a solid plan for how WebExtensions will have feature parity, and this is greatly worrying.
>>51479845
The plan was only just revealed and the API is in its early stages. There's still like a year left before Mozilla really makes a move toward officially deprecating XUL addons and removing support for the old extensions will probably come later.
>>51475544
Nice MacBook.
>>51473425
God damn it, which browser should I go now? Both Vivaldi and Edge are still incomplete.
>>51474154
>Their upcoming ideas are cool too (electrolysis
e10s is still garbage and they intend for it to go live within the next few releases.
>Mfw as a former Opera Presto user watching the same thing happen to Firefox users that happened to users like me.
You assholes laughed and now your browser is going to shit as well. The irony is delicious.
>First they came for the Opera users and I didn't speak up because I didn't use Opera. Then they came for Firefox users, and there was no one left to speak up for us.
>>51481472
>First they came for the Opera users and I didn't speak up because I didn't use Opera. Then they came for Firefox users, and there was no one left to speak up for us.
>>51481472
Yeah. You were right all along. Another browser is dying.
Does this make you happy?
>>51480506
P A L E M E M E
It's basically old Firefox
>>51473696
That's why I just stopped sharing opinions. No conversation topic is safe. I never make small talk with coworkers.
>2020
>Everyone likes Coke
>Fired for an internet post you made in 2010 that said you liked Pepsi
>2030
>Everyone likes Pepsi
>Fired for an internet post you made in 2030 that said you liked Coke
You can't win. It's like Stalin's purges in social form.
As recently as the 90s or early 2000s, being anti gay rights was NOT controversial (not saying I am, just saying that it was seen as a completely valid viewpoint). What safe opinion today will be scandalous in 10 years?
>>51481586
furry moon is garbage
>>51475204
When I click on a PDF, it automatically sends it to the Downloads folder instead of opening it in the browser. My parents' Downloads folder has like 2-3 copies of every PDF that has ever been clicked on in the past 5 years. I assume you can fix that easily with some kind of addon but I can't be fucked. Firefox just werks.
>>51481654
>furry
Explain.
>>51472632
please leave a space after >>
>>51475537
>http://www.downthemall.net/the-likely-end-of-downthemall/
In case you haven't read TFA - you won't have tree style tabs soon.
Enjoy, chum.
>>51481517
I'm not happy that your browser is dying, but I won't deny experiencing schadenfreude over the fact that you now understand what it feels like.
>>51478583
It wasn't even anti gay marriage. It was just an institution that supported marriage (in the original meaning of the word marriage).
>>51482098
That was always a fear of mine so I always understood, though my fear was inspired by the history and death of Netscape Navigator.
>>51472632
https://storify.com/realtalktech/shocker-mozilla-and-firefox-are-dying
>>51480162
Holy Kek
So to keep it short, it's pale moon or nothing now?
Thank god for Chrome. I always hated Firefox for different reasons and I'm glad Google killed it.
Hopefully now a new browser comes and kills Chrome because Google became too lazy to fix many of their bugs for years.
>>51472632
Can't we just start a fork?
>>51482553
I'll work on the logo.
>>51482564
seriously though, what's keeping people from maintaining a good, separate codebase?
>>51479762
>They should just add parallel support for their new Chrome-compatible model if that's what they want. No need to kill off the current extensions.
They don't seem to like maintaining 'unpopular' features (see: tab groups). If this new web extension API works fine then I can't see them wanting to maintain 2 interfaces for the sake of a minority.
>>51482572
we haven't made the logo yet
>>51482572
because like any project that old, large, and complex, nobody who hasn't been involved since forever can easily pick it up.
take a look at the bugzilla for firefox if you don't have any clue how complex shit has gotten.
>>51482591
they should have included tree-style tabs as default functionality years ago.
tab groups are complete shit in comparison.
>>51482597
:( b-but . . .
hold me senpai
>>51482572
>>51482616
there already is
pale moon
How will I batch download lewd manga now?
>>51482641
What?
Is there a downloadthemall equivalent for Chrome? I don't have Chrome installed at all.
>>51481588
>That's why I just stopped sharing opinions. No conversation topic is safe.
>You can't win. It's like Stalin's purges in social form.
Google 48 laws of power
Read laws 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 12, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 33, 36, 38, 39, 43, 45, 47, 48.
Especially law 38.
>>51482790
Could you respect intellectual property and copyright instead?
Not only downthemall, but also stylish, ublock, vimperator, all those addons you used to rice your looks (hide tabs,urlbottom,add statusbar).
So what's left, palememe?
>>51472632
Which of the forks are safe?
Those downthemall devs are such babies.
First, see https://billmccloskey.wordpress.com/2015/08/21/firefox-add-on-changes/
I think people are really jumping the gun here, for these reasons:
1) this change is being announced far in advance of any actual changes
2) firefox devs actively want to support current popular extensions, by extending the Web Extension APIs
>>51482376
I hate the writing but I get the point.
"Social Justice" did kill Mozilla.
>>51482894
SeaMonkey.
/g/ needs to get behind SM and make sure it doesn't follow FF's retardation, ever.
>>51483042
WHY CHANGE WHATS NOT BROKEN, THEY FUCKING UP THEIR ADDONS INSTEAD OF FIXING THEIR FUCKING BLOAT
ITS OKAY TO FUCKING USE RESOURCES FOR ADVERTISEMENTS, AND NOT HATE THEM FOR DOING THIS SHIT NOW?
my god its okay to be a mozilla shill, but youre just retarded
>>51482536
This just reeks of hipster.
It's obvious that google influenced them to do this since they are their biggest source of money, and knowing that google is forcefully making them to fuck up their services so chrome gets more users.
Fucking botnet.
>Decided to browse /g/ on a whim
>First thread I saw is this
I'm sad now. Even sadder by the fact that I don't know how to compile this chromium shit.
>>51483081
Actually, these retarded changes started after they ditched Google for Yahoo. Or that's what I've been told here but if you check under the hood there's still plenty of Google in Firefox so I really don't know what to believe.
>>51483058
>WHY CHANGE WHATS NOT BROKEN
Define "not broken" because the current system is really shitty.
1. It doesn't have any security at all it's essentially allowing total strangers the ability to run code on your computer. The only reason it has held together this long is mozilla audits the extensions on AMO which is hopefully where you download them from. The drawback to this is the auditing process takes a long fucking time and people constantly complain that it takes too long and that the extensions on AMO are out of date.
2. Every other version of firefox changes something under the hood that can break extensions. This makes the first problem even worse because a fixed version of an extension cannot be posted without being reviewed by Mozilla first so people have to go without their favorite extension for a few days to a week if the dev was slacking.
3. XUL extensions are often incompatible with e10s or makes use of compatibility hacks that introduce lag into the browser. e10s is not going away, rendering content off of the main thread is coming sooner or later because it makes the browser more responsive and more resilient it's also a prerequisite for sandboxing, another feature people have been crying about for months/years.
>>51477661
>When Chrome was released, everything else was just so far behind.
When Chrome was released it was compared to riding an explosive rocket to your destination.
Don't delude yourself. Chrome didn't start good, it got there with time by learning from its mistakes. The thing that gave it the edge is that it did that faster than anyone else because its backed completely by Google.
>>51474298
Yes, they would become my most trusted and best friend.
Welp, looks like FF41 is the one i'll be sticking with
>>51473012
>I don't like SJWs
>but i'll act like one
wat
>>51483270
They are going to remove all addons that don't match their new system anyways, so it's pointless.
You can't escape it.
>>51483265
Holy shit why did it take so long.
Is there any ways to have more privacy/security on chrome? if not, redirect me to an alternative from firefucks
>>51474298
One name: von braun. He was a hitler crony, and he pretty much single handedly built the u.s. space program. Past ignorance does not dictate morality.
>>51475121
Hitler didnt do anything wrong. His peoples did. Hitler just hated everyone. I can ifentify with that. He just hated the jews more, its the whole freudian 'mommys a bitch' thing. Funny... i see so many regarding muslims that way today. Oh wait, did i draw an analogy from hiatory to today. Fuck i hate it when that happens. My bad.
>>51473425
>ironically being religious just to post a meme
>>51483194
#1 is no more an issue than people being dumbfucks and installing malware on their PCs.
#2 is mostly an issue because instead of using a nice major.minor.whatever numbering system they went full retard with the chrome system.
#3 is the only valid point.
we need the old leader of Firefox to step up and fork this shit and do what he did earlier, the best browser in the world.
>>51482849
> Think as you like, but behave like others.
So I should pretend I like a black savage animal carnally ravaging my wife while I donate millions of dollars to Randi Harper?
>>51484040
*stolen*
>>51482130
>the original meaning of the word marriage
"The related word "matrimony" derives from the Old French word matremoine, which appears around 1300 CE and ultimately derives from Latin mātrimōnium, which combines the two concepts: mater meaning "mother" and the suffix -monium signifying "action, state, or condition""
good.
SJW must burn
>>51473964
Fucking this. Take the Gamergate cock made of tinfoil out of your asses. The very moment Firefox decided to change their versioning scheme to mimic the one of Chrome much earlier is when I knew everything would go to shit.
>>51472672
Well, it serves him right for hiring SJWs in the first place. No sympathy from me.
Is firefox going bankrupt? Why the fuck are they asking for donations now?
>>51485594
Google has been the major funder of Mozilla for some time. All, I suspect, part of a plan to put them under eventually. It seems to be working, and I imagine the added burden financially on Kekzilla of carrying all the SJW incompetents along is swamping Google's 'donations'.
>>51485642
This actually sounds plausible. Has anyone looked up how many code contributors, bug reporters and management are from Google?
See what all you fuckers leaving for Chrome/ium have wrought? Realize that this shit is only because people bought into the shitty botnet dangled on a shiny string. So Mozilla thinks "Well? People want Chrome-like functionality. We tried to make things better, but people wanted the shiny and they wanted it now, regardless of any privacy or design implications, so they switched."
Mozilla has made some crappy decisions lately with regard to Firefox (though I do think they've made some good ones. For instance, Firefox Hello is a GREAT tool, not proprietary etc.. Likewise, they implemented a version of the open source Disconnect addon into Private Browsing by default)., but I have to believe that this kind of decision will be overturned if enough users and developers complain. Unless Firefox has a way to have the exact same (or very similar anyway) features under he new addon API, people are going to be pissed. One thing that I use Firefox for is that its addon API is comprehensive and is user-focused, not for what's good for the botnet (remember when Chrome/ium adblockers could only hide ads visually, not actually stop them from being downloaded etc..).
Now is NOT the time to say "Firefox sucks, I'm going to stop using it". Yes, even to use PaleMoon or whatthefuck. Every time that Firefox has made a somewhat shitty decision and there is an exodus of hardcore users, they get stuck with more people who just want the damn thing to be Chrome. Instead, you've got to be a bit proactive, KEEP using Firefox and give tons of suggestions as to what/how they can fix things. For instance, Pocket Integration. Okay, the tech behind it is fine.. however, how about they make a fully open source Pocket alternative as they originally planned to do instead, much like how they created Sync? Tell them they need to allow full-powered addons, one way or another! The worst thing you can do is just quit, because that's bad for everyone in the future, feeding the machine.
>>51485642
>SJW
what's that
>>51472632
welcome to 3 months ago
>>51485732
Its notable that the fellow above who said that Firefox addons have too much power at times in terms of arbitrary code execution systemwide is correct. However, they can fix that sort of thing and add proper sandboxing without castrating browser functionality and still allowing "full power" addons to continue. Maybe they need a new addon API. Okay, that's fine, but having a modern API doesn't mean a castrated one with a shitload of limitations.
>>51485732
>give tons of suggestions as to what/how they can fix things.
I seriously doubt they're going to get rid of all the SJWs
>>51485732
I gave suggestions in the reddit and got downvoted and one of those mozilla devs deleted my message.
I tried to talk to them on the mozilla suggestion forums and got my thread delete.
It seems they are not taking suggestions clearly, and I completely told them what was wrong in a neutral written tone. They are very prickly atm it seems, try writing a suggestion and see how it gets deleted in seconds. (may it be their reddit or actual forums)
>>51485773
Is da SJWs the new da joos?
>social justice warrior
when did this meme start
>>51474030
Why don't we make a fork, with/g/ approved features
>>51485773
Fuck off misogynist.
>>51485831
Ok guys, let's do it!
I'll do the logo.
>>51478976
>>yfw the consolidation and limitation of the internet is continuing
>implying this was a bad thing
>>51485773
This has nothing to do with their actual products. It isn't like they programmed Firefox to spellcheck "he" and "she" to "zhe" or something stupid.
>>51485782
Have you tried sending emails directly? People on the subreddit aren't always Mozilla developers evren if they're mods etc. Since I don't know the exact circumstances I can't be sure of what happened, but if they totally shut down all suggestions or dicussion I expect a bigger shit storm than we have at current. Keep trying though and encourage others, especially popular addon developers and major elements in FOSS, privacy/openness etc. to do the same. I know I will.
Also look for those who donate, like certain Linux distros etc.. .and encourage them to put pressure on them to be open to changes.
I remember when Firefox became the dominant browser because it was both better for your privacy/openess AND had great functionality. Firefox will only win if they can grab hold of both those claims again and Mozilla has to know this. We do have our responsibilities not to fuck things up though and be inflexible with their attempt to compromise. For instance, its a GOOD thing that Firefox has the adobe video DRM engine as an OPTION installed. Mozilla tried to oppose any HTML5 DRM at all, but since they got overridden, if they didn't include the extension, then people would say "Why can't Firefox play video on site X?" and they'd lose more users. Getting pissed about stuff like that, or Hello, or other non-issues and leaving isn't helping.
>>51481896
The browser is called palemoon because the creator of it is a furshit porn artist who is into werewolves.
>>51485642
They are probably propping them up so there is some competition in existence so they can avoid antitrust issues.
>>51485790
On tumblr someone who was batshit kept going on about "white privilege" and "die cis scum" nonsense in very hypocritical and outright discriminatory fashions. Same person non ironically called themselves a social justice warrior. The term stuck to refer to those types stuck from that.
>>51472632
>http://www.downthemall.net/the-likely-end-of-downthemall/
noooo!
how are we download all those /s/,/hc/,/gif/,/wg/,/wsg/ now?
>>51483155
You know you can download a precompiled version right?
>>51485732
Mozilla does not listen, no matter how much you argue.
There plan is to be as close to Chrome as possible as they are now in direct competition with Google, so all advanced features have to go.
That's how it is. If you are no power user you will be happy with what Firefox is becoming, if you love features and options, you will hate it.
>>51485732
And no, it is not the worst thing. Why should a power user want to use a browser which goal is it to pull an Opera over their users just because it's makers got greedy and are not happy with the power user market share?
In the end, the user gain will be minimalistic, all simple users already use Chrome or IE/Edge or Opera.
>>51472632
What is the main issue? It is working fine just like always. It has integrated so well with Windows 10 with smooth scrolling and window animations that rival Edge.
I don't even want to touch Chrome or any other inferior browser anymore.
>>51486651
th-they don't listen to our desire for unsafe legacy code!! >:((((
>>51486651
If you want to use a more and more worthless Chrome UI clone, be happy with Firefox!
Honestly Downthemall is a piece of shit.
It usually never works for most of the time and there are so much better alternatives.
I use this to download images from Boorus and Pixiv, it works really damn well. It's probably my most favorite addon on Firefox right now.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/save-images/
i never uninstalled firefox...
i was afraid of the botnet-meme
did i fuck up?
>>51486675
Depends if you still are willing to use a Chrome clone browser.
>>51486651
>>51486665
did you even read the link? and top kek for still using firefox in 2015. it's been deprecated for 6-7 years
>>51486660
They are leaning towards industry standard which is what all companies do when their current model is becoming obsolete.
Both Chrome and Firefox are open source, so if they are borrowing features from each other, what is the harm? You can always compile your own version of Firefox or use the 50 derivatives out there like Waterfox and Ice Weasel.
>>51485744
generic term for someone who usually claims to be a "social justice warrior" but usually fights for anything but white male supremacy
>>51486686
Exactly. All what Mozilla does is copying chrome as they do not have own unique ideas anymore. And they only talk about creating Servo, in reality what is most likely to happen is that they pull another Opera - implement Chromium in the future.
>>51486651
blaze it
>Mozilla Is Removing Tab Groups and Complete Themes From Firefox
http://venturebeat.com/2015/11/20/mozilla-is-removing-tab-groups-and-complete-themes-from-firefox/
They're going to same way GNOME went, but only more slowly.
>>51486688
Nonsense! Mozilla is just becoming greedy. If they still would be happy with their power user market share they never would have changed at all. This was a simple betraying of it's core users, like Opera did too
>>51486688
Why is it not possible to have both power user features and features for simple users inside the core? Simple fags are not forced to use them, they can ignore them.
But Mozilla decided to go anti customization fascists and serve simple fags only.
Fuck you Mozilla whores!
wait so what's the highest firefox version before they started removing shit like tab groups? I'm still on 40.
>>51486710
>>51486728
Why don't someone fork the old source code and compile a modern version of Netscape? I am sure there will be a legion of fanboys waiting for a lightweight but user friendly browser that is open source.
>>51486527
this
>>51486580
one-by-one by hand ofc you faggot.
Wow, it's actually happening. I know it's been getting shitier, but those are all addons I use. I've just kind of shut my ears to everything Firefox related because I didn't want to believe most of what I was hearing and didn't like any of their new "features".
I've been using Firefox across multiple platforms for over 10 years. Do I go to waterfox or ice weasel, what the fuck do I do? I never prepared for this; I didn't think they'd actually drive that stake through it's heart.
>>51486894
palememe is the answer anon.
>>51486921
Waterfox is better desuwa~
>>51486710
this is plain.
>>51486959
no, waterfox is just a wrapper and will go down with the mothership. furrymeme isn't FF, and hasn't been for a long time.
>>51472672
>donating to an anti-gay marriage cause years ago
So the dude hates faggots, what's wrong with that?
SJW is the fall down of the internet along side TPB.
>>51472672
> muh sjw boogeyman
You are literally retarded.
>>51488595
In this case SJWs really made things worse. What happened at Mozilla is common knowledge at this point.
>tfw I followed a developer that I thought was pretty cool guy
>then it turns out he supported the CEO takedown beause he's bisexual
Fuck this gay Earth.
Google wants to kill Firefox for years and google is main contributor to Firefox/Mozilla, it was pretty clear it's going to happen sooner or later.
>>51472632
Tweet Mozilla. Post on their Facebook. Email them. Send them a fucking post card.
All we can do is show them how stupid their decisions are give them an idea of how many users they are going to lose over this fucking bullshit.
>>51488802
They know that and are trying to get funded by the community to avoid the contract and do what they want. Too bad they will never go to places without google, they are 80% of their money.
It's a battle between, do I want to get rich or do we want to please the crowds.
Fuck we are moving to the direction you will be able to access the Internet only through Google or through Apple.
Fuck Mozilla for ruining the only good open source browser.
>>51488595
How is it a boogeyman? They got rid of the CEO for his private political beliefs. Whether or not SJWs are usually a problem, they definitely did sabotage Mozilla.
>"firefox is dead" says faggot who makes dumbshit normie addon for people too pleb to use wget
>>51485790
>>51486548
i thought it was a disparaging comparison to "god warrior" zealots
>>51488595
>https://www.rust-lang.org/conduct.html
>>51472632
Why haven't you installed palemoon yet?
>>51482866
>>51490746
Do the Palemoon people have the recourses to maintain a independent browser indefinitely?
I don't want to have to move again in a year or two.
>>51475334
we could be lightyears ahead of where we are now technology-wise if it were not for the shackles of capitalism. Free/open source software is inherently marxist in nature. You're contributing toward a community simply from passion. If we centralized our factories with the goal of simply meeting necessary labor, we could be lightyears ahead.
>>51490788
firefox dies is gonna die with it
>>51482866
Had a good laugh. Saved weebum
>>51483872
>#3 is the only valid point.
It's not, xul extensions just needs changes in some parts to be 100% e10s compatible.
Mine works fine with e10s and it's not using any shims, so dropping xul is not necessary at all for e10s.
>>51483194
i fixed #2 just using nightly so i can fix the extension before the changes hits stable.
>>51476515
More like he've seen me posting it in the "best browser thread" yesterday to justify staying on ff40 and not updating
>>51481472
I switched to firefox after Opera death, and when I was comfy thanks to a neat extensions setup, now the same happens.
Feels bad.
>>51472672
>SJWs
So what now?
Should I just stop worrying and embrace the botnet?
If this happens, Firefox will die like Opera and some fork of the old version will take its place in popularity. People who have spent years browsing with the functionalities of the XUL-based add-ons are not just going to let it all go because they feel obliged to stick to the brand-name Firefox browser. The whole thing is open source after all
>>51491817
boohoo SJWfag
There's nothing wrong with FOSS. In fact FOSS is a good thing. It only goes wrong when the people in charge have no backbone and they cave to every SJW demand until the project collapses.
Stop giving them attention and let them rage on tumblr. Who gives a fuck? Nobody owes those people anything.
>b-b-but muh Safe Spaces
