
Firefox 31.0 - mziulu
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/31.0/releasenotes/
======
makmanalp
Firefox's developer tools are really becoming great. "Copy as CURL" for the
network tab was something in chrome that I really missed. Box model view which
was super handy is now editable. Console showing stack traces along errors was
long due. New Canvas debugger, eyedropper are very handy.

Font viewer, responsive design tools, the 3d view (very handy in debugging
silly box model issues) and highlight painted area mode (handy in optimizing
visualizations) are all things I love that I haven't been able to find good
analogues for in other browsers.

~~~
pinpoll
Still, I prefer Firebug. Is it fully supported yet?

~~~
soapdog
Firebug can't hook into stuff that the built-in tools can mostly because the
built-in tools are inside the browser itself and Firebug is an add-on.

I don't recommend using it any longer...

~~~
pinpoll
Could you please provide some decent examples that would convince a Firebug
fan from the beginning to uninstall it? :)

~~~
jitl
For me Firebug seems ~2x as slow (eg, for a 1s operation in native tools,
firebug takes 2s). Opening Firebug on my workstation causes a noticable pause
in all activity on page for several seconds, while opening the native tools
only takes about half a second. All of Firefox's dev tools are still a ways
from being as fast and bug-free as the Webkit tools (both Chrome and Safari).
I can't cite specific examples since I dropped Firebug in Firefox once the
native tools reached a certain level of quality. I just suggest trying to use
'em and seeing if you like them more than Firebug. I did.

~~~
pinpoll
Speed is a good point, I'll give the native tools in FF 31.0 a try. Moreover,
I'm curious if the built-in profiler is any good as YSlow for Firebug?

Btw, here's a discussion that I found to be interesting as well:
[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19180494/which-
advantages...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19180494/which-advantages-
does-firebug-still-have-over-the-integrated-developer-tools)

------
huhtenberg
> Block malware from downloaded files

Hi, Google. Would you just look at what I downloaded!

~~~
TheCraiggers
I'm also a bit worried about the privacy implications of this. Especially
given that the feature is hidden, and the only two ways to turn it off involve
going into about:config, which most people don't even know exists. I wouldn't
even know it was doing this if I hadn't read the changelog.

Reading the changelog, it also mentions having local and remote blacklists,
but how FF chooses which one to use wasn't clear to me. Local blacklists are
not as scary to me for obvious reasons. Being able to use this without the
remote blacklist would be nice.

I would really love some additional info on this feature from Mozilla, as well
as a more user-friendly way of disabling it.

~~~
Istof
It seems like the last few updates of Firefox are each hiding yet one more
important setting... I think that is what will finally drive me away from
Firefox (I've used it since the beginning even if chrome was much faster for a
while) ... time to browser shop.

~~~
magicalist
They might be "hiding" the setting by not including it in the main settings
page, but there is no other (mainstream) browser with anything close to the
equivalent of the flexibility of about:config.

~~~
Avshalom
Though judging by the logic espoused in the tab-close-button bug step one is
to move it to about:config and then step two is removing it all together for
not being discoverable enough.

~~~
Dylan16807
Well that's a GUI thing, so it's still available via CSS. Annoying to get to,
but configurable.

------
ElongatedTowel
They removed browser.tabs.closeButtons. It's now impossible to hide the close
buttons without css fiddling. I don't get it. What benefit is there to
removing that feature?

Same with clearing the download list. They removed that feature with the last
major UI overhaul.

The number of tiny addons I have to install just to get features back that
have been removed for no reason at all is starting to get too large...

~~~
ahoge
Aw, crap. Do you know the CSS offhand?

I already have to use some user CSS because they removed the ability to set
the tab min width via `browser.tabs.tabMinWidth`, because that property wasn't
"worth it" according to one developer.

 __Edit: __Turns out Classic Theme Restorer has an option for that.

~~~
Dylan16807
>tab min width

That is a nightmare to set now if you want tabs to go below about 40 pixels,
thanks to the Australis swoops. It used to be one line of CSS to set min width
to 0-ish, now I have a giant blob of custom CSS on top of Classic Theme
Restorer.

~~~
ahoge
Yea, same here. :/

------
bsimpson
Nice to see CSS vars shipping.

Chrome had an experimental version, but removed it for performance reasons:

[https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink...](https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-
dev/ScKw9zYRkBc)

------
zimbatm
The only thing I want from Firefox is to stop freezing completely when a
single tab goes crazy. It just makes the whole experience feel clunky compared
to Chrome.

Usually it happens with Gmail so maybe there is a conspiracy there to drive
adoption for Chrome :p

~~~
potshot
Have you tried using multi-process tabs?
[http://www.ghacks.net/2014/02/13/firefoxs-multi-process-
arch...](http://www.ghacks.net/2014/02/13/firefoxs-multi-process-
architecture/)

It looks like the prefs to enable it have been shipping beyond the nightly and
are in the latest release.

~~~
kipple
Oo neat I didn't know this was an option for FF

~~~
cpeterso
Multi-process Firefox (aka Electrolysis or just e10s) is till under
development. If you want to test it, I recommend using Firefox Nightly (34)
because it has recent e10s bug fixes and its File menu has a "Open e10s
Window". You can test e10s and non-e10s windows without flipping an
about:config pref or restarting Firefox. You can flip the optional pref
browser.tabs.remote.autostart to true to enable e10s by default, which also
enables extra "shims" for add-on compatibility so more add-ons will work than
with "New e10s Window".

------
lmedinas
I think this release is even more exciting for Android[1].

\- Ability to re-order existing panels in browser homescreen \- Added ability
to refresh synced tabs on demand

1 - [https://www.mozilla.org/en-
US/mobile/31.0/releasenotes/](https://www.mozilla.org/en-
US/mobile/31.0/releasenotes/)

------
bpierre
Changes for developers: [https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/Firefox/Releases/31](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/Firefox/Releases/31)

------
gregd
In Firefox 29 I continued to see weird font rendering issues on Windows 8.1.
So much so, that I can't use FF on Windows right now. I don't see the same
issues with Mavericks. Has anyone else experienced this and does it continue
into this version?

~~~
praeivis
Any chances it's about hardware acceleration? Uncheck Options>Advanced>Use
hardware acceleration when available

~~~
broolstoryco
I have also had this issue and turning off HW acceleration solved it.

------
praeivis
It's possible turnoff search field on the new tab page?

~~~
cpeterso
Unfortunately, no.

------
xkarga00
Wasn't that _Firefox is already running_ bug supposed to be resolved by
Firefox 30.0?

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7873779](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7873779)

~~~
rockdoe
"Firefox is already running" just means it failed to shut down. Any number of
things (including malware and bad plugins) can cause it. I think you're
referring to a specific bug that caused more regular users to see the warning,
but that doesn't mean the warning is gone.

Just that Firefox itself shouldn't cause it any more.

------
MrBra
[http://monica-at-mozilla.blogspot.it/2014/07/download-
files-...](http://monica-at-mozilla.blogspot.it/2014/07/download-files-more-
safely-with-firefox.html)

"What happens when you download malware? Firefox checks URLs associated with
the download against a local Safe Browsing blocklist. If the binary is signed,
Firefox checks the verified signature against a local allowlist of known good
publishers. If no match is found, Firefox 32 and later queries the Safe
Browsing service with download metadata (NB: this happens only on Windows,
because signature verification APIs to suppress remote lookups are only
available on Windows). In case malware is detected, the Download Manager will
block access to the downloaded file and remove it from disk, displaying an
error in the Downloads Panel below.

How can I turn this feature off? This feature respects the existing Safe
Browsing preference for malware detection, so if you’ve already turned that
off, there’s nothing further to do. Below is a screenshot of the new,
beautiful in-content preferences (Preferences > Security) with all Safe
Browsing integration turned off. I strongly recommend against turning off
malware detection, but if you decide to do so, keep in mind that phishing
detection also relies on Safe Browsing."

------
tux1968
Seems like a modest but welcome release.

The MathML torture test shoes some very nice progress[1] but makes me ask
myself once again, why do TeX fonts always look like crap? Isn't that the one
thing that TeX should get right? Anyway, at least they look great as rendered
by Firefox 31.

[1] [https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/Mozilla/MathML_Proj...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/Mozilla/MathML_Project/MathML_Torture_Test)

~~~
frenchy
I'm not sure "crap" is the word I'd use for that, but I think I understand
what you're getting at. The problem is that the TeX fonts are designed to work
at a much higher resolution (as is typical for being printed). They look much
better in that case.

~~~
tux1968
Yeah, i don't earn any points for eloquence, but just looking at the side by
side examples on the MathML page the contrast is pretty stark. Have often
wondered if it was due to low screen resolution so thanks for confirming that.
I'll try to be less grumpy the next time I get a TeX generated PDF and maybe
even print it out before trying to read it ;o)

------
Sir_Cmpwn
>WebVTT implemented and enabled

Finally! I've been waiting for this. This means we can drop the polyfill on
MediaCrush soon. I'm also pretty excited about the add-on debugger.

------
mr_november
I want to use Firefox (OS X), and with almost every release I give it a go but
it's simply too slow in comparison to Chrome.

I'm talking about actions you do multiple times an hour - opening a new tab,
closing a tab, rearranging tabs etc.

This is with no extensions in use, on a mid-2011 fully specced out macbook
air.

It's unfortunate but the lag is clear and I can't use it as my primary when I
know a better solution is right in front of me, that being Chrome.

~~~
amatera
This seams to be a problem with your machine. I also use a macbook air (End
2013) and dont have this problem (or feel any Lag on Tab-Actions). Even on my
old Ubuntu-rig it doesnt have this problem. Either in Firefox or Chrome.

~~~
Pacabel
Your response is the kind that has given the Firefox community a rather bad
reputation when it comes to addressing problems reported by users.

Instead of accepting that Firefox may indeed have performance problem, you
immediately discount this possibility, instead blaming it on mr_november's
computer.

It's irrelevant that it isn't happening on your laptop that's over 2 years
newer than his is. It's irrelevant that it isn't happening on your Ubuntu
system. None of that matters.

I don't doubt for a second that he is in fact running into performance
problems with Firefox. He isn't alone. Many people report Firefox having worse
performance than Chrome does on the same system. I've experienced this, too.

Yet instead of addressing and fixing these very real performance problems that
have been brought up time and time again by many users, the Firefox community
and developers seem content to deny that they exist, or refuse to consider
that it may be a problem with Firefox (like you've done), or point to useless
and totally unrealistic benchmarks to suggest it isn't a problem.

But worst of all is how mr_november's comment has been voted down. It's one
thing to deny that the problem exists, but it's much worse to try to actively
censor those who have merely pointed out a very legitimate and troubling
issue.

Firefox has been losing market share for some time now, and this trend will
only continue as long as Firefox's performance problems go unaddressed, and
the Firefox community mistreats anyone who dares mention that such problems
still exist.

~~~
vacri
_But worst of all is how mr_november 's comment has been voted down. It's one
thing to deny that the problem exists, but it's much worse to try to actively
censor those who have merely pointed out a very legitimate and troubling
issue._

'Actively censor ... a troubling issue'? You make it sound like a police
state.

 _Firefox has been losing market share for some time now, and this trend will
only continue as long as Firefox 's performance problems go unaddressed_

Firefox's problem is shedding it's past reputation. It really isn't that slow
anymore - it depends on what you're doing in the chrome vs firefox wars. I
work with a bunch of chromeheads, and they all spurn ff because of that past
reputation.

In actuality, they have as many problems with chrome as they do with firefox -
I'm constantly saying "[bug] not evident on firefox" and they express
puzzlement that The Awesomeness That Is Chrome actually has a problem other
browsers don't. Not to mention that a lot of the bugs I do run into on FF are
because of their 'designed-on-chrome-for-chrome' default mindset. The bugs do
get sorted out, but the _perception_ that FF is so much worse than chrome
isn't reflective of the truth of the matter. They're pretty similar these
days, swings and roundabouts.

~~~
Pacabel
Yes, voting down a legitimate comment here so that it's greyed out, thus
making it more difficult to read, is a form of censorship.

As for Firefox's reputation, I think it still has a reputation for poor
performance because, contrary to what you and others may claim, a lot of
people still find recent releases to be slower than Chrome and other browsers.

It will never be able to shed its reputation for poor performance as long as
it still suffers from those problems. And these problems will persist as long
as the Firefox community continues to deny that they exist, or go out of their
way to suppress discussion of these very real performance problems.

------
dashdot
Seriously... when can I have shumway in the regular builds? It's in the
nightly builds since... like forever o_O

------
throwaway41597
Very excited to see hash-source being implemented and enabled. This means you
can load files from a CDN and have their integrity checked by the client so
the CDN cannot trick the user.

Hope to see this land in Chrome.

------
brador
Does this fix the 1080p option not showing up on youtube problem?

~~~
wjoe
The 1080p option isn't shown because YouTube requires Media Source Extentions
enabled (HTML5 DRM) for this. You -can- enable this under about:config
(media.mediasource.enabled) but it's still experimental for now. When I tried
it, it did show the 1080p option, but then I had very mixed results from the
blank video, no audio, or the higher resolution video not actually loading.

This should also only apply if you have the HTML5 player enabled on YouTube,
the Flash player should still show the 1080p option.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
MSE is for varying the bitrate of videos when thing get congested.

EME is for browser video DRM.

------
digitalnalogika
Generational garbage collection didn't make it into release? I kept seeing it
in the 31.0beta release notes.

~~~
sp332
[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=619558](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=619558)

    
    
      status-firefox31: 	disabled
      status-firefox32: 	fixed 
    

Not much to the discussion there except to mention that it was reverted during
the beta.

------
birdmanicx
I thought it was downloaded, but there is no evidence of it anywhere that I
even got the file. Great program.

------
krakensden
I'm super excited about the add-on debugger- I should go back and check out
the add on sdk again.

------
JelteF
Where did the Shadow Dom support go?

~~~
ebidel
It's still behind the web components flag in FF nightly. The master bug for
web components is:
[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=811542](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=811542)

------
farawayea
When are we getting 32beta?

------
tragic
Looks like some nice improvements. Interested in this canvas debugger...

------
antman
Is this the version where we can export our bookmarks in android?

~~~
rockdoe
That feature hasn't been implemented:
[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=775104](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=775104)

Note the "we haven't seen any demand for this in our feedback channels".

------
J_Darnley
Did this remove the horrendous Australis UI?

~~~
Pacabel
Unfortunately not.

------
gcb0
...and FF finally caught up with IE and Chrome habit of reporting every single
URL you visit/download to check for malware.

Since there is no free-lunch, i'm pretty sure the people running those
services are mining that data for advertising or something. I know google is
with chrome. Malware protection and translator services phoning home on every
page, and pre-fetch adding the links you haven't clicked yet to that list...

------
joeclark77
Did they certify to the community that no Christians were involved in
developing this version? How can we be sure this is an intolerance-free
product?

~~~
voltagex_
Wouldn't that be intolerant to Christians and therefore create an intolerance-
loop?

~~~
Sanddancer
He's trolling. Look at his comment history and profile.

~~~
voltagex_
I know, but I couldn't resist.

