I have read comments in this thread suggesting that FF's performance is not that snappy but I cannot seem to notice any difference. Maybe my dev senses are not that strong ... maybe the benchmarks do show a difference but I have never felt FF to be any less performant than Chrome.
I am tired of listening to people screaming their lungs out about privacy when their actions don't reflect their opinions.
Those screaming for privacy, like myself, are in fact a small minority.
Also regardless of the topic, double standards are rampant in this community.
You’ll often see people screaming against Google but still using @gmail.com because paying for a domain and the price of one coffee per month is too expensive. Or people claiming that they need ad-blockers for privacy, but then screaming against paywalls.
I can run it on a $10 droplet from Digital Ocean. $10 is kinda high just for my email, but the bonus is I host _all_ my family's mail. Wife, kids even mom and dad!
It's been nice not being concerned about email privacy. Zimbra is a great piece of software. I think more people should look into it.
99.99+ uptime for mail is generally not as important, as undelivered emails get resend if it wasn't up at the time of delivery.
it might still be a problem, because its technically possible to disable that feature, but its generally done everywhere.
the bigger problem is, iirc, that the biggest mail provider (gmail) pushes unknown mail servers to spam... so you'll probably be forced to use a relay.
thats still not a big problem, because you generally get one from you domain registrar
there are also fully functional mail implementations that you can use right away with minimal configuration such as MailInABox 
...still, i've switched to fastmail ~2 yrs ago and won't be going back to self hosted anytime soon, though i do own several servers i could use for that...
It Rarely ever goes down (maybe twice in 4 years? I have to think really hard to remember an outage, it's just kinda always....there.)
I periodically run:
sudo apt update
sudo apt full-upgrade
I'm not that bothered about the type of privacy Chrome invades. If someone put a camera in my bedroom I'm bothered but if Google knows I'm thinking of fixing my washing machine and tries to advertise to me it doesn't bother me.
But say that and you get down voted etc by the "people screaming their lungs out about privacy" crowd. So us types kind of keep quiet.
Also, people (including me) think that some newsletters, some bills and receipts are not very personal, so people don't care.
I have two main addresses, one is from a local provider and my all financial e-mails and other stuff is coming to that e-mail address, however they don't encrypt anything.
I also just got a free Proton mail, and will upgrade the account when I'm a little better off. Paid e-mail addresses are not meaningless, but they're harder to justify in most people's eyes.
BTW, I never store anything which makes me uncomfortable, anywhere incl. my brain. That's a much better way of living. Not that privacy conscious people is hiding something, but that's my policy.
It's not just paid email addresses. It's paid anything. My father constantly pesters me to tell him where he can get free movies, music, software and so on. He wanted to know where he could make unlimited online backups for free and I told him that stuff costs money. Somehow people have gotten it in their heads that if it's on the internet it's free and they shouldn't have to pay for anything.
The VC funding model of investing for growth has helped to create this perception. The sad consequence is that this has made it difficult to run companies that don’t scale to sizes that interest VC investments.
After I started my job and the prices came down with the help of online music sales and streaming, I bought a lot of CDs and digitally distributed music. Most of them were albums that I already have, because I wanted to support the artists which brought that feelings into my life.
Same is also valid for software, movies, or anything. If I can justify price of a software, I buy it. Otherwise, I use something FOSS instead.
My point was that people aren’t willing to vote with their wallet, but being a loud mouth doesn’t cost anything.
And that’s how we end up with monopolies.
On the topic at hand I still remember the people crying against Firefox’s Pocket integration. Well, as Chrome crushes its competition, while becoming more invasive everyday, I hope they are happy with the outcome.
I think there's a confusion, by GMail, I've pointed to the free offering, not the GSuite, sorry for being not clear.
> My point was that people aren’t willing to vote with their wallet, but being a loud mouth doesn’t cost anything.
Because I think that the same people believe that their e-mail is not that private, so they don't feel the need for voting with their wallets, however they are loudmouths because they're bothered by the breaches or privacy invasions they read/hear. They feel they are either exempt from this or not affected as much, so they're not alarmed.
taint.net seems to be for sale.
That is a better way of living, but it’s a harder choice for a lot of people.
With recent political trends towards the far right, it could become a harder choice for even more.
Yes, you're right. The climate worldwide is not the kindest recently. BTW, with uncomfortable I didn't mean opinions or ideas, but anything which will embrass you or put you in a hard situation if revealed.
As a corollary, this means living an honest life and telling what you think. Generally violence doesn't born from ideas themselves, but the way these ideas are told. So talking politely and without attacking the other side results in a reasonable discourse in most cases. Disagreement is in the nature of communication, and if can be managed well, it's very beneficial to both parties.
This reminds me to actually check how many emails I received over the past year that came via gmail. Off the top of my head I can only recall a single one, at least from a person I know and wanted to receive email from. I swiftly replied with my new address of course.
I'm going to stop forwarding now, and set up an auto-reply to give people a new address. Not my personal one, but an alias I'll set up in a minute, so that I can shut that down eventually too. Probably useless paranoia, but it floats my boat.
I don't regret the move one bit, and the whole process of setting up my account and moving all ten or so years worth of email from gmail to Fastmail was over and done within a week. Fastmail does what it says on the tin – it's very fast. It also pretty much never fails. In the past two or so years that I've had my account I have only experienced downtime once, for a few minutes. I made myself some coffee and then service was back again.
I am not affiliated with Fastmail in any way, shape or form – just a very happy customer.
Out of the frying pan and into the fire, if you ask me.
This is why even an upgrade to GSuite is better, being governed by a different ToC.
Google's standard ToC says that their service:
1. may use tracking pixels, web beacons, browser fingerprinting, and/or device fingerprinting on users
2. may collect your device fingerprint
3. can use your content for all their existing and future services
4. can share your personal information with other parties
5. may stop providing services to you at any time, for any reason
6. keeps the rights on your content when you stop using it
And as we've seen, Google indeed does all of the above.
The second problem is one of lock-in. If you're using an email address that's not on your own domain, you're locked into Gmail and the cost of switching is higher, as can be seen by the people complaining about it. But that's a situation of making your bed and then sleeping in it.
And in the case of Chrome, we are already in a situation in which Google can crush its competition and impose whatever standard they want. It's the new IExplorer and the fact that it has an open source core doesn't matter that much when speaking of Google's lock-in on the market, because the Google-free forks are completely irrelevant.
I'm gonna stop you right there, because a ToC can only enforce certain provisions and companies can change their ToC anytime they want, as per their ToC. It also does not explicitly prohibit them from doing anything not on the ToC, just as it wouldn't prohibit a user from doing something not covered by the ToC. I guarantee you that Fastmail has this clause.
> second problem is one of lock-in. If you're using an email address that's not on your own domain, you're locked into Gmail
That's irrelevant and a false equivalency. You can use Gmail with your own domain.
> in the case of Chrome, we are already in a situation in which Google can crush its competition and impose whatever standard they want.
Again, completely irrelevant to the question that I asked.
It may be possible in the US, but especially if it's not in the interest of the consumer and if there is a service fee involved, then you need to be notified about such changes in the EU and an online publication won't do. Service providers in my country send me SMS messages and postmail with pickup confirmation required. If they don't have proof that I received that notification, then the new contract does not apply, by law.
Also these contracts can't be applied retroactively. So your point is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
>> "It also does not explicitly prohibit them from doing anything not on the ToC"
Indeed, but the law does. Especially in the EU companies cannot use personally identifiable information without explicit consent. And now with the GDPR, they can't track or profile users without explicit consent either.
We'll see what will happen in the following years, but guess what, Google and Facebook are still doing the same shit, without asking for consent, because they consider that a sign-up is enough, since you've read and agreed to their terms and conditions ;-)
>> "You can use Gmail with your own domain."
I already said in my previous message, along with other messages here, that "even an upgrade to GSuite is better, being governed by a different ToC" and I don't like repeating myself.
Please make an effort to read, or we're going to simply talk past each other.
>> "Again, completely irrelevant to the question that I asked."
You mean the one where you asked about jumping from a frying pan and into the fire? I assumed it wasn't a question related to cooking.
At which point they tell you that they have changed their ToCs
> It also does not explicitly prohibit them from doing anything not on the ToC, just as it wouldn't prohibit a user from doing something not covered by the ToC.
Which is why you check the ToCs to ensure that main classes of poor behaviour that you want to avoid are included in there.
And after a malicious ToC change, the company can immediately act on the policy, meaning if you're even a few minutes late to the party, or if it takes more than a few minutes to completely scrub your data from the website (it does) then your data is now subject to the new ToC.
So the ToC offers no legal protection from data abuse. It's just a nice thought.
Getting away from the convinient variant, for which I paid with my user data, to privacy oriented choices felt empowering.
I went with Posteo for email and calendar (EUR12/pa), went from mostly FF to all-in FFk (donated to Mozilla), from Google search to DDG and Qwant.
It's somewhat more effort. But it is worth it imv.
I am still on Android though. But I installed netguard, which reigns in Android somewhat. The only thing I struggle to find: A good alternative to the Google maps app (open street maps is decent for desktop).
There is no alternative (that I was able to find) for the "browsing what's nearby" feature of maps. It allows you to pull up the app and just look around from where you are to find stores, restaurants, museums and whatnot. You can check opening times, reviews, see pictures, all from inside maps.
But, if you are looking for a GPS navigator alternative, there are plenty, and some are much better than maps, IMO. I personally use Sygic on Android, in the free version, and I've found it more accurate than maps in many occasions. It doesn't have the live updates on traffic like maps, but it will take you from point A to point B with a few metres accuracy. While maps sometimes just gets you to the other side of a building, and leaves it to you to figure out that the actual entrance is on the other side, and to reach it you have to drive around half a block, be careful with access restrictions, and go through a traffic light. Sygic just always gets me to the correct place, on the correct side of the buildings, and even signals parking areas nearby.
On my phone I try to use OsmAnd on iOS, based on Open Street Map, see: https://osmand.net/ — my experience with this is mixed, where I live (in Bucharest Romania) it definitely has more info than GMaps on points of interest, however it's not as reliable for car navigation or public transit, so it's not as reliable for getting directions.
If you keep using Google Maps (I still do), at least disable the location tracking in your Google Account.
Locus/Locus Pro are good for looking at maps, it's nice having half the continent available offline. Depends a bit if OpenStreetMap works well in your area or not, and not much in the way of routing/POI as far as I know.
For public transport, there's transportr and Öffi and probably a bunch of specific ones for different regions - again, coverage depends on where you are.
I'm saying this, because you started with "to be fair...". As if this was a good explanation for the double-standard your parent poster mentioned. You can still fix it, even though it now takes more time than never having used Gmail at all. Complaining about "the effort" just reinforces the double-standard.
Use something like Fastmail. No hassle with setting up your own domain or email server (although you can use a custom domain) and they offer a tool to migrate your email from any IMAP server (and probably from Gmail as well).
Edit: added 2nd paragraph
Another point of view is that this is just the reality. Loads of people are on gmail, and migrating isn't always simple. Pretending it is doesn't make it so, and pointing out that one never should have done it in the first place is a moot point.
It's a sad world and we're a very geeky crowd.
Maintaining your own email server is crazy and not feasible unless you're passionate about email servers.
It's also a false dichotomy. Nobody with any experience and common sense suggests that you should install your own email server. Use FastMail, use Protonmail, use Office 365, heck, use Google's G Suite.
Most such services have import tools that work and the option to work with forwarded emails and external SMTP servers, so migration can be smooth.
Seeing software developers complaining about migration costs makes absolutely no sense.
Just yesterday I migrated a GSuite account to FastMail. I just changed the DNS records and imported the email via FastMail's import tool, which was automatic. And with a @gmail.com address you can just work with forwarding until everybody knows of your new address.
I migrated email addresses several times, including from my old @gmail.com address which now no longer exists. It wasn't a tragedy.
Sorry but I think this is FUD and it potentially discouraged people from taking steps to be part of the solution and not the problem.
I’ve run my own mail server for years on a $5/mo Linode VPS, and am not passionate about email servers. It was a little difficult to set up but no more difficult than a lot of weekend projects the smart people on this site undertake. It should not be scary. You can also make the switch gradually by first setting up your MX and forwarding to gmail if you want to take it slow. There’s no reason anyone with a moderate amount of Linux skills and patience can’t host their own Email.
Hindsight is 20/20 and the email landscape is different now than it was then. At the time I got my gmail (back when invites were still a thing) most options available to me were either ISP email or free web email, and gmail was one of the best. Not to mention, I was a lot younger and probably not in a position where paying for email made sense, and certainly not running my own.
For those of us that started many many years ago with gmail and kept it out of an inertia of convenience, now it is difficult to get everything switched off of it.
The difficult part isn't moving emails over. The difficult part is all the accounts and websites online I've signed up on with gmail that I need to switch the email address on. That's going to be a nightmare.
I had a Gmail in the month it was launched and I switched to my own domain (ironically, still in GSuite) in a process that took a few years. Whenever I login into a site with my old email, I would update it to the new one. My current email still connect to my old Gmail over POP3, but it’s mostly empty.
I don't want other people to read them but I'm resigned to the fact that they are.
In that context I'm not all that concerned about Google scanning my email to serve me ads that I'm blocking anyway.
For example your entire online purchasing history is in your email. That is not information that should be public ;-)
After cloning the repository and installing the listed dependencies (some Perl packages available in your Brew / Ubuntu repository already), you can do:
--host1 imap.old.com \
--user1 "firstname.lastname@example.org" \
--password1 xxxxxxxxxxxxx \
--host2 imap.new.com \
--user2 "email@example.com" \
--password2 yyyyyyyyyyyyy \
--errorsmax 1000000 \
--useheader 'Message-Id' \
But with FastMail, for those interested, the out of the box importing tools in their web interface work great, so no need for any command line tools.
It's a hugely flexible and versatile tool and it's quite zippy as well, can highly recommend.
Most of us speak out against against Google because we like most of Google and want to continue to use their services, just not to thrilled about some things and want them to shape up, not have them cease to exist completely. It's the difference between being reasoned or extreme.
That's some expensive coffee.
So no, it's not an expensive coffee, especially since we are talking about a highly skilled and highly paid demographic.
Also I'm from Romania where we have a lower cost of living and lower wages to go with it, so seeing my Silicon Valley brethren complaining about the price of paying for non-free email on your own domain is really awkward, given the importance of email.
I get it, I hate subscriptions for software too. But not when that service is essential for your profession, your security or your privacy and email is all of the above.
A cup of coffee is a pretty lousy indication of cost. For some people going into a Starbucks for a $5/€4,40/£3,92 gluten-free-unicorn-sprinkles-ariana-grande-latte may be part of a daily routine, but for others, coffee means using a coffee-maker to brew your own cup for a few cents, or just getting a cup to go at a some kiosk.
And your email address is your online identity and has plenty of information in it that shouldn't leak, including your entire online purchasing history at least.
I am against paying for crap via subscriptions, I hate the subscriptions trend myself, but email in my opinion is fundamental to who we are and what we do online.
I almost never buy coffee out anywhere like Starbucks, but it was easy for me to understand in the context of his post
I use Tiger Technologies (https://tigertech.net) for hosting mine and my wife's personal sites and email, they are all I need for basic Wordpress/email hosting and they have a superb support team. If I decide I want to get my hands dirty with running a server, I use Vultr.
Also the much better deal is the business edition, at $10 per month, which also gives you unlimited GDrive storage. Couple that with something like ArqBackup, Rclone, etc and it gets to be very cost effective, being cheaper than a Dropbox subscription.
Also the Terms of Service for G Suite is meant for businesses and thus much better.
Just be careful when buying apps and books from Google Play. If you don't want to be locked-in, don't purchase anything that can't be migrated.
I'd rather not have a world where only chrome and chrome clones exist - and I certainly don't appreciate that Chrome wants me to log in every time I use the browser (and getting more and more insistent at that lately from what I hear)
> I certainly don't appreciate that Chrome wants me to log in every time I use the browser (and getting more and more insistent at that lately from what I hear)
I am loving Quantum, and I don't understand why Firefox continues to slide.
With this Edge announcement (a new Microsoft Chromium browser), I'm nervous we're getting into not a duopoly, but potentially a monopoly.
Apparently a lot of Firefox installs are on older systems (think Windows XP/Vista era) from before Chrome took over the world. There's a reason Firefox was the last major browser to drop XP support (they only did so when 52 ESR left support a few months ago!). As those systems get phased out they generally get replaced with systems that come with Chrome preinstalled and that's "good enough" for most people buying them (unlike Internet Explorer back in the day) so they don't seek out alternatives.
They broke extension support. Half of the extensions disappeared (didn't migrate to Quantum). The other half works only partially. One year after Quantum i still have a blank new tab because a custom html file in new tab would require an extension AND a web server.
Sure, it is harder now for non-technical users to shoot themselves in the foot. On the other hand, Mozilla took away control from users. After Quantum I lost all hope.
Open your current Firefox settings (AKA Firefox profile) folder using either
"3-bar" menu button > "?" button > Troubleshooting Information
(menu bar) Help > Troubleshooting Information
type or paste about:support in the address bar and press Enter
In the first table on the page, click the "Show Folder" button.
In your profile folder, scroll down and double-click into the sessionstore-backups folder. You may see numerous files here. Of particular importance:
recovery.js: the windows and tabs in your currently live Firefox session -- if you check the modified date/time, is this fresh or is it from the time frame that keeps coming back?
recovery.bak: a backup copy of recovery.js
previous.js: the windows and tabs in your last Firefox session
upgrade.js-build_id: the windows and tabs in the Firefox session that was live at the time of your last update
Do you see any numbered files, such as recovery-1.js? Firefox may create those when it is unable to store your current session history in recovery.js. Unfortunately, at the next startup, those files are not used automatically.
Note: By default, Windows hides the .js extension. To ensure that you are looking at the files I mentioned, you may want to turn off that feature. This article has the steps: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/show-hide-file-na...
Given their small "market share", it would seem right to remove a major burden to rapid development (the old extension format, XPI) in favor of open standards (web workers).
It's more maintainable, more in-line with current standards. I am only speaking as a fly-on-the-wall here. Although I am a senior "full stack" developer, I am pretty far removed from any of the day-to-day here.
By wiping the slate clean in terms of extensions, hopefully this will be a small paint-point, quickly forgotten, and things move forward from here.
Re-reading this prior to submit, it seems like I've inserted too many items straight out of the BS generator but I'm ok with it.
Perhaps. But it sure would have been better if the new extension system were as capable as the old before axing the extensions. The loss in functionality, for me, is unacceptable. At the heart of it, this is what made me give up entirely on post-57 Firefox.
Was this intentional, or simply a consequence the architecture of quantum?
From my experience this is the ways most of the people I know came in contact with Chrome. Even those where I've installed FF end up with Chrome. When I ask them why they switched, they don't know. They don't even know where it came from...this is what you get from clicking "Next" without reading...
(Reading this thread and writing this comment from Firefox on my phone)
I think they switched to Gecko lately, but not sure if is still as fast.
It is not a big issue really as FFF (as I understand it) is not meant to be used for tabbing a lot and it prevents the usual tab accumulation.
On your machine perhaps. Not on mine. Just trying to be more precise here.
For me it's pinch zooming. I've been waiting for it for ages. It's the last issue keeping me from leaving Chrome.
Just tried newest Firefox on macOS and Windows 10, and sadly it still didn't work on either.
This feature is great for hiding flashing sidebars and distracting navigation bars. And of course zooming in occasionally, when the need arises.
Sometimes, after 2 days of work each worker consumes ~7Gb of RAM (on machine with 16GB of RAM)...
P.S. mostly opened documents in google doc, gmail, calendar, JIRA/Confluence...
 I think this was the bug I thought about: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1404042, see also https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1422090
I’ve been a very happy Firefox user since Phoenix days.
I use Firefox (Nightly) on a 2015 MBP and I do think it feels less snappy than Chrome.
If it didn't have Container tabs, I might switch back to Chrome, despite very much wanting Firefox to succeed. Performance is key.
That's how I feel about chrome. Parsing and rendering websites today is /hard/ and we're not helping things by pushing more and more and more into our browsers. Of course it will become a monopoly.
i.e. git.example.com has the IPv6 and sometimes sentry.example.com resolves the ipv6 of git besides not having any IPv6 AAAA entry at all. I could not find out why that is happing, since it's only happening in FF.
besides that, I also think the developer tools got better, but are still not on par with Google Chrome.
(At the moment I primarly use Firefox, besides when the bug occurs than I open these services in Safari or Chrome)
E: too many e's
I need an app like Fox Clocks, which worked in FF only for a long time, but now is available on Chrome too.
I tried to switch from Chrome to Firefox a few months ago but I had a terrible experience using Hangouts with a customer for two hours. The Firefox degraded until a point of no return and that sucks when you are talking with a customer. I initially blamed the network but there was no signal of network issues.
So, you're saying Google's anti-competitive tactic of degrading and not supporting other browsers worked on you. Did you know there's a name for that tactic? Embrace Extend Extinguish.
Did you consider using another, more neutral video conference system?
I use FF for normal browsing and Chrome for Google based stuff that requires an account, like Gmail, YouTube, Docs, etc. Besides not having ANY performance issues with FF I think it is good practice to separate most of your accounts from normal surfing.
In Chrome: no problem at all.
We pay for G Suite so I don't expect to pay for another service. I love Zoom btw.
I'm not sure which is likely to be lower ranked at Google - Edge compatibility for all those end users for whom changing browsers is too difficult or Firefox where compatibility is probably easy but the users can probably figure out the message of "works better with OEM branded components (or browsers)!"
Even if the money is simply spent on marketing, I think that could be a good thing.
I've been on Chrome for a long time, tried to switch to FF when Quantum came out and couldn't hear myself think over the sound of my laptop winding up.
Once you realize that not being evil isn't a priority at Google anymore this explanation actually makes some sense.
Then I tried it in Chrome and found that Gmail behaves like shit in Chrome too.
The solution however was to drop Gmail's web interface. Switched to a desktop client. If you're on MacOS I think MailMate is the best.
Couldn't be happier. And this advice is independent of your browser choice.
PS: the fact that Google's online properties are optimized for Chrome should make you realize that Chrome is the new IExplorer and it's our fault for allowing it to happen ;-)
A bug about overflow scrolling (the default bouncing when you scroll over in macOS) has been open for years. It doesn't fit in.
I'm a Firefox user on macOS and I don't remember issues with scrolling. I don't use a trackpad, maybe that's the issue?
Keychain does not work, FF57 killed KSE.
On Linux with KDE that web-extension change killed the kwallet integration too. But you are right when you are saying that it degrades the user experience of MacOS users :-(
I'm not sure what Mozilla's deal is these days, to be honest, but Firefox really just doesn't feel like it fits in on Mac. It's frustrating, because I want to support it... but I just end up back in Safari because it feels far more smooth and integrated.
How is Google Chrome more AppleOS then Firefox? Granted I can't stand AppleOS and find the UI to be totally frustrating still in 2018 and how old it feels. How is Firefox any different then Google Chrome?
Chrome I can at least disable CORS via the command line, and Safari does it best by putting it in a Developer menu that I can easily toggle.
Firefox's dev tools also seem to still be behind — I haven't seen a good way to inspect WebSocket frames, for instance.
I would really prefer to use Firefox due to Mozzila's stances on privacy, especially in contrast to Google; however, I have to use the tool that lets me actually get work done.
This is what we do while running docker for local development with node.
The cleanest solution is to extend the dev pipeline with a proxy for localstack. It won't take me long to knock that out, but it's not something I can prioritize at the moment.
I agree with you that fixing the headers (via a proxy in this case) is the right solution. I'm just not able to prioritize right now.
Beyond that, there are always going to be occasions where developers, security analysts, and testers need to bypass default security enforcement. I'd like to see every browser provide a way to make these adjustments for a one-off session (e.g., via a command-line switch). It's an efficient solution that I can offer when I come across a nasty hack living permanently in a developer's web configuration.
If you're not a lone wolf, or working in the SV bubble, the IT and security departments are going to tell you to go pound sand.
CORS is allowed while running locally and then set while running in development and finally production.
I don't buy your comment at all.
I know this is beginning to become off-topic, but why? Presumably, if you're using a flag that has to be run from the command-line, you're either doing it on purpose or using hardware you don't own (and a keylogger is a much greater risk than anything else at that point)
In practice, it's not a problem for me, because the presence or absence of my usual row of extension icons and profile photo is enough of a clue.
But I could see where someone who doesn't normally sign into Chrome, or who doesn't have very many extensions in their normal Chrome profile, could have trouble distinguishing it from their a profile. The windows will tend to look pretty similar.
The problem I see is that not everyone takes the same precautions. And plenty of developers accumulate these sort of tweaks and hacks in their daily driver without realizing or remembering that they've crippled their own security posture.
From a UX perspective, my preference is to make it clear when normal security mechanisms are disabled.
Then you can change the theme for that profile which makes it obvious which instance you're using.
Is it for 3rd party domains and APIs or response that you control? Either way, controlling it in browser doesn't sound like the right way.
I have localhost.com in my hosts file and a local web server to run around it, but it's still really frustrating not being able to turn it off entirely.
If yes, you can setup different environments (dev, staging, production) and set CORS accordingly for each of them.
If no, how is it working in production?
I mostly have the setup you describe, and most development happens against a CORS-free staging server. But it's often necessary to build a local prod version that is identical to the live version for debugging or analysis, that plays against real players and reads/writes to the same data store.
It's an edge case, and in the past when I've done web development simply turning off CORS on staging has trivially solved any issues. But it does feel a bit like the developers of the browsers have chosen not to include the feature in a "we're smarter than you, trust us, you don't want this" kind of way. For the most part, they're probably right.
Just a wild idea that I haven't tried yet:
Would it work if you configure your etc/hosts to point production domain to localhost and open the production domain in the browser?
I'm gonna try this when I get free time.
I have found a few session manager options on Firefox but most suffer from permission bloat and poor UI.
Last I checked, there was nothing to make it easier to manage add-ons.
Agreed with the missing WebSocket inspection.
I think modern Firefox is a much better browser than Chrome though, but Mozilla certainly lost the PR war and to no fault but their own, because Firefox sure sucked for a long while.
This gets said often, but I've been using Firefox continually since 2003 and I've never noticed it sucking.
The only only thing that really annoys me is that when you snap a tab out of a window into a new window, the gesture is similar with snapping a tab into the favorite bar, and I end up with lots of "New Tab" or other unwanted favorites.
Also a small personal annoyance. I got into the habit of always launching the browser by clicking the shift key on the windows task bar icon, so that I always get a new window, irrespective of whether some session is already running or not. But in firefox, when no session is running, launching with the shift key pressed results in the "safe mode" prompt. I wish there was a way to disable that.
Firefox doesn't suck, and matches Chrome. But there's no accounting for user behavior. I have seen user behavior that is mind-blowingly stupid, and subcultures of user activity and tendencies trace well with product loyalty trends.
Some user subcultures are retardedly dependent on browser extensions, never clear their cache, retain cookies for the lifetime of their laptop battery, and seemingly need hundreds of tabs open. And none of this shit makes sense to me.
These are likely the same people who carry around phones on the brink of overheating while locked, and in their pocket, because they have to have a thousand apps installed, in order to feel like they're getting the $1,000 phone they paid for, I guess. Their emails are constantly peppered with "sent from [app|device|service]" signatures, and they claim microphone permissions are why ads target them.
Honestly, if you've been blaming the browser, it's more likely that you're the one being your own worst enemy.
( And as a user I knew that too. I just wanted to support Firefox. )
So saying Firefox Doesn't suck may be partially right. As we will have to define "suck" first. But saying it is as fast as Chrome during Firefox 4 and early Chrome era is just the same as saying earth is flat.
And, yeah, if Mozzila likes dropping numbers, nothing has to change.
Just this last month I've had Firefox crash tabs daily that Chrome handled perfectly fine, I've seen it crash the entire browser when Chrome did just fine. Underlying both those issues was a janky Windows install that was partially broken. But still, Chrome carried on like a trooper.
I've even just switched back to Linux and immediately saw Firefox stumble over scrolling frame rates. That was caused by using an Nvidia graphics card and the proprietary drivers on Kubuntu which was a bit janky again to say the least. But Chrome carried on through again with no problem.
Just today I've switch to an AMD graphics card and the opensource drivers on Fedora and only now is Firefox seemingly playing nice.
It's a great browser (though Dev Tools don't seem as good to me) and I love the containers but it does seem it needs a bit more of a particular environment to operate just right whereas Chrome 'just works' more of the time. That is possibly why lots of people say 'fine for me' (it is for me now, yey!) but others say "it's broken" or 'slow' or whatever.
Google's own websites are some of the major culprits. The funny thing is that similar webs don't have this issue, and I don't notice any slowdowns that push me to do side-by-side tests.
Chrome feels like an untamed animal which does stuff without telling you, and I don't like it.
To this day, my browsing experience is still worse with Firefox than it was before 57, because so many useful little add-ons have never been replaced or have been replaced only with inferior versions. In some of those cases, that useful functionality can't be provided in the new environment, because the APIs to support it aren't there. I was unpleasantly reminded of this just a few days ago, when the same problem infected the latest Thunderbird update.
More seriously, I am running into increasing numbers of sites that simply don't work properly with Firefox. Sometimes this is because of the privacy/blocker extensions I use, but often the problem persists even if I disable those. Whether it's due to bad web developers doing Chrome-only things or bugs in recent versions of Firefox, the unfortunate result is still the same from the user's point of view.
I too experience privacy extensions breaking websites frequently, since I'm a heavy user of those, but so far I have never encountered a case of a website that was truly broken under Firefox. It was always one of my settings and worked under a clean profile.
They didnt release the specifications early enough for people to rewrite their addons and at the end of ESR52 there where still multiple bugs open which prevented people from porting their addons. We didnt even get a normal 1 year ESR support frame for gods sake. All that ignoring the fact that there was no warning for the end users that all their security addons were disabled after the automatic update.
I am still furious about the absolute arrogance and carelessness Mozilla showed here.
But Chrome as an alternative? That's not even on the table. Firefox is definitely the lesser of two evils.
They simply changed the default bookmark location with no option to change it back.
I need an addon to change the default bookmark location to keep my earlier filing approach.
I mean really?
I'm still upset that they broke custom keyboard shortcuts for ... two years now? All the replacements will only remap keys after a tab's JS has loaded. I used to be able to just zoom through the tabs with shift-j and shift-k, but now it will randomly stop on pages that need to reload, which breaks the whole experience.
I've had Super NES games that offered key customizations, and had much less memory and money to work with. That's really disappointing.
There have been major speedups since, and container tabs help fix the other issue. At this point, I still find Firefox worse than Chrome in a large number of ways, but they're small and often preference-based - but lots of people seem to agree that were a lot of users lost (or not gained) during a stretch where Firefox was pretty much objectively behind.
I ditch all Alphabet services, I do not like to waste my system and network resources for it's sake.
But Chrome will quietly exit, and when you start it next time, will offer to restore the tabs that were open last time. Chrome approach wins, hands down.
I think Firefox for a long time tried to optimize for those users who do want to tweak their software, and doing that can even be a way to make superior software (instead of aiming for the lowest common denominator), but it is certainly not the right approach to maximizing _web browser market share._
I didn't use Firefox for many years (because I thought it sucked; slow, bad defaults, always apologizing in this anoying way for having crashed the last time I used it) but I now use it every day again (though not as my default browser; I tend to keep all the major ones open) and I'm glad to see Mozilla recently seems to have changed their priorities and focused on usability and performance. I hope it's not too late.
> I would even expect if I quit browser with something written in the address bar (or search bar, etc), when it starts up again, it should be able to preserve this half-entered user input!
I'm pretty sure no one expects nor wants this. You're definitely in a minority here. The problem you describe isn't very technical, it's simply that you want something else than most people else and you don't want to take the time to configure your browser to how you want it to behave.
I think the lack of improvements in desktop UX in the last 10 years is making every desktop OS to slowly adopt mobile UX conventions. Some of those new conventions are a step back.
Personally, I don't like it when browsers implicitly keep tracking things when I close the application and then fire up some half-baked version of the same stuff when I come back later. If I want to remember where I am, I can easily bookmark some or all of my tabs.
Firefox has had a particular problem in recent versions where it seems to think it crashed on the previous shutdown, even though there was no user-visible evidence of this, and then tries to restore the previous session even when it otherwise wouldn't. That's not helpful if your previous session involved shopping for surprise Christmas presents for the SO who is now standing behind you as you open the browser again several hours later for some entirely unrelated purpose, in a totally hypothetical example.
I wouldn't expect this at all!
The last part is true, it did suck for a while. But I can't say "no fault but their own". Even if they rocked, they would have taken a big hit: chrome was advertised for a long time, and at no cost, using solicitating prompts directly on the most consultated and trusted web page in the world.
Both their plugin ecosystems are significantly less robust as well e.g if you want to use any popular tools e.g shodan, google data saver, edit this cookie, etc
Firefox was always good on other OS. And you got noscript there with full access to block everything Chrome does not want you to block.
Recently I was playing with it, in an attempt to curate which site is allowed to make connections to which domain but I discovered that I cannot do it on a per domain basis and every whitelisted entry was applied everywhere. Apparently that was something that could be configured at noscript's ABE panel which doesn't exist in the latest versions.
If you want per domain rules I would suggest trying umatrix instead.
I really enjoy this feature and even catch myself regularly trying to use it on other computers, which obviously don't have such keywords defined.
I recently switched from chrome to Firefox but the search engine situation is something I’m not really happy about.
Nope, you can just right-click the site's own search bar, which is how I've been doing it forever.
Actually this is exactly what lorenzhs said, and it is my experience too. I know this because I spent half an hour trying to get a “blue search” for BBFC.
It works flawlessly in all browsers I use.
Typing "w! foo" beats "wikipedia foo" every time.
Funnily enough, I've often seen Firefox users unaware that they can do the same with custom search keywords in Chrome, so the problem runs both ways.
As someone who uses these features in both Firefox and Chrome, I do think it would be nice if Firefox copied how Chrome automatically adds these search actions, and perhaps a bit of the UI polish too (like how Chrome's omnibox will recognize you're performing a keyword search and adapt accordingly). It doesn't make much of a difference for existing power users, but it could help new users discover and use the feature.
It's still not as smooth and doesn't support as many OpenSearch providers as Chrome's, but might already help a bit.
Firefox actually has 2 domain specific search-shortcut features, but both take time to set up and then is not intuitive at all. Chrome just blows it out of the water.
Also wtf - if I type "hello" and press enter in the search bar in FF, it puts a "www." in front and ".com" at the end.. like holy hell, if I knew the domain I'll write .com myself, it really is no problem. I even went ahead and googled for 15 minutes and disabled this in some deep settings somewhere, but it still does it when I press enter too fast... damnit, it frustrates me every single day.
I hope they see this and fix this very-frustratingly-obvious anti-UX behaviour..
it's really jarring to be sent to a random domain when looking up something in a hurry.
I find it intriguing that each incognito window in Chrome is not sandboxed between each other. Am I missing anything here?
Things that bug me
- For some reason often when I have quite a few tabs, open link in new tab stops working, the tab appears then disappears instantly, oddly if I use Vimium to open the tab in a new link it works. Mostly I use Vimium so this is not too much of a problem
- Copy pasting of formatted html is worse than Chrome.
- Confluence runs like a pig on Firefox for some reason, completely unusable on some pages, not strictly a FF problem, but is problematic.
- Just something about the aesthetics that is somehow "off"
On the positive
- I like the developer tools
- "Column select" out of the box just works
- scrolling tab bar instead of teeny tiny tabs where you can't see anything is good
- I feel better that I'm hopefully leaking less data, not that I can really verify that, but I generally believe I should be better protected than if I was using chrome
Overall, while there is cool things about FF, I feel I'm using it not because its the better browser, but some vauge idea I'm helping browser diversity.
The websocket inspector was a feature request filed 6 years ago. 
Maybe Firefox devs didn't have time for it. But somehow they got all the time in the world to add clickbait Pocket articles on my new tab page.
They obviously see that this relationship is extremely risky, especially as Firefox becomes less popular and thus their userbase less valuable to Google. As such, they're trying to diversify their revenue stream.
Do you have any better solutions? Browsers are absurdly expensive to develop, by the way.
But the market is not a meritocracy, as much as some people like to pretend it is. Success in the market is much more to do with things like marketing, momentum, inertia, and general opinions. All of these things are favoring Chrome right now, and Mozilla is not in a position to turn this around.
And you may not have noticed, but being popular doesn't actually give you money when your product is free and features no ads or tracking. All you are saying is that "google should give mozilla more money". How do you suggest they diversify their revenue stream?
1. Hardware acceleration is still disabled by default on Linux
3. Unwanted notifications about wanting to update / being updated / having updated
3. Ugly spacing left and right of the adress bar
4. Takes longer to start
5. No integration with GNOME keychain.
6. Ctrl+Q quits the browser.
7. Laggy UI
> How do you suggest they diversify their revenue stream?
I would suggest that they don't need to diversify their revenue stream. As long as they are a major player, Google (or any other search engine) will continue to fund them.
Those spacers are easily removed via customize mode.
Firefox has always been a resource hog and crash prone for me on just about any system. Although I use it primarily for some of its features and prefer it over chrome.
Why support what already broke your work once without an actual transition plan? They didn't have a full replacement ready to go when they got rid of XUL, and seemed that they didn't really care.
At the end of August of 2018 they stopped supporting 52 ESR which is the last extended support release that supports the old addons.
During the 3 years between a and b mozilla worked to provide support for flexible interesting addons which is why all the notable interesting addons I'm aware of have new versions.
I'm sure that the will to port every useful addon in existence just isn't there but it seems challenging for firefox to move forward without ditching the old addons.
Did you realize the new addon system was released over 3 years ago? It kind of seems as if perhaps as a user you were only peripherally aware of matters and derived an erroneous interpretation of events.
Why would a web developer support one browser over others? They keep everyone honest by sticking to the middle road and not having a badge like "Works Best In FireFox".
I still have open bugs in Firefox from 2012. Firefox is riddled with layout and scripting bugs. I don't understand how they can afford all of this experimental development and "outreach" stuff, when the core product is basically just accumulating bugs which they will never address. Their tracker is full of untriaged bugs from as far back as a decade.