Slashdot Mirror

Where's the 'don't touch my old fucking settings because i'm a hating curmudgeon' button, because I think its time for it.

Don't worry, they kept the important parts. That being the fact that addons in Firefox are all powerful and can give you back everything you liked and hide all the new stuff, something that's never been diminished.

Classic Theme Restorer add-on. Works well. Tabs underneath as I type this very message! https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

I hate what they did with Australis, I nearly changed to Seamonkey, but classic-theme-restorer has put Firefox back the way I like it, I just hope it doesn't stop working.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

Is it just me or is Firefox going much slower with Version 29.0? (no-script + ghostery installed)

All true, and a great article. Still, I already bought a couple Kyocera Hydro water-proof cell Android Smartphones for $50 or so each, and hardware costs are falling fast, so it is not clear that OS footprint matters much in the USA, although maybe in Africa and China and India it still does.

That said, Mozilla could instead have focused on its XPCOM technology to ride above the OS in a cross-platform way (somewhat like VIsualWorks Smalltalk or now Qt or some others):
https://developer.mozilla.org/...
https://developer.mozilla.org/...

And Mozilla could also develop democracy-empowering apps and standards on top of that XPCOM platform for everyone, including ones for collective civic sensemaking and a semantic desktop like I talk about here:
http://www.phibetaiota.net/201...

If I was leading Mozilla, that is what I would have focused more on. Firefox OS on a Smartphone or elsewhere is a great idea in theory, but seems like a nonstarter in practice as far as *extensive* adoption in the Western world (even if I myself might buy a phone with Firefox OS on it preferentially for FOSS and privacy reasons). Google succeeded against iOS with mobile phones from nothing to 80% Smartphone market share in a few years because Google had deep pockets and a lot of good will at the time and was at the beginning of an exponentially growing marketplace. Mozilla may have the good will (although not at the scale Google had then among consumers) but it does not have the deep pockets. It also faces an entrenched mobile Smartphone landscape at this point with Android. Plus it does not have a compelling broad service offering like Google had with search and gmail to go with the phone (so people will just use Firefox OS to use Google Search, Gmail and Maps?). What money Mozilla has is almost entirely coming from Google (about a billion dollars total over the last few years), where only about a million a year is in individual donations. While there is a lot a few sharp developers could do if funded with even just a million dollars in donations a year, if Google pulls the plug on Mozilla's funding if Firefox OS were to even hint of being a successor for any other reason, where does that leave Firefox OS? Probably not stuff I should be saying in public given I just applied for a "Software Engineer, Platform" job at Mozilla, but what the hey. :-)
http://careers.mozilla.org/en-...

I love the Mozilla mission of FOSS software to support open standards (with the exception I feel Mozilla made a big mistake on not backing WebSQL built on SQLite as a defacto standard). However, getting people to *install* anything as an uphill battle, let alone buy anything. That's a big reason web-browser-hosted software is winning over the desktop and why I'm moving more of what I do in that direction. Even Alan Kay and Dan Ingalls moved that way with the "Lively Kernel" because they could not get many people to download Squeak. And getting people to install a full OS is an even bigger battle. Plus there are other groups making alternative phone platforms (Ubuntu, Android forks, WebOS from HP, more). So, given limited funding available for FOSS web stuff, and also given Mozilla has other great initiatives worthy of more support including "Webmaker," it is sad to see so much Mozilla resources and mental bandwidth go into something like Firefox OS that seems unlikely to gain much traction given the computing landscape we now have. And instead, the core Mozilla applications like Firefox and Thunderbird languish relatively speaking as far as bug fixes and innovation. The biggest change just recently with Firefox is it looks more like Chrome... As a "lazy" d

All true, and a great article. Still, I already bought a couple Kyocera Hydro water-proof cell Android Smartphones for $50 or so each, and hardware costs are falling fast, so it is not clear that OS footprint matters much in the USA, although maybe in Africa and China and India it still does.

That said, Mozilla could instead have focused on its XPCOM technology to ride above the OS in a cross-platform way (somewhat like VIsualWorks Smalltalk or now Qt or some others):
https://developer.mozilla.org/...
https://developer.mozilla.org/...

And Mozilla could also develop democracy-empowering apps and standards on top of that XPCOM platform for everyone, including ones for collective civic sensemaking and a semantic desktop like I talk about here:
http://www.phibetaiota.net/201...

If I was leading Mozilla, that is what I would have focused more on. Firefox OS on a Smartphone or elsewhere is a great idea in theory, but seems like a nonstarter in practice as far as *extensive* adoption in the Western world (even if I myself might buy a phone with Firefox OS on it preferentially for FOSS and privacy reasons). Google succeeded against iOS with mobile phones from nothing to 80% Smartphone market share in a few years because Google had deep pockets and a lot of good will at the time and was at the beginning of an exponentially growing marketplace. Mozilla may have the good will (although not at the scale Google had then among consumers) but it does not have the deep pockets. It also faces an entrenched mobile Smartphone landscape at this point with Android. Plus it does not have a compelling broad service offering like Google had with search and gmail to go with the phone (so people will just use Firefox OS to use Google Search, Gmail and Maps?). What money Mozilla has is almost entirely coming from Google (about a billion dollars total over the last few years), where only about a million a year is in individual donations. While there is a lot a few sharp developers could do if funded with even just a million dollars in donations a year, if Google pulls the plug on Mozilla's funding if Firefox OS were to even hint of being a successor for any other reason, where does that leave Firefox OS? Probably not stuff I should be saying in public given I just applied for a "Software Engineer, Platform" job at Mozilla, but what the hey. :-)
http://careers.mozilla.org/en-...

I love the Mozilla mission of FOSS software to support open standards (with the exception I feel Mozilla made a big mistake on not backing WebSQL built on SQLite as a defacto standard). However, getting people to *install* anything as an uphill battle, let alone buy anything. That's a big reason web-browser-hosted software is winning over the desktop and why I'm moving more of what I do in that direction. Even Alan Kay and Dan Ingalls moved that way with the "Lively Kernel" because they could not get many people to download Squeak. And getting people to install a full OS is an even bigger battle. Plus there are other groups making alternative phone platforms (Ubuntu, Android forks, WebOS from HP, more). So, given limited funding available for FOSS web stuff, and also given Mozilla has other great initiatives worthy of more support including "Webmaker," it is sad to see so much Mozilla resources and mental bandwidth go into something like Firefox OS that seems unlikely to gain much traction given the computing landscape we now have. And instead, the core Mozilla applications like Firefox and Thunderbird languish relatively speaking as far as bug fixes and innovation. The biggest change just recently with Firefox is it looks more like Chrome... As a "lazy" d

All true, and a great article. Still, I already bought a couple Kyocera Hydro water-proof cell Android Smartphones for $50 or so each, and hardware costs are falling fast, so it is not clear that OS footprint matters much in the USA, although maybe in Africa and China and India it still does.

That said, Mozilla could instead have focused on its XPCOM technology to ride above the OS in a cross-platform way (somewhat like VIsualWorks Smalltalk or now Qt or some others):
https://developer.mozilla.org/...
https://developer.mozilla.org/...

And Mozilla could also develop democracy-empowering apps and standards on top of that XPCOM platform for everyone, including ones for collective civic sensemaking and a semantic desktop like I talk about here:
http://www.phibetaiota.net/201...

If I was leading Mozilla, that is what I would have focused more on. Firefox OS on a Smartphone or elsewhere is a great idea in theory, but seems like a nonstarter in practice as far as *extensive* adoption in the Western world (even if I myself might buy a phone with Firefox OS on it preferentially for FOSS and privacy reasons). Google succeeded against iOS with mobile phones from nothing to 80% Smartphone market share in a few years because Google had deep pockets and a lot of good will at the time and was at the beginning of an exponentially growing marketplace. Mozilla may have the good will (although not at the scale Google had then among consumers) but it does not have the deep pockets. It also faces an entrenched mobile Smartphone landscape at this point with Android. Plus it does not have a compelling broad service offering like Google had with search and gmail to go with the phone (so people will just use Firefox OS to use Google Search, Gmail and Maps?). What money Mozilla has is almost entirely coming from Google (about a billion dollars total over the last few years), where only about a million a year is in individual donations. While there is a lot a few sharp developers could do if funded with even just a million dollars in donations a year, if Google pulls the plug on Mozilla's funding if Firefox OS were to even hint of being a successor for any other reason, where does that leave Firefox OS? Probably not stuff I should be saying in public given I just applied for a "Software Engineer, Platform" job at Mozilla, but what the hey. :-)
http://careers.mozilla.org/en-...

I love the Mozilla mission of FOSS software to support open standards (with the exception I feel Mozilla made a big mistake on not backing WebSQL built on SQLite as a defacto standard). However, getting people to *install* anything as an uphill battle, let alone buy anything. That's a big reason web-browser-hosted software is winning over the desktop and why I'm moving more of what I do in that direction. Even Alan Kay and Dan Ingalls moved that way with the "Lively Kernel" because they could not get many people to download Squeak. And getting people to install a full OS is an even bigger battle. Plus there are other groups making alternative phone platforms (Ubuntu, Android forks, WebOS from HP, more). So, given limited funding available for FOSS web stuff, and also given Mozilla has other great initiatives worthy of more support including "Webmaker," it is sad to see so much Mozilla resources and mental bandwidth go into something like Firefox OS that seems unlikely to gain much traction given the computing landscape we now have. And instead, the core Mozilla applications like Firefox and Thunderbird languish relatively speaking as far as bug fixes and innovation. The biggest change just recently with Firefox is it looks more like Chrome... As a "lazy" d

As I understand this, a vulnerable server can expose its private SSL key to an attacker. With this private key, I can decrypt all of its encrypted SSL traffic.

As already mentioned, it's anything in the server's memory. Or the client's, since Heartbleed affects clients too.

Now, as I understand this so far, having the private key is great, but I need to be able to MITM the connection to decrypt anything.

It depends whether the connection is using perfect forward secrecy or not. If it's using PFS, then you need an active MITM to grab the session keys, so you can't decrypt old captured traffic and you need to keep your MITM up for new traffic. If there's no PFS, then all traffic ever sent with a given SSL cert can be decrypted with access to that cert's private key. All you need is to passively sniff it, then store it for later on the off-chance you ever get (or crack) the key.

(I'm going to write a small essay on this, because it's important but very poorly documented on the web.)

Given that, you'd think PFS would be common, but according to this study it's only available on 60-70% of web servers (they don't give a precise number, just 60% that support DHE and 18% that support ECDHE, but those two sets overlap), of which 80% prefer to use cipher suites without PFS, so about half of webservers either don't support PFS or typically won't use it. Slashdot doesn't, for example. Neither does microsoft.com. I guess that's just the homepage, but then windowsupdate.microsoft.com doesn't use it either. It's not supported on outlook.com's web, IMAP, POP3, or SMTP servers. addons.mozilla.org and marketplace.firefox.com also join the club, but their main website and the Firefox update sites do PFS at least. I couldn't find a Google property that didn't do PFS.

And on top of that, of those sites that do use it, 99.3% use 1024-bit DH parameters, which essentially lowers the length of their RSA keys to 1024 bits (which affects the 80% of sites with 2048-bit or longer RSA keys).

If you want to make sure you're actually using PFS, and with decent DH parameters, you generally need to make sure to configure it. Apache does this for you automatically from 2.4.7 onwards (before that, it'll use PFS but only with 1024-bit DH parameters). A lot of other software requires being fed DH parameters manually -- for instance, Courier's IMAP/SMTP servers, ZNC, ircd-hybrid etc. (And when was the last time you configured DH parameters for a server?)

You can check if any given connection supports PFS by looking at the cipher suite in use. If it starts with DHE or ECDHE, it has PFS. (The "E" at the end stands for ephemeral; if it says DH, ECDH, or doesn't mention either of those, then there's no PFS). You can check with e.g. CipherFox in Firefox, or using the openssl command-line tools:

$ openssl s_client -connect www.debian.org:443 | grep Cipher
        Cipher : DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384

If you point it at servers you use regularly, you'll probably be pretty depressed at the results. I know I was when I was making that list above...

As I understand this, a vulnerable server can expose its private SSL key to an attacker. With this private key, I can decrypt all of its encrypted SSL traffic.

As already mentioned, it's anything in the server's memory. Or the client's, since Heartbleed affects clients too.

Now, as I understand this so far, having the private key is great, but I need to be able to MITM the connection to decrypt anything.

It depends whether the connection is using perfect forward secrecy or not. If it's using PFS, then you need an active MITM to grab the session keys, so you can't decrypt old captured traffic and you need to keep your MITM up for new traffic. If there's no PFS, then all traffic ever sent with a given SSL cert can be decrypted with access to that cert's private key. All you need is to passively sniff it, then store it for later on the off-chance you ever get (or crack) the key.

(I'm going to write a small essay on this, because it's important but very poorly documented on the web.)

Given that, you'd think PFS would be common, but according to this study it's only available on 60-70% of web servers (they don't give a precise number, just 60% that support DHE and 18% that support ECDHE, but those two sets overlap), of which 80% prefer to use cipher suites without PFS, so about half of webservers either don't support PFS or typically won't use it. Slashdot doesn't, for example. Neither does microsoft.com. I guess that's just the homepage, but then windowsupdate.microsoft.com doesn't use it either. It's not supported on outlook.com's web, IMAP, POP3, or SMTP servers. addons.mozilla.org and marketplace.firefox.com also join the club, but their main website and the Firefox update sites do PFS at least. I couldn't find a Google property that didn't do PFS.

And on top of that, of those sites that do use it, 99.3% use 1024-bit DH parameters, which essentially lowers the length of their RSA keys to 1024 bits (which affects the 80% of sites with 2048-bit or longer RSA keys).

If you want to make sure you're actually using PFS, and with decent DH parameters, you generally need to make sure to configure it. Apache does this for you automatically from 2.4.7 onwards (before that, it'll use PFS but only with 1024-bit DH parameters). A lot of other software requires being fed DH parameters manually -- for instance, Courier's IMAP/SMTP servers, ZNC, ircd-hybrid etc. (And when was the last time you configured DH parameters for a server?)

You can check if any given connection supports PFS by looking at the cipher suite in use. If it starts with DHE or ECDHE, it has PFS. (The "E" at the end stands for ephemeral; if it says DH, ECDH, or doesn't mention either of those, then there's no PFS). You can check with e.g. CipherFox in Firefox, or using the openssl command-line tools:

$ openssl s_client -connect www.debian.org:443 | grep Cipher
        Cipher : DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384

If you point it at servers you use regularly, you'll probably be pretty depressed at the results. I know I was when I was making that list above...

Yesterday, the net neutrality petition passed the halfway mark, with 18 days left to go. The FCC request for comments is still live and looking for your feedback, and Mozilla has an alternative in the offing.

Keep the pressure on, keep posting these things on your social networks, keep telling your friends. The only thing less effective than telling the government what we want is not telling them what we want. It is a double edged sword; either they do as we say, or we get one more bit of documentation to support reforming the government.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

Nor is the company that makes it attached to the ad industry, unlike ghostery.

Use 'DoNotTrackMe' addon. The company that makes it is run by Moxie Marlinspike and has no connection to the ad industry.

About the only thing I've run into that it breaks is Disqus logins. But I use a separate browser - which also deletes everything on close - for that.

You can: http://www.dedoimedo.com/compu...

More to the point you can set colours with Classic Theme Restorer https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

This one works: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

This is worth a read to get Firefox back to sane: http://www.dedoimedo.com/compu...

Use Chrome or Firefox when browsing, and if possible remove Flash and Java (I actually removed Flash about half a year ago for security reasons, and found that, for the most part, I don't really need it anymore). Note that this exploit was performed with the help of Flash as well - nothing to do with XP.

For those whose flash lockin is Youtube content (Let's Play videos), I finally found an answer to questions I'd explored months ago. We are forced to allow flash before seeing some monetized content. It's annoying how Google refuses to give you flash-less webm and mp4 streams and even lies that Flash is a must --until you force the right browser identification strings.
The Video without flash extension for firefox is a welcome solution for Youtube and some other mainstream sites known to have HTML5 video content.

The extension gets around the problem and you can use content such as mid-quality Webm. Though there are a few bad videos still, it's 100 times more effective than the rigged HTML5 "trial" youtube offers. I enjoy longer battery life. I also enjoy skipping like in olden times *without* a crippled default flash player that insists on DISCARDING the full video's past and future on *every* click.

But part of me wonders if I'm missing the point, if they're so intent on breaking it then might I as well just move browsers now? If I'm having to rely on addons to make a browser work then am I not just sat precariously one step away from Mozilla deciding that addon is unacceptable and cancelling it anyway?

It appears the FF devs have forgotten that their main advantage over Chrome is addons. I have so many addons, with icons to control them in the status bar (addons bar) that the new FF gave me about an inch of locationbar to see URLs. Thanks guys. I reverted this by using the dev version of Status-4-Evar. The GP's mention of Classic Theme Restorer is interesting, but I worry about its compatibility with Tab Mix Plus and other addons, as well as to your point of perhaps trying the new look & feel.

But part of me wonders if I'm missing the point, if they're so intent on breaking it then might I as well just move browsers now? If I'm having to rely on addons to make a browser work then am I not just sat precariously one step away from Mozilla deciding that addon is unacceptable and cancelling it anyway?

It appears the FF devs have forgotten that their main advantage over Chrome is addons. I have so many addons, with icons to control them in the status bar (addons bar) that the new FF gave me about an inch of locationbar to see URLs. Thanks guys. I reverted this by using the dev version of Status-4-Evar. The GP's mention of Classic Theme Restorer is interesting, but I worry about its compatibility with Tab Mix Plus and other addons, as well as to your point of perhaps trying the new look & feel.

But part of me wonders if I'm missing the point, if they're so intent on breaking it then might I as well just move browsers now? If I'm having to rely on addons to make a browser work then am I not just sat precariously one step away from Mozilla deciding that addon is unacceptable and cancelling it anyway?

It appears the FF devs have forgotten that their main advantage over Chrome is addons. I have so many addons, with icons to control them in the status bar (addons bar) that the new FF gave me about an inch of locationbar to see URLs. Thanks guys. I reverted this by using the dev version of Status-4-Evar. The GP's mention of Classic Theme Restorer is interesting, but I worry about its compatibility with Tab Mix Plus and other addons, as well as to your point of perhaps trying the new look & feel.

Now fixed in 29! Bug 600500.

Check that out: an actual improvement in Australis.

What I cannot get my head around is that Mozilla claims they cannot access your data (as they don't know your password) but that they are able to reset a lost password... how can that be a secure system??

They can't. You can, by decrypting all your data and then reencrypting it with a new key.

To be more specific, they can always reset your password, but if they (rather than you) do it, any data encrypted with kB will be lost. Any data encrypted with kA can be retained, because Mozilla have access to kA, which is more of an obfuscation key than an encryption key. (Currently, all data is encrypted using kB.)

Not realistically having password sync though... I didn't know that. That's, uh, unfortunate. Kinda limits the usefulness of Sync, I'd say. And apparently no info as to why other than a link to bug 986637 which is inaccessible to me :(

I recently gave seamonkey a try, and the only real cant live without extension I havent been able to get to work with it is tree style tabs. But yeah, that one is pretty important to me.

(As an aside, the built-in extension search has really turned to crap. I can search for the exact name of the extension I am looking for, it's hosted at addons.mozilla.org even, yet for some reason they just cannot find that extension and you have to find a direct link somewhere else to even get to it. )

I have used my voice reader many times with Pale Moon and works perfectly. I have studied Firefox's accessibility features list and I haven't found anything that isn't supported by Pale Moon or the OS. I am using Pale Moon with font override for months since I don't want to give web authors another means to connect to Google for custom fonts.

I didn't care for the optimizations either, though people in the forums claim the gains are tangible. I started using Pale Moon after Firefox v4 because I didn't like re-editing my userchrome.css file every time Mozilla decided that Firefox needed a face lift.

There is an addon which will fix these issues: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

For now, all I can notice that is missing is the status bar. After updating to the newest version of status-4-evar https://addons.mozilla.org/en-..., everything is back to normal. I don't see what all the fuss is about. Some of the changes I like, for example the totally different color of the active tab (the shape makes no difference to me). I don't like the way they are headed with the restriction for UI modification (back button), but it is still the only browser with scrollable tabs, and that is a must for someone like me who never has less than 50 open tabs.

Yep, installed the update and Firefox toolbars went nuts, completely unusable, message in that, watch out for installed themes and preferably remove them. Once the default is theme running and you can see what you are doing, if your into the classic look, like the grumpy old man I am, then add https://addons.mozilla.org/en-... and chill. All is good and still customisable and you can go back to peacefully drifting across the internet promoting that ever so desirable brain chemical flow.

Also, in the new version it's no longer possible to use a master password... if you want to use sync all your password will be in plaintext (well, obfuscated) in FF's password file. Any malicious or vulnerable application can get access to ALL your passwords. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...

Doesn't sound like an improvement to me...

This is a HUGE, MAJOR fuckup.

Really, they shouldn't have rolled out the new sync without having some kind of solution to this. I have hundreds of randomly-generated passwords for various sites and because I use multiple computers, I rely on Firefox to sync them. I have a secure master password set on all of these computers, but now that sync refuses to work properly, I'll either have to disable my master password (not gonna happen), rely on a third-party piece of software such as KeePass or literally copy down all of my passwords to paper and carry them around with me.

This is absolutely ridiculous, and almost as insane as the Pidgin developers' insistence on saving all account passwords in a plain-text XML file "because anything else is just security by obscurity".

For everything else, click here and tell them how much they suck.

Here is what I left for Mozilla at that Feedback link you provided:

"
The User-Interface has been destroyed by the UX team and the ability to restore the functionality that they have removed has been removed. Please ADD functionality and OPTIONS, stop removing them... It's almost like someone was paying (funding) you to subvert Firefox...
"
With a link to this thread in the URL field:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/04/29/1638220/firefox-29-redesign

Also, in the new version it's no longer possible to use a master password... if you want to use sync all your password will be in plaintext (well, obfuscated) in FF's password file. Any malicious or vulnerable application can get access to ALL your passwords. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...

My reaction when reading this

Booted to Ubuntu, it wants to install new Firefox. Okay. Here are the first impressions: TL;DR: It's terrible. The designer hipsters are now ruining Firefox, too.

1. Why are the tabs again above the URL bar? I have configured them time after time below. But this time, the option to put them back below is gone even from about:config! WTF?

2. Where has the "add-on bar" gone? Wasn't it enough that the status bar was replaced with the buggy text that shows on mouse hover?

3. Google "firefox 29 tabs below url bar", people are recommending this add-on. Thought: has Firefox really gone the way of Windows 8 where you need to install 3rd party extension (Classic Shell) to band-aid the catastrophic damage the hipster designers have done to the original product?

4. Reboot the browser after installing the extension. Spend 20+ minutes making everything as close as possible to what is what before.

5. Finally, continue working. About 2 hours in, suddenly my back/forward buttons stop working. Assume the extension is interfering with core somehow. Fortunately, rebooting the browser helps. Some time later, this happens again, need to again reboot Firefox.

6. Seriously consider switching to Google Chrome. The few reasons to use Firefox are evaporating fast.

Overall experience: 30min spent fiddling with Firefox settings. There is currently no easy way to make it like it was before. If you are running Firefox 28, I would suggest waiting a few weeks before upgrading until there is an easy and tried way to un-fuck the UI.

"... a future dominated by retards." I think retards may rise in protest: "We may be retards, but we're not dumb!"

Let me guess: The new version of Firefox will be even less stable. The memory-hogging flaws have not been fixed. The memory-hogging flaws are so widely acknowledged that there are add-ons for re-starting Firefox: Firefox Re-start Add-ons. I use Restartless Restart.

Please no obvious replies to this. Please don't make it necessary to post my list of 22 excuses for not fixing the Firefox memory hogging again.

I'm having another problem with the latest version of Firefox. The toolbar icons change back to the default. I have to go to View > Toolbars > Customize and take away the ones I don't want and put back the ones I want.

Also, when I log into Slashdot, I'm recognized as my user name. However, often when I open a tab for a Slashdot story, the story shows that I am not logged in, and logging in at that tab does nothing. Re-starting Firefox fixes that problem for a while.

Have they fixed Allow popups? I know the version at work, everytime (work) changes the OracleDB server name, I have to readd "allow popup for ..."

I can either show popup (this time), always allow popups from *** (but it won't show the popup), but I can't both show the popup this time, and always allow in the future.

"... a future dominated by retards." I think retards may rise in protest: "We may be retards, but we're not dumb!"

Let me guess: The new version of Firefox will be even less stable. The memory-hogging flaws have not been fixed. The memory-hogging flaws are so widely acknowledged that there are add-ons for re-starting Firefox: Firefox Re-start Add-ons. I use Restartless Restart.

Please no obvious replies to this. Please don't make it necessary to post my list of 22 excuses for not fixing the Firefox memory hogging again.

I'm having another problem with the latest version of Firefox. The toolbar icons change back to the default. I have to go to View > Toolbars > Customize and take away the ones I don't want and put back the ones I want.

Also, when I log into Slashdot, I'm recognized as my user name. However, often when I open a tab for a Slashdot story, the story shows that I am not logged in, and logging in at that tab does nothing. Re-starting Firefox fixes that problem for a while.

Have they fixed Allow popups? I know the version at work, everytime (work) changes the OracleDB server name, I have to readd "allow popup for ..."

I can either show popup (this time), always allow popups from *** (but it won't show the popup), but I can't both show the popup this time, and always allow in the future.

>Yes. This addon was specifically developed for FF29 to deal with the new GUI.

If past experience is any guide, FF30 will break functionality for extensions that allow you to use the old GUI.

For example: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

I absolutely, positively *DETEST* the UI redesign. I immediately installed https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

I have no idea why they would want to ruin a perfectly good browser like this. There is nothing wrong with having REAL menus on the top line, nor the ability to have tabs on the bottom, where they belong. It is beyond reason why they would not make such a change OPTIONAL... resorting to an addon is a huge and irritating kludge that will annoy the S*** out of me every time I have to install a new Firefox somewhere and will likely cause breakage later.

Color me very, very annoyed.

How could you possibly use Chrome with that many tabs and not have tabs on the side?

I routinely have 50-100 tabs open in Firefox, memory usage is great, even with a bunch of add-ons, from versions 26-28. Granted, some of my add-ons help reduce overall resources by blocking cookies and scripts. Also 'click to play' is a necessity so Flash only loads on the few sites I allow.

which is here https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/...
It changes *a lot* more slowly than the noraml releases.

Have at it

It's this issue: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...

Been around a long time, but seems almost impossible to reproduce reliably, so no clue what's causing it.

I found this to be the best solution: http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-24.5.0esr&os=win&lang=en-US. Too bad it'll only be good for a few more versions.

"... a future dominated by retards." I think retards may rise in protest: "We may be retards, but we're not dumb!"

Let me guess: The new version of Firefox will be even less stable. The memory-hogging flaws have not been fixed. The memory-hogging flaws are so widely acknowledged that there are add-ons for re-starting Firefox: Firefox Re-start Add-ons. I use Restartless Restart.

Please no obvious replies to this. Please don't make it necessary to post my list of 22 excuses for not fixing the Firefox memory hogging again.

I'm having another problem with the latest version of Firefox. The toolbar icons change back to the default. I have to go to View > Toolbars > Customize and take away the ones I don't want and put back the ones I want.

Also, when I log into Slashdot, I'm recognized as my user name. However, often when I open a tab for a Slashdot story, the story shows that I am not logged in, and logging in at that tab does nothing. Re-starting Firefox fixes that problem for a while.

"... a future dominated by retards." I think retards may rise in protest: "We may be retards, but we're not dumb!"

Let me guess: The new version of Firefox will be even less stable. The memory-hogging flaws have not been fixed. The memory-hogging flaws are so widely acknowledged that there are add-ons for re-starting Firefox: Firefox Re-start Add-ons. I use Restartless Restart.

Please no obvious replies to this. Please don't make it necessary to post my list of 22 excuses for not fixing the Firefox memory hogging again.

I'm having another problem with the latest version of Firefox. The toolbar icons change back to the default. I have to go to View > Toolbars > Customize and take away the ones I don't want and put back the ones I want.

Also, when I log into Slashdot, I'm recognized as my user name. However, often when I open a tab for a Slashdot story, the story shows that I am not logged in, and logging in at that tab does nothing. Re-starting Firefox fixes that problem for a while.

> Oh, when did Firefox (or Chome, or Safari) fix the issue of using too much memory?

They've been working on it for about two years now. And note that I didn't say they fixed it, it's just its memory usage is more in-line with Chrome or Safari

I'm not sure what you're doing with your browsers to cause them to steadily increase in memory while doing nothing. But since it's happening across browsers, you might point the finger inward rather than outward

The short answer:
- add-on bar has been removed
- ability to move tabs below ("browser.tabs.onTop") address bar is gone
- address bar cannot be moved when customising toolbars.

Classic Theme Restorer seems to fix most of these problems.

Brendan was not fired and was not asked by the Board to resign. Brendan voluntarily submitted his resignation. The Board acted in response by inviting him to remain at Mozilla in another C-level position. Brendan declined that offer.

Instead of redesigning the web inspector every release, mozilla should set more effort to implement HTML5. Of course, they are ways better than MSIE, but look at the mozilla schedule for MSE.
HTML5 video streaming without plugins? forget it. At least now.

Instead of redesigning the web inspector every release, mozilla should set more effort to implement HTML5. Of course, they are ways better than MSIE, but look at the mozilla schedule for MSE.
HTML5 video streaming without plugins? forget it. At least now.

I love Firefox and have used it for years. I've put up with all the updates and changes and ridiculous behaviour since they started this rapid development cycle.

There's been some improvements. But every couple of releases my plugins break because they've removed some functionality or changed something. I can put up with that; software changes and needs maintenance.

This is the first upgrade I've done where my interface has been changed this significantly.

The Add-on bar is gone. Can't replace it without an extension. I have (well, had) tools in that I used daily.

Tabs now on top. Can't move them back to the bottom. Here's a two year old Bugzilla filled with people pleading that it remain an option.

There appears to be extensions to fix all this. But what's the fucking point any more? I'm sick of fighting to keep Firefox looking and working like Firefox if all they're going to do is take away the things that I actually use it for. It's just too much effort.

Mozilla, you used to be a leader. Now you're a follower. I know so few people that are still using Firefox - most people I talk to are surprised that I don't use Chrome - why are you going out of your way to alienate those of us that are left?

Take a look at keywords. That has been in Mozilla since, oh, 2001 I think. For example, I type 'd something' into the location bar to search duckduckgo for the 'something'

> It's easy to see what tab you're currently visiting
> and the other tabs fade into the background to be
> less of a distraction when you're not using them.

I swear, if I ever meet a guy in a bar and he says he's on the UX team at Mozilla, I'm going to punch him in the dick as hard as I can. Now that all the background tabs are a mushy mass of grey, it is HARDER to tell them apart and jump to the one you want next. WHY DO YOU THINK TABS EXIST?!?!?

"when you're not using them" -- do you know what constitutes USING tabs? FINDING THEM AND CLICKING ON THEM.

Gee assholes, why don't you just put all my tabs behind that bullshit menu icon in the top right? That's be SUPER clean and easy-to-use! Out of sight, but right there when you need them! >:-|

If I wanted to know the title of the page I'M LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW -- not usually needed because I'M LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW -- I can glance at the title bar OH WHOOPS WAIT THAT'S FUCKING GONE TOO. Fucking retards.

Yes, I got the fucking extension to un-fuck-up the theme, but I shouldn't have to do this all the time.

Now, if they actually FIXED the sync, so you can just log in and not jump through the bullshit hoops of having a DIFFERENT instance of it open so you can type in the stupid PIN (WTF are you supposed to do if you want to sync two non-portable computers in different places?), *THAT* will be some progress.

For everything else, click here and tell them how much they suck.

And finally, a note to ALL browser makers: "View" -> "Source" should be a top-level menu, not buried behind some "developer tools" bullshit. FF, Safari, Chrome -- you're all guilty. "View source" is what made the web great. It SHOULD be easy to get at.

> It's easy to see what tab you're currently visiting
> and the other tabs fade into the background to be
> less of a distraction when you're not using them.

I swear, if I ever meet a guy in a bar and he says he's on the UX team at Mozilla, I'm going to punch him in the dick as hard as I can. Now that all the background tabs are a mushy mass of grey, it is HARDER to tell them apart and jump to the one you want next. WHY DO YOU THINK TABS EXIST?!?!?

"when you're not using them" -- do you know what constitutes USING tabs? FINDING THEM AND CLICKING ON THEM.

Gee assholes, why don't you just put all my tabs behind that bullshit menu icon in the top right? That's be SUPER clean and easy-to-use! Out of sight, but right there when you need them! >:-|

If I wanted to know the title of the page I'M LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW -- not usually needed because I'M LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW -- I can glance at the title bar OH WHOOPS WAIT THAT'S FUCKING GONE TOO. Fucking retards.

Yes, I got the fucking extension to un-fuck-up the theme, but I shouldn't have to do this all the time.

Now, if they actually FIXED the sync, so you can just log in and not jump through the bullshit hoops of having a DIFFERENT instance of it open so you can type in the stupid PIN (WTF are you supposed to do if you want to sync two non-portable computers in different places?), *THAT* will be some progress.

For everything else, click here and tell them how much they suck.

And finally, a note to ALL browser makers: "View" -> "Source" should be a top-level menu, not buried behind some "developer tools" bullshit. FF, Safari, Chrome -- you're all guilty. "View source" is what made the web great. It SHOULD be easy to get at.

You might like the Classic Theme Restorer addon. Tabs back down, multiple bars, back/forward separated and arbitrarily movable, reload next to them, addon bar back at the bottom, and text labels on everything.