Slashdot Mirror

That's my reaction, also.

The article is poorly edited: "Expenses grew too, but not as much, from $361 million to $337 million...". The numbers should be reversed. When the editing is that sloppy, can we depend on other information being accurate?

Also, the article does not tell the full story. For example: "Mozilla in 2014 signed a major five-year deal with Yahoo to be the default search engine in the US, but canceled it only three years in and moved back to Google instead in November."

During that 3 years, Mozilla was dominated by Microsoft. Microsoft paid Yahoo to use Microsoft's Bing search. Yahoo paid Mozilla Foundation to make Firefox browser use "Yahoo Search", which was actually Microsoft Bing search.

A repost of part of a previous comment:

The browser situation is very, very ugly. Firefox is now, basically, owned by Microsoft, who is apparently trying to destroy it. In the past, Google paid Mozilla Foundation $300 million each year (December 22, 2011) to make Google search the default search engine in Firefox. Google apparently didn't cause problems in the design of Firefox, even though it paid a shocking amount.

Now, I understand, Mozilla Foundation gets most of its money from Microsoft: Microsoft pays Yahoo. Yahoo pays Mozilla Foundation to make "Yahoo search" (actually mostly Microsoft Bing search) (April 16, 2015) the default search engine in Firefox.

The Thunderbird and SeaMonkey Composer GUIs have been damaged in several ways, apparently deliberately. For example, file saves in the newer versions of both ask for a new file name, and don't suggest the last one chosen. The damage was reported several months ago, but has not been fixed.

Mozilla Foundation said it will no longer improve the Thunderbird email client. Is that because Microsoft wants more customers for Microsoft products like Outlook? Is that another example of Microsoft's Embrace, Extend, Extinguish? People who feel forced away from Thunderbird may choose Microsoft software to replace it. Is that something Microsoft is trying to accomplish?

We are seeing technology companies that are shockingly badly managed. Why is that happening? Are we experiencing a general social breakdown?

One small but indicative example: On the Mozilla Foundation Download Firefox in your language web page the 32-bit and 64-bit versions have the same file name!

Mozilla Foundation could be far better at communicating with users. Basically, however, Mozilla Foundation does what big corporations want, apparently. Now that Google is paying Microsoft huge amounts again, will the Firefox browser continue to improve in some ways, but continue to be degraded in others, as in losing important add-ons?

A long time ago, I tried the Google Chrome browser. It installed 3 system services. Google had more control over my computer than me as a limited user!!

In my view, the 3 years of Microsoft paying Mozilla Foundation were 3 years of destructiveness in numerous ways.

Should a United Nations agency demand that browsers not be abusive? That is a world-class goal.

One AC comment about Microsoft: Microsoft's a blight, stuffing ballots, poisoning standardization processes, bribing decision makers, spying on users and using their market power to sell inferior products. Your typical big-corp sociopathic behaviour.

One of the many, many stories about poor management

That's my reaction, also.

The article is poorly edited: "Expenses grew too, but not as much, from $361 million to $337 million...". The numbers should be reversed. When the editing is that sloppy, can we depend on other information being accurate?

Also, the article does not tell the full story. For example: "Mozilla in 2014 signed a major five-year deal with Yahoo to be the default search engine in the US, but canceled it only three years in and moved back to Google instead in November."

During that 3 years, Mozilla was dominated by Microsoft. Microsoft paid Yahoo to use Microsoft's Bing search. Yahoo paid Mozilla Foundation to make Firefox browser use "Yahoo Search", which was actually Microsoft Bing search.

A repost of part of a previous comment:

The browser situation is very, very ugly. Firefox is now, basically, owned by Microsoft, who is apparently trying to destroy it. In the past, Google paid Mozilla Foundation $300 million each year (December 22, 2011) to make Google search the default search engine in Firefox. Google apparently didn't cause problems in the design of Firefox, even though it paid a shocking amount.

Now, I understand, Mozilla Foundation gets most of its money from Microsoft: Microsoft pays Yahoo. Yahoo pays Mozilla Foundation to make "Yahoo search" (actually mostly Microsoft Bing search) (April 16, 2015) the default search engine in Firefox.

The Thunderbird and SeaMonkey Composer GUIs have been damaged in several ways, apparently deliberately. For example, file saves in the newer versions of both ask for a new file name, and don't suggest the last one chosen. The damage was reported several months ago, but has not been fixed.

Mozilla Foundation said it will no longer improve the Thunderbird email client. Is that because Microsoft wants more customers for Microsoft products like Outlook? Is that another example of Microsoft's Embrace, Extend, Extinguish? People who feel forced away from Thunderbird may choose Microsoft software to replace it. Is that something Microsoft is trying to accomplish?

We are seeing technology companies that are shockingly badly managed. Why is that happening? Are we experiencing a general social breakdown?

One small but indicative example: On the Mozilla Foundation Download Firefox in your language web page the 32-bit and 64-bit versions have the same file name!

Mozilla Foundation could be far better at communicating with users. Basically, however, Mozilla Foundation does what big corporations want, apparently. Now that Google is paying Microsoft huge amounts again, will the Firefox browser continue to improve in some ways, but continue to be degraded in others, as in losing important add-ons?

A long time ago, I tried the Google Chrome browser. It installed 3 system services. Google had more control over my computer than me as a limited user!!

In my view, the 3 years of Microsoft paying Mozilla Foundation were 3 years of destructiveness in numerous ways.

Should a United Nations agency demand that browsers not be abusive? That is a world-class goal.

One AC comment about Microsoft: Microsoft's a blight, stuffing ballots, poisoning standardization processes, bribing decision makers, spying on users and using their market power to sell inferior products. Your typical big-corp sociopathic behaviour.

One of the many, many stories about poor management

I don't know about this particular iPhone case, but we should remember that other browsers and software can use Google's services or advertising IDs, which can obviously involve some user data getting sent to Google. Most users probably aren't aware that this can happen.

Firefox is a great example of this. There are a lot of people who mistakenly believe that Firefox "respects their privacy", or some gibberish like that.

Yet even a quick look at Firefox's privacy policy shows that Firefox can collect a large amount of user information, and can send it to a variety of different organizations/companies, including Google.

According to the Firefox privacy policy dated Sep 28 2017, Firefox will send user information to Google (emphasis added):

Webpage and technical data to Google’s SafeBrowsing service: To help protect you from malicious downloads, Firefox sends basic information about unrecognized downloads to Google's SafeBrowsing Service, including the filename and the URL it was downloaded from.

Location data to Google's geolocation service: Firefox always asks before determining and sharing your location with a requesting website (for example, if a map website needs your location to provide directions). To determine location, Firefox may use your operating system’s geolocation features, Wi-fi networks, cell phone towers, or IP address, and may send this data to Google's geolocation service, which has its own privacy policy.

It also states that mobile versions of Firefox can send some "Google advertising ID" to some "Adjust" analytics company (emphasis added):

On iOS and Android: Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor, which has its own privacy policy. Mobile campaign data includes a Google advertising ID, IP address, timestamp, country, language/locale, operating system, and app version.

When confronted with these abysmal facts, some Firefox fanatics will claim that this isn't a problem because "those features can be disabled" or "just because it can doesn't mean it will". Well, that's all a load of bullshit! Firefox even just being able to send data to Google and others means that it doesn't respect its users' privacy.

So we need to remember that people might think they're using a non-Google software product that "respects their privacy", but this non-Google software could very easily be using services offered by Google, with personal information unexpectedly being sent to Google (and other companies) as part of these interactions.

... when the fuck did that ever happen?

Once, when it showed me this: Download Firefox

Firefox's main selling point is privacy.

HELL NO.

By default, Firefox sends every URL that you access to Google. It's a "feature" that they call "safebrowsing".

Go to about:config and search for "goog". In fact, look for all the 3rd party servers within about:config.

Also, have a look at this:
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/...

Privacy is one thing that they're quite invasive.
Just because it's not as worse as Chrome, a browser designed by an AD company, doesn't mean that Firefox isn't terrible by itself.

A browser such as Palemoon has shit such as safebrowsing stripped out.

Everyone who considers using Firefox should read its privacy policy.

Firefox collects a lot of personal information, and sends it to a variety of organizations/companies, including Google.

The privacy policy dated September 28, 2017 contains awful stuff like:

Firefox sends data about your interactions with Firefox to us (such as number of open tabs and windows; number of webpages visited; number and type of installed Firefox Add-ons; and session length) and Firefox features offered by Mozilla or our partners (such as interaction with Firefox search features and search partner referrals).

Firefox sends data about your Firefox version and language; device operating system and hardware configuration; memory, basic information about crashes and errors; outcome of automated processes like updates, safebrowsing, and activation to us. When Firefox sends data to us, your IP address is temporarily collected as part of our server logs.

Firefox sends us data such as the position, size and placement of content we suggest, as well as basic data about your interactions with Firefox’s suggested content. This includes the number of times suggested content is displayed or clicked.

When you choose to click on a Snippet link, we may receive data about the link you followed.

Desktop versions of Firefox periodically check for browser updates by connecting to Mozilla servers. Your Firefox version, language, and device operating system are used to apply the correct updates. Mobile versions of Firefox may connect to another service if you used one to download and install Firefox.

Firefox for Desktop and Android periodically connect to Mozilla to protect you and others from malicious add-ons. Your Firefox version and language, device operating system, and list of installed add-ons are needed to apply and update the add-ons blocklist.

Firefox sends basic information about unrecognized downloads to Google's SafeBrowsing Service, including the filename and the URL it was downloaded from.

This may involve Firefox sending certain information about the website to the Certificate Authority identified by that website.

Firefox by default sends Mozilla HTTP data that may be included with Firefox’s installer. This enables us to determine the website domain or advertising campaign (if any) that referred you to our download page.

Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor, which has its own privacy policy. Mobile campaign data includes a Google advertising ID, IP address, timestamp, country, language/locale, operating system, and app version.

Firefox by default sends data about what features you use in Firefox to Leanplum, our mobile marketing vendor, which has its own privacy policy.

Firefox by default sends search queries to your search provider to help you discover common phrases other people have searched for and improve your search experience.

Mozilla receives your email address and a hash of your password when you create a Firefox Account. You can choose to include a display name or profile image. Your email address is sent to our email vendor, SalesForce Marketing Cloud, which has its own privacy policy. If you use your Firefox Account to log into other websites or services (such as AMO or Pocket), we receive the timestamp of your log-in from those services.

For security purposes, we store the IP addresses you use to access your Firefox Account in order to approximate your

First, I look forward to seeing you flagged as flamebait.

Enjoy your cheap thrills. You read my message that's what counted.

Second, way to miss the point. The question is one of privacy.

The question is one of continuous survival of a company, and how hypocritical people are about privacy for something they contribute absolutely zero towards. The concept doesn't need to be "sorted out" because it is intertwined from the onset.

We should expand the meme: "If you're not paying, you're the product, or you're using something from a company that's about to go out of business." It may add some much needed perspective for you. But hey there's something you can DIRECTLY DO to help the situation: https://donate.mozilla.org/

Nuke Anything Enhanced already supports FF 57.

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

The necessary 10-15 extensions are the ones they're using.

I imagine theweatherelectric wanted the names of the necessary 10-15 extensions that DNS-and-BIND is using in order to analyze a sample.

maybe say "hey, if Greasemonkey and Noscript made the jump in the past couple months, write your plugin developers or hang in there... equivlents will likely appear"

Or how about "the author of the extension I need is waiting on a resolution of Bug #XXXXXXX"? In my case, it's Keybinder, and it's Bug 1325692.

Also there are only 75 extensions or so.

No. As of right now there are 7,040 add-ons available for Firefox Quantum. You can check this stuff for yourself.

It now competes head to head in performance and features, and offers an alternative with improved privacy.

The improved privacy is bullshit. WebExtensions breaks a large number of privacy plugins that blocked fingerprinting (Stop Fingerprinting), stopped redirects (NoRedirect), provided control over cross-site requests (RequestPolicy Continued), self-destructed cookies, super-cookie safeguards (BetterPrivacy), and these won't be ported. David Teller of the Mozilla Foundation has stated "some of our priorities with WebExtensions are - improving privacy. ..." Want to guess how he responded when he was asked how these privacy enhancing addons will be reintroduced to FF57? He went silent.

Then there is the Mozilla Cliqz partnership and the October experiment. "In August 2016, Mozilla ... made a strategic investment in Cliqz. Cliqz plans to eventually monetize the software through a program known as Cliqz Offers, which will deliver sponsored offers to users based on their interests and browsing history." "Mozilla is experimenting with including the Cliqz plug-in by default in its open source Firefox browser." Decide for yourself whether or not any of this is in the interest of privacy. Mozilla is drowning in its own bullshit.

It now competes head to head in performance and features, and offers an alternative with improved privacy.

The improved privacy is bullshit. WebExtensions breaks a large number of privacy plugins that blocked fingerprinting (Stop Fingerprinting), stopped redirects (NoRedirect), provided control over cross-site requests (RequestPolicy Continued), self-destructed cookies, super-cookie safeguards (BetterPrivacy), and these won't be ported. David Teller of the Mozilla Foundation has stated "some of our priorities with WebExtensions are - improving privacy. ..." Want to guess how he responded when he was asked how these privacy enhancing addons will be reintroduced to FF57? He went silent.

Then there is the Mozilla Cliqz partnership and the October experiment. "In August 2016, Mozilla ... made a strategic investment in Cliqz. Cliqz plans to eventually monetize the software through a program known as Cliqz Offers, which will deliver sponsored offers to users based on their interests and browsing history." "Mozilla is experimenting with including the Cliqz plug-in by default in its open source Firefox browser." Decide for yourself whether or not any of this is in the interest of privacy. Mozilla is drowning in its own bullshit.

It now competes head to head in performance and features, and offers an alternative with improved privacy.

The improved privacy is bullshit. WebExtensions breaks a large number of privacy plugins that blocked fingerprinting (Stop Fingerprinting), stopped redirects (NoRedirect), provided control over cross-site requests (RequestPolicy Continued), self-destructed cookies, super-cookie safeguards (BetterPrivacy), and these won't be ported. David Teller of the Mozilla Foundation has stated "some of our priorities with WebExtensions are - improving privacy. ..." Want to guess how he responded when he was asked how these privacy enhancing addons will be reintroduced to FF57? He went silent.

Then there is the Mozilla Cliqz partnership and the October experiment. "In August 2016, Mozilla ... made a strategic investment in Cliqz. Cliqz plans to eventually monetize the software through a program known as Cliqz Offers, which will deliver sponsored offers to users based on their interests and browsing history." "Mozilla is experimenting with including the Cliqz plug-in by default in its open source Firefox browser." Decide for yourself whether or not any of this is in the interest of privacy. Mozilla is drowning in its own bullshit.

It now competes head to head in performance and features, and offers an alternative with improved privacy.

The improved privacy is bullshit. WebExtensions breaks a large number of privacy plugins that blocked fingerprinting (Stop Fingerprinting), stopped redirects (NoRedirect), provided control over cross-site requests (RequestPolicy Continued), self-destructed cookies, super-cookie safeguards (BetterPrivacy), and these won't be ported. David Teller of the Mozilla Foundation has stated "some of our priorities with WebExtensions are - improving privacy. ..." Want to guess how he responded when he was asked how these privacy enhancing addons will be reintroduced to FF57? He went silent.

Then there is the Mozilla Cliqz partnership and the October experiment. "In August 2016, Mozilla ... made a strategic investment in Cliqz. Cliqz plans to eventually monetize the software through a program known as Cliqz Offers, which will deliver sponsored offers to users based on their interests and browsing history." "Mozilla is experimenting with including the Cliqz plug-in by default in its open source Firefox browser." Decide for yourself whether or not any of this is in the interest of privacy. Mozilla is drowning in its own bullshit.

Gone are pretty much all the extensions that separated Firefox from Chrome.

The developers of NoScript and uBlock Origin say Firefox's WebExtensions API is the best of any browser. The API isn't standing still. New features are getting added. Firefox's implementation of WebExtensions does more than Chrome's does.

Quantum completely broke noscript

NoScript is available for Firefox Quantum. Read the developer's blog to get the latest NoScript status.

Personally I use uBlock Origin and I've also set Firefox's built-in tracking protection to "always".

Quantum completely broke noscript

NoScript is available for Firefox Quantum. Read the developer's blog to get the latest NoScript status.

Personally I use uBlock Origin and I've also set Firefox's built-in tracking protection to "always".

don't mention that Mozilla is apparently merely copying the Google Chrome browser

No, this is a separate issue. Firefox has long had attack site warnings. I think Internet Explorer was the first to have unsafe site warnings starting with Internet Explorer 7 11 years ago, so everyone's copying Microsoft.

This is not over yet! Sadly, we need to keep saying the same thing to the same people, who want to ignore the overwhelming, bipartisan public support for net neutrality. Weigh in directly with the FCC with this form, type 17-108 in the "Proceeding(s)" box, then fill in the rest of the required information.

This is a battle between the interests of consumers (citizens) and the interests of large ISPs (corporations). It is also crucial to us as citizens to have the free speech protections provided by strong net neutrality rules. Economists and lawyers have studied this. Claims that net neutrality rules hinder innovation have proved to be nonsense, empirically. Claims that existing antitrust law provides adequate net-neutrality protections have proved to be nonsense, legally. Tell the FCC to serve the public interest, not just corporate interests.

Can also stay on older versions and still patched on Firefox ESR (Extended Support Release) https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/... at version 52.5 currently.

I am using Firefox ESR (Extended Support Release) https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/... for this only reason, can keep using the add-ons i want. They are currently at version 52.5

In Firefox 57 there's now also the option to turn on its built-in tracking protection all the time, as opposed to only in private browsing mode.

You should do that anyway if for no other reason than to actually speed up the internet. http://www.ieee-security.org/T...

Previously I would have said NoScript

Use it again. NoScript has been released for Firefox 57.

This is yet one more reason why I never browse without NoScript and uBlock Origin.

In Firefox 57 there's now also the option to turn on its built-in tracking protection all the time, as opposed to only in private browsing mode.

Everyone who considers using Firefox should read its privacy policy.

Firefox's privacy policy mentions it sending data to organizations/companies like Mozilla, Google, SalesForce, Leanplum, Adjust, and possibly others.

The privacy policy dated September 28, 2017 contains awful stuff like:

Firefox sends data about your interactions with Firefox to us (such as number of open tabs and windows; number of webpages visited; number and type of installed Firefox Add-ons; and session length) and Firefox features offered by Mozilla or our partners (such as interaction with Firefox search features and search partner referrals).

Firefox sends data about your Firefox version and language; device operating system and hardware configuration; memory, basic information about crashes and errors; outcome of automated processes like updates, safebrowsing, and activation to us. When Firefox sends data to us, your IP address is temporarily collected as part of our server logs.

Firefox sends us data such as the position, size and placement of content we suggest, as well as basic data about your interactions with Firefox’s suggested content. This includes the number of times suggested content is displayed or clicked.

When you choose to click on a Snippet link, we may receive data about the link you followed.

Desktop versions of Firefox periodically check for browser updates by connecting to Mozilla servers. Your Firefox version, language, and device operating system are used to apply the correct updates. Mobile versions of Firefox may connect to another service if you used one to download and install Firefox.

Firefox for Desktop and Android periodically connect to Mozilla to protect you and others from malicious add-ons. Your Firefox version and language, device operating system, and list of installed add-ons are needed to apply and update the add-ons blocklist.

Firefox sends basic information about unrecognized downloads to Google's SafeBrowsing Service, including the filename and the URL it was downloaded from.

This may involve Firefox sending certain information about the website to the Certificate Authority identified by that website.

Firefox by default sends Mozilla HTTP data that may be included with Firefox’s installer. This enables us to determine the website domain or advertising campaign (if any) that referred you to our download page.

Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor, which has its own privacy policy. Mobile campaign data includes a Google advertising ID, IP address, timestamp, country, language/locale, operating system, and app version.

Firefox by default sends data about what features you use in Firefox to Leanplum, our mobile marketing vendor, which has its own privacy policy.

Firefox by default sends search queries to your search provider to help you discover common phrases other people have searched for and improve your search experience.

Mozilla receives your email address and a hash of your password when you create a Firefox Account. You can choose to include a display name or profile image. Your email address is sent to our email vendor, SalesForce Marketing Cloud, which has its own privacy policy. If you use your Firefox Account to log into other websites or services (such as AMO or Pocket), we receive the timestamp of your log-in from those services.

For security purposes, we store the IP addresses you use to access your Firefox Accoun

No, I mean this about mozilla. Try learning something.

You mean that about:mozilla ?

What product failure? Firefox 57 works. Mozilla has been telling everyone they'll be making this transition for over two years. NoScript wasn't released on time, even though it had plenty of time.

Yes. uBlock Origin, uMatrix, Adblock Plus, Ghostery, Privacy Badger, etc. are similar add-ons that made the transition smoothly. In the end it's up to the NoScript developer to get it done like the others have. And he will eventually (even though so far he has missed the three deadlines he set himself).

Yes. uBlock Origin, uMatrix, Adblock Plus, Ghostery, Privacy Badger, etc. are similar add-ons that made the transition smoothly. In the end it's up to the NoScript developer to get it done like the others have. And he will eventually (even though so far he has missed the three deadlines he set himself).

Yes. uBlock Origin, uMatrix, Adblock Plus, Ghostery, Privacy Badger, etc. are similar add-ons that made the transition smoothly. In the end it's up to the NoScript developer to get it done like the others have. And he will eventually (even though so far he has missed the three deadlines he set himself).

Yes. uBlock Origin, uMatrix, Adblock Plus, Ghostery, Privacy Badger, etc. are similar add-ons that made the transition smoothly. In the end it's up to the NoScript developer to get it done like the others have. And he will eventually (even though so far he has missed the three deadlines he set himself).

Yes. uBlock Origin, uMatrix, Adblock Plus, Ghostery, Privacy Badger, etc. are similar add-ons that made the transition smoothly. In the end it's up to the NoScript developer to get it done like the others have. And he will eventually (even though so far he has missed the three deadlines he set himself).

The performance sucks

You fundamentally broke something. User error. There's just no way around it. In every metric in every way across a massive install based by every tester the new Firefox is faster than the old.

You can start by Refreshing your profile: https://support.mozilla.org/en...
If that doesn't work export your bookmarks and password file and nuke your entire profile.
If that doesn't work then maybe set your computer on fire, pour salt on it and chant in some long lost language until the spirits of slowness vanish.

This new FF quantum architecture has a major regression which they're very slow on fixing so far. If you have a large select list(html SELECT), FF takes several seconds to open it when you click on it. It's so bad that we had to tell users to use IE for now until they fix it. Chrome and Safari all display the select list in less than 1 second. Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...

Not only is Quantum faster than Chrome, in my very subjective experience, but, more importantly, it preserves the only reason that I continue using FF over Chrome: the search field.

https://support.mozilla.org/en...

Here is the surprisingly obvious use case:

1. search for something using the all-in-one search/address field
2. click one result
3. click through to several other pages
4. now decide you would like to refine/modify your search somehow. how? oh, simple. just retype the entire query again, since it has been cheerfully replaced by the address of the site you're currently viewing.

Now, do we all agree yet that a search field is a useful thing? Please, O design gurus, stop over simplicating our user interfaces. Yes, we need two mouse buttons, and we need a search field.

Also, just found one more extension that may help Tab Mix Plus users:

Open Link with New Tab https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

I haven't actually tried it because when you go to install it, it says that it requires your permission to access your data on all websites, and since I'm not really certain how Firefox extension permissions work, I don't know if that actually implies some kind of security risk.

If you read the comments a lot of people are berating the author because it won't open bookmarks in new tabs, but that can easily be accomplished by adding a Firefox preference; you don't need an extension for that anymore. http://techdows.com/2017/09/fi...

With the new FF 57, it all comes down to whether you care about privacy and the details of your Internet use kept out of Google's databases, and the 3rd party businesses and government instances they have to share it with.

You really should read Firefox's privacy policy.

Firefox's very own privacy policy readily admits that it can share personal data with Google and other companies in a variety of ways.

The September 28, 2017 version of it states (with emphasis added):

Webpage and technical data to Google’s SafeBrowsing service: To help protect you from malicious downloads, Firefox sends basic information about unrecognized downloads to Google's SafeBrowsing Service, including the filename and the URL it was downloaded from.

Location data to Google's geolocation service: Firefox always asks before determining and sharing your location with a requesting website (for example, if a map website needs your location to provide directions). To determine location, Firefox may use your operating system’s geolocation features, Wi-fi networks, cell phone towers, or IP address, and may send this data to Google's geolocation service, which has its own privacy policy.

On iOS and Android: Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor, which has its own privacy policy. Mobile campaign data includes a Google advertising ID, IP address, timestamp, country, language/locale, operating system, and app version.

It can also send information to SalesForce:

Your email address is sent to our email vendor, SalesForce Marketing Cloud

And to some "Adjust" company:

Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor

And to some "Leanplum" company:

Firefox by default sends data about what features you use in Firefox to Leanplum, our mobile marketing vendor

If you're using Firefox because you want to avoid sending data to Google or other companies, well, you've fucked up!

In my opinion, Firefox does not respect its users privacy at all. It's even worse that there are people like you spreading misinformation about Firefox, suggesting it respects the privacy of its users when as far as I'm concerned it very clearly doesn't.

ImageZoom hasn't been updated, but there is ZoomImage which seems similar.

The developer behind Classic Theme Restorer has a set of custom CSS files that can tweak a lot of the interface.

(Also, FF and Chromium don't send all your data and browsing history directly to google. Just throwing that out there).

It's really disturbing to see this nonsensical "Firefox doesn't send information to Google" myth being propagated again and again, especially here at Slashdot of all places.

READ FIREFOX'S PRIVACY POLICY!

The September 28, 2017 version of it states (with emphasis added):

Webpage and technical data to Google’s SafeBrowsing service: To help protect you from malicious downloads, Firefox sends basic information about unrecognized downloads to Google's SafeBrowsing Service, including the filename and the URL it was downloaded from.

Location data to Google's geolocation service: Firefox always asks before determining and sharing your location with a requesting website (for example, if a map website needs your location to provide directions). To determine location, Firefox may use your operating system’s geolocation features, Wi-fi networks, cell phone towers, or IP address, and may send this data to Google's geolocation service, which has its own privacy policy.

On iOS and Android: Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor, which has its own privacy policy. Mobile campaign data includes a Google advertising ID, IP address, timestamp, country, language/locale, operating system, and app version.

It should be pretty clear to you now that Firefox very well can send information to Google, or otherwise uses Google nonsense like Google advertising IDs.

So don't give us this bullshit about Firefox somehow respecting our privacy. In my opinion it doesn't. In fact, I think it's worse than Chrome, in that it has tricked fools like you into thinking that Firefox doesn't violate your privacy by sending information to Google when, as Firefox's very own privacy policy clearly states, Firefox can send information to Google.

Everyone who considers using Firefox should read its privacy policy.

Firefox collects a lot of personal information, and sends it to a variety of organizations/companies, including Google.

The privacy policy dated September 28, 2017 contains awful stuff like:

Firefox sends data about your interactions with Firefox to us (such as number of open tabs and windows; number of webpages visited; number and type of installed Firefox Add-ons; and session length) and Firefox features offered by Mozilla or our partners (such as interaction with Firefox search features and search partner referrals).

Firefox sends data about your Firefox version and language; device operating system and hardware configuration; memory, basic information about crashes and errors; outcome of automated processes like updates, safebrowsing, and activation to us. When Firefox sends data to us, your IP address is temporarily collected as part of our server logs.

Firefox sends us data such as the position, size and placement of content we suggest, as well as basic data about your interactions with Firefox’s suggested content. This includes the number of times suggested content is displayed or clicked.

When you choose to click on a Snippet link, we may receive data about the link you followed.

Desktop versions of Firefox periodically check for browser updates by connecting to Mozilla servers. Your Firefox version, language, and device operating system are used to apply the correct updates. Mobile versions of Firefox may connect to another service if you used one to download and install Firefox.

Firefox for Desktop and Android periodically connect to Mozilla to protect you and others from malicious add-ons. Your Firefox version and language, device operating system, and list of installed add-ons are needed to apply and update the add-ons blocklist.

Firefox sends basic information about unrecognized downloads to Google's SafeBrowsing Service, including the filename and the URL it was downloaded from.

This may involve Firefox sending certain information about the website to the Certificate Authority identified by that website.

Firefox by default sends Mozilla HTTP data that may be included with Firefox’s installer. This enables us to determine the website domain or advertising campaign (if any) that referred you to our download page.

Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor, which has its own privacy policy. Mobile campaign data includes a Google advertising ID, IP address, timestamp, country, language/locale, operating system, and app version.

Firefox by default sends data about what features you use in Firefox to Leanplum, our mobile marketing vendor, which has its own privacy policy.

Firefox by default sends search queries to your search provider to help you discover common phrases other people have searched for and improve your search experience.

Mozilla receives your email address and a hash of your password when you create a Firefox Account. You can choose to include a display name or profile image. Your email address is sent to our email vendor, SalesForce Marketing Cloud, which has its own privacy policy. If you use your Firefox Account to log into other websites or services (such as AMO or Pocket), we receive the timestamp of your log-in from those services.

For security purposes, we store the IP addresses you use to access your Firefox Account in order to approximate your

Mozilla has been stating loudly for YEARS that they would be moving on from the old add-ons. Here's an official post from them in August 2015 about beginning to move in the direction of web extensions: https://blog.mozilla.org/addon... For a browser to compete, it has to be fast, and it has to be safe. Web Extensions tick box #2.

Functionality trumps bugs and performance issues every time. If I have to make a choice between two pieces of software that do roughly the same thing and one does something I need and the other doesn't. I will probably go with the one that does what I need even if it is not as reliable or efficient. Firefox is a perfect case in point. I have Opera, Chrome, Pale Moon, Safari, SRWare Iron, and numerous other forks installed, but I always made Firefox my go to even though Firefox is less stable (probably addon related) because of all the customizations. That was an acceptable cost.

Firefox is frequently slow, crashes, and causes all sorts of heck, but the Firefox addon ecosystem is second to none. Yesterday I had my first taste of the new WebExtension system. The experience was bad. First Stylish broke and all my user styles went kaput. I thought no big deal, should be some easy minor edits. Boy was I wrong. Edits that previously worked nicely in Stylish I had to move to userChrome.css and even then many still didn't cooperate. To make matters worse userChrome.css is going away too according to http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/sh... . Then I started reading Wladimir Palant's comments about the changes coming down the pipe with WebExtensions and I realized every extension in Firefox that I spend time with will likely be catastrophically and permanently broken. The only reason Firefox attracts any market share is because of niche addons users can't find in other browsers. The second all of that goes away is the second Firefox loses all relevance.

Use Firefox ESR. Problem solved. By the time ESR is updated with this API change, any maintained plugin should be updated to run in it.

It's time that the Mozilla Foundation cease to exist. Firefox 57 actively harm's users and their tactics are on par with Microsoft's rollout of Windows 10.

Many people depend on extensions such as Noscript for security within their browser. Some of these extensions have been broken in Firefox 57, and as of now, functionality hasn't been restored. Despite claiming to be a security update, many users are left less secure than they were before. Furthermore, automatic updates that many users are experiencing break Firefox security extensions without any interaction on the part of the user. The lack of many APIs needed for these extensions to function leaves users without a reasonable alternative.

The Firefox developers are actively working to break these extensions and prevent users from running legacy extensions. The webpage https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Firefox57 clearly states, "the main goal is prevent the running of legacy add-ons in Firefox Desktop and Android release." The Firefox developers are actively working to harm users when this renders security-related extensions like Noscript unavailable. It reduces functionality for users who rely on legacy extensions for productivity.

The Mozilla Foundation is supporting and funding these activities. When open source developers actively work against users, there needs to be community backlash. It is time that the Mozilla Foundation cease to exist, because their actions are deliberate and actively harms users.

> What else do you need?

Tab groups.

Fortunately, the developer of Simplified Tab Groups says that Mozilla is working on putting back the necessary APIs, and he will update the extension when possible. (See Issue #60 - Port to WebExtensions.)

It's time that the Mozilla Foundation cease to exist. Firefox 57 actively harm's users and their tactics are on par with Microsoft's rollout of Windows 10.

Many people depend on extensions such as Noscript for security within their browser. Some of these extensions have been broken in Firefox 57, and as of now, functionality hasn't been restored. Despite claiming to be a security update, many users are left less secure than they were before. Furthermore, automatic updates that many users are experiencing break Firefox security extensions without any interaction on the part of the user. The lack of many APIs needed for these extensions to function leaves users without a reasonable alternative.

The Firefox developers are actively working to break these extensions and prevent users from running legacy extensions. The webpage https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Firefox57 clearly states, "the main goal is prevent the running of legacy add-ons in Firefox Desktop and Android release." The Firefox developers are actively working to harm users when this renders security-related extensions like Noscript unavailable. It reduces functionality for users who rely on legacy extensions for productivity.

The Mozilla Foundation is supporting and funding these activities. When open source developers actively work against users, there needs to be community backlash. It is time that the Mozilla Foundation cease to exist, because their actions are deliberate and actively harm's users.

Mark Davis, before you make an asinine claim about Firefox like:

3) Contains no Googleisms and Google tracking

you should read Firefox's privacy policy!

That way you'd see that it contains stuff like (emphasis added):

Location data to Google's geolocation service: Firefox always asks before determining and sharing your location with a requesting website (for example, if a map website needs your location to provide directions). To determine location, Firefox may use your operating system’s geolocation features, Wi-fi networks, cell phone towers, or IP address, and may send this data to Google's geolocation service, which has its own privacy policy.

and

Webpage and technical data to Google’s SafeBrowsing service: To help protect you from malicious downloads, Firefox sends basic information about unrecognized downloads to Google's SafeBrowsing Service, including the filename and the URL it was downloaded from.

and

On iOS and Android: Firefox by default sends mobile campaign data to Adjust, our analytics vendor, which has its own privacy policy. Mobile campaign data includes a Google advertising ID, ...

So don't give us this bullshit about Firefox not containing "Googleisms and Google tracking". Firefox very clearly does use at least two Google services, and using these services involves sending data to Google. And this "Google advertising ID" is clearly an example of a "Googleism" that has found its way into Firefox.

Anyone who claims that Firefox cares about its users' privacy is full of bullshit.

Given how Firefox uses services provided by Google, I don't consider it any better than Chrome. In fact, it may be worse, because clearly some people like you have been fooled into wrongly thinking that Firefox is free from "Googleisms and Google tracking".

It doesn't use the abomination that is XUL.

Mozillians are not to be taken seriously.

NoScript - "but it will be out later today!" only works for so long

Check out uMatrix, you might find it far superior to NoScript.