Slashdot Mirror
The Secrets of Firefox about:config
jcatcw writes "While Firefox is very customizable, many of its settings aren't in the Options. Each setting is named and stored as a string, integer, or Boolean in a file called prefs.js and accessed via about:config from the nav bar. Computerworld provides instructions on 20 tweaks for speeding up page loads, making tabs behave, reducing memory drain, and generally making the interface act the way you want it to. Customization also comes through the must-have FF extensions (but be sure to skip these)."
Do not tune stuff that is hidden unless you know what you are doing.
I thought we agreed that ComputerWorld article was mostly crap...
The perfect sig is a lot like silence, only louder
I just want to make it stop going to Google when it's looking up a URL. If it can't find it in DNS, I want it to return a 404, not ask some fsking company where they think I should go.
I tried changing every entry that mentions google.com, and sometimes it still queries. WTF!
In Soviet Russia, Firefox keeps tabs on YOU!
I still use Camino, a Mozilla-based browser for OS X. Is there a similar guide to configuring Camino options or do most of these work as is?
1) Install Stumble Upon 2) Set your topic to FireFox 3) Stumble Dollars to donuts, the first Stumble you hit is someone elses TopN list of must have extensions, which is pretty much a mirror of FF most popular extensions, so there ya go.
here
So what's the problem then if everything works out in the end? Nothing to complain about?
Well, a lot of these "tweaks" will have negative effects.
Example: nglayout.initialpaint.delay as 0. This will slow rendering of the page as it causes reflows. Fools.
Using Firefox on FC6, the Slashdot firehose stopped working for me a while back.
The thumbs-up/down thingies don't do anything anymore. I tried turning off the NoScript extension, but that didn't seem to help. I also have Adblock+ installed.
Any clues?
Is why useful tweaks are hidden behind and obscure and risky-to-use interface like about:config. If the tweaks are worth doing, shouldn't they have first-class support in the main configuration GUI?
http://kb.mozillazine.org/About:config_entries
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Some of these tweaks cut down on memory usage. Given that there are still plenty of computers with 512MB of ram (e.g. notebook computers), you don't want applications pinning 100% CPU or memory as it slows down the rest of the system. This is more important with notebook computers, since a second lost through CPU usage or hard drive thrashing is a second lost from battery charge.
The notebook I'm using right now has this amount of memory, and was easily available in stores 1 year ago. Last time I checked, a web browser should never require the absolute latest system for day-to-day operations (which include having another application in the background, such as a word processor or even MSVC 2005.)
...works really well if you first watch the video you want to download, putting it in your cache. Then going to video downloader, and regardless of the file size, takes just a few seconds and you are done. Apparently it can grab it from your cache and make it a file on you system (very little for it to really do - very low bandwidth to convert).
In fact, it seems to me that when it doesn't work, "service not available" only happens when I don't watch it first, not in my cache.
Set general.config.obscure_value to 42 for a special treat :D
The real path to male liberation
I mean, they don't like AdBlock Plus? They wanted people to avoid AdBlock Plus because it blocked ads!? At least they could've said to avoid AdBlock or not to bother unless you get the Filterset.G updater with it (AdBlock Plus with no block lists blocks approximately nothing).
I'd say that's disingenuous at the very least...
For the record, I'm a happy user of 4 of the 10 extensions in that article, and the only one that gives me pain on occasion is NoScript and that mostly because I only unblock sites temporarily unless I really trust them. Almost without exception, I tend to regret unblocking the few sites I do. For example, I will _NEVER_ use Western Union's website again; it's one of the most annoying websites I've ever had the displeasure of using.
P.S. Here's a link to a Slashdot comment with the list of "extensions to avoid" but I personally enjoy using NoScript, Adblock Plus, PDF Download, and Greasemonkey. To those of use with the skill to use them, they're great.
A long time ago, when computers remembered using little donuts made of rust, I worked on on a mainframe computer system (CP/V) that supported batch, timesharing, realtime, the works. It had performance monitoring tools, and a large basketload of parameters for sys admins to twiddle.
One of our favorite parameters was SL:BB, documented as batch bias, an input to the process scheduler. When someone called or wrote to us saying they were having problems with performance tuning, we usually suggested they redo their tests varying the setting of SL:BB and let us know what happened. Try different values, 0, 1, 5, 20, 50, 100, things like that. Try it and get back to us.
And lo, they would go off and redo performance runs, and report back.
And we would collect their results and go and muse over them, usually over beer.
SL:BB told us a lot about the user, because SL:BB was a knob that wasn't connected to anything. Oh, the value was range-checked by the parameter setting tool, and dutifully stored in memory, and displayed on performance displays, but it didn't change system performance in any way at all.
That's not what the documentation said, but who believes documentation? We had plans for SL:BB, we just hadn't gotten around to writing the code yet.
So if the user reported that setting SL:BB to 25, but not 24 or 26 gave them incredibly better (or worse) results, we definitely factored that into our analysis.
Those that reported back that the setting of SL:BB didn't make a damn bit of difference, and there were some, we honored as brothers, took into our confidences, and shared beer with at the soonest opportunity. Their bug reports and feature requests received far more attention, for they had passed an important test.
And how many of these Firefox parameters are like SL:BB?
Good stuff.
I really don't like favicons in the bookmark menu. Added in firefox 2.0, they force the menu linespacing to be bigger, so I fit less items in a screenful, and the site that I used to know was 6 inches down the screen isn't where I'm expecting it to be anymore. I understand why some people like them, but for me they are a distracting rainbow coloured mess.
Guess which one of the billion or so features in the UI I can't turn off? I can use about:config to remove them from the URL bar, and the tool bar, where they were actually somewhere between bearable and useful... but in the bookmarks menu where they annoy me, I'm stuck with them.
I've installed a plugin that turns custom ones off, so they all look like 5 cyan jellybeans (wtf?) so they are a bit less annoying, but why can't I banish them?
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
Oh wow, I love how this was modded "offtopic" and not "troll".
KDawson is the new Zonk? Given the quality of the articles he is approving these days, he would soon surpass Zonk in crap-o-meter.
Gah. Why is it that these people insist on calling anything not found on the main options page "hacking"? As for the above questions - usually the reason things like that are 'hidden' is to stop people fiddling with them. A good example is the old 'coolbits' entry in the registry for nVidia cards - the overclocking functionality was there, but you had to do something non-standard to enable it. That way, the company's ass is covered if you melt your card; you can't pretend you enabled the options accidentally. Since Firefox is free and nobody is paying tech-support, I'm not sure why these things aren't available - but the fact of the matter is, anyone messing around with fundamental parameters should _not_ be the kind of person who lets random articles on the internet tell them what to change.
You can configure many settings in Thunderbird using a similar interface. However, in Thunderbird you can get to the config section from the Options menu Advanced tab. I have reduced the size of the attachment icons this way. set mailnews.attachments.display.largeView to False.
#bookmarks-menu .bookmark-item .menu-iconic-left {
display: none !important;
}
Slashdot Classic
This morning at work (don't ask why I was surfing the web at work!) I launched FF and opened six tabs, each with a fairly common site: NOAA, TD Ameritrade, Yahoo Finance, etc. Later in the day, perhaps 6 hours later, I noticed my machine (IBM T42) was swapping and noticeably. The Windows XP Task manager, with tasks ordered by memory usage, showed that FF was using 270MB of RAM, far more than any other application. During the day I had closed and opened a few tabs, and reloaded a few pages, but my god -- 270MB of RAM? I am using FF 2. Tomorrow morning I'll try changing browser.sessionhistory.max_total_viewers to 0, and hopefully that will resolve my issue. I'll report back.
Filterset.G is not recommended for Adblock Plus! Use Easylist+EasyElement from the subscriptions page for better results.
Some of them are among the most useful ones ever created (Adblock{plus}, grasemonkey, noscript, etc.). Hmmmm... jcatcw, are you a Computerworld corporate shill by posting that link again after a lot /. users showed how the first Computerworld article was a pile of corporate rubbish?
this circulates every couple months and just ends up pissing off a bunch of routers and sys admins. if you didn't know that about:config existed, the defaults were meant for you.
about:config
change from true to false on the two following items:
browser.chrome.favicons
browser.chrome.site_icons
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
In Firefox 2.0.3, I opened up the DOM inspector, chose the main window, and started drilling down in to the element tree: I found the icons which you loathe.
Open up userChrome.css (in your profile: [profile dir]/chrome/).
In it, the following CSS rule should work to hide the icons:(This selector appears in chrome://browser/skin/browser.css, if you know where that is).
As hinted in my earlier post, those controls turns off the lfavicons in the url bar, and in tabs. They do *not* turn off favicons in the bookmarks menu.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
Get the FavIcon picker and reduce some of your bookmarks to nothing BUT a favicon. You can get some of them pretty small that way.
(I learned this from another Slashdot comment like this.)
The one thing that you cannot configure in FF is the order or preference of plugins. Say that you have 2 or 3 plugins that support the same filetypes, you can't configure if which filetype opens with which plugin. In situations where the support is broken by a plugin, as it often happens in linux with eg. streaming windows media, you are stuck with the plugin that doesn't work and you can't change it. If you remove it, then you loose functionality, because the others might not work with filetypes that this one supported well.
I couldn't find that on the about:config menu. Is that one of the hidden settings?
Software and Games for Wii's Opera Browser
opera:config
Computerworld actually had the gall to suggest switching to blocking software that's more selective, allowing you to cherrypick ads to block "while continuing to support the sites we love by allowing most ads to appear." Oh, what a cynical dearth of principles: block our competitors' ads, but NIMBY!
Nope, I'm an equal opportunity Scrooge, and for my free-as-beer money these are two of the most useful Firefox extensions around.
Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
I've found some secret hidden tweaks you can make to Slashdot articles, just by editing this thing called a URL. For instance, you can set the comment threshold HIGHER than 5 by editing the number after "threshold=", ensuring only the absolute best comments (apparently none in this story meet that standard yet). Why do they hide useful options like this from us?
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure you will), but I seem to remember that Firefox had an option in its cookie preferences dialog that allowed you to restrict cookies to those set by the originating site. It's a nice option, as it marginally increases privacy, and probably should be on by default. But as of 2.0, that option is gone. It still exists in the about:config, but less-sophisticated users are stuck with the default "allow sites to set just about any cookie they want" setting.
One must wonder: why would the Firefox team remove that option? The only conspiracy theory I can dream up is Google's involvement...
Can I get a single script/installable/whatever to tweak all these in one shot?
O this learning! What a thing it is - William Shakespeare
Did you know with the DownThemAll extension you can grab the files from tv-links.co.uk. I do not have java installed on this machine and some of the better quality episodes are streamed via a java applet. With DTA after clicking DTAOneClick! I go to the additional tab and manually click the file and I then download the episode in a matter of minutes and then I can watch the show without streaming it.
I like DTA and DownloadHelper. VideoDownloader is nice, but I never got around to messing with it that much.
about:config is the worst method of changing preferences that I have ever seen.
about:config is evidence of feature creep, and hence evidence of Firefox turning into the Mozilla browser.
Past versions of Firefox have added additional features such as image resizing. And guess, what, users are not given the ability to disable this; they must enter into the cryptic about:config.
about:config is an HCI catastrophe.
about:config and about:opera have existed in Opera for ages. Why is thie being touted as a "feature"? I love how firefox/mozilla takes features that existed in Opera for years and try to hype them up as new "features" in firefox!
Another reason firefox is over-hyped and doesn't compare to Opera really.
Consider all of the sites you go to in a single day.
How many do you actually need cookies for? Right. A handful.
The default behaviour, given how the technology is abused these days, should be to delete all cookies and purge the cache when the browser closes - except for the sites specified by the user.
It still irks me that IE (yes, we have to use it at work) still doesn't have an option for 'delete all cookies on exit' - but it is perfectly capable of clearing the rest of the cache.
I agree that the option to accept from originating site is good, but these days I don't care. Either way the cookies are purged every day.
You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
Is how to turn off that fricking auto typeaheadfind. I'm not typing apostrophes on a blank web page. I'm typing them into a text box. I'm typing them into the GOOGLE TEXTBOX (plain-vanilla homepage era). This is not a feature. A feature is an added capability. This is a BUG. I'm not disabled; I don't need accessiblity assistance. If I want to find text, I'll type ^F. If I'm typing an apostrophe into the Google text box, I don't want to search for text on that empty page, I want to search for my quoted text. Maybe they could add an accessiblity.typeaheadfind.goawayandnevercomeback. Or maybe they could even obey the EXISTING typeaheadfind options. Or map the key to a ~. Or, even, now this is a radical idea, stop erasing people's bug reports telling us it's a feature, and fix it.
about:config
mousewheel.withnokey.sysnumlines -> false
mousewheel.withnokey.numlines -> any number, personally I use 6.
"about:config is the worst method of changing preferences that I have ever seen"
The alternate being a mass of sub-menus and click boxes. At least they are all in the one place.
davecb5620@gmail.com
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
"The Windows XP Task manager, with tasks ordered by memory usage, showed that FF was using 270MB of RAM"
See my other posts, lots of Windows and tabs opened and closed, went up over 75 MB and then back to 58 MB and hung there. Maybe mine is a magic computer.
davecb5620@gmail.com
Why is is that when I click the on the main slashdot page, it takes ages and hangs on sites like e.nvero.net, images.slashdot.org, zdmp.net, smartgetting etc. I know it doesn't matter on your fast connection, but it does mean I [waiting for images] don't [waiting for images] have [waiting for pages2.googlesyndication.com] to [waiting for images] wait [waiting for doubleclick] so [waiting for images] long [waiting for adserver] for [waiting for images again] a [waiting for google analytics] complete [ f*****g finally] page to appear ..
It's not just slashdot but most sites, clicking the back button doesn't make a difference as it still reloads from the web site. I thought the cache stored pages for resuse.
davecb5620@gmail.com
We used to dream of zeroes.
In my day, all we had was a pile of bones, each bone representing "one".
If some joker stole all the bones, we were, like: "What happened to all the bones?"
This went on for millenia, you can't imagine the frustration.
What's worse, before the damned zero got invented, we first had to invent Roman numerals!
-kgj
Is there a tweak that turns Linux into Windows? That's always been Lunix's biggest drawback as a product.
You make a good point, in a poorly phrased way.
Encouraging users to tweak a "meaningless" parameter is a deception; all deceptions invite trouble.
Whatever might be gained (identifying the "smart" users) is compromised by other losses (failing to educate "dumb" users, alienating users who sense the deception, wasting company time).
That said, phrases like "dangerous twit" undermine your argument, shutting the ears of your potential allies before they hear what you have to say.
-kgj
-kgj
" http://kb.mozillazine.org/About:config_entries " - by wizardforce (1005805) on Tuesday May 29, @08:10PM (#19316205)
e -index.html
Nice link! Good reference point for understanding... but, there is something based on it that does the job, so consider it, & it's called "FireTune"!
(After all, it's doing the tweaks/tunings manually using that page (a good idea, so you can understand what it is that is being tweaked/tuned) & notepad (or in FF itself) OR, just use "FIRETUNE":
http://www.totalidea.com/content/firetune/firetun
As it makes short work of doing ANY tweaking to FireFox, & it works (GUI point-N-click easy).
APK
P.S.=> FireTune is based off of the materials on that page you pointed out & it has yet to "mess up firefox" on me thru I don't know HOW MANY VERSIONS... good stuff, try it out! apk
Type in about:config in Opera's address bar, & it WILL automatically resolve out to/change to, opera:config!
As far as performance goes though, overall, across many OS platforms (especially Win32, the most used platform there is by far)?
Opera IS the fastest browser there is!
I base that off of this page where many browsers across many OS platforms were tested:
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html
(The is the most comprehensive "browser speed test" comparison I have run across to date)
The overall winner? Opera "uber alles"...
APK
My question is simple: Is there good, concise documentation of the about:config page and it's options?
If yes, where is it and is there an an easy why to find it?
If no, why not? If this is all about choice, should people be able to learn about their choices?
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
"If the tweaks are worth doing, shouldn't they have first-class support in the main configuration GUI?" - by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Tuesday May 29, @08:08PM (#19316193)
e -index.html
If how it is currently in FF is not to your liking? Then, I suppose you should try FIRETUNE:
http://www.totalidea.com/content/firetune/firetun
If you want "GUI point-N-click easy" for tuning FireFox then I suppose... it works well!
APK
P.S.=> I've used it over many versions of FireFox & it has yet to 'screw me up' & iirc, it is based off of this page @ "the horses mouth" here:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/About:config_entries
Which is in & of itself, a great reference to the settings in the "about:config" url in FF!
apk
My opinion about hidden configs is that if they were meant for the end-user to dick with, they'd be on a friendly Options dialog.
If there's a very useful hidden option, it should be promoted to a visible widget. The fact that Firefox devs are often lazy about such "little" things is the main source of problems. They spend too much time building flashy (and useless) features instead of tightening the existing experience, which is why you see a new FF 3.0 attention-grab every couple of days. They've gone completely Microsoft!
-Billco, Fnarg.com
For those of you who want to read the article without having to click through seven pages of ads: http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?com mand=printArticleBasic&articleId=9020880
Who has been left out in the dark this long that this is news to them? Slow day I guess.
"People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything."
So far I'm more productive on Firefox because of the lack of features in Opera.The fact that my bank site even works in Konqueror but not in Opera, does not make it seem like a 'overall winner' to me. Even when I switch the browser identification, it doesn't work.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
"Ah, didn't work in the past for me." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday May 30, @12:02PM (#19322819)
Cool, & I was thinking to myself when I wrote it:
"I'd bet this fellow is using an older model of Opera"
(See, because iirc, it was NOT always that way (probably inserted for FF folks that try it would be my guess)).
"I agree, Opera certainly is noticeably more snappier." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday May 30, @12:02PM (#19322819)
No questions asked. It is very fast, and feature laden (has features in it like tabs (for example) far before FF & IE had them).
"However, performance is only something I really care about when lack of it hinders my productivity." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday May 30, @12:02PM (#19322819)
Point taken, & noted (and, I agree).
Now, I have yet to see such an occurance here myself on websites I use personally!
(However, upon trying your url you noted, I received an err msg myself (looked like polish, which I am, but I did not read it in detail, because I am NOT that great @ it (2nd language of mine)), & this MAY be a fault of the website itself possibly!)
OR
This url/site of yours may be a site to submit to the folks @ Opera so they can resolve it!
(I submitted such a thing to the FF/Mozilla crew, years ago, regarding their browser's handling of NTCompatible.com's website forums (home made and quite good forums board engine) - the folks from FF wrote me, that day, & fixed it the next day, AND came to speak to us @ NTCompatible.com about it as well (which I thought was WAY cool, & great service)).
Question: "Dzien dobre, & cie ti mowisz po polsku?"
LOL!
APK
"The fact that my bank site even works in Konqueror but not in Opera, does not make it seem like a 'overall winner' to me. Even when I switch the browser identification, it doesn't work." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday May 30, @12:02PM (#19322819)
Ok, upon FURTHER INSPECTION? I turned on JavaScript for the site you had hassles with & it seems to work!
Mind you: You can do this as well, BY PAGE/SITE no less (not wholesale), by right-clicking in the latest version(s) of Opera & it will allow you to use JavaScript for that site only IF you keep it off for most sites as I do here!
(JavaScript is something which that site requires, since I finally read the errmsg in polish)
I turned it on, for THAT PAGE ONLY (keeping it off for all others, which is how I keep it, for security AND speed purposes) & it seems to work now!
Try that... it worked for me.
(Granted, I do not belong to that bank, so I am not sure if FULL functionality will be restored via that, but it seems to work... get back to me on it, if you have the time to install the latest Opera 9.21.xxx etc.)
APK
Nigel Tufnel: [pointing to the moderation] ...the numbers all go to six. Look, right across the board: six, six, six, six... ...nowhere! Exactly! What we do is if we need that extra... push over the cliff, you know what we do? ...six. Exactly. One funnier.
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most comments go up to five?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's funnier? Is that any funnier?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one funnier, isn't it? It's not five. You see, most... most blokes, you know, will be modded up to five. You're on five here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up... you're on five on your comment. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don't know...
Nigel Tufnel:
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to six.
Nigel Tufnel:
Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make five funnier, and make five be the top... number, and make that a little funnier?
Nigel Tufnel: [pause, blank look and snapping chewing gum] These go to six.
Until Opera lets me turn on/off Javascript/Flash/etc per source (not per-site) like I can with Firefox and Noscript, I can't switch to Opera. NoScript is the *only* thing keeping me on Firefox.
This is a sig. Deal with it.
Can you define what you mean by "per source", rather than "per site"?
(This is eluding me, as to what you mean, exactly)...
See, I am currently (as I write this) looking thru Opera's right-click popup menu on this page, in the popup menus selection item of "EDIT SITE PREFERENCES"!
(That's where you can control the content on a number of things in Opera, afaik per page only (depending on what you mean by 'sources'). Things such as popups, cookies, animation/sounds/java/plugins, display of frames/borders/scrollbars/forums, scripting, browserID, referrer logging, & lastly auto-redirects)..
Thanks!
APK
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
"You need to login on the site, using the link in the top right corner (login in english). Which you probably can't do since you likely don't have a account with them." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday May 30, @02:46PM (#19325379)
Right, as I stated to you in my last reply? I am not a member of CITIBANK!
That is the "only" thing holding me back from testing full functionality on the website you noted...
(To wit/e.g.-> I no longer see the error in polish, but now instead see the logon & drop lists, etc. et al (just by turning on JavaScripting, & for THAT SITE, only - which you can do in Opera & could for a LONG while via rightclick on page, SITE PREFERENCES popup menu submenu item selection - it provides a great deal of flexibility)).
You might want to see if you can logon to your banking page (making sure Javascript is turned on for that site, OR, all sites wholesale (I don't allow this for security reasons))!
The latest model of Opera is 9.21.8776 so you know, as you may wish to download & install it, & see if it works for you now, on your banking site (things change in Opera pretty rapidly version to version, as you saw with about:config resolving to opera:config nowadays).
That is, IF you wish to take the time to try the latest Opera, & if you don't, I don't blame you that.
(Again - I can't do it, because I am not a CITIBANK customer here as I stated earlier: Good luck in either/any event!)
APK
The 'internal' site itself is just a popup window that has a bunch of frames and relies heavily on javascript.Yep I have it installed.
Looking at the javascript (and this is just lightly skimming through it), it seems to check if the browser is Safari, IE, Firefox, Mozilla etc. (no Opera listed) -- and throws out that error when it's a undefined browser.
Apparently changing the browser identification doesn't change how Opera identifies itself in Javascript. I get the feeling this site would work fine if they had Opera defined.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
"Apparently changing the browser identification doesn't change how Opera identifies itself in Javascript. I get the feeling this site would work fine if they had Opera defined." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday May 30, @03:33PM (#19326075)
Agreed: Which is why I mentioned in my 1st 2 replies to you, that it MIGHT be a problem with their website's code itself, possibly...
However, upon reading your words & descriptions?
Then again, it might be one in Opera (not actually changing its BrowserID string).
Have you considered forwarding this site & situation to the folks @ Opera?
LOOK IN OPERA'S HELP MENU, & USE THE "REPORT A SITE PROBLEM" MENU ITEM (a great feature imo @ least), if need be...
(See, I did that for the folks @ FireFox/Mozilla a few years back, as I mentioned also in my 1st couple of posts to you (regarding NTCompatible.com's very nice homemade forums board, & they fixed it literally, in a day's time & even came to speak with us there... I can see the folks @ Opera doing no less in this regard, in this case!))
Above all else:
Thanks for replying so soon, I was thinking I'd miss your reply...
(AND, I am going out now to enjoy the sunny weather (rare, where I am from, 2nd most cloudy city in the U.S.A., so I have to get out & enjoy it))...
APK
Opera blocks each component on the entire site you're currently on. So if the site itself has some scripting and you want to enable it, go to NoScript and say Allow from (sitename). But if there is some javascript, flash, or java from an external source (ads, for example), these won't get enabled unless you also go into NoScript and select Allow From EvilAdServer. With Opera, you only get Enable and Disable, and that means everything gets enabled, which I don't want.
It's something you just need to try out with NoScript. Until Opera gets something like that, I can't use it.
This is a sig. Deal with it.
Don't know what the hell you were saying there. If it was 'does no evil', you've got your facts mixed up. Their slogan was/is 'Don't be evil'
No, MS is the enemy. I think you got mixed up somewhere along the line, with your link to MS server and all. How did you get so brainwashed to think MS might not be the most evil, despicable company most worthy of hatred ever to exist?
You really think MS has your best interests in mind? How about Google, supporting an open-source browser, and pushing for more free tools for the masses? Seems like they have completely different ideas about how they want to shape our future, and the dim view of MS is scary.
http://www.mozillazine.org/about/
.pac files, look into them.
Actually I don't mind icons in the bookmark menus, but they really waste space on the toolbar.
.bookmark-item > image { display: none; }
The following rule did the trick for me:
...be able to drag any about:config entry to the toolbar, whereapon boolean antries become toggle buttons, numerics become spin buttons, and editable values become, well, editable values :)
This way you can set any tweak anything quickly, and see the result. Now whatever happened to 'disable image load'?