Slashdot Mirror
Firefox 23 Arrives With New Logo, Mixed Content Blocker, and Network Monitor
An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla today officially launched Firefox 23 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. Improvements include the addition of a share button, mixed content blocker, and network monitor on the desktop side (release notes). The new desktop version was available on the organization's FTP servers last night, but that was just the initial release of the installers. Firefox 23 has now officially been released over on Firefox.com and all existing users should be able to upgrade to it automatically. As always, the Android version is trickling out slowly on Google Play."
We use firefox across our work network, and for obvious reasons, the head of our company has ordered Facebook blocked. The last thing I want is everyone being ordered to use Internet Explorer as a result. Even better if we can install one that doesn't even have those functions.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Wow a share button?!?!
This is what Mozilla is wasting time on now?
AND... user prefs returned to default?
Thank the FSM I'm using NoScript.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
If Facebook is blocked then users will be unable to use any Facebook integration features in Firefox... I don't see a problem here?
Isn't that a "hacking tool"? Germany might not approve..
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
CHANGED: “Enable JavaScript” preference checkbox has been removed and user-set values will be reset to the default.
*Groan* all my selenium tests stopped working :(
But we blame Microsoft anyway.
Still, don't worry, FireFox 27 will be out next week and will have full Google-Glass integration.
Perhaps edit the HOSTS file so that facebook.com is sent to 127.0.0.1 ? Set and forget solution.
There is nothing wrong with yr Internet. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission - NSA
<blink>No!!!</blink> They removed the blink tag!
...well, a bit at least. This anti-skeuomorphic craze is pretty damned irritating - the new logo looks worse than the old one in my view, just as the Windows 8 theme looks worse than Aero Glass and iOS 7 looks worse than iOS 6. I had enough of 2D, flat icons in the 80s (when there weren't the resources to do better); I can only imagine the designers doing all this 2D stuff today weren't around back then.
..many sites still need to be updated to work with it. Likely some behind the firewall stuff as well. (And many of these sites break in IE10 and Chrome as well)
See here for full details: https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2013/05/16/mixed-content-blocking-in-firefox-aurora/
Basically it prevents loading active content (JS/CSS/etc) from a non-HTTPS source when the page is HTTPS.
Also, if you are a HTTPS Everywhere user and wondering why sites like XKCD and NYtimes are no longer HTTPS, this is why.
Hate to go all hipster on you guys, but here goes.
I was using Firefox before it was cool. It was called Phoenix when the project started, then later renamed to Firebird. This was circa 2002/2003.
It was a great browser: cross-platform, smaller than Mozilla, fast. Everything I wanted. I used FF for over ten years without problems. I was OK with playing whack-a-mole in the settings each new release, trying to keep my preferences for things consistent. But then the UI people showed up. At some point they completely re-arranged the user interface, breaking over a decade of my visual/muscle memory. Seriously, what the fuck guys? I guess they wanted to make it look more like Chrome. So I switched to Chrome.
The Firefox project needs to get rid of all of the people who don't code but "contribute" by fucking around with the UI. So, FF team, you can take your new logo and jam it up your ass.
The continual removal of configuration options from Firefox is not only insulting, it's pointless. I seriously doubt it reduces the amount of code for the browser by any significant amount.
The day Firefox removes the ability to set client-side font overrides is the day I switch to Chrome. Currently that is the only feature left in Firefox that keeps me using it. For me, it's an invaluable feature, and I'm really annoyed that Firefox seems to be the only browser that supports the concept. After all, the whole point of HTML was that the client is supposed to control rendering, not the server.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
according to Wikipedia they added the input type "range". Sadly, the input type "number" is still listed as experimental, and no support for the date/time input types. Since Firefox 22 added a couple of different element types, I was hoping that the "number" type would be supported, and have at least 'experimental' support fo the date/time formats.
Ol' Rick Dawson had a farm EIEIO
No.
That is not funny and moreover is stupid.
Block facebook at the firewall and be done with it.
...and breaks HTTPS Everywhere badly . Poor show Mozilla, poor show.
Adblock works just great as a first line of defense against Facebook. Same for any other http/https-based spyware sites.
I for one hate those buggers so much I also serve an empty zone for {facebook,fbcdn}.{com,net} and friends in my DNS, and block their IP ranges just in case some new domain pops up, but that's probably overkill. If you don't trust your co-workers to not muck with Adblock settings, you can do the DNS trick. If you want my zone management scripts, shout, I can clean them up for public consumption.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
In version 22, I could use the URL bar to search for something via google and use the search box (on the right) for other searches without changing it. Now in 23, they are in sync. So if the right bar is set for "corporate bug search engine" the URL bar is set for that as well.
Kinda liked being able to have two different search bars at the same time.
I know I can use aliases in the URL bar (I use 'dir' to search the corporate directory), but this was a surprise.
There is, but it's going to get removed in version 30 in September.
The network monitor looks nice for troubleshooting. I'll be using that in the future. It also has a 3D button which is pretty cool, good for showing the different elements of a web page. I don't care for the sharing feature. I guess the icon only shows up if you login to Facebook, so I'll never see it.
This was half a joke about knee-jerk management decisions without consulting IT, and half a legitimate concern about having Facebook integrated in one's browser in any way. As far as my own tests since my first post here, I did find the main bit to be disabled by default, and with Facebook already blocked on our network, there's really no concern on my part that people will actually enable it. I did go ahead and disable a couple other social bits that were probably disabled by the primary one. Blocking the domains is always a good step.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
The browser.tabs.autoHide functionality has been stripped. I've read all the history on this. I'm fucking livid.
I hope they reverse this decision.
Mixed content blocking has been in IE since IE8. Good to see Firefox finally catch up with that old version of IE on the mixed content front. I had just assumed that FF was ahead of IE on everything. Apparently they aren't; just on most things.
Mozilla Foundation: We know better than you how your browser should be configured. We can re-configure your browser at any time.
Meanwhile, Firefox is the most unstable program in common use, if you often have a lot of windows and tabs open.
OMG the new logo is so incredibly.... the same as the old one...
I notice less white on the paw and then globe with more on the tail, and that's about it.
Unless the announcement is they made the new one bigger...
New Logo?
The new logo is the same as the old logo, like the new boss/president is the same as the old boss/president?
Or did it actually change.
Doesn't look different at firefox.com (which, by the way, still forwards to mozilla.org/blahblahblah).
I don't give a $#it about social "media".
Hiding controls is seen as a bad thing, especially in these Prism times.
It's as if Mozilla is trying to create hype around Firefox by pissing off it's users.
FoxNews called. They want their SOP back.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
Pointless version number comments go here.
Well seems the new version hasn't hit the Ubuntu repositories yet, so I'll have to wait till tomorrow!
Well, the OP didn't say how big his company is... nor what level of IT talent they have available.
There is nothing wrong with yr Internet. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission - NSA
Yes, there's a way to turn it off. Go to "about:config" and set "social.enabled" to False. This was previously the default.
The biggest thing here is that Firefox doesn't need FB (or any) social integration. So why add it? As an add-on, sure, go for it. But not as part of the core.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
OP here. It's already blocked at the firewall. I'm also aware of the about:config settings.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Built-in Like (Share) button? What are they trying to become, a facebook browser?
Browser should focus on browsing, this feature bloat is highly regretful and is ultimately unwanted.
You're not really blocking Facebook in the user browsers, are you? Wouldn't it make more sense to block at the network level?
I just don't understand how could you not see a problem with X integration in a web browser, where X is not directly related to displaying web content.
This social media integration is not unlike bukake integration, sure some users might enjoy convenient access to their vice of choice, but it is unreasonable to assume that everyone wants to partake.
Agreed. Between this and the removal of easy javascript disabling, I'm leaning more and more toward jumping over to Seamonkey.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Block it in DNS too to be sure.
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Windows 3.11 is also a tailor-made selection for your workgroups.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Only the police and military should be allowed to disable javascript.
Perhaps you could explain the evils inherent in altering my own HOSTS file so that Facebook requests are lost in the aether? No sarcasm intended.
There is nothing wrong with yr Internet. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission - NSA
http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm seems to find it acceptable.
There is nothing wrong with yr Internet. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission - NSA
Of course not. It's blocked centrally at the firewall.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
If you're administering a network, dicking around with everyone's HOSTS file individually is idiotic, rather than blocking at your firewall or web proxy or whatever you use.
...just when Magneto came up you will never again be able to disable JavaScript in FireFox.
Yeah, hooray and RIP, FF.
I lag
The fact that a new logo is a feature shows that there's no innovation left in the computer industry.
No. That is not funny and moreover is stupid.
Block facebook at the firewall and be done with it.
How are the suits going to access facebook then?
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
NS@ was there (in mozilla of course) ... :'(
This shit is getting out of hand. Mozilla is going full-on GNOME here. Someone with some resources and a bit of sanity needs to fork this crap.
from their smartphone.
There's finally a Linux version!
Nobody is forcing you to partake. Firefox is simply catering to people who want it. This is like complaining about Firefox adding support for any new feature you don't care about. They're not just here for you, you know.
Why not praise them for their amazing work on bringing the core Gecko engine into the new decade? Or in further reducing the memory footprint of the browser? Or any number of other features that aren't just buzzword compliance issues?
Hell, even their work on Firefox OS has helped resurrect their Electrolysis efforts. It's not like Mozilla's just been working on social media buttons, removing features, and shitty Chrome-like UIs. But here on Slashdot, that's all I ever hear about. Some nerds we turned out to be.
They probably get a lot of kickbacks from social networking sites. Firefox has been getting dumber with each release, clearly preparing the audience to get ready for social networking.
You know, with all these options in the "about:config", it would be a great feature to have some of this in the preferences instead of their trend to actually remove options from the users or make them difficult to find.
Just add a bookmark with about:config?filter=javascript.enabled as the address to your bookmarks toolbar. Now it's more prominent in the UI than ever!
Real smart - and are you able to think of every permutation of subdomain to add? I don't think it uses the TLD alone for the API. Wildcards are not permitted in HOSTS.
I don't see a problem here?
If the company has a policy of not permitting social media sites like facebook to be used on-site (because they have geniune security concerns that mean they want strong control on communication from withing the company, or they are just grumpy old fuddy duddies that don't want anyone else to have a good time) then this appearing will be a red flag - it may be decided that the update can not go in until the change has been reviewed by a security team to make sure it does not circumvent their blocks in any way (intentionally or otherwise), that review could be delayed behind a pile of higher priorities, and older versions of firefox pulled from desktops due to not being the latest and therefore possibly not contained all the latest security updates.
Do you know how hard it is, to this very day, to get some companies to take of the blinkers long enough to take half a look at considering anything other than Internet Explorer onto their machines? This could change their minds back.
(yes, I know IE10 is actually said to be pretty decent, many people have already told me, but I'm so bitter about the years of stagnation caused by "classic" IE that I'll not be using it by choice any time soon)
Blocking it at the firewall means you can't get around it by editing your own HOSTS or pointing to different DNS servers. DNS spoofing is another alternative to force a specific DNS server, but that still isn't as simple as just blocking access to the IP range at the firewall.
With there being such an extensible UI, you can just create your own preferences button and dialog and share it with the rest of the world.
If you don't trust your co-workers to not muck with Adblock settings, you can do the DNS trick.
Users in my shop HAVE to muck with the adblock settings; we DL stuff from government databases. Ever register a copyright online? When I got the email response from their help desk I was like "DOH!!" because it was the same problem with gov databases we use at work.
Pale Moon is a Firefox variant optimized for Windows and modern processors, but also keeps most of the missing features and interface complained about here on Slashdot. It also works with NoScript and the handful of other add-ons I've tried.
While I agree that blocking it at the firewall is the best idea, if one of your users can edit their own hosts file then you've fucked up your setup so badly that people accessing Facebook will be the least of your worries.
The chickens in my hen house utilize hosts file blocking.
If it's https, your firewall isn't going to be seeing the URL, and Facebook has a fuckton of IPs. I manage Websense in several environments, and one is a whitelist only. We have to whitelist facebook at their request. Short of using a MITM attack on everyone to make the URLs visible to Websense, the proxy only sees IPs. We have to wait until something stops working, check the logs, and unblock whatever IPs were logged as blocked.
But now they have a new Facebook category we can unblock, but this doesn't fix the other sites that are https.
Cluck a doodle doo, harar.
facebook, twitter, google+, tumblr, etc, etc. can all suckit.
i dont know why the fuck they built this shit right into the browser core. it belongs in an addon.
there's no reason why there can't be "official" mozilla-made addons separate from the browser core that contains this kind of extra crud.
I had suspected that to be the case. Thank you for confirmation. Just quit a large, Romney-funded outsourcer of consumer device support who overwrote the user's HOSTS file at every boot. Just another verification that they were IT-clueless.
There is nothing wrong with yr Internet. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission - NSA
You could even block at the local computer firewall (outbound policy) via ADS (preventing local users from modifying them). That way even laptops taken to another location can't access Facebook. The firewall settings for modern versions of windows are very usable.
I just don't understand how you see a problem with X integration in a web browser, when any self-respecting corporate IT group blocks X at the firewall/gateway.
on the toilet.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
You say dumber.
They say more monetary tie-ins.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Typical Linux user answer. This is why it will fail on the desktop, as if it needed restated yet again.....
xkcd fixed themselves. nytimes hasn't yet.
Perhaps edit the HOSTS file so that facebook.com is sent to 127.0.0.1...It's already blocked at the firewall. I'm also aware of the about:config settings.
Oh yeah. Well where I work it is blocked at the firewall, in the hosts file redirect to 127.0.0.1 on both the client computer and Internet cache computer, in both group policy and GPP that refreshes every 5 seconds, and a keylogger checks for typing the word "facebook" which then sends an electric shock to the chair of the person who typed it. Beat that!
The Social Media API isn't a Facebook only thing. It can be used with any site.
For example here Ericsson demonstrates how WebRTC and Social Media API can be combined to be the corporate "unified communications" system (PBX, chat, whatever):
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2013/02/24/webrtc-ringing-a-mobile-phone-near-you/
New things are always on the horizon
You know, with all these options in the "about:config", it would be a great feature to have some of this in the preferences instead of their trend to actually remove options from the users or make them difficult to find.
THIS. I use Dvorak. V is next to W. Paste is Ctr+V. Close Tab is Ctrl+W. There used to be ways to change the shortcut key... Now there's not. Thank Fuck I know how to run user scripts and disable the default action for any Ctrl+W key presses. Escape used to halt .GIF animations too... Now it's the "Stop Loading" key, because they removed the stop button. Grr.
So... what should I use now if I want a browser targeting to those looking to browse the internet?
Nobody is forcing you to partake. Firefox is simply catering to people who want it. This is like complaining about Firefox adding support for any new feature you don't care about. They're not just here for you, you know.
Why not praise them for their amazing work on bringing the core Gecko engine into the new decade? Or in further reducing the memory footprint of the browser?
All those "social integration" features end up increasing the footprint of the browser, even if you don't use them.
Or any number of other features that aren't just buzzword compliance issues?
Hell, even their work on Firefox OS has helped resurrect their Electrolysis efforts. It's not like Mozilla's just been working on social media buttons, removing features, and shitty Chrome-like UIs. But here on Slashdot, that's all I ever hear about. Some nerds we turned out to be.
Sure, Electrolysis is cool, but it could have been ready MONTHS ago if resources hadn't been shoved into useless stuff that actually belongs in a plugin.
The video on the TFA can't been seen with firefox, ironically, on blog.mozilla.org.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Just sharing the love (or the protection from decisions for the sake of everyone): this extension apparently allows you to hide the tab bar complete (didn't check), and this hiding the tab bar when single-tab browsing.
And wasn't it Mozilla who complained that the main reason Firefox ate up so much memory was because people were running 'too many addons'? It seems we're nearing a point where Firefox is only an addon manager, and all the functionality is addon based.
This removal of features is getting extremely irritating, I want to customize my browser to look the way I want it to, not some dev, not some group of self-proclaimed experts. If I wanted lack of choice I'd be using IE or Chrome. What worries me is that fact that the new UI 'upgrade' (aka Australis) looks almost exactly like Chrome. I have a feeling once it oozes from the ground and smears itself all over the interface even more addons will be necessary to restore the classic look and feel.
Depends... if said file weren't writable by end users.. and it was a locally installed service to overwrite the hosts file regularly, that might not be so bad... that said, handling it with an internal DNS server, and redirecting all DNS traffic through said server would be more effective.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
If you put them up as a gist, that would be cool... I've thought about doing the same thing, not so much for facebook, as other/various tracking and ad networks.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
I find the about:config method easier than hunting through UI tabs myself, but to each their own.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Bad luck if they didn't fix their site to be secure. Mixed content (with insecure JS), is just as sufe as non-https content, since JS can basically inject anything it wants to, redirect the user, etc.
I find about:config to often be easier than the UI navigation... plus, you can find some interesting settings in there... I usually have to go in to change my caching params in my dev environment anyway.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
I just checked FF and social.enabled is indeed "false" as the default, however, social.remote-install.enabled is set to "true", so I toggled it.
Why not praise them for their amazing work on...
Because a simple option to disable or hide the social integration feature should be included.
In this release, they also REMOVED the checkbox options for: ...AND those options will be reset to the defaults! (ie. if you did set them before, too bad - your settings will NOT be retained, and you'll have go dig through about:config to set them back to how you had already chosen to customize them).
* Enable javascript
* Load images automatically
* Always show the tab bar
IE. There's plenty of room for a new checkbox.
Of course, I'm 99% sure the about:config will include options to control the new social features, so GGP's point is probably moot, or at least not as big a deal, but it certainly should have some way to disable it. IMO, that should be in the easily accessible preferences, but that's being continuously gutted and dumbed down.
I don't get why the social thing isn't simply an add on. It could even be distributed with FF by default, but it makes little sense to include it as part of FF proper.
I can use the about:config, but I hate it. Leftover geekism, in my opinion. Have both.
The thing that *really* pisses me off is when they make one and remove the other. What the hell for?
Wonder how the head of your company plan to ban Facebook on everybody's smartphones... sigh.. management
Used to be I could highlight text, right click, and search with google. That's been replaced with Ask. I wasn't asked if I wanted this. It's not obvious how to fix it. No, fuck you user, you'll start using Ask.com now. What the fuck guys...
All those "social integration" features end up increasing the footprint of the browser, even if you don't use them.
Do you have some evidence of such? Because I haven't seen a damned bit of this ZMGBLOATZ! you speak of. Memory usage is down and performance is up when compared to both previous versions of Firefox AND current versions other browsers which lack such functionality.
Put up or shut up. Show me something concrete which demonstrates your terrible loss.
I want this account deleted.
It still isn't a core "browser" feature. Add-on sure, browser, no thanks. Browsers have enough issues being secure as is, don't add a whole new vector.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Here is the whole story:
https://blog.mozilla.org/tanvi/2013/04/10/mixed-content-blocking-enabled-in-firefox-23/
New things are always on the horizon
I don't get why the social thing isn't simply an add on. It could even be distributed with FF by default, but it makes little sense to include it as part of FF proper.
Because it's extendable. It needs to be built in so extensions can add new social providers.
I still think it's stupid though. Social extensions can add their own buttons and panels.
Those social integration features should decrease performance issues for users of those features (which is a huge chunk of people) without hindering it for those who do not. If the footprint must rise, it might as well be for a feature people need. Even if that doesn't fit into our suddenly-outdated notions of what a browser should be.
Electrolysis would not have been done any sooner just because a branch of Firefox devs unfamiliar with the Gecko internals spent some time working on a social media feature. Firefox devs have been spending the better part of two years moving to new APIs in order to make the switch to Electrolysis easier.
If you weren't paying attention, then I don't blame you, but it's easy to criticize Firefox for not getting your pet feature done when you don't know how much work it really is, and how few devs can work on things for everyone's pet features.
I'm disgusted, also. I regularly get crashes. Some of them are reported, some of them cause the Crash Reporter to crash.
See Mozilla Crash Reports.
About GD time.
Employee Of the Month - Cyberdyne Systems Corporation - September 1997
Do you have some evidence of such? Because I haven't seen a damned bit of this ZMGBLOATZ! you speak of.
Sure, I've got a few PC's that run 2nd generation atom CPU's, with every upgrade in firefox with "something special" the load, rendering, and startup time increases. Sometimes it increases by a lot. It can be quite annoying, say with 4 tabs open you'll see the browser slow to a crawl. Sometimes even stall out on loading javascript itself right from a site. This doesn't happen with Chromium or Chrome.
Sometimes, just sometimes people want a straight up simple browser. Sadly FF is following the path of netscape and IE in terms of feature creep.
Om, nomnomnom...
This was critical for people on bandwidth constrained connections. Is there even an about:config for it any more? I looked for everything containing "image" but nothing looked very promising :(. Is this feature gone entirely? Because that would really, really suck. Might drive me to a different browser.
Perhaps edit the HOSTS file so that facebook.com is sent to 127.0.0.1 ? Set and forget solution.
This is a simple solution I've used before in places that just wanted a simple solution like friends houses that wanted to keep their kids off certain sites. Anyone smart enough to get around that can also figure out how to use a proxy server, so unless you want to spend a bunch of time really locking it down, it works for 99% of the time.
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
Oh god that first sentence. Note to self: don't stop typing a comment in the middle of a sentence when you get distracted.
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
So yes - just blocking it at the firewall would just be simpler than DNS.
All true.
But there are add ons that perform those functions. Too few "average" users understand the consequences of their choices. This lead to problems.
If you know what you are doing, you can still disable those functions.
Too many people were reporting Firefox as broken, because they had those features on.
Blame the ignorant masses.
Are you talented enough to have those features?
By firing anyone caught with a phone out at their desk.
It's what my company does.
I employ a clan of ninja who personally watch everyone's internet activity. They may be your co-worker, your boss, that plant in the corner, the cafeteria lady, the water cooler, or even the UPS guy.
On the first infraction of the computer usage policy, employees are given a mild sedative via a dart to the neck. They usually wake up a few hours later, a little groggy and with a friendly reminder note on their desk about breaking policy.
On the second infraction, employees are administered a dose of poison in their food or drink which makes them violently sick for a few days. When they return, they find a reminder of the computer use policy tied to an arrow which is now sticking through one of the pictures on their desk.
On the third infraction...well...when Hiroshi tells me he disposed of the body, I believe him.
Keylogger? Well, there's a simple hack for that. At home prepare a text file with something like sequences liike "iliketodefacebooksucks". At work copy the relevant part and paste into your favorite search engine. Pasting "face" will probably be enough. Or you can do it the hard way. Copy-pasting letter by letter from a text file that contains all the letters of the English alphabet plus the dot.
Note: the above procedure assumes you can connect to a VPN or third party proxy that bypasses the host files, firewall, etc.
Well, there's not really anything to disable. This Social API is just that - an API. You literally have to opt in to each social media "app" that you want to integrate into Firefox this way. It's not even trying to be offensive, so I fail to see why people are so up in arms about it.
Also, the Firefox devs really SHOULD obscure ("remove") error-prone settings that break the web for users who don't understand them. That includes not loading Javascript and images. That's good design, not bad.
An intermediate user will have no trouble finding this stuff, a basic user will just click the shiny red button. It's basic human psychology, and intelligence isn't always a factor. "Dumbing down" is not an inherently bad thing if you leave the advanced features available without too much obstruction.
There are some things that Australis is doing that really piss me off, but I understand the core dev team having to pick and choose their battles, and offloading the stuff they don't have time to update to their newer, more modern codebase into addons. That's what Firefox was SUPPOSED to do. We're just spoiled that they're adhering to it, because suddenly our freedums are at stake or something.
Even we (allegedly) intelligent nerds turn into slobbering idiots when we're asked to take one for the team and be patient for a while (or, hell, contribute a god damned add on rather than just being a spineless little whiner.. not that you're being one).
Seriously? Mozilla is building fucking Facebook directly into the browser?
Someone please hand me a noose.
I thought Firefox was supposed to fight the original suite's bloat... and now, all they can add is a fucking "share" button and tamper with the logo (which I could barely tell the difference between looking at them side by side)? Mozilla, you are pathetic. Copy every aspect of Chrome... and then, give us a god damn worthless social networking button.
Keyloggers are easy to bypass...and shock a person enough and they will grow to like it...at least some people will
I thought that the point of bukkake was that everyone was partaking.
You profiled it down to that specific feature? You know, using a tool that isn't subject to personal bias?
Also, please explain how do such features impact performance when they aren't even loaded in memory.
I want this account deleted.
If people want it, it should be made into a plugin. That's the firefox motto, isn't it? All they need to do is make the fucking thing work properly. Silly things like non-shit font rendering, rendering speed and maybe something truly groundbreaking, like an engine that doesn't lock up everything when one window/tab has some shit content on it. Or an engine that uses more than one core.
"The Facebook button you installed on my computer last night doesn't work!"
IE 10 really is pretty darn good. I especially like the F12 window that opens, where you can tell it to emulate any version of IE back to 7. The only thing that keeps me from using it full time instead of Firefox is the hassle of moving my bookmarks over. I'm just not in the mood for it.
With there being such an extensible UI, you can just create your own preferences button and dialog and share it with the rest of the world.
And next time you want to go into the city, you can learn all the skills required to construct a train or motor vehicle from scratch, and then you can share them with the rest of the world. Go build it yourself assumes everyone is a developer - the person coming out with the phrase is bound to have a medically diagnosable social disorder.
And if Facebook ads a new ip block, you'll be chasing that firewall config.
There is. It's called bad breath.
so, you are a grumpy old fuddy duddy then?
Looks like Slashdot needs to update its image for Firefox stories too, it's still on the old one..
funny, i just downloaded version 22 on Friday
We use firefox across our work network, and for obvious reasons, the head of our company has ordered Facebook blocked. The last thing I want is everyone being ordered to use Internet Explorer as a result. Even better if we can install one that doesn't even have those functions.
If you're relying on browsers to block websites, you're already doing it wrong.
Block *.facebook.com on the firewall. This will prevent any client from accessing it.
Have the boss make it known to the users at large Facebook is blocked and accessing it is a sackable offence. This is very important as if the boss does not make an announcement end users will hound you to unblock it as they think you made the decision.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
With there being such an extensible UI, you can just create your own preferences button and dialog and share it with the rest of the world.
And next time you want to go into the city, you can learn all the skills required to construct a train or motor vehicle from scratch, and then you can share them with the rest of the world.
Don't be ridiculous. We're all about automation. Instead of providing a working but rather inflexible rail system, we will provide you with a fantastic machine that will quickly build any kind of train you can imagine as long as you can describe it accurately using our custom variant of lisp.
Firefox includes Google tracking by default (you get a google spying cookie the first time you start Firefox after a fresh install), because otherwise they don't get enough money. I bet Facebook are paying them to make the social addons impossible to remove.
Indeed, I am thankful that seamonkey still has those prefs and is noscript compatible.
I thought I was a firefox user up until I explored other options, turns out that I am a noscript user.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
One thing I've finally come to accept over many many years is that when it comes to technology and computers, you HAVE to learn to accept change and learn how things are rather than how they were. People complain about UI changes with Firefox - I understand that, but I'd rather just learn what they've change and adapt to the (minor) differences in each new version, rather than hang back with older versions/styles until I discover the world around me has changed and adaptation is harder now than it would have been if I just adapter bit by bit as things progressed.
Now keep in mind - I'm not saying change is always for the better. Indeed, a lot of it sucks balls. But I can't help that, and what I DON'T want to be is some aging bearded nerd at 50 thinking everything was better back in my time, even though we have all this great mainstream tech but I avoided it entirely because I was convinced, completely convinced that I knew better and that what I was used to was the epitomize of design and usefulness.
In this field, change happens all the time. It's not necessarily good, but for the sake of your sanity and blood pressure, just go along with it. Adapt bit by bit, and you won't be stressed unnecessarily by the realization in a few years that you're one of the very few who even uses a desktop anymore and everyone considers you an old fogie for not keeping up with the world.
You can download Firefox for Android right here: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mobile/releases/23.0/android/
Important work on Firefox doesn't get done, like providing an easy way to log out from the master password.
This is how it is done now:
If you supply the Master Password in the popup window that you see if a master password is needed, then you log in to the Software Security Device (Firefox uses: "Tools -> Options -> Advanced -> Encryption: Certificates: Security Devices: Software Security Device"). If you select the Software Security Device then you notice an enabled "Log Out" button if you are logged on, otherwise the "Log In" button is enabled in that window. Access to the encrypted names and passwords is possible as long as you are logged on to the Software Security Device and you need to log out to prevent others from accessing that data if you leave your computer unattended. "Tools > Clear Private Data: Authenticated sessions" does the same, but also additionally will log you out of secure web sites. You may need to clear the cookies to log out of other sites.
Also, I don't have "Tools > Clear Private Data". Do you?
This *isn't* a part of the core. Nothing is shipping with the browser, it must be installed.
It's an API, just like the addons APIs, except addons can see what page you're on, and what links you click, and your history, etc, etc. This API is significantly more restricted (and that's a good thing). The only way for Facebook (or anyone else) to see what page you're on is if you share it to them - which is kinda the point anyway. Its "surface area" to affect the browser is much more limited than addons.
I'd much rather have my friends & relatives using Facebook's version of this than an addon equivalent.
I have a better idea.. Since the source for FF is open lets go out and create our own browser. Or better let's go to slashdot and whine about it. Surely they owe us so much for providing shit for free.
I had suspected that to be the case. Thank you for confirmation. Just quit a large, Romney-funded outsourcer of consumer device support who overwrote the user's HOSTS file at every boot. Just another verification that they were IT-clueless.
Probably had that cunt APK as their network administrator.
Excuses: Category Hostile
Excuse Category: It's open source. Make your own.
That makes it okay for Mozilla Foundation to be mis-managed?
Excuse Category: Unstable extensions
The instability isn't Firefox, they say, it is the extensions, add-ons, and plug-ins. They use 3 terms for one thing.
Fine: Tell us what extensions are unstable. That's in the crash reports?
While SeaMonkey is fine, I don't understand the javascript disabling disabling issue. There are 3 kinds of users:
1. Don't care or understand. For them, javascript always on is the only usable option.
2. Want to keep it always disabled for all websites. While lynx is better for them, I can understand why they might choose firefox instead. Such people can easily find the option in about:config, and since they will never change it again, occupying space in preferences for this doesn't make sense.
3. Want to customize when and for which websites javascript is enabled. Such users are extremely likely to use RequestPolicy and NoScript, and the "Enable Javascript" checkbox in firefox preferences earlier was JUST the WRONG solution for their problem.
4th, the mysterious kind of user : Want to globally enable and disable javascript frequently. I don't understand what purpose this serves. Could you elaborate?
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Has it been vetted by the NSA?
Looks like part of the core to me - I download FF, and look - there it is. No add-on needs to be installed.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Language, please!
Oh, he acknowledged that by stating if he catches anyone using Facebook on their phone, they're fired.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
and you'll have go dig through about:config to set them back to how you had already chosen to customize them
that's no use, the code to use the browser.tabs.autoHide pref was gutted.
I've spent the last half-hour futzing with userChrome.css. For the moment this seems to work, as long as your browser.tabs.closeButtons pref != 3
Oddly I just updated mine and there's not a social button to be found.
In about:config "social.enabled" is set to false by default. I never did that, so it just installed that way, and I don't see an option in the normal settings dialog to enable it. Go figure.
I don't need new features, I need stability. After every new version, FF crashes several times a day. And Mozilla always blames the add-ons. If this is true, why do the FF revisions make the add-ons not work. Doesn't anyone do regression testing? Are the changes that significant? Most FF revisions look to be minor. Aren't we really on FF 5.13, perhaps.
Bloat? Feature creap? Isn't all of this shit why we jumped to Firefox, in the first place?
Because of the setup, it's probably easiest to use/read it as a Debian package:deb http://angband.pl/debian sid main(or directly: https://angband.pl/debian/pool/main/d/dnscruft/).
The database there is grossly outdated as it's been a while since I last had an use for distributing it that way, but the scripts didn't need updates. They're straightforward to use or configure, including a tool to import hosts file type lists.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.