Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Firefox Will Run Chrome Extensions

Posted by Soulskill on from the mi-casa-es-su-casa dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Today Mozilla announced some big changes to its extension support. Their new addon API, WebExtensions, is mostly compatible with the extension model used by Chrome and Opera. In short, this means we'll soon see cross-platform browser extensions. They say, "For some time we've heard from add-on developers that our APIs could be better documented and easier to use. In addition, we've noticed that many Firefox add-on developers also maintain a Chrome, Safari, or Opera extension with similar functionality. We would like add-on development to be more like Web development: the same code should run in multiple browsers according to behavior set by standards, with comprehensive documentation available from multiple vendors."

9 of 152 comments (clear)

  1. Never mind run Chrome extensions... by jez9999 · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... Firefox will be Chrome. Anyone who cared about extensive browser customization will simply abandon their addons. Why keep recoding them on Mozilla's whim?

    For anyone who still cares about this stuff, the time to jump is most certainly NOW. I don't even think SeaMonkey is good enough - Pale Moon is a totally clean break.

    --
    == Jez ==
    Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
    1. Re:Never mind run Chrome extensions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you check out NoScript itself, you'll see that it's written using an XPCOM object. This update kills XPCOM, so, no, the new API will not allow NoScript. It can't block at the same level as NoScript, because Chrome offers no method to modify the DOM before the document finishes loading, which means scripts embedded in the document can't be blocked.

      So, yes, this absolutely kills NoScript in future versions of Firefox.

    2. Re:Never mind run Chrome extensions... by Guspaz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Chrome does provide support for modifying the DOM before it finishes loading.

    3. Re:Never mind run Chrome extensions... by roca · · Score: 3, Informative

      The old addons model isn't going away until the new model is as capable as the old model supports NoScript, the better-than-Chrome AdBlock, Tree Style Tabs, etc at least as well as the old model currently does. Although the new model is largely based on Chrome's extension API, we're not limited to that API; we're adding the features those extensions need even though Google didn't want to add them to Chrome.

    4. Re:Never mind run Chrome extensions... by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

      in Chrome, I can do a shift-esc, and kill a lot of memory hogs per tab. No real way to do that in FF.

      about:memory estimates how much memory each tab is using. Close the hogs and then click "Minimize memory usage".

    5. Re:Never mind run Chrome extensions... by Giorgio+Maone · · Score: 3, Informative

      Some hints at what's happening with NoScript, with my proposal to preserve the edge Firefox has over Chrome in terms of innovation through extensions, despite the limitations of a Chrome-compatible API: https://hackademix.net/2015/08...

      --
      There's a browser safer than Firefox, it is Firefox, with NoScript
  2. I like firefox over any of the alternatives. by sjbe · · Score: 3, Informative

    FF is a perfect example of a project going completely off the rails. I don't hear anyone saying good things about it anymore.

    I use firefox as my primary browser and it continues to serve my needs better than any of the alternatives. It's available on linux unlike IE or Safari and for my needs at least it is less buggy than Chrome. Google can't seem to stop breaking things in Chrome and while they usually fix them it's annoying in the meantime. I see no meaningful speed or performance differences between the major browsers. Firefox seldom has site compatibility issues. While I won't argue that FF is without warts, it is to my mind the best available option at this time. That may change of course but I don't see anything better out there for my needs at present.

    It started as an effort to be lighter and faster than the old Mozilla suite. I actually like the mail client...

    At one time I did too. However it stagnated and I move on to other things. 12 years have passed since the project was started and the web has evolved substantially since then. Things have gotten more complex and so has the software to deal with them. This isn't 2002 and expecting the software to be the same is kind of silly.

    Completely lost sight of what they'd been trying to do.

    What they originally were trying to do is not as relevant today. Perhaps you want a stripped down browser with minimal frills. That's fine but most of the rest of us are concerned with other things. So long as it let's me view the bits of the web I want and gives me options to configure to my particular quirks without crashing or causing problems, I don't really care if it takes up extra space or has a few features I don't use.

  3. Re:Fucking morons by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative

    The sole advantage of Firefox over Chrome these days is the fact that it's add-on SDK allows addons to modify just about any part of the browser. Chrome extensions are extremely limited in what they do.

    They are planning on extending the add-on API so it still has most of the functionality of the current add-ons. It will be much more sophisticated than what Chrome allows now.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  4. Re:So what's the point of Firefox anymore? by roca · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Pocket issues had no effect on Firefox users not actually using Pocket, i.e. you (I assume). Furthermore the Pocket integration code in Firefox is open source.

    The Adobe DRM module is closed source but integrated in the best way possible given the DRM requirements. You can delete the module without breaking anything except DRM. If you don't, the module is very tightly sandboxed so it can do nothing but decode video and audio. It is thus much more privacy and security friendly than, say, Flash. (You have already removed Flash, right?) I'm glad you don't want to watch Netflix, but it turns out a lot of people do, and "can't watch Netflix!" is not a great feature.

    The new Firefox extensions model will support extensions like Tree Style Tabs and better ad blocking than Chrome's API provides. We're not limiting ourselves to Chrome's API.