Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mozilla to Remove Support for Built-In Feed Reader From Firefox (bleepingcomputer.com)

Posted by msmash on from the up-next dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Mozilla engineers are preparing to remove one of the Firefox browser's oldest features -- its built-in support for RSS and Atom feeds, and inherently, the "Live Bookmarks" feature. All Firefox users are probably well accustomed to this feature, albeit not many have ever used it. This feature powers the browser's ability to detect when users are accessing an RSS/Atom feed and then show a special page that lets them subscribe to the feed with a custom feed reader or the browser's built-in "Live Bookmarks" feature. [...] In a recent discussion on the company's bug tracker, Mozilla engineers said they plan to remove feed support sometime later this year, with the release of Firefox 63 or Firefox 64 --scheduled for October and December, respectively.

161 comments

  1. Who cares ? by petermp · · Score: 0

    Seamonkey is around. Who cares about FireWhat ?!

    1. Re:Who cares ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must care! you read the story and felt compelled to make a comment.

    2. Re:Who cares ? by dryeo · · Score: 2

      SeaMonkey is dying. Not enough developers to keep up with the rapidly changing code from Mozilla. Hopefully they can make the adjustments to keep up but it doesn't look good.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  2. Why do I use Firefox Again? by nucrash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Management of my feeds has been a primary reason that I have used Firefox over other browsers since.....

    I am deeply disappointed in the loss of this feature. I am not ready to shift to Chrome and I don't want to shift to Chrome. Yet moves like this are deeply frustrating.

    Is this a feature that others don't use? Am I unique? What's going on?

    --
    Place something witty here
    1. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by quintus_horatius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're not alone. I use Live Bookmarks daily.

      Like others are saying, I hope it remains available through a plug in because it will be sorely missed. If not, it's departure won't be enough to make me switch to another browser as my daily driver, but it will impact my experience negatively.

    2. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's plenty of web based RSS readers out there even after Google Reader shut down. I use The Old Reader, and CommaFeed was also good when I tried it.

    3. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Srin+Tuar · · Score: 1

      Ive tried to use it but could never stay interested... I suspect they are dropping it because noone uses it. RSS seems to by dying as a technology.

    4. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by slack_justyb · · Score: 5, Informative

      The RSS feature is not very good in Firefox. You should really switch over to a desktop RSS feed reader. The parser in the Firefox RSS feed reader is hacked together and on a lot of feeds will silently error and give you garble or no feed entry at all. Usually happens with feeds that mix media in with the XML, such as podcasts, but even an RSS feed that uses images can sometimes make the parser go haywire.

      I get you, and it's really disappointing that they never went back to update the RSS feature to be better. But yeah, the code is old (like seven years old) and no one really wants to fix all the problems it had. It was a pretty neat feature in Firefox, but once I switched over to a desktop based (Liferea) the difference in how the content was rendered was pretty obvious. Additionally, it supported Podcasts as well so that was a nice plus. So it's a shame that the Feed feature never got the polish it should have, but yeah you at least owe it to yourself to try a desktop client and compare it to Firefox RSS. I don't know what feeds you use and if they're pretty Plane Jane, you might never know the difference, but the Firefox RSS just never got the love it should have. Maybe someone will rewrite it into a plugin or something? Maybe make it the client it should of been?

    5. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, I use it every day and will miss it if it is pulled. Why Mozilla do you feel the need to pull features?

    6. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Management of my feeds has been a primary reason that I have used Firefox over other browsers since.....

      I am deeply disappointed in the loss of this feature. I am not ready to shift to Chrome and I don't want to shift to Chrome. Yet moves like this are deeply frustrating.

      Is this a feature that others don't use? Am I unique? What's going on?

      I'll be hanging on to my ESR for a while.

    7. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youre not the only one, for me its a primary feature of firefox and why i stayed with it all this time...
      well, i think ill take a look at vivaldi again.

    8. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      In many ways RSS isn't needed as much. Back in the dial up days and broadband that is less then 1mbs RSS was almost nessary as we could get the info we wanted without waiting for pictures to load up, crazy ads, Javascript that was not well coded, and the crazy plugin feature. RSS were clean way to get data.

      However today, we have data aggregation sites, and bandwidth is often not a big deal, even a heavy website, is fast to load.

      That being said, I don't get the reason behind removing it, unless its maintenance is that much harder to manage then it is worth. But how many bugs does that feature get that needs to be fixed.

      I can see Google getting rid of it, because of Ad revenue. But for Mozilla?

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    9. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't use it in Firefox, but I still use RSS feeds in Thunderbird (hint, Mozilla, hint) every day.

      It's useful for lower-spec machines (like my old lappy) for looking at news sites. Still loads faster than visiting all these sites one at a time... even the "cutoff" style that forces you to look on the website for the full article is useful for figuring out what I don't want to waste my time with.

      Anybody here needing a good feed reader could try Thunderbird instead, you don't need to use it for email to get the feed reader functionality.

    10. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because they're loaded with SJWs that can't program. It's easier for them to just pull the feature so that's what they do. Besides, they're not using it, so nobody that matters is hurt.

    11. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      This, I don't know why anyone would stick to a traditional RSS client when there are web-based readers around. I use G2Reader although Old Reader is good too.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    12. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by coliva · · Score: 1

      They aren't killing off RSS/Atom, just a part of their code that they don't want to maintain and has lesser usage. No big deal. There are multiple plugins and many non-Mozilla solutions. I use the Brief plugin and it works well for me.

    13. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Or in other words, nobody gives a rat’s RSS...

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    14. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are several web based RSS readers out there which took over after Google Reader shut down. I use The Old Reader, and CommaFeed was also good when I tried it.

    15. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't know why anyone would stick to a traditional RSS client when there are web-based readers around.

      I'm sick and tired of the push to use a registered account on some online system in place of software running on my own computer.
      Every account I have to log into is yet another website to add to the cookie whitelist.

    16. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by alexp700 · · Score: 1

      +1 - the live bookmarks are the way I catch up with all the crap I don't check that often. And they are great.

    17. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by yurikhan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So run Tiny Tiny RSS on your own server. Or Go Read. Or any other self-hosted RSS daemon. (Yes, these do use accounts and cookies.)

      If you rely on Firefox to poll your feeds, you risk missing posts if you are away from your computer for a while, or seeing dupes if you use more than one.

    18. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Surely extensions will crop up to replace the missing functionality, which is where it actually belongs — like everything which is not core browser functionality. If you run Pale Moon, you can use these extensions (two of three of 'em, anyway) to read feeds.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are already options for RSS reader add-ons, I use FeedBro myself. So you may or may not get something exactly like Live Bookmarks, but you certainly will have ways to access RSS feeds without leaving the browser or using a web based reader.

    20. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

      The rendering engine of Mozilla has been reworked, and the chrome (not Chrome) around it is next, to profit from the improvements.

      This means that features aren't cut from the code so much as simply not ported. Though that is not much of a distinction, but it may explain that bugs have nothing to do with it.

      This is not the first time Mozilla have done this. Firefox was originally a minimal port of Netscape's Navigator with just enough functionality for web browsing.

    21. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not ready to shift to Chrome and I don't want to shift to Chrome.

      Don't shift to Chrome. Shift to Chromium if you feel you must. I use it with a RSS feed extension as a browser of last resort.

      Personally, I'm staying with Firefox and adding a RSS add-on.

    22. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As do I. It is THE killer feature for FF for me. Without Live Bookmarks, there will be no reason to stay with FF. This is a sad, sad day...my daily browser of 14 years is going to become useless.

      Damn...

    23. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could not agree more. I use this feature every single day forr all of my news headling reading and have never found an alernative which matches its ease and simplicity.

      I am very disappointed that they are removing this feature.

    24. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by sn0wflake · · Score: 1

      I found it easier to just have often used websites open in windows or tabs. If I wanted to look at a website I just pressed Ctrl + T, started typing in the first two letters of the URL, and I was there. I never understood what the big time saver was with RSS. I was also a web-developer from 1998 to 2012 so also looked at how it worked. The idea sounds good on paper, but the benefit of it was miniscule in my personal experience.

    25. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will finally leave FF if they remove this. It's the only thing that has kept me with them all these years...

      Why in hell they would remove a unique, useful and utilized feature is beyond me, but that will be the end of FF on my machines if it's removed.

      Damn... I really liked Quantum too.

    26. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      I've never understood using a UI for data that I expect to stay the same for viewing data that I expect to change.

      Then again, I don't even use the bookmarks UI for bookmarks.

    27. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Pascal+Sartoretti · · Score: 1

      Is this a feature that others don't use? Am I unique? What's going on?

      I tried it when Google abandoned their Reader, but I quickly settled for Feedly : having my feeds status on multiple machines (work desktop, home desktop, laptop, mobile phone) is a must for me.

      YMMV

    28. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by rnturn · · Score: 1

      No... you're not alone. I use the RSS feature to watch for updates to newsletters and podcasts. And here I was considering making a move back to Firefox. Now it'll likely be relegated to an add-on that will break every other time Mozilla releases another update and then will eventually be abandoned. (sigh)

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    29. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hits me hard. I've been following various podcasts through this feature for ages.

      This will probably be the straw that'll finally make me switch to an alternative.

      Is anyone left who did not have a favorite feature dropped or change in the last two, three years?

    30. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by tepples · · Score: 1

      So run Tiny Tiny RSS on your own server. Or Go Read. Or any other self-hosted RSS daemon.

      Are you referring to leasing a VPS or running a server on your home LAN? If the latter, under what domain name?

    31. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by tepples · · Score: 1

      bandwidth is often not a big deal

      If you believe that, would you be willing to let us forward you the monthly data transfer allowance overage bills from our ISPs?

    32. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      I never understood what the big time saver was with RSS

      Then I will be happy to demonstrate to you.

      Websites used to show new links as blue underline (default) and visited links as purple (default).

      Now web sites want you to come back over and over again, and to appear to read lots and lots of pages, and so they resort to a variety of tricks to achieve this.*

      #1 for our purposes here is they no longer use purple for visited links. Worst is when the color doesn't change at all -- guaranteeing people will re-click links. Slightly more elegant as a color tone change that nerdier users can work with.

      RSS, on the other hand, shows clearly when you have viewed a summary, becoming like an Out box (as well as an IN box). And many sites provide the whole page in the RSS, saving you a trip on Hwy HTTP altogether. All of this is blasphemy to advertisers, of course, and that is the real $ore point here.

      * - slide shows that a whole series of pages (while you go to the John), shortening links (and hiding the status bar...a two-fer) so that you have to click on a page link to find out how useless it is, and putting the same story/link on the same page in multiple places so that you will Rick Astley yourself -- "news" sites love this one.
        Slashdot's comment size limit prohibits me from elaborating further...

      --
      I come here for the love
    33. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, and especially if it leaves to its name ("Tiny") you should run this on localhost. I don't see why not at least :)

      I did run Emby Server Beta which probably way more complicated (media server, with web client) on localhost, it worked and was cool (it didn't work with the phone's browser I tried though)

    34. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use rss2email and my MUA (notmuch-emacs) for rss. Before I use elfeed.
      Long story short: good MUA are the most effective manager for feeds and many other contents. WebApp are not.

    35. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by gnunick · · Score: 1

      Is this a feature that others don't use? Am I unique? What's going on?

      Just another anecdotal observation, but I've been using Firefox since it first came out, and wasn't aware it even had an RSS reader. No loss for me, but I also never made a habit of following RSS feeds.

      IMHO the best thing about Firefox is it was the browser from Mozilla without all the bloat that made it suck. All I want from my web browser is a web browser (that's fast, easy to use, not from an advertising and/or evil company, and works on Linux).

      --
      I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
    36. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You should ....

      Don't *should* on me. This kind of comment isn't really that helpful. Mozilla said "do this", the OP said "I don't want to", and you're restating Mozilla's "do this". That only creates a circular debate. Obviously the OP doesn't care if it is Plain Jane or not. Others have commented this is a daily used feature. That's not enough for Mozilla to keep supporting it but this comment doesn't really move the conversation forward ...

      Don't *should* on people.

    37. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by ponraul · · Score: 1

      curses based reader that I used everyday: https://codezen.org/canto-ng/

    38. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      I don't know a lot about RSS. What I do know is that I get a list of recent BBC and Slashdot stores that I can click on. I use this daily.

      I have never seen an RSS reader that worked in a similar fashion. If they get rid of this feature i don't think a plugin would being it back. I don't want pictues, I don't want curated news, I don't want summaries, I don't want a browser page full of stories, I don't want anything that looks remotely like a phone's social media news app. I just want the headlines in a list and have it work like any other bookmark.

    39. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Risk missing posts? Is that a problem somehow? I admit I don't understand RSS much. But with Firefox it's just a list of headlines and I can click on a headline and get the story. I don't care if I miss a headline or that I can't see yesterday's headlines, I'm just browsing the news and this is the best way I've ever found to do this on the web. If people use RSS differently then I don't care, I just want the feature that Firefox has today.

    40. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      RSS for me just gave me the headlines in a live list of bookmarks. Then I could choose the ones I wanted to look up and open them in their own tabs and throughout the day I would read the articles. This is not at all the same thing as going to a news site's front page and having to scroll down past the fluff to find what I'm interested in. It's a major time saver. I can see the top news story at a glance, I don't have to waste the time to switch over to a new page and wait for it to load.

      If they can do this same feature without RSS then that's fine. Or some other Pointcast like feature.

    41. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FF wasn't a "port" of anything. It was a complete rewrite.

    42. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Ingenium13 · · Score: 1

      You can try switching to other RSS software. I use Tiny Tiny RSS, and am very happy with it. It has lots of plugins, such as inlining the content (via Readability). There are also a few mobile apps if you prefer to make it easier to read on your phone (or download everything for offline viewing, which is great for flights). I used to be an avid Google Reader user and moved away from RSS when they shut it down, but now I browse primarily via RSS.

    43. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I want the headlines listed, then use the Web as the reader. Because every single one of those live bookmark links is a URL that goes to a web site. Why have a third party reader display a web page when a web browser can do this? I'm not using Firefox RSS like other people use RSS I guess. All I want is a list of titles and when I click on them they go to the URL.

    44. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What's a user.css file?"

    45. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The developers develop Firefox for their own use. The fact that people who are not Mozilla developers also use Firefox is just a quirk. Or at least that seems to be their attitude.

    46. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

      Well I can only comment on the RSS reader that I use which is Liferea. Let me first start out by saying, I'm not saying everyone should move to a desktop reader, but you ought to give it a try. But I'll admit, it's definitely not for everyone so YMMV. Now with that said, you can setup the middle mouse button in Liferea so that when you middle mouse click a headline, it opens that up in a browser. You check that out and see if that works for you, if of course you're on a Linux box that is.

    47. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by blogagog · · Score: 3, Informative

      Install the addon 'Brief'. It has it's own RSS detector built in. It will take a little getting used to, but once you do, you'll like it a lot. It's certainly better than going to Chrome!

    48. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't care at all about feeds and automatic updates. I use the RSS display to view the contents of pages with the crap stripped out. Example: https://theintercept.com/feed/?lang=en is a lot better than looking at the "web view". The article author writes words, I read them, and in between us is a "web designer" which I've begun to think of as a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack messing up the words. So I use RSS to bypass the MITM.

      Even RMS needs a MITM bypass: it's far easier to read his blog on http://stallman.org/rss/rss.xml than on his web page.

    49. Re:Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, yes, I'm sure you're right. Just start programming.

      That is bound to be easier than...clicking an RSS link and then "subscribe". Yes, I'm sure you're right.

      Even though forcing one's own CSS taste onto web pages doesn't solve half the problems I mentioned while probably adding a few more...

    50. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by yurikhan · · Score: 1

      Whatever you already have. I assume any sufficiently nerd household has multiple computing devices and an ISP that only gives you one public IP address so you have to run a boundary router/NAT box. So I run TT-RSS in an LXC container on that router. And you don’t need a domain name in order to run a server, but if you want that, free-of-charge dynamic DNS providers are a thing.

    51. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by yurikhan · · Score: 1

      Running an RSS retriever on localhost has the same deficiences as using a desktop RSS reader: it’s tied to one device, and it misses posts if turned off for a long period of time.

    52. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by yurikhan · · Score: 1

      Huh? In my version of the reality, RSS is a mechanism by which you subscribe to a source of regular posts such as a blog or a webcomic so that (1) you don't have to visit all these sources' sites every day to see if anything has been posted, and (2) never miss a post.

      If you're using RSS as a "here's a bunch of things that went live at these sites you didn't choose yourself and that you might or might not want to read" list... well then I'm sure a Web Extension comes around that can replace Live Bookmarks for you.

    53. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by chrish · · Score: 1

      That's a great suggestion, thanks!

      When Google killed Reader I moved everything over to Feedly... if Feedbro's data syncs as part of Firefox's normal sync data I can drop Feedly. Nice!

      --
      - chrish
    54. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by strikethree · · Score: 1

      I have never really been interested in RSS. Way back when, Firefox used to ship with a BBC newsfeed by default. They stopped adding that feed as a default but I really liked that feature, so I figured out how to add it back in manually.

      Oh! I am using RSS, something I was never interested in... but I was. I still have a live bookmark filled with an RSS feed from the BBC even today. I use it every day.

      What is the value in removing this feature? Why is the change necessary? Is it too buggy to maintain? Removing it seems so ... arbitrary. Mozilla disgusts me.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    55. Re: Why do I use Firefox Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many times Iâ(TM)ve wanted to move on from Firefox, but you just explained why itâ(TM)s hard. Runs on Linux, respects privacy, syncs between many devices. Brave and Vivaldi arenâ(TM)t there yet and I donâ(TM)t dare log into Google to sync anything. I would have added âoenative rss readerâoe as another of my favorite FF features but oh well.

  3. A Utilities Package I wrote: 5-5 star rated @ZDNet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You guys strike me as HIGHLY technical users of NT/WindowsÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ, and I wrote this mainly for guys like you to extend the OS with Graphical tools not present in it, and also Graphical alternatives to MANY commandline tools in it (as well as exposing alot of "hidden tools" in WindowsÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ for your use for TOTAL system control!)

    Here is the URL to it @ZDNet:


    http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/topcat/otherutilities.html

    * That's where it's been rated 5-5 stars & has been in their Top50 "Other Utilities" section (competing against the "Big Boys" like Microsoft & Symantec, the ones I cannot seem to rate higher than... lol!) & has stayed for 6 months in the Top 15 at the lowest... was up to #4, but tough to stay there! It's at CNET too, but I like the ZDNet sites... VERY fast!

    APK

    P.S.=> Enjoy... apk

  4. Moved to an extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully this will at least be moved to a browser extension

    1. Re:Moved to an extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doubt it. With Quantum many good extensions did not work and most will never convert to WebExt due to the horrible API's

  5. well, sure by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Feeds are too user-centric. You might not have all your reading choices aggregated and tracked by a central authority!

    1. Re:well, sure by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also, if you are allowed to use feeds, you might get updates on things in mere chronological order or something crazy like that.

    2. Re:well, sure by nucrash · · Score: 1

      Yes, one of the things that is maddening about many social media platforms. They are trying to steer you into conversations you don't care to engage. The value of social media has dropped significantly since I took a hiatus this year. Reason enough for me to continue to step away.

      --
      Place something witty here
    3. Re: well, sure by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

      Feeds are too user-centric. You might not have all your reading choices aggregated and tracked by a central authority!

      Feeds don't circumvent that either.

    4. Re:well, sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in chronological order, or something crazy like being ad-free

    5. Re:well, sure by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You might even see news articles that your social media profile does not indicate you are normally interested in. It would be horrible if people managed to learn what actually happens in the world.

  6. Re:A Utilities Package I wrote: 5-5 star rated @ZD by tonique · · Score: 0

    I've always liked WindowsÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ. It's better than WindowsÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ.

  7. Impersonating me? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & whoever you are, please - grow up!

    APK

    P.S.=> You wish you could develop programs that do well in the eyes of others but wasting your time IMPERSONATING me online isn't gonig to make that happen for you whoever you are - I pity you... apk

    1. Re:Impersonating me? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      will the real APK please stand up

  8. Re:What needs support instead by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    Maybe you should not be expecting that kind of support from a web browser.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  9. LOL, no, but whatever floats your boat... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you say so... lol! Not that it matters...

    I'm coming bearing gifts & performance tips right off the bat & am getting demeaned & sworn at by you?

    This is good "Kung-Fu", & the programs are my gifts...

    * See, when I go to a party, I usually bring something for folks to enjoy & walk away with helping them out... I look at messageboards the SAME way!

    APK

    P.S.=> I'm gonna open up point-blank with guns blazing on you I guess, your type of person (Messageboard GOD) shows me you only understand that type of behaviour, so here goes:

    1.) Write better stuff than I did and show me you got as high a rating where stuff like that is rated like ZDNet, CNET, & others... and then I might listen! lol... till then? Please just stay outta my face, Ok?

    2.) Show me whitepapers corporate bodies or software houses use that you did, and I MIGHT take that back... I showed mine, they're proven effective & in use!

    (Thing is? I know you can't... no way, no how... so I think you know what I think of YOU already! I wouldn't be this harsh, but telling me to Fuck off in that other post merits this... enjoy it, swallow it down pal! lol...)

    * Sorry folks, this guy is the type of person (swearing at me right off) that I have to flatten with his own tactics... neanderthalic & primitive!
    apk

  10. Re:A Utilities Package I wrote: 5-5 star rated @ZD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why does your app bark like that?

  11. Mozilla Can't Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When Mozilla adds new features to Firefox because that's what keeps people upgrading and using the product, they are blamed for adding bloat and slowing the product down. When Mozilla removes little used features, suddenly they are doing away with a vital function and the one reason a person had for continuing to use Firefox.

    1. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      See Also, Microsoft.
      This is slashdot, everything everyone does is wrong.

    2. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Well what is the cost/benefit analysis of removing the feature that has already been there. Will it save a meg of storage? or does this feature adversely affect overall performance?

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Mozilla adds new features to Firefox because that's what keeps people upgrading and using the product, they are blamed for adding bloat and slowing the product down.

      Why shouldn't they be blamed when they add new features and as a result performance tanks + memory utilization goes to plaid? Adding new features does not in and of itself necessitate tanking performance. This typically arises from sloppiness not necessity.

      When Mozilla removes little used features, suddenly they are doing away with a vital function and the one reason a person had for continuing to use Firefox.

      Again why shouldn't they be blamed? A customer depends on a feature they use every day being there then vendor just unilaterally decides to yank it for no reason. Hard to disagree with criticism from affected users.

      Must be nice to be in a position to not have to give a shit about customers with needs different from "mainstream". If I behaved this way the end result would be foreclosure on my home. The reality of commercial software is everyone needs something different. This is why "Advanced" and "Expert" menus, extension APIs and DSLs exist. It's why configuration registries such as about:config are useful.

      This one size-fits-all outliers can pound sand, no choice is better, less is more mentality is ruining software and making people who depend on and use it the most less productive.

    4. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This one size-fits-all outliers can pound sand, no choice is better, less is more mentality is ruining software and making people who depend on and use it the most less productive.

      Yeah, instead of appealing to the most amount of people, they should only do what you personally want. That makes sense.

    5. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by allo · · Score: 1

      So maybe they should keep the features they have and do not add stuff nobody missed before. Win-Win.

    6. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by jon3k · · Score: 1

      It might use screen real estate or keyboard shortcuts that cannot be used by other parts of the application. It might also add complexity to the menus that confuses casual users. But mostly, sometimes it is easier to pull out old code than constantly maintain it as the rest of the application evolves, especially when hardly anyone uses it.

    7. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      https://xkcd.com/1172/

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    8. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TL;DR: Change is bad. Isn't that the life lesson of every software engineer ever?

    9. Re:Mozilla Can't Win by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      So maybe they should keep the features they have and do not add stuff nobody missed before. Win-Win.

      As the customer base slowly rots and dwindles.

  12. For fuck's sake by xack · · Score: 2

    The death of Firefox with version 57 was bad enough, now the corpse is decomposing as well. I don't think Waterfox amd Palemoon will be able to keep up with the surge in users they're getting from Firefox refugees. Can we take any sort of action to force Mozilla to stop removing features?

    1. Re: For fuck's sake by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

      Can we take any sort of action to force Mozilla to stop removing features?

      No.

      What you can do is fork it and maintain the feature yourself.
      (Or pay someone to do it for you.)

      Who knows, your fork might see wider adoption than the mainline version.

    2. Re: For fuck's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but then I'd have to do wooooorrk (or pay)! :( :( :( these people should make the software exactly how I want it and for free!!!

    3. Re:For fuck's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This, I'm also tired from the firefox'es revolutionary changes. Maybe it is possible to workaround this problem by changing the config file and compiling firefox yourself. I do that myself since firefox imposed the use of pulse on linux.

    4. Re:For fuck's sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are there any reliable numbers out there showing PaleMoon and Waterfox gaining users, or is this just hearsay?

  13. Impersonator of me grow up... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Impersonator of me grow up & get a life!

    APK

    P.S.=> Seriously... apk

    1. Re: Impersonator of me grow up... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geez,

      Guys... it's not intended as spam!

      It's intended as a gift some of you might like & use is all! Like going to a party, I like to bring a gift or two that others might like & enjoy!

      That is the intent of it...

      Man!

      I got called names here already, & I even offered up some good performance tricks & tips you may not be aware of in the postings...

      APK

  14. Move to ESR by williamyf · · Score: 1

    Since ESR releases are supported for a year, with ESR60 you will keep this feature for a year.

    By that time, some sorto of alternative solution (in the form of an extension or plug-in) will be available.

    That is what many of us did with the blocking of plug-ins and XUL that acompanied the shift to Firefox quantum...

    Best of luck

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
    1. Re:Move to ESR by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why are you dragging Eric S. Raymond into this?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  15. Um, why are they doing this? by mad+zambian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The RSS reader is something I use regularly, and have something like 30 feeds subscribed to including the one here on Slashdot. It is way easier (much faster) to skim through the RSS feeds for headlines, rather than going to the website itself. But pageviews etc, is what count these days I guess. Screw the user's time and any data caps.

    Mozilla gets a downvote for this one.

    --
    Trying to associate Microsoft with "fun" is like trying to associate Satan with aromatherapy. -Tycho
    1. Re:Um, why are they doing this? by scrimmer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is way easier (much faster) to skim through the RSS feeds for headlines, rather than going to the website itself.

      This captures it perfectly.

      I've 63 subscribed feeds, about 55 of which I review daily. Skimming for relevant headlines and then opening those pages in new tabs has become a central part of how I, and others I've introduced the feature to over the years, find and read articles on the web. I've curated a wide range of sources through LiveBookmarks and RSS, and this Firefox feature has been the most efficient way for me to find items of interest. I might also add that I'm using, by today's bleeding-edge standards, antiquated hardware, as I'm sure not an insignificant number of users do, and the RSS feature helps to facilitate web browsing.

      (And, I saw the headline for this story through my RSS feed for Slashdot.)

    2. Re:Um, why are they doing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't want you to skim feeds, they want you to goto the website so they can harvest your info and they can get some type of payment.

    3. Re:Um, why are they doing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is, Firefox is in all honesty not that great as an RSS reader. The user experience isn't what it should be and that's even ignoring the fact that it's pretty buggy. The problem with Swiss Army programs is that they often lose focus: they do one or two things well and all the other things crappy, often forcing you into also using the main aspects of the program in the process. It's better if a program does one thing well.
      If I were in charge of things, I would also strip PDF support from Firefox. Firefox's built-in PDF reader is extremely bad. It doesn't navigate as smoothly or intuitively as most stand-alone PDF readers, it's slow, it runs out of memory often (even on my game rig), it's buggy... And if Firefox is used by an unsophisticated user, he'll think that's just the way PDFs are and he'll effectively be forced into a bad experience.
      And I guess I could say the same for Firefox's image viewer, one of its oldest features. It's impossibly bad. How has it not improved at all for almost two decades while even the built-in Windows image viewer is better? Why doesn't Firefox allow you to use an external viewer? The mind boggles.
      And it tries to be a media player as well, even though it often flat-out refuses to play things that are no problem for let's say Media Player Classic (or for VLC) and when it does play a video there are often bizarre issues like video tearing caused by not vsyncing or performance problems that are a mystery to me given the smooth playback in MPC.
      Firefox tries to be too many different things at the same time. It succeeds, mostly, in being a fairly decent web browser and I do use it daily for that purpose. But all its other features are turds.

    4. Re:Um, why are they doing this? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      After careful consideration of various options (which also included doing nothing, or investing heavily in updating the code), we've decided to go ahead and remove builtin feed support from Firefox. This metabug covers both the removal and creating public documentation for users (e.g. on support.mozilla.org ) of alternatives.

      I believe they've decided it is easier to remove a feature that is not used heavily versus maintaining it. You could certainly offer to maintain it yourself. Or you could use one of the many, many alternatives for RSS. Personally I don't need my web browser to be my RSS reader. I also like to be able to use RSS from multiple locations, which is why I use TinyTiny-RSS which I access via my web browser using the web interface, an iOS application on my mobile device as well as via the command line using newsbeuter, all of which shares the same TinyTiny-RSS database, so reading it on any device shows it read on any other.

      I've also heard good things about FreshRSS and there are lots of other desktop clients.

    5. Re:Um, why are they doing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason is simple: follow the money. Mozilla's biggest sources of funding are surveillance economy companies like Yahoo/Google. RSS doesn't have built-in user tracking and advertising, so it's not a feature these companies want to see in any mainstream browser.

      Or, Mozilla's current crop of fetuses-turned-developers decided on their own that RSS is far too old to be relevant. Maybe some of them were pissed off that nobody uses Pocket.

    6. Re:Um, why are they doing this? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      It works just fine for me. I have tried some other readers or plugins but they do not provide the feature of live bookmarks in a browser for the purpose of bringing up web based content.

      Also, I need PDF support in the browser! Adobe Acrobat is no longer just a reader and is instead bloatware, any third party tool is better than Adobe. Adobe Reader forces me in to a bad experience. I could get a different tool that does this, but why should I when the browser is right there and the URL I just clicked on was from the same browser? With the browser I can put different PDF docs in different tabs. Also Firefox has never attempted to modify a PDF or made a copy of a read-only PDF or any other unnatural act that standalone readers do.

    7. Re:Um, why are they doing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an interesting way of browsing content, but it's also an edge case. Mozilla says that 0.1% of Firefox users are using the feature. If one out of every 1000 people are using something, and you're looking to make cuts, that's a reasonable plan.

      This seems like a feature that should be an addon, anyways - especially considering that 0.1%.

  16. Seems reasonable to me by urusan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I use Firefox and I didn't realize this was a feature. The engineers seem to have thought it through, and it makes sense to remove this kind of largely unused legacy code, since it costs time and money to test and maintain. I mean, the last updates were 7 years ago. They're also giving a migration path for the users and there are reasonable alternatives, so it's not like they're just leaving people out in the cold.

    Most importantly, it's really a feature that makes more sense as an extension than as a built-in part of the browser. As an add-on it can evolve separately from the browser, and multiple extensions can compete with each other (and fill in different niches) without having to go through the trouble of developing a full web-browser.

    1. Re:Seems reasonable to me by Bill+Hayden · · Score: 1

      Most importantly, it's really a feature that makes more sense as an extension than as a built-in part of the browser. As an add-on it can evolve separately from the browser, and multiple extensions can compete with each other (and fill in different niches) without having to go through the trouble of developing a full web-browser.

      If they would allow addons to alter the UI beyond adding single little button, you'd be right. Unfortunately, they don't. There is no way to duplicate the Live Bookmark feature because, as of FF 57, support for altering the UI like that has been removed.

      --
      Protect your browser with the Force Safe Search add-on
    2. Re:Seems reasonable to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't cost them money though. If no on has touched it, no money was spent unless someone is just getting paid for doing nothing. They haven't spent money is the reason they are removing it.

    3. Re:Seems reasonable to me by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Just because that section of code hasn't been updated in 7 years doesn't mean that people aren't using that feature. It just means that feature is working well enough that the developers haven't had to modify that code. It hasn't caused any major problems and if there are any bugs filed then they have been relatively minor so that not working on them hasn't impacted the rest of the browser.

      Code churn != use of feature

    4. Re:Seems reasonable to me by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      If no one has touched it, then maybe the feature was just right and didn't need mucking with?

  17. Re:What needs support instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why the jock strap was invented.

  18. Web platform = cancer by clueless nutjobs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thw What(TheFuck)WG members do everything, to push their shitty excuse of platform on a platform (Sup dawg ...) that it is a crippled copy of.

    At this point we are basically downloading applications and running them in a VM with a pre-loaded extremely bloated OS API.

    Slap a URL bar to VirtualBox or somthing, and you have about the same thing, just vastly more powerful.

    I am actually a neuro-psychologist, and I had a four hour IRC talk with the WhatWG members that led me to the conclusion that they are mentally insane. At this point, I'd recommend medically assisted therapy, as you're not getting through to their world anymore otherwise.

  19. I am APK the LORD of HOSTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am APK the great "LORD of HOSTS", a.k.a. AlecStaar or Alexander Peter Kowalski.

    See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux h t t p : / / I . a m . a . f u c k i n g / a s s h o l e . r e t a r d . z i p (remove spaces between characters & download).

    I am the godlike creator of various GUI front-ends for other people's configuration files.

    Calling people ne'er-do-wells or Jealous JOWIEs is how I think I win every argument

    When people state the truth about me I get really mad and accuse them of projecting which is something I do all the time.

    Don't call me out on anything unless you are willing to prove you too can write some strings to a file programmatically

    Spamming and being a general pain in the ass is what I do

    Listen as I relive my glory days of being a college athlete in the early 80s

    You must be conspiring with the Jews and Soros if you disagree with me

    Bask in my greatness as I can do a ping as a non root user.

    Watch as I whine about my work being flagged as malware by anti-virus software.

    Witness my descent into madness

    APK

  20. Nice move by Tsolias · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They've been shitting on firefox's code since the version 27.0.
    They destroyed the add-ons community,
    they destroyed the interface,
    they have zero mobile presence,
    they lost a shitload of market-share,
    they started taking political positions,
    and what did they learn about this?
    remove moar features.

    do you remember https://www.reddit.com/r/firef... ?

    1. Re:Nice move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      and what did they learn about this?
      remove moar features.

      and yet, if the article was about adding a feature, everyone would bitch about bloat.

    2. Re:Nice move by amorsen · · Score: 2

      And they're massively better off for it.

      Modern Firefox is an absolutely great browser.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    3. Re:Nice move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've been shitting on firefox's code since the version 27.0.
      Since 27.0, the browser has gained a lot of performance. It's hard to call that "shitting" on code.

      They destroyed the add-ons community,
      Yes, this part sucked - but they did at least put in a partial substitute for it that should grow. And the performance gains outweigh the XUL loss, IMO.

      they destroyed the interface,
      They copied Chrome because Google has the best UI/UX data; It was their best guess at what people wanted... I mean, how can they know what's best for their user group when us end users won't share our data because we're more informed (and paranoid) about it. Between a rock and a hard place.

      they have zero mobile presence,
      They couldn't use their own codebase in iOS - which meant no adblocker and such, so why use it there?

      they started taking political positions,
      I agree 100% on this point. The firing of a top engineer over anti-gay marriage donations === DUMB. Know your role, and make a good browser. Leave the rest up to the internet mobs.

      ...remove moar features.
      When you calm down, look at the facts, and use logic (vs. emotion), you'll see that it was the right choice.

    4. Re:Nice move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modern Firefox is an absolutely great browser.

      They lost market share massively due to .... absolute greatness?!

      So what is the ultimate benchmark here? When they achieve the Nirvana of Browser Perfection the market share will trend toward ZERO, no?

      Possibly related question: are you off your meds?

      Because for sane people when a product loses market share massively its either because its latest version sucks compared to previous ones or the competitions' products have left the sucker in the dust (barring general economic upheaval - which does not apply here due to the sale prices being $0). Just so you know. When you take those pills again of course...

    5. Re:Nice move by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Marketshare doesn't affect me much. Modern Firefox is faster, more stable, less memory-intensive, renders even complex pages great.

      If Firefox loses enough marketshare that it means layoffs for its developers, then that obviously affects me. But really, if I didn't care about stability and performance and rendering, what need would I have for new development?

      Hopefully people will see how much of an improvement modern Firefox is, and the market share will go up again.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    6. Re:Nice move by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yeah and have produced a fantastic browser as a result. The Firefox team doesn't owe you anything. Don't like it? Click here: http://chrome.google.com/

    7. Re:Nice move by Tsolias · · Score: 1

      this sounds like
      "If you don't like firefox transforming into chrome, download chrome."
      No, thanks. I'd rather use a fork.

    8. Re:Nice move by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      So you have an alternative. Then what are you complaining about. Use that.

  21. Browsers are pointlss anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    URL retrieval and such should be separate from hypertext viewing or virtual machines.

    IMHO the former should go to another library/daemon bundled with and integrated into the OS (but modular, so there can be competing ones, of course.)
    And the latter should be normal viewer (like for PDFs) or a VM (like VrtualBox), but less cumbersome to use with the former.

    1. Re:Browsers are pointlss anyway. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      But no one has really done this. For the only thing I use this Firefox feature for, the URL is *always* to a web page, never to a PDF file or something else. Thus it acts exactly like a dynamic list of bookmarks. If they get rid of this feature, I'll probably stop visiting Slashdot permanently.

      (never mind that Firefox already is my normal PDF viewer, given that modern Acrobat Reader is a crime against humanity)

  22. Before everyone freaks out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The feed reader functionality in Thunderbird doesn't show signs of going away (I hope...). If you want a place to easily drop your feeds into, Thunderbird's been working fine for me since I left Liferea. No need to integrate email functionality whatsoever, just set it as your default feed reader only if you use another email client or webmail.

    Don't Mozilla-bash too hard when another of their offerings is still doing what people want. :P (hint, Mozilla, hint)

    1. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by nucrash · · Score: 1

      Ryan?

      --
      Place something witty here
    2. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So, use an email client to read websites. Fail!

    3. Re:Before everyone freaks out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ??? What?

  23. Netvibes by Xord · · Score: 1

    I have been using Netvibes to aggregate all my RSS feeds onto a single page since the demise of iGoogle. As it's all browser-based, it's easy to get to it, whatever device you're on. It works better than a dedicated RSS feed application for me at least.

  24. Feedbro Add-on by Kludge · · Score: 1

    I have tried several RSS addons for Firefox. Feedbro works well. It is how I read all my news across many web sites.

  25. Re:A Utilities Package I wrote: 5-5 star rated @ZD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not sure, but it's hella better than WindowsÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇ.

  26. goodbye slashdot... and others by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    I only go to slashdot from a RSS bookmark and other sites. I suppose it will save me time but in the end I'll just hate mozilla's idiotic management more. The limited resource excuse is always a fallback for BS arguments; it's not honest many times it is used - this is an existing feature which made it past many big transitions; they don't need to rewrite it in rust.

    Many of these IDIOTIC moves are not technical like the multi-process transition. Management must be all narcissistic novice users. Power users decide for others and promote software for others. I literally bring 100s of users to Firefox every year - upsetting people like me is foolish.

    --
    Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
  27. Re: A Utilities Package I wrote: 5-5 star rated @Z by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boy,

    The man with no brain sure talks loud... but I am waiting to see if his LIMP brain can begin to write those "simple" apps, and then if he can outrate my work...

    It'll never happen, the chumps just "PLUM-DUMB" (lol)... a limited networkin boy! Flunky... hehe... network techboy! hahaha...

    face it, playing on your ballcourt is chump stuff... how come so many folks FAIL on Computer Science degrees... but any dork who can read gets MCSE?

    Think about it... don't strain TOO hard boy! lol...

    APK

  28. Accustomed but never used? by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

    All Firefox users are probably well accustomed to this feature, albeit not many have ever used it.

    Can anyone explain the meaning of this sentence? I literally can't figure out what he's trying to say there.

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    1. Re:Accustomed but never used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People have gotten used to seeing some weird icon, all the time, on almost all pages, that looks pretty cool and says something like 'subscribe'. They have become accustomed to the existence of a button.

      But only few have figured out how to use it.

    2. Re:Accustomed but never used? by allo · · Score: 1

      The RSS-Button in the URL-Bar vanished quite a few versions ago.

    3. Re:Accustomed but never used? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      They're trying to say that we have always been at war with Eastasia.

  29. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  30. RSS belongs in a mail client anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where you get notification, search and archiving for free. Opera's M2 had the perfect RSS implementation (integrated with the browser so you did not have to copy URLs but otherwise using mail capabilities), but I'm fine with Thunderbird's as well.

    1. Re:RSS belongs in a mail client anyway by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Why mail? I use it in Firefox for seeing BBC and Slashdot headlines. Why should that be in mail?

  31. Like a weak SysAdmin flexing their insecurity... by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    If they had anybody with a brain in management at Mozilla, they'd NOT remove anything without making an API for somebody to add back an equal or greater replacement! They should give TIME for some to surface and then have a whole category on the Add-on site for restoring old firefox features. It is just basic customer service; when you upset the customers provide them SOMETHING they can do about it. Hell, Mozilla promotes "freedom" yet they keep imposing their BS onto others. They could poll users and at least cite that when the changes happen; it's likely the poll will agree with them anyhow but at least it is better customer relations. Not this power trip by a tiny minority organization trying to push people around like their the big dog.

    Why aren't more people upset the SAME mozilla post mentions that Firefox RSS was ported to Chrome and somebody may port that back into firefox for them??

    I forgot that I have an add-on which RESTORES the RSS icon which I had to add when they removed the subscribe to RSS icon feature! No wonder few people even KNOW about RSS!

    --
    Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
  32. Unbelieveable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is PRECISELY the main reason I still use Firefox and now they are killing this RSS functionality. Who wants to use a desktop RSS reader that pops open another app (browser) to properly display pages so that I can read them. I don't.

    I'm tired of technology companies and their indifferent attitudes regarding their end-user's longstanding workflows, continually changing them without any regard or consideration as to the harm they are doing to huge swaths of people's lives.

  33. I used a live bookmark to find this story by Bill+Hayden · · Score: 1

    Seriously, I would like a month to go by without Firefox removing some feature I use daily. I'm already stuck on FF 56 indefinitely due to continuing lack of multi-row tabs on later versions. Live bookmarks are the way I keep up with news... pull down the feed, see at a glance anything I might want to read, like this story for example. I use it to keep up with Craigslist ads too, based off search queries. I've never found anything nearly as convenient.

    Why would I want to use a separate program to see browser links?

    --
    Protect your browser with the Force Safe Search add-on
  34. Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every move like this just means fewer and fewer neckbeards using their browser. Maybe then those neckbeards will get off the Internet entirely since no single browser is specifically catered to their autistic needs.
    You nerds in here act all smart like you could totally build your own. I wonder why you haven't yet??

  35. Does the workflow work for my use case? by gman003 · · Score: 1

    I tried desktop RSS feed readers many years ago, back in the Firefox 3.0 era, when the RSS update happened in the main UI thread and would draw your browser down to an absolute crawl. Nothing I found worked the way I actually use RSS feeds.

    I mainly use Live Bookmarks for webcomics. I have around a hundred I follow. Every day, I roll down a big folder on my bookmarks bar that has a Live Bookmark "folder" for each of them, and read any unread entries, one at a time. This does take a while but most of that time is spent reading, not on the RSS process because I can just hover over an LB and see if I need to read anything. I've manually sorted them into groups by how often they're supposed to update - daily/5-a-week/3-a-week/weekly/etc. which speeds the process up even more. And the few webcomics that don't have a working RSS feed fit into the process nicely - they happen to have mostly-consistent schedules so I just remember "hey, it's wednesday, ___ should have updated". It's also not uncommon for a webcomic to go on a lengthy hiatus. I have a subfolder of "maybe dead?" LBs which I check less often.

    I really do not want to miss even one update (most of the ones I read are story-based), which RSS readers designed for skimming a news feed generally don't focus on. In particular, ones that just shovel everything into one ginormous stream won't work for me. Live Bookmarks follows my browser history so it shows which entries I have and have not read, so even if I skip a few days I won't be unable to catch back up.

    As extreme cases, it also needs to be able to deal with an RSS feed with several hundred entries in it (one comic includes its entire decade-plus archive into the feed), several feeds that include entries I don't want to read (news/blog entries), and one that goes in reverse order for whatever fucking reason (newest item at bottom).

    I read from multiple devices, so Firefox syncing history between them mostly keeps that in line (this is maybe 50/50 whether it actually works or not, because Firefox doesn't sync redirect pages and like half the RSS feeds I read don't give canonical URLs).

    Do you (or anyone else) have any desktop RSS feed reader that works for my use case as well as, or better than, Firefox Live Bookmarks?

    1. Re:Does the workflow work for my use case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a good mail setup try RSS2Email, so you can use your MUA to refile, index/search, tag anything with a comfortable interface.

  36. Oh yay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but freakin' POCKET gets to stay?!? Fortunately there's more than one web browser out there (besides Internet Exploder, Edge, and Chrome, I mean).

  37. uhh no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I actually use this so I dont have to have a youtube account.

  38. Replacement: https://theoldreader.com/ by kwerle · · Score: 1

    My sympathies. I never used the firefox tool, but I understand the frustration with disappearing readers.

    I recommend https://theoldreader.com/ as a replacement.

  39. yesterday was a sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    0) surprised it got here so fast. maybe that's a good sign?

    a) People who read feeds are likely to disable reporting usage data to mozilla. People who do not disable usage data reporting are unlikely to use the livelinks. Usage statistics will clearly show very low numbers.

    b) People who read slashdot are more likely to use feed readers than people who don't read slashdot. Its clear that the majority of the posts here don't like the change.

    c) Firefox Livelinks are nearly unusable since support for classical addons was dropped. The new chrome'ish addons have no access to the livelinks. Hence no addon can provide rendering of the feeds in any meaningful way.

    d) rss/atom feeds in general are not read much, because they are too hard to read. And by too hard to read I mean too hard to read for you grandmother. That's the majority of the people surfing the web these days. They have a browser. They may have, in rare cases, a dedicated email client. End. Nothing more. Surely not a dedicated feed reader, where you need to transfer links from your browser to the reader. Or to a website.

    e) Big players are not interested in promoting feed readers (or feeds) for obvious reasons. They complete remove their ability to mess with our timelines, to shift our interest to their advertisers, or just provide digital crack to make us waste more times to look at their pages and their ads.

    f) Feed readers as WebExtensions seem to be available. Currently trying Brief and FeedBro. Both seem to work well so far, better than the broken state of livelinks (both less well than with livelinks and the old add-ons). That should be good enough to not be a problem for anyone who cares only about themselves.

    g) Feed readers are freedom. Everyone should be entitled to that freedom, not only technically interested few. A feed reader should be a core feature of a browser. After all, in its most simple form all does is browse (feeds), and bookmark feeds.

  40. imaginary function by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i suspect people just dont know that RSS exists.
    loads about in the same time as regular website, only without javascript, jpegs and lots of html formatting:
    http://uj3wazyk5u4hnvtk.onion/rss/top100/201

    it's pure sugar, mixed with crystal meth and high octan aviation fuel until frothy : ]

  41. Frim TFA: by denzacar · · Score: 1

    The Mozilla team is already set in its decision and has even drafted a blog post for the official announcement. In this unpublished document, engineers share more of the reasons that led to the decision to remove Firefox's built-in feed support and Live Bookmarks utility.

    â-- Live Bookmarks doesn't really have a concept of a "read" state. It uses a history visit state as a proxy, which doesn't work for redirects.
    â-- Live Bookmarks doesn't work well with Firefox Sync
    â-- Live Bookmarks is not available for Android or iOS and has no mobile integration
    â-- Doesn't work well with podcast types of feeds
    â-- Only 0.1% of the Firefox userbase uses Live Bookmarks
    â-- Outdated and hard to maintain code (last update was 7 years ago)
    â-- Uses its own custom code for various tasks instead of reusing Firefox's current libraries

    "These features had an outsized maintenance and security impact relative to their usage," the draft announcement said. "Making these features as well-tested, modern and secure as the rest of Firefox would have cost significant time and effort, and the usage of these features doesn't justify such an investment.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  42. Free software verifiably respects privacy by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    Feedbro is nonfree software; according to its license entry in Firefox Add-Ons (where the site you pointed to directs users to get the Feedbro add-on) the license is "All Rights Reserved".

    Feedbro tries to convince you they care about your privacy by including "We believe privacy is important so that only you know what sources you follow." on their site but that's completely unverifiable. If they really believed privacy was important, users included, they'd distribute the software as free software -- free for the user to run, inspect, share, and modify.

    /. just listed another story where browser add-ons were caught collecting data on users. Developers get away with malware in proprietary (nonfree, user-subjugating) software. It's much harder to get away with that in free software because technically capable and willing users can and do help their community by distributing malware-free copies of the software. This is also ironic in that the main feature that separates Firefox from other browsers is that Firefox is software that can be made into free software very easily (and users have done this with multiple Firefox derivatives).

    You should not use Feedbro to do this job. You'd be better off keeping your privacy and using software that respects your software freedom.

    --
    Digital Citizen
  43. use feedly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    since google closed google reader, people have moved to feedly.

  44. Thunderbird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Leave it in Thunderbird and nobody gets hurt...

  45. Re: What needs support instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd love to see some pictures of your anus so I can jack off to them. Feces encrusted preferred. Please send them to hostslover@hotmale.cum.

  46. Re: What needs support instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're just so damned sexy. What has two thumbs and wants a piece of your ass?

    This guy! Eyyy!

  47. Bandwidth no, filter and homogeneity yes! by Herve5 · · Score: 1

    With all due respect, I have almost the opposite view : I use RSS aggregators everywhere (on my website, computers, phone) with a single aim : eliminating advertisement and fancy website interfaces, leading to a simple, clean, homogeneous presentation along *all* my information channels (and I have over 100).
    Without aggregators I'd be terribly less efficient.
    Now, that FF removes this doesn't bother me at all -I love aggregated info but not all-in-one things, and I switched to dedicated apps almost when RSS appeared. There are so many of them...

    --
    Herve S.
  48. You need a domain name to get a certificate by tepples · · Score: 1

    I assume any sufficiently nerd household has multiple computing devices

    I wouldn't be so sure that most users of Live Bookmarks live in a sufficiently nerd household. In a lot of cases, "multiple computing devices" are likely to be devices that go to sleep when not in use, such as smartphones and laptops. Or does "nerd" mean owner of a Raspberry Pi single-board computer or a router specifically purchased for DD-WRT compatibility?

    and an ISP that only gives you one public IP address so you have to run a boundary router/NAT box. So I run TT-RSS in an LXC container on that router.

    Provided you can even choose to install a container on a router. I imagine that most households lease a modem-router combination device from a home ISP, and I don't see how these are user-flashable. Even those who own their own modem and router probably bought consumer-grade gear, which isn't marked on the box for compatibility with DD-WRT or other user-installed software, at a chain similar to Office Depot or Best Buy.

    And you don’t need a domain name in order to run a server

    If you don't have a domain name, you don't qualify for a TLS certificate from a publicly trusted certificate authority. If you don't have a TLS certificate, you can't run HTTPS and are instead restricted to cleartext HTTP. If you run a cleartext HTTP server on anything but localhost, the browser will wall it off from certain JavaScript features.

    but if you want that, free-of-charge dynamic DNS providers are a thing.

    Provided the dynamic DNS provider 1. is on the Public Suffix List and 2. supports TXT records. Otherwise, use of Let's Encrypt to obtain a certificate for the server on your LAN is not feasible.

    1. Re:You need a domain name to get a certificate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or does "nerd" mean owner of a Raspberry Pi single-board computer or a router specifically purchased for DD-WRT compatibility?

      Both of those things are pretty nerdy indeed, most people won't know what any of them actually are. And general purpose PCs are coming full circle and turning back into work machines and nerd's toys like they used to be.

  49. Server on localhost on Android? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Honestly, and especially if it leaves to its name ("Tiny") you should run this on localhost. I don't see why not at least :)

    Should it be expected that a user of Firefox for Android learn how to run a server on localhost on an Android device? If not, then explaining why not will help answer your question.