Slashdot Mirror
Firefox 62 Arrives With Variable Fonts, Automatic Dark Theme on macOS, and Better Scrolling on Android (venturebeat.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla today released Firefox 62 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. The release builds on Firefox Quantum, which the company calls "by far the biggest update since Firefox 1.0 in 2004." Version 62 brings variable fonts, automatic dark theme on macOS, and better scrolling on Android. Firefox 62 for the desktop is available for download now 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. The latest iOS version is available on Apple's App Store.
I'm going to post a stupid question and then go read what it is, so here it goes:
Haven't browsers had variable fonts since the introduction of CSS?
#DeleteFacebook
But... I still find myself opening Chrome pretty often for various reasons.
Yeah, me too, but all those reasons end in google.com, or they are the result of some noobs using it as an interface for something that shouldn't use it as an interface, like for programming drones or something.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Variable fonts is improved functionality. It's a Web Standard that Firefox now supports. You know, the whole point of web browser?
Mostly various websites. Particularly government websites (I use their websites constantly.) I really don't know why. For example, the city of Dallas Procurement website doesn't work at all in Firefox. Neither does the Texas Water Development Boards website. I have to use Chrome or IE.
Just noticed integrated tracking protection - kind of nice
some noobs using [the web] as an interface for something that shouldn't use it as an interface
What's better?
A. Using the web as an interface for something
B. Using a Windows 10 license in a virtual machine as an interface for something
C. Another binary portability mechanism that your reply explains
D. Not having access to something at all if your device happens to run GNU/Linux, FreeBSD, or macOS
Chrome has a more Metroid-morph-ball-looking logo.
#DeleteFacebook
What's better?
A cross-platform application. Use Tcl/Tk if you have to, or even python. That's cross-platform. But don't use a web browser to do a simple job. That's unnecessary bloat. Having to load Chrome on a netbook just to twiddle some settings on a drone is dumb.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Variable fonts is improved functionality. It's a Web Standard that Firefox now supports. You know, the whole point of web browser?
Now if they would just remove all the useless garbage that *IS NOT* the point of a web browser.
Fonts have ceased to be a bottle neck about a twenty years ago.
Mozilla needs more work on rendering performance. Rendering SVGs is slower than on Internet Explorer 11 in many cases, and in general about four times slower than on Chrome. In one extreme test case it is even about ten times slower than Chrome ( https://testdrive-archive.azur... ), but luckily that is not a typical example.
The problem with fixing this is that it is really hard work and this kind of work is not really valued. And that is where Open Source does not work too well. Why should people work their ass off if work is not really recognized? At Google engineers are at least paid well, so it's much easier to find people who are willing to do the hard work. Just look at the team size for Google's Slimming Paint project: https://www.chromium.org/blink...
Yeah, sorry, but variable fonts won't win you too many users I suspect.
Signature deleted by lameness filter.
I just tried your software for Linux, it does nothing that cannot be done with a few shell scripts. If you went through the trouble GUI make the most of the interface, provide documentation and make it intuitive. Perhaps the most common use case could be turned into a wizard and the documentation should be rewritten in clear non preachy-ranty prose.
A cross-platform application. Use Tcl/Tk if you have to, or even python. That's cross-platform.
Which would require tech support to walk users through installing Tcl/Tk or Python with Tkinter. A developer can assume that one of the big four web browsers is already installed, unlike Tcl/Tk or Python with Tkinter. Nor would Apple's App Store Review Guidelines allow publishing a generic Tcl/Tk or Python with Tkinter interpreter for purposes other than learning to program. The developer would have to buy an iOS Developer Program subscription and an Xcode license separately and package the interpreter with the application.
Just upgraded - now, new tabs focus in the URL bar. THANKS! I had been opening Chrome for just that reason--now I can use Firefox without annoyance.
But... I still find myself opening Chrome pretty often for various reasons.
Mostly various websites ... I really don't know why.
I don't know why, but your charming name Dallas May makes me cut you slack for such slack comments.
What the heck! We have an important update, we recommend you update as soon as possible. BAM! All extensions except two gone, it has some blueish theme and many things look ... strange. Screw you Mozilla.
I suggest Waterfox.
There is both a PC and Android variant.
The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
Firefox 52 has been EOLed now, anyone using XUL or Windows XP have to look elsewhere. It’s the end of an era, back in 2002 Mozilla released Firefox when it was Phoenix as a minimalist browser using XUL and therefore use nimble extentions. Now the XUL fox is dead and being devoured by basilisks under a pale moon.
Discordapp.com, a web-based text and voice chat platform, allows uploading server-specific emojis in Chrome. It used to allow uploading them in Firefox as well until the settings UI redesign in May 2017. Since then, clicking the "Upload Emoji" button has done nothing: no change in the window, no message in the developer console. When this bug was reported on Reddit, on Twitter, and on Discord's feedback forum. The official response out of Discordapp.com's developers for the past 16 months has been that if it works in Chrome, it works. (See this Tweet and this feedback reply.)
Open about:config in the Firefox location bar
Type browser.sessionstore.resume_from_crash in the filter box, or search for it manually iny
Double click
browser.sessionstore.resume_from_crash
It should change from
browser.sessionstore.resume_from_crash default boolean true
to
browser.sessionstore.resume_from_crash user_set boolean false
And this is another peeve I have about Firefox.
"resume_from_crash" set to TRUE means don't resume ask the user, while
"resume_from_crash" set to FALSE means resume from crash immediately.
It's like you have to leave your command of English at the door and just "do what the devs say to do".
(BTW: Thanks for the tip, I just changed it, and I'll see if it works. Would have saved me a zillion hours of work if I could have found it on the net at the time.)
Keep in mind that the built-in tracking protection uses Disconnect's filters. You can achieve the same thing via adding the Disconnect filters to uBlock Origin. The reason I'm mentioning this is because the Disconnect list breaks things like the Twitter embeds that some people like and there isn't an easy way to disable the filter for a single page, unlike with uBlock Origin. "Why did Twitter embeds break?" is actually an extremely common issue people end up having.
Regardless of how much I dislike Google and other big Internet corporations, and how much would I like to have better alternative to Chromium, I read a mailing list post by a guy I trust with software-related stuff - Theo de Raadt of OpenBSD fame - saying "Firefox is YEARS behind (Chromium), unless they change their strategy" in terms of security:
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-m...
I sincerely hope they will change the strategy. Until then it's Chromium for me.
It's a Web Standard that Firefox now supports
Incorrect. Variable size OpenType isn't a standard at all. It's an extension to OpenType, which is a standard, that was developed by Apple, Microsoft, Adobe, and Google. Variable size OpenType allows a font file to give enough instructions on glyph construction, that the browsers can construct font sizes and styles that are not specified in the font file on the fly. Typically, when you specify a font size that isn't in your font cache, the web browser will use the largest font size and then scale upward to make do, fo rmissing styles, the browser just ignores it. This allows a web browser to take the instructions for how the font is built and build any size needed as opposed to scaling the fonts.
You can see this in action here. The CSS specifies an OpenType file and then goes on to specify styles and sizes that are not in the original file. Thus the browser dynamically builds the fonts according the specific instructions given on how to build those kinds of styles and sizes. Just as an example, you can see this line of code in the style attribute of one of the div tags.
style="font-variation-settings: 'size' 0, 'quad' 0, 'bevl' 0, 'oval' 0"
This allows those values "size", "quad", "bevl", and "oval" to be passed down to the font engine. Now those specific names "size"... are specific to how the font was created, the browser just takes those named values and passes it down to the font rendering engine. The font engine will know what to do with those named values because the font file specifies what those named values "do" to the font.
I believe that Firefox was sitting the fence on this technology since it has yet to become standard and Mozilla didn't want to encourage this style of "helping to make a standard". But yeah, pretty much the W3 has become more and more irrelevant for the web.
It's an extension to OpenType, which is a standard, that was developed by Apple, Microsoft, Adobe, and Google.
Just in case that wasn't clear. OpenType fonts are a standard file format. OpenType fonts are loosely based off Apple's TrueType font format. However, the variable size extension to OpenType is not a standard.
It's an extension to OpenType, which is a standard, that was developed by Apple, Microsoft, Adobe, and Google.
The "Google" bit is the important part. Chrome added support for this about a year ago, and following it's monkey see, monkey do policy of "innovation" for Chromefox, Mozilla has just finished copying them.
From my original comment
Mozilla didn't want to encourage this style of "helping to make a standard". But yeah, pretty much the W3 has become more and more irrelevant for the web.
Now on to what you said...
Mozilla has just finished copying them
We're starting to get into the territory of the question that was asked way back in the 90s, "Who gets to make a standard on the web?" I don't think there's been any satisfactory answer to that question. Microsoft felt that the folks writing the web browsers back in the day were the ones who should have the most say in what "is" and what "isn't" a web standard. Mozilla, post Netscape, mostly wanted to stick strictly to W3 published standards. Google came aboard and pretty much was "Yeah! Open Standards!!". Fast forward to around 2016 and Google isn't so hip on waiting on W3 to standardize something. Firefox is starting to see the writing on the wall that standards don't mean much of anything, if no one is willing to follow them.
So that's where we are with Firefox. Mozilla is content to stick to W3 spec verbatim. Also smaller browser players see standards as good things. But of course, major players don't really want to have to wait on W3 to having meetings, have a vote, have a period for comment, etc just so that they can get their new shiny out the door.
So yeah, if Mozilla seemed a bit hesitant about implementation, it's because this isn't a standard and supporting it means supporting a non-standard web. I'm not sitting here trying to pass judgement, but it is for sure something to think about for a second. Do we want web browser makers to dictate the web standard or do we want a standards body to dictate it? There's not a right or wrong, it's just a different set of pros and cons. However, I feel that we're heading right back whence we came and we'll soon have sites that only work correctly because they use "Google HTML" and if you want a browser to actually work, you'll need one that is as close as possible to being compliant with "Google" spec. Much like how it once was with the "IE" web.
So yeah, what might have looked like a "let's copy Google" move, this was more in lines of Mozilla saying, "Hey Goolge! The W3 says nothing about this new type of fontworks you're doing! You are breaking the Internet with putting out non-standard HTML. *looks around industry* Oh I guess no one really cares. I guess we'll hold out. *waits a year, gets a few bugzilla reports demanding feature* Well I guess we'll have to cave on this one."
Does it put back automatic text reflow on Android, so you don't have to scroll all over the place when you zoom?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Well said, my friend.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Good point. If enough people take up tracking protection, maybe given enough time, the whole mechanism of Twitter embeds will be given up upon. To me, this would be a good thing.