Restore a way to easily disable javascript WITHOUT any extension/ going though about:config
And do so on a case-by-case basis, like NoScript. That ability lets me use badly designed websites that are nonfunctional without JS without having to allow all the JS on the page to run.
I dunno... the browser space is filled with terrible browsers (including Chrome). There is room there for someone to make a really great one and take over the market. It could, in theory, be FireFox.
People get pissed off at your stupid UI decisions? Extension.
Yes, I forgot about this. The default FF UI is painful, and it's the Classic Theme Restorer plugin that makes FF continue to be usable to me.
So, I'll correct my prior comments: If FF can't support plugins that do what NoScript does and there's no way to correct the awful UI direction that FF has gone, then it's Pale Moon or some equivalent for me.
I use bookmarks heavily, but I don't use the bookmarking system in browsers. I have a private bookmark server that I use instead, so that I can have easy access to my bookmarks no matter where I'm browsing from or what browser I'm using while at the same time avoiding using a cloud service.
Yes, that duplicate serial thing is a serious PITA.
I should be allowed to use any wonky cert that I wish. If the concern is that people will just blithely click a "use this anyway" button without knowing what they're doing, then make it an about:config setting.
[Nick Nguyen] promises “a sleek and modern user experience, buttery-smooth animations and crisp interface elements for all resolutions.”
Uh oh.
Pretty much every one of the adjectives he used there are red-flag words to me. Particularly "sleek" and "modern". (At least he didn't say "minimalist", although that's implied).
In the past few years, every time I've seen software proclaim those things, the UI for that software has sucked.
Revamping the plugin system is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. There are big problems with it that could stand improving.
The issue is if the new plugin system is less powerful and featureful than the old (which appears to be the case).
A plugin that does the same thing as NoScript is mandatory for me, and I can't stand using any browser that doesn't (which, currently, means any browser that isn't FireFox) -- the web is simply too risky and unpleasant to use without it.
If, as appears to be the case, the new plugin system does not allow something like NoScript, then I'll be using Pale Moon. I literally cannot think of a single thing that Mozilla could do with FireFox that would change that equation.
Some may believe so strongly in their own self-direction that they discount the possibility that the ads will strongly impact them.
In all fairness, people who believe this are being foolish. Research strongly back up the fact that this belief is incorrect nearly 100% of the time. And furthermore, there is lots of evidence that shows that people who believe they are unaffected by advertising and actually more affected by it than people who don't.
Now, they will only give you the sale price if you use their tracking program, which they usually refer to as a "Customer Loyalty Program".
And the "sale price" is usually the same as the normal price from stores that don't have "loyalty" programs.
That's why I don't do loyalty programs, and treat every store that has them the same way I treat 7-11 type convenience stores: I avoid them, unless I have a special urgent need and there's no other options.
I dunno, could you sign up for the Verizon spying program and then bypass all the spying by using a VPN? Might be worth it, if only as a middle finger to such marketing tactics.
I'd never heard of Brawndo before your reply (so I guess it was targetd?), but sure, why not? I have never found an ad that was useful or interesting, targeted or not, so they're all the same in terms of enjoyability.
Indeed. Even with non-HD digital cable displaying without any transmission garbles, the compression artifacts are bad enough that I can't watch it for more than a few minutes.
Err..I have no problems saying anything about any group if it is true.
Me either. The problem is that almost none of what I hear said about millennials is actually true (or, at least, is no more true of them than any other generation).
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, but wishing for that is, I suspect, a pointless exercise.
Restore a way to easily disable javascript WITHOUT any extension/ going though about:config
And do so on a case-by-case basis, like NoScript. That ability lets me use badly designed websites that are nonfunctional without JS without having to allow all the JS on the page to run.
I dunno... the browser space is filled with terrible browsers (including Chrome). There is room there for someone to make a really great one and take over the market. It could, in theory, be FireFox.
Thunderbird is my primary email client. It works OK (better than the alternatives), but I would be thrilled if it had some badly-needed improvements.
In all fairness, I haven't had FF crash or hang in years, either on Windows or Linux.
I hope you get your wish -- as long as I can disable those integrations. I want none of that.
People get pissed off at your stupid UI decisions? Extension.
Yes, I forgot about this. The default FF UI is painful, and it's the Classic Theme Restorer plugin that makes FF continue to be usable to me.
So, I'll correct my prior comments: If FF can't support plugins that do what NoScript does and there's no way to correct the awful UI direction that FF has gone, then it's Pale Moon or some equivalent for me.
I use bookmarks heavily, but I don't use the bookmarking system in browsers. I have a private bookmark server that I use instead, so that I can have easy access to my bookmarks no matter where I'm browsing from or what browser I'm using while at the same time avoiding using a cloud service.
Meh.
Browsers because plenty fast enough for me a long while ago. Having one be faster than another is not a meaningful differentiator for me.
Except, perhaps, on smartphones -- the last time I tried FF on my smartphone, it was so slow and resource-hungry that it was quite literally unusable.
Yes, that duplicate serial thing is a serious PITA.
I should be allowed to use any wonky cert that I wish. If the concern is that people will just blithely click a "use this anyway" button without knowing what they're doing, then make it an about:config setting.
Uh oh.
Pretty much every one of the adjectives he used there are red-flag words to me. Particularly "sleek" and "modern". (At least he didn't say "minimalist", although that's implied).
In the past few years, every time I've seen software proclaim those things, the UI for that software has sucked.
Revamping the plugin system is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. There are big problems with it that could stand improving.
The issue is if the new plugin system is less powerful and featureful than the old (which appears to be the case).
A plugin that does the same thing as NoScript is mandatory for me, and I can't stand using any browser that doesn't (which, currently, means any browser that isn't FireFox) -- the web is simply too risky and unpleasant to use without it.
If, as appears to be the case, the new plugin system does not allow something like NoScript, then I'll be using Pale Moon. I literally cannot think of a single thing that Mozilla could do with FireFox that would change that equation.
Oh, of course! I missed that reference, and yet I still managed dress myself this morning. Wonders never cease.
Doesn't help if the VZW provided firmware on your phone injects an "X-CheapRube-ID: UUID" in to every HTTP packet sent.
How can they inject any HTTP header tag into an HTTP sequence that they can't see because it's running through a VPN?
Some may believe so strongly in their own self-direction that they discount the possibility that the ads will strongly impact them.
In all fairness, people who believe this are being foolish. Research strongly back up the fact that this belief is incorrect nearly 100% of the time. And furthermore, there is lots of evidence that shows that people who believe they are unaffected by advertising and actually more affected by it than people who don't.
That just rewards store for engaging in these sorts of shenanigans. I prefer to just avoid giving them my money when I can.
Now, they will only give you the sale price if you use their tracking program, which they usually refer to as a "Customer Loyalty Program".
And the "sale price" is usually the same as the normal price from stores that don't have "loyalty" programs.
That's why I don't do loyalty programs, and treat every store that has them the same way I treat 7-11 type convenience stores: I avoid them, unless I have a special urgent need and there's no other options.
I dunno, could you sign up for the Verizon spying program and then bypass all the spying by using a VPN? Might be worth it, if only as a middle finger to such marketing tactics.
I'd never heard of Brawndo before your reply (so I guess it was targetd?), but sure, why not? I have never found an ad that was useful or interesting, targeted or not, so they're all the same in terms of enjoyability.
Indeed. Even with non-HD digital cable displaying without any transmission garbles, the compression artifacts are bad enough that I can't watch it for more than a few minutes.
That used to be true, but is no longer. A high quality LCD beats the pants of of a high quality CRT.
Also, CRTs absolutely have a native resolution: you can't display any image at a resolution higher than the density of the phosphor dots.
The TV we had when I was a kid had a channel 13 on the VHF dial.
Rabbit ears are for VHF. Bowties or loops are for UHF.
Personally, I dramatically prefer untargeted ads over targeted ones. Targeted ads just remind me that I'm being spied on.
Err..I have no problems saying anything about any group if it is true.
Me either. The problem is that almost none of what I hear said about millennials is actually true (or, at least, is no more true of them than any other generation).