No, the problem is that the people didn't turn on sync and logged into chrome. They logged into some Google properties and then Google use that info to log them in Chrome. And although they might want to step back now, for sure they will try any other method in the future to keep on tracking you even if you try to disable it. They make their money from ads, so they must know you in order to get the maximum price for your data.
In the Apple store, those "Firefox", "Chrome" and "Opera" are just skins over Safari. Apple doesn't allow anyone to provide a different rendering engine.
I don't think that Microsoft "banned Firefox", but instead that the APIs that can be used by the App Store apps are quite limited and as Mozilla is struggling to avoid death they didn't try to waste resources working in something that no one would use.
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but Firefox uses Gecko, and Chrome and Opera use Blink. Safari is the only mainstream browser that keeps using Webkit. So you really need to test all of them and checking that Edge works as expected is not too hard (really, most of the time Edge works out of the box)
Now, please tell me how to test that "cross-platform" Safari for both Mac and iOS without paying huge amounts to Apple or a monthly fee to BrowserStack
No?
I would bet that my instance of Brave takes care quite well of the ads. And Brendan Eich is one of the persons behind it, so I'm happy if this is the way to show Firefox that they committed suicide by supporting the justice warriors instead of its CEO.
I also used to use Firefox on my phone, but it was really slow.
Since some months ago I'm using Brave which uses the Chrome engine, but it includes privacy protection against ads and trackers and I haven't missed Firefox not even one moment.
You should test Brave.
It has the adblock built in and it starts loading the pages as soon as click on the links, so you don't have to wait for redirections and all the stuff to be downloaded while you keep on reading other stuff
I don't remember the last time that Firefox crashed for me although I use it daily, but on the other hand I use Chrome just for testing and I've seen it crash at least twice last week.
What they have "released" is just the Aurora channel with the Dev Tools theme covering all the browser.
Everything else seems to be just the same that it used to be, the only improvement is the ability to run it side by side with another Firefox profile but if you used work with Aurora like I did, all this means that you must go back to the beta channel to keep an usable Firefox with a normal UI (after applying the Classic Theme Restorer)
Their "mobile emulator" is quite simple, I don't understand why anyone would like to use it to debug Chrome on Android instead of using Chrome on their computer as it has better tools and surely it will always be integrated better.
And for CSS tweaking I prefer to use Firebug or even the IE11 dev. tools thanks to its great CSS Changes pane.
I will not trust in Chrome until they stop adding their plugin into Firefox.
If they care so much about what's run inside Chrome, why do they inject their Google Updater into Firefox and put their update code in a bazillion places?
Yes, they say that it's mean to always have the latest version available, but if I'm not using it daily, why should I waste CPU cicles and bandwith trying to upgrade it until I use it?
I have Chrome installed only because I need to use it for testing, but I strongly dislike its UI and its behavior, I just wish that it would be a normal program that only tries to update itself when I run it.
I use Firefox daily on my Nexus 7 and I think that I haven't ever seen it crash.
When the Jelly Bean 4.2 was released Firefox was one of the apps that required an upgrade, but even then I didn't had a problem because I use the beta so by the time that Google sent the OTA to my tablet Firefox was already updated.
Uh?
Besides their own branded tablets, have you checked which is the manufacturer of the Nexus 10 monster (2560x1600 screen, 16Gb at 400$) that comes out tomorrow?
However, on Android I've made far far less revenue on the same apps, only to see my app get 'returned' daily and probably pirated.
So your apps are returned in Android and you blame that on piracy.
But the fact is that the user only has 15 minutes to return the app and if he plans to pirate it, why would he bother on buying it at all?,
Pirates won't ever bother inserting their credit card on Google Play and go straight to the alternative markets and when people are returning your app after just 15 minutes then it's clear that there's something wrong with your app and you shouldn't blame anyone else but you about that
Are your apps those that are simple ports from iOS and that lacks total respect for the Android UI and environment?
It's funny to see how people claim how iOS is much more stylish and when they port an app to Android they try to force such iOS UI and of course people rejects those abominations
Instead of creating your own browser as other people have suggested, you can use an existing app: Kiosk Browser HC, and for a little price (after all you won't pay that so that shouldn't be a worry) there's an improved version: Kiosk Browser SE.
According to the version of the OS and if you can root the tablets or not, that might be all that you need, but if there's some other requirement then check SureLock Kiosk Lockdown
"IE is still easily number one at 50%, while Chrome has 25%."
What's it matter? I'm much more interested in what percentage of web sites are W3C compliant. When that approaches 100%, then browsers will compete on true merit (speed, UI, etc.), not their support of proprietary extensions and how well they put up with badly coded HTML.
I'm sick and tired of "browser x isn't supported," and "this site best viewed with..." crap, which is just indicative of clueless website developers.
And what happens with new sites (specially mobile versions) that use webkit only css features instead of using a standard approach?
Why can't they add the vendor prefix for the other browsers as well?
Although not stated as "best viewed with..." they are hurting the forward development of the web by sticking to just one vendor and we are going to suffer the same IE6 problems that we hate so much, but now it's webkit the culprit
First, bring back the fucking menu bar and the status bar by default!.
Go to the Firefox button, Options and check Menu bar. For the status bar, install the status-4-ever extension
I also thought at the beginning that not having the status bar would mean a lack of UI that I will miss very much, but the fact is that I only really need it while I'm hovering a link and in those cases it automatically pops up, so I'm perfectly happy of not having those pixels wasted.
If you look at other comments, people still complain that there's still too much UI in Firefox, and all the browsers have been focused on cleaning up the UI. There's no reason to keep the same metaphors and UI elements than 20 years ago, browsing the internet should be easy and focused on that: browsing the web, not looking at the UI of the browser. I don't mean that the current trends are perfect, but rejecting any changes doesn't help us to move forward; of course sticking to a very old version and then jumping to the latest one will mean lots of changes but staying updated helps to take the changes little by little.
An example of something that I don't like/understand about the current Firefox is that Panorama thing. It could be useful if it could handle all the Firefox windows and tabs, but instead it just allows to group the tabs inside a window and hide the rest so I did test it a little and then forgot about it. The problem might be that someday they fix it and start behaving really well but I will miss it because they introduced it in a broken state and so I no longer have any interest about it
Google is already serving webkit-only css in the mobile versions, so when people try Firefox mobile those sites don't work as nicely as the default browser in Android, although Firefox is perfectly capable of handling them if they were coded properly.
Don't overestimate Safari. If we have crossbrowser sites today is thanks to Mozilla, Apple is happy to copy anything from IE instead of trying to push the developers to use the W3C standards and if Mozilla didn't make a stand on many fronts (like ActiveX or recently H264), the web would be quite different.
It won't be a complete competitor with iToons unless it requires you to install the Google Music Player, the Google Video Player, and grabs all the file associations in your system.
Lets not forget automatically loading programs on startup even though you specifically disabled them. OOO and also constantly pestering you to download the latest version of your worthless browser every time there is an update. Yeah @$%#%$^ you Apple.
Google is already quite good at pushing their browser as a side-install along with many unrelated products even of third party companies and you'll be lucky if you can get through the day without visiting some sites (as long as you're not using AdBlock Plus) and being offered to speed at greater speed thanks to Chrome.
And it will inject another plugin into Firefox just in case you did found out how to remove the previous one.
But do you know why it won't be possible to use those new grid features introduced in IE10 for a long time?
You won't be able to use them because IE10 will be available only in newer versions of Windows, (I don't know if even Vista is supported), so taking into account the people that just stick with the browser that came preinstalled and the long time until all those older versions of Windows disappear, it will take several years until the number of users with those versions is low enough.
The rest of the people with Firefox, Chrome, Opera will update at a more steady pace, so when the developers add those features you'll know that in a few months you could start using it if you're able to ignore old IE versions.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe because there's a dialog telling the user that the copy is still going on?
No, the problem is that the people didn't turn on sync and logged into chrome. They logged into some Google properties and then Google use that info to log them in Chrome.
And although they might want to step back now, for sure they will try any other method in the future to keep on tracking you even if you try to disable it. They make their money from ads, so they must know you in order to get the maximum price for your data.
In the Apple store, those "Firefox", "Chrome" and "Opera" are just skins over Safari. Apple doesn't allow anyone to provide a different rendering engine.
I don't think that Microsoft "banned Firefox", but instead that the APIs that can be used by the App Store apps are quite limited and as Mozilla is struggling to avoid death they didn't try to waste resources working in something that no one would use.
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but Firefox uses Gecko, and Chrome and Opera use Blink. Safari is the only mainstream browser that keeps using Webkit.
So you really need to test all of them and checking that Edge works as expected is not too hard (really, most of the time Edge works out of the box)
You use BrowserStack for free https://developer.microsoft.co... or you download one of the many VM that Microsoft provides for free https://developer.microsoft.co...
Now, please tell me how to test that "cross-platform" Safari for both Mac and iOS without paying huge amounts to Apple or a monthly fee to BrowserStack
If you want an ad blocker, then you should install the proper extension: https://www.microsoft.com/en-u...
No?
I would bet that my instance of Brave takes care quite well of the ads. And Brendan Eich is one of the persons behind it, so I'm happy if this is the way to show Firefox that they committed suicide by supporting the justice warriors instead of its CEO.
I also used to use Firefox on my phone, but it was really slow. Since some months ago I'm using Brave which uses the Chrome engine, but it includes privacy protection against ads and trackers and I haven't missed Firefox not even one moment.
You should test Brave.
It has the adblock built in and it starts loading the pages as soon as click on the links, so you don't have to wait for redirections and all the stuff to be downloaded while you keep on reading other stuff
I don't remember the last time that Firefox crashed for me although I use it daily, but on the other hand I use Chrome just for testing and I've seen it crash at least twice last week.
What they have "released" is just the Aurora channel with the Dev Tools theme covering all the browser.
Everything else seems to be just the same that it used to be, the only improvement is the ability to run it side by side with another Firefox profile but if you used work with Aurora like I did, all this means that you must go back to the beta channel to keep an usable Firefox with a normal UI (after applying the Classic Theme Restorer)
Their "mobile emulator" is quite simple, I don't understand why anyone would like to use it to debug Chrome on Android instead of using Chrome on their computer as it has better tools and surely it will always be integrated better.
And for CSS tweaking I prefer to use Firebug or even the IE11 dev. tools thanks to its great CSS Changes pane.
I will not trust in Chrome until they stop adding their plugin into Firefox.
If they care so much about what's run inside Chrome, why do they inject their Google Updater into Firefox and put their update code in a bazillion places?
Yes, they say that it's mean to always have the latest version available, but if I'm not using it daily, why should I waste CPU cicles and bandwith trying to upgrade it until I use it?
I have Chrome installed only because I need to use it for testing, but I strongly dislike its UI and its behavior, I just wish that it would be a normal program that only tries to update itself when I run it.
I use Firefox daily on my Nexus 7 and I think that I haven't ever seen it crash.
When the Jelly Bean 4.2 was released Firefox was one of the apps that required an upgrade, but even then I didn't had a problem because I use the beta so by the time that Google sent the OTA to my tablet Firefox was already updated.
even if Samsung doesn't make an Android tablet,
Uh?
Besides their own branded tablets, have you checked which is the manufacturer of the Nexus 10 monster (2560x1600 screen, 16Gb at 400$) that comes out tomorrow?
However, on Android I've made far far less revenue on the same apps, only to see my app get 'returned' daily and probably pirated.
So your apps are returned in Android and you blame that on piracy.
But the fact is that the user only has 15 minutes to return the app and if he plans to pirate it, why would he bother on buying it at all?,
Pirates won't ever bother inserting their credit card on Google Play and go straight to the alternative markets and when people are returning your app after just 15 minutes then it's clear that there's something wrong with your app and you shouldn't blame anyone else but you about that
Are your apps those that are simple ports from iOS and that lacks total respect for the Android UI and environment?
It's funny to see how people claim how iOS is much more stylish and when they port an app to Android they try to force such iOS UI and of course people rejects those abominations
I tested with Firefox (actually Aurora) in Win7 64 bits and I don't notice any problem. So maybe it's a problem with the drivers of your graphic card?
Instead of creating your own browser as other people have suggested, you can use an existing app: Kiosk Browser HC, and for a little price (after all you won't pay that so that shouldn't be a worry) there's an improved version: Kiosk Browser SE.
According to the version of the OS and if you can root the tablets or not, that might be all that you need, but if there's some other requirement then check SureLock Kiosk Lockdown
I don't know which browser you're using, but with Firefox it automatically shows a status bar with the destination of the link as soon as I hover it.
Sorry, clicked wrong while moderating the post.
"IE is still easily number one at 50%, while Chrome has 25%."
What's it matter? I'm much more interested in what percentage of web sites are W3C compliant. When that approaches 100%, then browsers will compete on true merit (speed, UI, etc.), not their support of proprietary extensions and how well they put up with badly coded HTML.
I'm sick and tired of "browser x isn't supported," and "this site best viewed with..." crap, which is just indicative of clueless website developers.
And what happens with new sites (specially mobile versions) that use webkit only css features instead of using a standard approach?
Why can't they add the vendor prefix for the other browsers as well?
Although not stated as "best viewed with..." they are hurting the forward development of the web by sticking to just one vendor and we are going to suffer the same IE6 problems that we hate so much, but now it's webkit the culprit
First, bring back the fucking menu bar and the status bar by default!.
Go to the Firefox button, Options and check Menu bar. For the status bar, install the status-4-ever extension
I also thought at the beginning that not having the status bar would mean a lack of UI that I will miss very much, but the fact is that I only really need it while I'm hovering a link and in those cases it automatically pops up, so I'm perfectly happy of not having those pixels wasted.
If you look at other comments, people still complain that there's still too much UI in Firefox, and all the browsers have been focused on cleaning up the UI. There's no reason to keep the same metaphors and UI elements than 20 years ago, browsing the internet should be easy and focused on that: browsing the web, not looking at the UI of the browser. I don't mean that the current trends are perfect, but rejecting any changes doesn't help us to move forward; of course sticking to a very old version and then jumping to the latest one will mean lots of changes but staying updated helps to take the changes little by little.
An example of something that I don't like/understand about the current Firefox is that Panorama thing. It could be useful if it could handle all the Firefox windows and tabs, but instead it just allows to group the tabs inside a window and hide the rest so I did test it a little and then forgot about it. The problem might be that someday they fix it and start behaving really well but I will miss it because they introduced it in a broken state and so I no longer have any interest about it
Google is already serving webkit-only css in the mobile versions, so when people try Firefox mobile those sites don't work as nicely as the default browser in Android, although Firefox is perfectly capable of handling them if they were coded properly.
Don't overestimate Safari.
If we have crossbrowser sites today is thanks to Mozilla, Apple is happy to copy anything from IE instead of trying to push the developers to use the W3C standards and if Mozilla didn't make a stand on many fronts (like ActiveX or recently H264), the web would be quite different.
It won't be a complete competitor with iToons unless it requires you to install the Google Music Player, the Google Video Player, and grabs all the file associations in your system.
Lets not forget automatically loading programs on startup even though you specifically disabled them. OOO and also constantly pestering you to download the latest version of your worthless browser every time there is an update. Yeah @$%#%$^ you Apple.
Google is already quite good at pushing their browser as a side-install along with many unrelated products even of third party companies and you'll be lucky if you can get through the day without visiting some sites (as long as you're not using AdBlock Plus) and being offered to speed at greater speed thanks to Chrome.
And it will inject another plugin into Firefox just in case you did found out how to remove the previous one.
But do you know why it won't be possible to use those new grid features introduced in IE10 for a long time?
You won't be able to use them because IE10 will be available only in newer versions of Windows, (I don't know if even Vista is supported), so taking into account the people that just stick with the browser that came preinstalled and the long time until all those older versions of Windows disappear, it will take several years until the number of users with those versions is low enough.
The rest of the people with Firefox, Chrome, Opera will update at a more steady pace, so when the developers add those features you'll know that in a few months you could start using it if you're able to ignore old IE versions.