MozillaZine

Changes in Firefox 57

Discussion about official Mozilla Firefox builds
ICQ5

User avatar
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 7:34 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia

Post Posted September 10th, 2017, 3:30 am

anyway this is going offtopic, keep it on firefox57 related stuff only, take the talk elsewhere

mightyglydd

User avatar
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: November 4th, 2006, 7:07 pm
Location: Hollywood Ca.

Post Posted September 10th, 2017, 6:54 am

LoveMyFoxy wrote:I have a factor concerning switching browsers that maybe no one here thought of: Support.

Good point, a 'certain member' wrote an excellent post about 'one man operations' ;)
Vivaldi has excellent support, a forum where devs actually visit and react to users.
Heck they even implemented one of my suggestions..rapidly! :shock:
PM forum?....one man's bully pulpit.
@On Topic....Will Fx 58 follow Fx 57 or will it become FxP(hoton)2 ?
#KeepFightingMichael

Omega X

User avatar
 
Posts: 7921
Joined: October 18th, 2007, 2:38 pm
Location: A Parallel Dimension...

Post Posted September 10th, 2017, 7:13 am

I thought about switching to Vivaldi for a time. But then I found out that the cookie/local storage manager was even more garbage than Firefox.
Latest: Firefox/57.0 *ESR/52.5 - Mobile/57.0 - Thunderbird/52.5 - SeaMonkey/2.49.1
Nightly: Nightly/59.0a1 - Mobile/59.0a1 - Daily/59.0a1 - SeaMonkey/2.55a1

jhaber3
 
Posts: 261
Joined: January 16th, 2005, 9:04 am

Post Posted September 10th, 2017, 7:32 am

I'm not as hostile to Chrome now that I've added Quick n Clean so that it has the option to clear the cache on exit, and FileZilla is sure fast, even if it has to be run separately and takes up space. Not my preferred outcome, but I guess come November I'll see what still works.

avada
 
Posts: 1742
Joined: February 10th, 2008, 6:30 am
Location: Hungary

Post Posted September 10th, 2017, 7:53 am

mightyglydd wrote:Heck they even implemented one of my suggestions..rapidly! :shock:

Bah... Mine is the opposite. They ignored outright regressions (compared to chrome) I reported. Such as you can't drag and drop anywhere but the new tab button or ON a tab (not between.) Drag and drop for local files doesn't work at all...

Brummelchen
 
Posts: 2609
Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am

Post Posted September 10th, 2017, 8:27 am

be careful with "click&clean" (not quick n clean)
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/deta ... mamedcbeod
https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/clickclean/

the firefox version is much outdated, it was auto-signed and got no update (March 6, 2013)
firefox can do such cleaning itself. same for chrome

for the chrome version i am not sure if it sends some telemetry to google-analytics.com - code is included.
i recommend chrome cleaner pro
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/deta ... ccjcacackp
it dont contain google-services - the only conenction is when checking "unwanted" extensions which are check on their homepage (opt-out)

loosing your passwords is a pity but i would bet that is not fault of firefox - i never lost any.
lastpass i wont trust - it was vulnerable twice and the current v4 seems a reduced evrsion, some people stayed with latest v3.

currently firefox 57 is an experiment - i work with v55 or chromium as long it is not ready or stable beta. changing every day. i am experiencing converted extension, with less results because API is not ready yet.

Edds

User avatar
 
Posts: 321
Joined: July 21st, 2010, 1:13 pm
Location: SVK

Post Posted September 10th, 2017, 11:27 am

Just curious, is there any bug regarding improving a new tab page loading starting time? If you know what I mean. When I click on the bookmark to open a page on the new tab there is circa 2-3 seconds where nothing is happening, no establishing connection or something. I think it has something to do with creating a child process. It is a lot faster, almost instant when I'm loading a different page on already opened tab.
PC: CPU: Core i7 6700K@4.6Ghz, MB: MSI Z270 GAMING M7, VGA: MSI GTX 1080 GAMING X, RAM: 16GB DDR4 Corsair, SSD: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB, OS: W10 x64
NB: CPU: Core i3 4030U@1.9Ghz, VGA: Intel HD4400, RAM: 4GB DDR3, SSHD: Seagate 500GB, OS: W10 x64 Phone: LG G4 Android 6.0

jhaber3
 
Posts: 261
Joined: January 16th, 2005, 9:04 am

Post Posted September 10th, 2017, 11:32 am

I appreciate the recommendation. Just to be clear, though, I didn't lose Firefox passwords because of a bug, but it is the fault of Firefox all the same. That is, on the assumption that I shall no longer be able to use Firefox once it dumps all my add-ons, of which I have six even apart from Lastpass, every one of them "legacy." I'm still outraged, but resigned. I thus needed to import my passwords into Chrome, and a free password manager like Lastpass that could talk between them seemed the obvious solution. Naturally it deletes Firefox's saved passwords once you install it. In any case, it's done. It also has the advantage that it saves passwords for a couple of sites designed so that Firefox wouldn't save them, plus I now have for personal reference and backup a csv file listing them that not even a hack of my entire computer is all that likely to locate.

ICQ5

User avatar
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 7:34 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia

Post Posted September 15th, 2017, 5:42 pm


ICQ5

User avatar
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 7:34 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia

Post Posted September 21st, 2017, 6:33 pm

https://www.ghacks.net/2017/09/21/greas ... atibility/ Greasemonkey 4: Firefox 57 compatibility

JOJ0
 
Posts: 95
Joined: November 13th, 2006, 11:33 pm

Post Posted September 21st, 2017, 11:51 pm

Guys can someone explain to me this trend. New WE extensions are released in alpha, beta or final stage they claim 57+ compatibility but on AMO they are with version limitation 56.* - Greasemonkey, a few days ago NTT also ...?

Brummelchen
 
Posts: 2609
Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am

Post Posted September 22nd, 2017, 3:37 am

WE are present and usable more or less since firefox 48

avada
 
Posts: 1742
Joined: February 10th, 2008, 6:30 am
Location: Hungary

Post Posted September 22nd, 2017, 6:20 am

JOJ0 wrote:Guys can someone explain to me this trend. New WE extensions are released in alpha, beta or final stage they claim 57+ compatibility but on AMO they are with version limitation 56.* - Greasemonkey, a few days ago NTT also ...?


You mean that they are labeled by AMO as 57 compatible. They probably do that for all WE based addons automatically.

ICQ5

User avatar
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 7:34 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia

Post Posted September 22nd, 2017, 3:49 pm


JOJ0
 
Posts: 95
Joined: November 13th, 2006, 11:33 pm

Post Posted September 23rd, 2017, 10:20 am

avada wrote:
JOJ0 wrote:Guys can someone explain to me this trend. New WE extensions are released in alpha, beta or final stage they claim 57+ compatibility but on AMO they are with version limitation 56.* - Greasemonkey, a few days ago NTT also ...?


You mean that they are labeled by AMO as 57 compatible. They probably do that for all WE based addons automatically.

No I mean that these cannot be installed in 57 or 58 because are not marked in the version support. Maybe a release compliance issue right now.

Return to Firefox Builds


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests