FF 52ESR

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

FF 52ESR

The Real Bev
I have yet to see a definitive answer, even in m.s.f, from which I'm
permanently banned:  Will older versions of FF (including 52ESR)
continue to operate after the drop-dead date in 2018 with all 'legacy'
extensions previously installed or has Mozilla figured out a way to
render them inoperable even on older FF versions?

NOT going to update.  Period.

--
Cheers, Bev
   "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably
    the day they start making vacuum cleaners."  --Ernst Jan Plugge



_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

WaltS48-5
On 9/9/17 4:28 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> I have yet to see a definitive answer, even in m.s.f, from which I'm
> permanently banned:  Will older versions of FF (including 52ESR)
> continue to operate after the drop-dead date in 2018 with all 'legacy'
> extensions previously installed or has Mozilla figured out a way to
> render them inoperable even on older FF versions?
>
> NOT going to update.  Period.
>


I don't have the definitive answer, but I would expect the last 52 ESR
release and older versions to continue working.

You won't get security and stability updates, and all extensions that
you use probably won't be maintained or available on AMO.

You can always install the current Nightly, created a separate profile
and see how much better it is. 😉

<https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/desktop/#nightly>

--
Go Bucs, Pitt, Steelers!
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04 LTS - Unity Desktop
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

The Real Bev
On 09/09/2017 05:20 PM, WaltS48 wrote:

> On 9/9/17 4:28 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> I have yet to see a definitive answer, even in m.s.f, from which I'm
>> permanently banned:  Will older versions of FF (including 52ESR)
>> continue to operate after the drop-dead date in 2018 with all 'legacy'
>> extensions previously installed or has Mozilla figured out a way to
>> render them inoperable even on older FF versions?
>>
>> NOT going to update.  Period.
>
> I don't have the definitive answer, but I would expect the last 52 ESR
> release and older versions to continue working.
>
> You won't get security and stability updates, and all extensions that
> you use probably won't be maintained or available on AMO.

Not going to worry about that.  I'm increasingly displeased with
updates, which tend to be what a net-friend calls slob-enablement for
the use of cubicle meat :-(

> You can always install the current Nightly, created a separate profile
> and see how much better it is. 😉

I'll probably do that.  I installed 52 as a test and after tweaking it
to at least some level of satisfaction I didn't feel like retreating to
47, which I THINK I was using before.  I've got a snail-trail of older
versions and profiles that I should really get rid of, although I really
don't NEED the space.  8TB drives split into 8 1TB partitions (current
installation is only 231GB) are cool!

> <https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/desktop/#nightly>

Perhaps...


--
Cheers, Bev
  People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it's
  safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs.        --Unknown
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

Desiree-11
On 9/9/2017 2:26 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

> On 09/09/2017 05:20 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>> On 9/9/17 4:28 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> I have yet to see a definitive answer, even in m.s.f, from which I'm
>>> permanently banned:  Will older versions of FF (including 52ESR)
>>> continue to operate after the drop-dead date in 2018 with all 'legacy'
>>> extensions previously installed or has Mozilla figured out a way to
>>> render them inoperable even on older FF versions?
>>>
>>> NOT going to update.  Period.
>>
>> I don't have the definitive answer, but I would expect the last 52 ESR
>> release and older versions to continue working.
>>
>> You won't get security and stability updates, and all extensions that
>> you use probably won't be maintained or available on AMO.
>
> Not going to worry about that.  I'm increasingly displeased with
> updates, which tend to be what a net-friend calls slob-enablement for
> the use of cubicle meat :-(
>
>> You can always install the current Nightly, created a separate profile
>> and see how much better it is. 😉
>
> I'll probably do that.  I installed 52 as a test and after tweaking it
> to at least some level of satisfaction I didn't feel like retreating to
> 47, which I THINK I was using before.  I've got a snail-trail of older
> versions and profiles that I should really get rid of, although I really
> don't NEED the space.  8TB drives split into 8 1TB partitions (current
> installation is only 231GB) are cool!
>
>> <https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/desktop/#nightly>
>
> Perhaps...
>
>
Don't forget to download to disk (and backup too) all legacy extensions
you use.  Do this for each gecko based browser you have including
various Fx versions, SeaMonkey, Pale Moon, etc.  My friends and I spent
hours doing this recently.  I have mostly the same extensions on all
gecko browsers but different versions for different browsers and every
one had to be downloaded to disk and then saved also on an external disk
and on a thumb drive.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

The Real Bev
On 09/10/2017 02:25 AM, Desiree wrote:

> On 9/9/2017 2:26 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 09/09/2017 05:20 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>> On 9/9/17 4:28 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>> I have yet to see a definitive answer, even in m.s.f, from which I'm
>>>> permanently banned:  Will older versions of FF (including 52ESR)
>>>> continue to operate after the drop-dead date in 2018 with all 'legacy'
>>>> extensions previously installed or has Mozilla figured out a way to
>>>> render them inoperable even on older FF versions?
>>>>
>>>> NOT going to update.  Period.
>>>
>>> I don't have the definitive answer, but I would expect the last 52 ESR
>>> release and older versions to continue working.
>>>
>>> You won't get security and stability updates, and all extensions that
>>> you use probably won't be maintained or available on AMO.
>>
>> Not going to worry about that.  I'm increasingly displeased with
>> updates, which tend to be what a net-friend calls slob-enablement for
>> the use of cubicle meat :-(
>>
>>> You can always install the current Nightly, created a separate profile
>>> and see how much better it is. 😉
>>
>> I'll probably do that.  I installed 52 as a test and after tweaking it
>> to at least some level of satisfaction I didn't feel like retreating to
>> 47, which I THINK I was using before.  I've got a snail-trail of older
>> versions and profiles that I should really get rid of, although I really
>> don't NEED the space.  8TB drives split into 8 1TB partitions (current
>> installation is only 231GB) are cool!
>>
>>> <https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/desktop/#nightly>
>>
>> Perhaps...
>>
> Don't forget to download to disk (and backup too) all legacy extensions
> you use.  Do this for each gecko based browser you have including
> various Fx versions, SeaMonkey, Pale Moon, etc.  My friends and I spent
> hours doing this recently.  I have mostly the same extensions on all
> gecko browsers but different versions for different browsers and every
> one had to be downloaded to disk and then saved also on an external disk
> and on a thumb drive.

I was under the impression that they're already on our HDs, albeit with
cryptic names.  I have multiple full-installation backups.  Is it likely
that Mozilla will reach into our computers and delete our extensions
against our will?


--
Cheers, Bev
  People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it's
  safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs.        --Unknown
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

B00ze
On 2017-09-10 11:07, The Real Bev <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 09/10/2017 02:25 AM, Desiree wrote:
>> On 9/9/2017 2:26 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 09/09/2017 05:20 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>> On 9/9/17 4:28 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>>> I have yet to see a definitive answer, even in m.s.f, from which I'm
>>>>> permanently banned:  Will older versions of FF (including 52ESR)
>>>>> continue to operate after the drop-dead date in 2018 with all 'legacy'
>>>>> extensions previously installed or has Mozilla figured out a way to
>>>>> render them inoperable even on older FF versions?
>>>>>
>>>>> NOT going to update.  Period.
>>>>
>>>> I don't have the definitive answer, but I would expect the last 52 ESR
>>>> release and older versions to continue working.
>>>>
>>>> You won't get security and stability updates, and all extensions that
>>>> you use probably won't be maintained or available on AMO.
>>>
>>> Not going to worry about that.  I'm increasingly displeased with
>>> updates, which tend to be what a net-friend calls slob-enablement for
>>> the use of cubicle meat :-(
>>>
>>>> You can always install the current Nightly, created a separate profile
>>>> and see how much better it is. 😉
>>>
>>> I'll probably do that.  I installed 52 as a test and after tweaking it
>>> to at least some level of satisfaction I didn't feel like retreating to
>>> 47, which I THINK I was using before.  I've got a snail-trail of older
>>> versions and profiles that I should really get rid of, although I really
>>> don't NEED the space.  8TB drives split into 8 1TB partitions (current
>>> installation is only 231GB) are cool!
>>>
>>>> <https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/desktop/#nightly>
>>>
>>> Perhaps...
>>>
>> Don't forget to download to disk (and backup too) all legacy extensions
>> you use.  Do this for each gecko based browser you have including
>> various Fx versions, SeaMonkey, Pale Moon, etc.  My friends and I spent
>> hours doing this recently.  I have mostly the same extensions on all
>> gecko browsers but different versions for different browsers and every
>> one had to be downloaded to disk and then saved also on an external disk
>> and on a thumb drive.
>
> I was under the impression that they're already on our HDs, albeit with
> cryptic names.  I have multiple full-installation backups.  Is it likely
> that Mozilla will reach into our computers and delete our extensions
> against our will?

No, they won't, but seeing as the maker of Better Privacy decided to
remove his AddOn from AMO early, I had to scramble and search to find
some place where to download version 1.77 (hopefully compatible with
FF52 to which I am migrating to this week.) Alice White also removed his
extensions some time back (of which Show Parent Folder is the most
useful). I therefore spent hours yesterday downloading the latest
versions of all the XPIs I use. Can never be too careful with this; when
ESR moves to Web Extensions Mozilla will yank all XUL from AMO...

Best Regards,

--
! _\|/_  Sylvain / [hidden email]
! (o o)   Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society
oO-( )-Oo  Have you hugged your sysop lately?

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

WaltS48-5
On 9/11/17 11:49 PM, B00ze wrote:

> On 2017-09-10 11:07, The Real Bev <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 09/10/2017 02:25 AM, Desiree wrote:
>>> On 9/9/2017 2:26 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>> On 09/09/2017 05:20 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>>> On 9/9/17 4:28 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>>>> I have yet to see a definitive answer, even in m.s.f, from which I'm
>>>>>> permanently banned:  Will older versions of FF (including 52ESR)
>>>>>> continue to operate after the drop-dead date in 2018 with all
>>>>>> 'legacy'
>>>>>> extensions previously installed or has Mozilla figured out a way to
>>>>>> render them inoperable even on older FF versions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NOT going to update.  Period.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't have the definitive answer, but I would expect the last 52 ESR
>>>>> release and older versions to continue working.
>>>>>
>>>>> You won't get security and stability updates, and all extensions that
>>>>> you use probably won't be maintained or available on AMO.
>>>>
>>>> Not going to worry about that.  I'm increasingly displeased with
>>>> updates, which tend to be what a net-friend calls slob-enablement for
>>>> the use of cubicle meat :-(
>>>>
>>>>> You can always install the current Nightly, created a separate profile
>>>>> and see how much better it is. 😉
>>>>
>>>> I'll probably do that.  I installed 52 as a test and after tweaking it
>>>> to at least some level of satisfaction I didn't feel like retreating to
>>>> 47, which I THINK I was using before.  I've got a snail-trail of older
>>>> versions and profiles that I should really get rid of, although I
>>>> really
>>>> don't NEED the space.  8TB drives split into 8 1TB partitions (current
>>>> installation is only 231GB) are cool!
>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/desktop/#nightly>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps...
>>>>
>>> Don't forget to download to disk (and backup too) all legacy extensions
>>> you use.  Do this for each gecko based browser you have including
>>> various Fx versions, SeaMonkey, Pale Moon, etc.  My friends and I spent
>>> hours doing this recently.  I have mostly the same extensions on all
>>> gecko browsers but different versions for different browsers and every
>>> one had to be downloaded to disk and then saved also on an external disk
>>> and on a thumb drive.
>>
>> I was under the impression that they're already on our HDs, albeit with
>> cryptic names.  I have multiple full-installation backups.  Is it likely
>> that Mozilla will reach into our computers and delete our extensions
>> against our will?
>
> No, they won't, but seeing as the maker of Better Privacy decided to
> remove his AddOn from AMO early, I had to scramble and search to find
> some place where to download version 1.77 (hopefully compatible with
> FF52 to which I am migrating to this week.) Alice White also removed his
> extensions some time back (of which Show Parent Folder is the most
> useful). I therefore spent hours yesterday downloading the latest
> versions of all the XPIs I use. Can never be too careful with this; when
> ESR moves to Web Extensions Mozilla will yank all XUL from AMO...
>
> Best Regards,
>


Have you looked at Privacy Badger? Works with 57.0.

<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/>

--
Go Bucs, Pitt, Steelers!
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04 LTS - Unity Desktop
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

B00ze
On 2017-09-12 12:43, WaltS48 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 9/11/17 11:49 PM, B00ze wrote:

>> No, they won't, but seeing as the maker of Better Privacy decided to
>> remove his AddOn from AMO early, I had to scramble and search to find
>> some place where to download version 1.77 (hopefully compatible with
>> FF52 to which I am migrating to this week.) Alice White also removed
>> his extensions some time back (of which Show Parent Folder is the most
>> useful). I therefore spent hours yesterday downloading the latest
>> versions of all the XPIs I use. Can never be too careful with this;
>> when ESR moves to Web Extensions Mozilla will yank all XUL from AMO...
>
> Have you looked at Privacy Badger? Works with 57.0.
> <https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/>

Well, Better Privacy deals with one specific tracker, Flash Cookies,
which are probably not used much anymore. Privacy Badger deals with
trackers on webpages, but I have uBlock for that. Better Privacy will
become a non-issue once Flash goes away, but it's worked well all these
years, I wanted to keep it with FF52. I'll move to
FFxx-Web-Extensions-Only one day but I will wait, while WE addOns are
created to replace what I use now. I do have a list of a few WE that I
need to look at once I install 52...

Best Regards,

--
! _\|/_  Sylvain / [hidden email]
! (o o)   Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society
oO-( )-Oo  C:\DOS\SYSTEM\OS2\UTILITIES\DOCS\HELP\WHERE\THE\F$#%\AM\I?

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

PietB-2
B00ze wrote:
> WaltS48 wrote:
>> Have you looked at Privacy Badger? Works with 57.0.
>> <https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/>
>
> Well, Better Privacy deals with one specific tracker, Flash Cookies,
> which are probably not used much anymore.

Flash is still around pretty much, and so are "Flash cookies".

> Privacy Badger deals with trackers on webpages, but I have uBlock
> for that.

According to the description Privacy Badger also deals with
canvas fingerprinting, and as far as I can tell uBlock doesn't.
But what is an add-on worth when negative reviews are deleted?
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/
("Disappointing")

-p

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

WaltS48-5
On 9/13/17 5:38 AM, PietB wrote:

> B00ze wrote:
>> WaltS48 wrote:
>>> Have you looked at Privacy Badger? Works with 57.0.
>>> <https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/>
>>
>> Well, Better Privacy deals with one specific tracker, Flash Cookies,
>> which are probably not used much anymore.
>
> Flash is still around pretty much, and so are "Flash cookies".
>
>> Privacy Badger deals with trackers on webpages, but I have uBlock
>> for that.
>
> According to the description Privacy Badger also deals with
> canvas fingerprinting, and as far as I can tell uBlock doesn't.
> But what is an add-on worth when negative reviews are deleted?
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/
> ("Disappointing")
>
> -p
>


I didn't read the reviews, but I do know it blocked the paywall, and
annoying, "You have reached your limit of free articles" popup on my
local newspapers web site.

--
Go Bucs, Pitt, Steelers!
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04 LTS - Unity Desktop
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

B00ze
In reply to this post by PietB-2
On 2017-09-13 05:38, PietB <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> wrote:

> B00ze wrote:
>> WaltS48 wrote:
>>> Have you looked at Privacy Badger? Works with 57.0.
>>> <https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/>
>>
>> Well, Better Privacy deals with one specific tracker, Flash Cookies,
>> which are probably not used much anymore.
>
> Flash is still around pretty much, and so are "Flash cookies".

Oh they are? I've never bothered much with them since Better Privacy
deletes them. I just whitelist those cookies that I need and let it do
its thing with the rest. But flash should be click-to-run by default on
most browsers by now, no? So the chances that it will run (in an Ad for
instance) are limited...

>> Privacy Badger deals with trackers on webpages,
>> but I have uBlock for that.
>
> According to the description Privacy Badger also deals with
> canvas fingerprinting, and as far as I can tell uBlock doesn't.
> But what is an add-on worth when negative reviews are deleted?
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/
> ("Disappointing")

Privacy Badger works by tracking 3rd party requests that appear on
multiple sites; it doesn't use block-lists. IE used to do that too btw.
It could be a nice addition to my arsenal, but then it would be one more
place I'd have to tinker with when a site doesn't work correctly. When
it first came out, information about it was pretty scarce (still is), so
I skipped it. Used Ghostery for a while then switched to uBO (I also use
NoScript, CanvasBlocker, RefControl, Modify Response Headers, Self
Destructing Cookies, No URI Leak, DecentralEyes) - All for nothing
really, I'm probably the only one with a window-size of 1234x987 (for
example) who also has the Google Font installed and has 53 extensions
running (for example): all bits of information identifying me. It's a
loosing battle...

I checked Privacy Badger's AMO listing again, no mention of Canvas. The
release history also shows that EFF spends an inordinate amount of
efforts perfecting DNT checking/validating/etc in the addOn, which is
pretty useless (I really don't care to know if DNT is respected or not).

I'll give it a try but I have no idea if I'll keep it.

Best Regards,

--
! _\|/_  Sylvain / [hidden email]
! (o o)   Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society
oO-( )-Oo  10 kinds of people: those who know binary and those who dont

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF 52ESR

B00ze
In reply to this post by WaltS48-5
On 2017-09-13 10:35, WaltS48 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 9/13/17 5:38 AM, PietB wrote:
>> B00ze wrote:
>>> WaltS48 wrote:
>>>> Have you looked at Privacy Badger? Works with 57.0.
>>>> <https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/>
>>>
>>> Well, Better Privacy deals with one specific tracker, Flash Cookies,
>>> which are probably not used much anymore.
>>
>> Flash is still around pretty much, and so are "Flash cookies".
>>
>>> Privacy Badger deals with trackers on webpages, but I have uBlock
>>> for that.
>>
>> According to the description Privacy Badger also deals with
>> canvas fingerprinting, and as far as I can tell uBlock doesn't.
>> But what is an add-on worth when negative reviews are deleted?
>> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/
>> ("Disappointing")
>
> I didn't read the reviews, but I do know it blocked the paywall, and
> annoying, "You have reached your limit of free articles" popup on my
> local newspapers web site.

Yeah, it's a real annoyance to control these blocking addOns. When
something doesn't work and I really need it I can spend 30 minutes
reloading a page over and over until I find all that needs to be allowed...

Regards,

--
! _\|/_  Sylvain / [hidden email]
! (o o)   Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society
oO-( )-Oo  Plan to be spontaneous tomorrow.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general