Firefox, relic without a future

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

Firefox, relic without a future

HoneyBun-2
[posted at firefox ng but didn't work]

I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
credit cards warn about it being outdated. No such problems with IE11,
probably my new default browser on W8.1.

No major problems on XP with Firefox 48, although I use it sparingly.

I DO(!) need some of the old add-ons, and certain important sites which I
visit regularly DO(!) require java. I must go to a bit of trouble to
manually download and update some of those things, but it's worth it.

Firefox versions after 48-50 offer nothing to me.

Except the new Tor browser based on Firefox 52 seems to work OK for it's
limited purpose, although I seldom need a proxy.
--
Honey Bun



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

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Big Al-3
On 09/10/2017 05:55 AM, HoneyBun wrote:
> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
> errors on Facebook and elsewhere.
I get flashing on Chrome in Linux also with Facebook and only Facebook.
FWIW.

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

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

WaltS48-5
In reply to this post by HoneyBun-2
On 9/10/17 5:55 AM, HoneyBun wrote:
> [posted at firefox ng but didn't work]

I don't see a support question in the body of the message.

>
> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
> credit cards warn about it being outdated. No such problems with IE11,
> probably my new default browser on W8.1.
>
> No major problems on XP with Firefox 48, although I use it sparingly.
>
> I DO(!) need some of the old add-ons, and certain important sites which I
> visit regularly DO(!) require java. I must go to a bit of trouble to
> manually download and update some of those things, but it's worth it.
>
> Firefox versions after 48-50 offer nothing to me.
>
> Except the new Tor browser based on Firefox 52 seems to work OK for it's
> limited purpose, although I seldom need a proxy.
>

If you need Java, the website administrators haven't a clue and should
be informed that the Java plugin is dead and they need to do some
website redesign.

You didn't state which of the old extensions you DO (❗) need, or
indicate that you couldn't find a web extension replacement.

--
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: Firefox, relic without a future

PietB-2
In reply to this post by HoneyBun-2
HoneyBun wrote:
> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
> credit cards warn about it being outdated.

Running FF 52.3.0esr on W7 and W8.1. None of the mentioned problems
(don't use the disaster called Facebook though). Promlems only with
one bank, but that's due to a bug in Ghostery.

-p

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

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Mozilla - General mailing list
In reply to this post by HoneyBun-2
On 9/10/2017 10:55 AM, HoneyBun wrote:

> [posted at firefox ng but didn't work]
>
> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
> credit cards warn about it being outdated. No such problems with IE11,
> probably my new default browser on W8.1.
>
> No major problems on XP with Firefox 48, although I use it sparingly.
>
> I DO(!) need some of the old add-ons, and certain important sites which I
> visit regularly DO(!) require java. I must go to a bit of trouble to
> manually download and update some of those things, but it's worth it.
>
> Firefox versions after 48-50 offer nothing to me.
>
> Except the new Tor browser based on Firefox 52 seems to work OK for it's
> limited purpose, although I seldom need a proxy.
>
I uninstalled it and began to use Edge.  This went belly up in a few
weeks.  I mainly use Opera, but I have reinstalled Firefox and it seems
okay so far.

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally.  History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember.  -Albert Goldman
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Mozilla - General mailing list
In reply to this post by PietB-2
On 9/10/2017 6:28 PM, PietB wrote:

> HoneyBun wrote:
>> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
>> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
>> credit cards warn about it being outdated.
>
> Running FF 52.3.0esr on W7 and W8.1. None of the mentioned problems
> (don't use the disaster called Facebook though). Promlems only with
> one bank, but that's due to a bug in Ghostery.
>
> -p
>
I agree that Firefox is a crock, how does it make so much money?

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally.  History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember.  -Albert Goldman
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Luis
In reply to this post by PietB-2
PietB wrote:

> HoneyBun wrote:
>> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
>> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
>> credit cards warn about it being outdated.
>
> Running FF 52.3.0esr on W7 and W8.1. None of the mentioned problems
> (don't use the disaster called Facebook though). Promlems only with
> one bank, but that's due to a bug in Ghostery.
>
> -p
>
A few weeks ago I did quit FF in favor of Opera. Then I reinstalled FF
54.0 and left it as second browser. However I am now also using Yandex
and Avast SafeZone but left Opera as my default browser. I'm very
displeased with FF after using it for many years as my only trusted browser.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Wolf K.
In reply to this post by PietB-2
On 2017-09-10 1:28 PM, PietB wrote:

> HoneyBun wrote:
>> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
>> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
>> credit cards warn about it being outdated.
>
> Running FF 52.3.0esr on W7 and W8.1. None of the mentioned problems
> (don't use the disaster called Facebook though). Promlems only with
> one bank, but that's due to a bug in Ghostery.
>
> -p


+1

Basic rule: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

OTOH, based on the (rather sparse) data on the problem systems, I infer
that most of them suffer from one or more of:
- FF add-ons that have been superseded by added FF functionality;
- FF add-ons that haven't been updated;
- OS not up-to-date;
- obsolescing (or obsolescent) hardware;
- old software that's no longer playing nice with newer systems;
- system has too much left-over detritus from miscellaneous sources;

I also note that Windows seems more prone to developing these faults
than OS-X or Linux.

Have a good day,

--
Wolf K.
https://kirkwood40.blogspot.com
It's called "opinion" because it's not knowledge.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Mozilla - General mailing list
In reply to this post by Mozilla - General mailing list
On 9/11/2017 7:45 AM, Martin Edwards wrote:

> On 9/10/2017 6:28 PM, PietB wrote:
>> HoneyBun wrote:
>>> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
>>> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
>>> credit cards warn about it being outdated.
>>
>> Running FF 52.3.0esr on W7 and W8.1. None of the mentioned problems
>> (don't use the disaster called Facebook though). Promlems only with
>> one bank, but that's due to a bug in Ghostery.
>>
>> -p
>>
> I agree that Firefox is a crock, how does it make so much money?
>
Sorry, I meant Facebook.  My new copy of Firefox is okay so far.

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally.  History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember.  -Albert Goldman
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

PietB-2
In reply to this post by Luis
Luis wrote:
> A few weeks ago I did quit FF in favor of Opera. Then I reinstalled FF
> 54.0 and left it as second browser. However I am now also using Yandex
> and Avast SafeZone but left Opera as my default browser.

You may want to try the Brave browser. That is, after they've fixed
the beginner's error that it blindfoldedly installs itself in the
user's Appdata folder.

-p

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

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Luis
PietB wrote:

> Luis wrote:
>> A few weeks ago I did quit FF in favor of Opera. Then I reinstalled FF
>> 54.0 and left it as second browser. However I am now also using Yandex
>> and Avast SafeZone but left Opera as my default browser.
>
> You may want to try the Brave browser. That is, after they've fixed
> the beginner's error that it blindfoldedly installs itself in the
> user's Appdata folder.
>
> -p
>

I love open source and yes I already have Brave installed.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Wolf K.
In reply to this post by Mozilla - General mailing list
On 2017-09-12 2:45 AM, Martin Edwards wrote:

> On 9/11/2017 7:45 AM, Martin Edwards wrote:
>> On 9/10/2017 6:28 PM, PietB wrote:
>>> HoneyBun wrote:
>>>> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
>>>> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
>>>> credit cards warn about it being outdated.
>>>
>>> Running FF 52.3.0esr on W7 and W8.1. None of the mentioned problems
>>> (don't use the disaster called Facebook though). Promlems only with
>>> one bank, but that's due to a bug in Ghostery.
>>>
>>> -p
>>>
>> I agree that Firefox is a crock, how does it make so much money?
>>
> Sorry, I meant Facebook.  My new copy of Firefox is okay so far.

http://marketrealist.com/2016/05/facebooks-average-revenue-per-user-trending/

IMO the average revenue per user (ARPU) revenue is pathetic. Multiply it
by the number of users, and it's a hefty sum.

The Register had a story recently about how FB's user numbers are fudged:
https://search.theregister.co.uk/?q=facebook+user+numbers

I note that my younger FB friends are posting less on FB, but don't have
any stats t5o confirm a trend.

IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.

--
Wolf K.
https://kirkwood40.blogspot.com
It's called "opinion" because it's not knowledge.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

The Real Bev
On 09/12/2017 08:47 AM, Wolf K. wrote:

> On 2017-09-12 2:45 AM, Martin Edwards wrote:
>> On 9/11/2017 7:45 AM, Martin Edwards wrote:
>>> On 9/10/2017 6:28 PM, PietB wrote:
>>>> HoneyBun wrote:
>>>>> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant flash
>>>>> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably. Banks and
>>>>> credit cards warn about it being outdated.
>>>>
>>>> Running FF 52.3.0esr on W7 and W8.1. None of the mentioned problems
>>>> (don't use the disaster called Facebook though). Promlems only with
>>>> one bank, but that's due to a bug in Ghostery.
>>>>
>>> I agree that Firefox is a crock, how does it make so much money?
>>>
>> Sorry, I meant Facebook.  My new copy of Firefox is okay so far.
>
> http://marketrealist.com/2016/05/facebooks-average-revenue-per-user-trending/
>
> IMO the average revenue per user (ARPU) revenue is pathetic. Multiply itbut that's a major annoyance
> by the number of users, and it's a hefty sum.
>
> The Register had a story recently about how FB's user numbers are fudged:
> https://search.theregister.co.uk/?q=facebook+user+numbers
>
> I note that my younger FB friends are posting less on FB, but don't have
> any stats t5o confirm a trend.
>
> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.

I wouldn't.  AdblockPlus is free and works well.

FB is nowhere near as good as usenet.  Perhaps I'd feel differently if I
didn't have to jump through hoops to view FB videos with firefox (Chrome
has no problems) and if I could see ALL the posts I've chosen to see on
a timely (or "at all") basis.


--
Cheers, Bev
   VISE GRIPS (VYS'-gripz) [n]  A tool used to transfer intense
   welding heat to the palm of the welder's hand.         -- DS
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Mozilla - General mailing list
On 9/12/2017 1:35 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

> On 09/12/2017 08:47 AM, Wolf K. wrote:
>> On 2017-09-12 2:45 AM, Martin Edwards wrote:
>>> On 9/11/2017 7:45 AM, Martin Edwards wrote:
>>>> On 9/10/2017 6:28 PM, PietB wrote:
>>>>> HoneyBun wrote:
>>>>>> I had to quit Firefox 50 sooner than expected with W8.1. Constant
>>>>>> flash
>>>>>> errors on Facebook and elsewhere. Videos won't play reliably.
>>>>>> Banks and
>>>>>> credit cards warn about it being outdated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Running FF 52.3.0esr on W7 and W8.1. None of the mentioned problems
>>>>> (don't use the disaster called Facebook though). Promlems only with
>>>>> one bank, but that's due to a bug in Ghostery.
>>>>>
>>>> I agree that Firefox is a crock, how does it make so much money?
>>>>
>>> Sorry, I meant Facebook.  My new copy of Firefox is okay so far.
>>
>> http://marketrealist.com/2016/05/facebooks-average-revenue-per-user-trending/
>>
>>
>> IMO the average revenue per user (ARPU) revenue is pathetic. Multiply
>> itbut that's a major annoyance
>> by the number of users, and it's a hefty sum.
>>
>> The Register had a story recently about how FB's user numbers are fudged:
>> https://search.theregister.co.uk/?q=facebook+user+numbers
>>
>> I note that my younger FB friends are posting less on FB, but don't have
>> any stats t5o confirm a trend.
>>
>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>
> I wouldn't.  AdblockPlus is free and works well.
>
> FB is nowhere near as good as usenet.  Perhaps I'd feel differently if I
> didn't have to jump through hoops to view FB videos with firefox (Chrome
> has no problems) and if I could see ALL the posts I've chosen to see on
> a timely (or "at all") basis.

Ditto. I use uBlock Origin though since it is faster than ABP.
--
"In every enemy that is an ant, behold an elephant." --Turkish
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see
this signature correctly.
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )               Axe ANT from its address if e-mailing privately.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

PietB-2
In reply to this post by Wolf K.
Wolf K. wrote:
> I note that my younger FB friends are posting less on FB, but don't have
> any stats t5o confirm a trend.
> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.

I'd never spend even a single dime on a privacy nightmare like FB.

-p

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

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

PietB-2
In reply to this post by Luis
Luis wrote:

> PietB wrote:
>> Luis wrote:
>>> A few weeks ago I did quit FF in favor of Opera. Then I reinstalled FF
>>> 54.0 and left it as second browser. However I am now also using Yandex
>>> and Avast SafeZone but left Opera as my default browser.
>>
>> You may want to try the Brave browser. That is, after they've fixed
>> the beginner's error that it blindfoldedly installs itself in the
>> user's Appdata folder.
>
> I love open source and yes I already have Brave installed.

I was really surprised by the stupid installation process, given that
there are experts like Brendan Eich (although he is controversial) and
Marshall T. Rose behind it.

-p

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

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Disaster Master
On Wed Sep 13 2017 13:57:38 GMT-0400 (Eastern Standard Time), PietB
<www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> wrote:
> I was really surprised by the stupid installation process, given that
> there are experts like Brendan Eich (although he is controversial)
He is only controversial to idiots...
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Big Al-3
In reply to this post by PietB-2
On 09/13/2017 01:53 PM, PietB wrote:

> Wolf K. wrote:
>> I note that my younger FB friends are posting less on FB, but don't have
>> any stats t5o confirm a trend.
>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>
> I'd never spend even a single dime on a privacy nightmare like FB.
>
>
But it's free.  :-)

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

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

PietB-2
Big Al wrote:

> PietB wrote:
>> Wolf K. wrote:
>>> I note that my younger FB friends are posting less on FB, but don't have
>>> any stats t5o confirm a trend.
>>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
>>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>>
>> I'd never spend even a single dime on a privacy nightmare like FB.
>
> But it's free.  :-)

That goes for every nightmare, doesn't it? ;-)

-p

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

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Wolf K.
In reply to this post by The Real Bev
On 2017-09-12 16:35, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 09/12/2017 08:47 AM, Wolf K. wrote:
[...]
>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>
> I wouldn't.  AdblockPlus is free and works well.

I would because FB's algorithms for displaying posts are defective. Like
Google's, they over-value current read history.

> FB is nowhere near as good as usenet.

For interest groups. yes, except that every now and then a Usenet group
is messed up by trolls or by flooders.

> Perhaps I'd feel differently if I
> didn't have to jump through hoops to view FB videos with firefox (Chrome
> has no problems) and

??? No problems with FF on Win8.1 Pro/64.

>if I could see ALL the posts I've chosen to see on
> a timely (or "at all") basis.

That's precisely what I would pay for. All control at my end. You can't
control any ad-supported service. Blocking ads isn't the same as control.

If FB won't provide that service, maybe somebody else is smart enough to
do so.

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"Wanted. Schrödinger’s Cat. Dead and Alive."
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
12