this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
177 points (94.9% liked)

Technology

58164 readers
3413 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 107 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Fortunately, this is easily avoided by not using Chrome.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 45 points 10 months ago

Common Firefox W

[–] RooPappy@kbin.social 32 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It would be best to make the switch today. That has the dual benefit of a) Showing Google that they will lose users, and maybe they will change their mind (again), and b) Show every website that they do need to put actual effort into supporting and testing against Firefox.

[–] ftbd@feddit.de 4 points 10 months ago

Best? Better than not using chrome in the first place?

[–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 76 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Good. Firefox is the answer.

[–] Senex@reddthat.com 26 points 10 months ago

For me, the future is Firefox and Linux.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today -1 points 10 months ago

Yeah but putting all our hopes into Firefox is quite dangerous. All Google needs to do to fuck us over is to stop funding Firefox.

[–] Piecemakers3Dprints@lemmy.world 63 points 10 months ago (2 children)
[–] 257m@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago

No do it for your own sake. Or simply your sanity.

[–] iFarmGolems@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago

But Firefox is way slower than chrome...

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago

🎶No they won't because I don't use chrome 🎶

[–] rob299@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago

In other words, these older extentions work just fine, no one wants the new limited features, and google is force disabling older extentions despite any outcries from its users because it can.

[–] kambusha@feddit.ch 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The popular uBlock Origin extension, for example, would be limited under Manifest V3. The developer created uBlock Origin Lite, a reduced version that is compatible with Manifest V3.

[–] Frellwit@lemmy.world 46 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

uBO Lite have a lot of limitations:

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Sounds like manifest 3 would also break extensions like Stylish, Greasemonkey and Dark Reader, basically anything that injects or interacts with the html, css or JavaScript of a page in any way.

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 10 months ago

Basically, most actually useful extensions

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 10 months ago

Hilarious. Please people, just stop using Chrome seriously. There's no reason to do it.

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 10 months ago

Well, googie has certainly given me ample reason to never use Chrome again... Not that I ever planned to anyway, but still...

[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Running winget install firefox should fix that problem for windows users

EDIT: Fuck off autocorrect

[–] slowroll@r.nf 4 points 10 months ago
[–] satans_crackpipe@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

My what extensions? Isn't that the keylogger and network compute software with perfunctory ad delivery features?

[–] 0x2d@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How will vivaldi and ungoogled-chromium be affected by these changes

[–] SapphironZA@lemmings.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I made the switch to waterfox (Firefox fork) that strips out much of the problematic mozilla stuff.

I started to switch because of the tab containers, as I work across a dozen or so accounts in our MSP business.

Now I realised how good Firefox can be if you get rid of the bloat.

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 14 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I've never once used Firefox and thought "man, is there bloat here". Whatwas bugging you?

[–] SapphironZA@lemmings.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I was mainly referring to how sluggish it was. For my web apps, it was always slower and the UI would bog down. Maybe not the correct definition of you refer to unnecessary features.

I am more referring to how lean or streamline the software is. Both in front end design and backend.

A lot of browser performance has to do with how you use it, so my experience is not universal.

Still, even full fat Firefox is skinny compared to the morbidly obese Chrome and edge browsers.

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So weird to me how when Chrome first came out, it was the opposite: Firefox was getting sluggish and poorly optimized with too much going on, and Chrome was sleek and fast and seemed to just have what was needed to work.

[–] SapphironZA@lemmings.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

These things go in cycles. But I think the writing is on the wall. Google will never make the investment to unbloat Chrome.

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago

They have no incentive to, at least not as long as they're the dominant web browser

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

There isn't much, Waterfox removes Pocket and disables most of the telemetry, tweaks some of the settings to be more privacy and performance minded, swaps google from default search engine and iirc it has more aggressive compiler optimization settings in exchange for having slightly more modern hardware requirements. And the default theme is more compact and less chrome-esque.

It originally was just about providing 64-bit builds of Firefox back when Mozilla didn't yet, today it's mostly "Firefox, but slightly better."

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Around the time Chrome first hit the scene, Firefox was getting pretty bloated and inefficient... They've come a long way since then but they still do a bunch of unnecessary stuff that should probably be off by default but isn't

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago

Like what should be off by default

[–] 01adrianrdgz@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

will it affect Linux Chrome too?? Oh no!!

[–] 4z01235@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] 01adrianrdgz@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

ok thank you!! I will update my extensions then.