To any Mozilla/Firefox developer reading this. I try to convert people to Firefox. The number one reason people switch, by far, is because mobile has add on support. So I say to push this front and center in marketing (I know this is a preview). People are reluctant to switch their desktop browser because chrome pretty much has the same features. But it they switch their mobile browsers they also switch their desktops to take advantage of the full feature suite.
And to anyone trying to convert your friends "mobile supports ublock" is usually all I have to say.
Edit:unblock == uBlock Origin (sorry, on my phone)
We're certainly aware of how significant ad blocking extensions are. This release required a great quantity of features with only a six month timeline until now.
We already support a very limited set of the WebExtensions API to offer features like Reader Mode. Rest assured that more features will land in the coming months.
If you're a developer and you want to help us, our Github site is at this link. We mark easier issues with a Good First Issue label. We also need help with translations, documentation, and even getting issues filed.
The hard work you guys put in is always appreciated, FF in all its forms has become truly the best browser there is. That being said, how on earth was Reader Mode prioritized above adblocking?
As it stands, adblocking is "post MVP"[1][2]. QR code scanning, however, is somehow part of the MVP. This doesn't make sense to me: there are many apps that launch the default system browser when scanning a URL QR code. You can easily get by without that functionality in the browser.
The comments in this post should be sending you really loud signal: technical users (the type of people who install preview software) don't consider a browser without adblocking MVP. You are drastically underestimating the significance of adblocking extensions.
I understand where you're coming from, but I honestly find Firefox Preview's built-in tracking protection blocks enough ads on its own. I'd encourage you to give it a shot. (Though, to reassure you: proper adblocking is on the roadmap.)
On the other hand, QR code scanning is necessary for a good Firefox Sync setup experience, and that genuinely seems crucial to the MVP: we don't want your data stranded on one device unless that's explicitly what you want.
That's upsetting. Please do report bugs. We do fix them. Bookmark sync had been working in Nightly for weeks, so I'm really surprised. I imagine it's hitting some kind of exception on your bookmarks.
It looks like that should have been resolved a month ago with build 1.0.1921 (https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/2252)... are you sure your bookmarks are set to sync (check in about:preferences on desktop)? If so, try forcing a new sync Firefox Preview by hitting Settings -> Sync -> Sync Now.
Yes, the only thing I'm not syncing are passwords. Are those 3 folders under "Desktop Bookmarks" visible in clean install before syncing? https://imgur.com/q1W7GgZ Maybe it's synced somehow only partially? All those folders are empty. And also on my desktop browser I can't see bookmarks I created in FP. I tried hitting "Sync Now" multiple times since yesterday, it always looks like it's working, after a second there's "Last synced: 0 minutes ago"
I removed FP and installed it again, this time with pairing through QR code, it again looks like it's working perfectly, but I can't see bookmarks, only history. And there is no mobile session under devices in https://accounts.firefox.com/
I'm not sure if it's prioritization so much as just Reader mode being easier because it doesn't need that much from the extension API. Adblockers need to do more browser-level things like intercept HTTP requests, while Reader mode can be done with just DOM/CSS manipulation.
Also, reader mode is the only way non-mobile websites are readable on my phone. I left chrome on my phone for it (now I use Firefox Focus as my primary mobile browser for the vastly better privacy, but very much miss that it seems to have no reader mode). If this has reader mode I am absolutely going to use it as my backup for when Focus breaks a site over Chrome.
When it came out I considered reader mode a killer feature, and coincidentally it also tends to remove the ads. Or at least the ones not embedded in an article, which is good enough for me as long as they remain stationary.
When Chrome first came out I stopped using it cause it didnt have adblock. Then when it did it was still crippled and I realized Google is in the Ad business so I never used Chrome since. This is very correct adblocking is a necessity, if they even include a Mozilla Adblocking DNS server for the browser thats fine to me. As long as I dont see ads.
I wont give up on Firefox anytime soon. I would love to see some serious competitors though.
> We're certainly aware of how significant ad blocking extensions are. This release required a great quantity of features with only a six month timeline until now.
It is always soft of amusing to watch companies make all kinds of unforced errors with their products because the managers feel that they know much better than the users of the product what should be important to users. They fail all the time just to have someone else come in and say "Oh, those people, they were just holding the instructions wrong" and go repeating the same mistake.
So far in this ( software + hardware space ) there has been exactly one company that nailed it. The company is called Apple and the product is called iPhone. Since that point on Apple has not introduced anything that was not a direct play on "Our users want X, we are going to give them X, maybe with a bit of a twist"
The users are telling you that the USP of Firefox is ad blocking. If your PM says it is something else, you should replace the PM. That should be your singular focus. Everything else is secondary.
I agree with you 100% both about ad blocking being essential and product managers being tone deaf to user's priorities, however, I don't see Apple as any paragon in this regard.
> Apple has not introduced anything that was not a direct play on "Our users want X, we are going to give them X, maybe with a bit of a twist"
Unless you want plug-ins in a mobile browser or a headphone jack or ... well, too many things to list really. Apple mobile/tablet software experiences are some of the worst offenders of "We'll tell you how you should want it and if you don't agree, you're just wrong and we're right."
> We're certainly aware of how significant ad blocking extensions are. This release required a great quantity of features with only a six month timeline until now.
A usable night mode e.g. invert the topbar icons and change the white screen you see before the page loads combined with an existing dark theme would be an easy feature to implement and would put it miles ahead of other mobile browsers too. I presently have to use Swift for Samsung to overlay a proper black theme (with white icons etc), but still get bright white when loading pages.
I'm sending this from it right now using the dark theme it comes with, dark bar (at the bottom), it has exactly what you're asking for! I'm really happy about this; dark with bar at bottom is what I've always wanted.
Im an idiot.... just tested it. Beautiful. Its nearly perfect now. Still blasts you with white in some situations but maybe thats due to the coding of the webpage as it loads. Im seriously impressed.
Fullscreen mode would be good. And bookmarks seem like something of a car-crash. They're in there somewhere but it looks like Collections are easier to get to so obviously they're going to get used instead. I don't care what they're called - i just need a way of getting to frequently used urls. And it would be good if I could rename bookmarks/urls/items in collections because currently i'm stuck with whatever the site owner put there which means I end up with 4 links all called "train timetable" instead of "luton-london","london-luton","luton-tring","tring-luton". I would suggest firefox developers use both collections and bookmarks and see how many clicks they have to use, if they have to stretch their thumbs etc, and ask if there's a better way.
And..where to report this sort of thing? There seem to be about 7 different rival official locations.
What a ridiculous claim. Of course there is finished software. If you need a subscration calculator what do you do when it can do substraction? Add addition?
That's how we end up with this disgusting bloated software world we live in. Why do I need a calculator app with food delivery service?
Strongly seconding. The one and only reason I bothered to switch from Chrome to Firefox on Android was because I could install uBlock Origin on it. It's also the reason I installed Firefox on my wife's smartphone, and why I keep recommending it to friends and family members.
(Of course, some time later I realized what "extensions enabled" truly means, and started using other extensions I have enabled on my desktop browser too :).)
I moved to firefox on mobile explicitly because the context menu has options I use. Google Chrome dropped almost all the options, and annoyed me to know end.
IMO Mozilla is the only option to keep the web free. Google won't even remotely have your interests even in mind for the changes they make.
Please listen Mozilla. Firefox is the only browser that works as intended for me, on mobile. Cookie AutoDelete + uBlock Origin and Dark Reader. What a blessing.
Using Firefox because it has a particular technological feature is a political choice. That political stance would lead users to turn to other browsers as fast as tech is added or removed.
I use Firefox for political reasons and for what it stands.
Which means that when Firefox gets worse I still use it and support what it stands for.
It's very Stallmanesque and let it be clear I am not saying the choice to favour superior tech over ethic concerns is wrong. It's just a different choice.
That's what I tell people when talking about Signal and messenger, Chrome and Firefox.
Also, I don't think Mozilla is a white knight and in my opinion they fucked up some good things over the years (tech or ethic). But the good still largely surpasses the bad.
It's great that you have political reasons to use Firefox. But to be most effective, you have to recognize that most other users won't care about it that strongly, so you have to use arguments that matter to them in a practical way.
This way, you can switch your acquaintances to use Firefox, and they'll stay with it by inertia. I'd say that's a win-win.
> It's great that you have political reasons to use Firefox.
I don't think I am making myself clear. Everyone has a cultural and political profile that dictates some choices and it doesn't matter if they acknowledge it or not.
> But to be most effective, you have to recognize that most other users won't care about it that strongly, so you have to use arguments that matter to them in a practical way.
Oh, but the privacy and anti-ad argument is a strong political argument that will outlive the tech of the day.
> and they'll stay with it by inertia.
And if Mozilla pulls a google and becomes evil, that inertia is now a problem you have to overcome on other grounds than the tech.
It's an easy and short term win-win until the next HN article "ff slower than chrome in test XYZ, jump ships everyone !".
> Oh, but the privacy and anti-ad argument is a strong political argument that will outlive the tech of the day.
Right, but that doesn't matter an inch if you can't use it to convince people to switch to a FLOSS browser.
> It's an easy and short term win-win until the next HN article "ff slower than chrome in test XYZ, jump ships everyone !".
And then it's time to make political arguments, when they're already using Firefox, are accustomed to it and have all its configurations and workflows in this tool. This way you use the powerful force of inertia in your favor, instead of fighting it.
I wish iOS version had addons to block ads. (I know Apple doesn't allow that)
I still use it because of the synchronization and because Firefox is awesome. :)
Not that I want to defend them, but it does have a nice side effect that web developers must run their sites in some browser other than Chrome (even if they ignore Firefox).
There have been enough divergences between Webkit and Blink that I wouldn't consider them the same engine anymore, just like I wouldn't consider WebKit and KHTML/KJS to be the same.
non-chromium browsers only matter if the owner in question actually has any incentive to give users more control. Apple exercises even tighter control over their software than Google.
Firefox matters not because it's "not chromium" but because it's firefox, a non-profit dedicated to an open web.
Firefox matters because they're dedicated to an open web, but Firefox is usable by the general public because web developers are forced to support multiple engines if they want to work on iOS. These are two different things and both are important.
(Note: I've been running Gecko based browsers almost since the beginning. I guess in those days it was probably easier to use a browser that isn't perfectly supported, but I'd probably do it again if it came to it. But I can recommend Firefox to whoever I want, since it works on every site except Linked In. I couldn't do that if it only worked well on one in two or three or four sites.)
> Unlike Firefox on Android, Firefox for iOS does not support browser add-ons. Additionally, it uses Apple's Webkit rendering engine, rather than Mozilla's Gecko.
I also think they should fix zooming and un-zooming with the Mac trackpad for desktop Firefox. I had someone switch and they were so used to zooming in using the trackpad, they couldn't stay on Firefox. There is a 3rd party extension that fixes this, but should it not be built-in?
I feel like this is a running joke at this point. I've been waiting on this since getting a mbp in 2003. I swear it has been under development the whole time. Or, at worse, blocked by rendering engine updates. People always seem hopeful the next major rendering update will make it usable.
Bug opened seven years ago. It looks like the only real updates in the last year are a non-dev advocating for it.
Good to hear it's getting some attention behind the scenes. I'm a little sad the driving factor is probably just mobile. Given that it already seems to work in the mobile Firefox Preview, apparently using gecko, it gives me a little hope we may one day see this on the desktop.
I think at this point all the mac issues can only be solved if someone does a kickstarter specifically for mac and hires a bunch of developers and contributes the resulting code to upstream.
Thank you Mozilla team for making this great browser! I am a happy user since it was first released. Super happy with how fast the browser is now. I think Firefox always is ahead with great features and better UX. (Lazy tab loading, sticky tabs, containers, no video autoplay, to name a few)
Also plugin support on mobile is how I converted several chrome users :)
I hope "collections" will come to the desktop too. Are there plans?
How do you mean? I wasn't aware the assistant really did anything with Chrome. Certainly it renders some search results using the android webview. But otherwise, it launches any pages you click in whatever browser you want. Inside of Chrome, what assistant features are there? The voice recognition is part of the keyboard so all apps have that. Genuinely not sure what you're referring to.
Hmm I see. I think I was getting confused since I searched for browser app in settings and ended up setting browser app as well as Voice and Assist app as Firefox as they are in the same submenu.
If I choose Voice and Assist app as Firefox instead of Google then active edge, Ok Google does not work. May be I could just try setting browser app to firefox.
Let me give this combination a try for a few days. Browser is firefox and assist app is google which as you say still renders some links in android webview.
Yeah, the assist app and default browser aren't really related settings.
"Assist app" settings determines which app can respond to assistant invocations (ok google, long press home, squeezing the phone...) and grants special assistant privileges to app.
Also the news on the Google app (the most easily accessible one with a left swipe), also open in I guess Android Web View. I use my mobile browser mostly for news articles and less often for opening other websites. Will still end up using Chrome like stuff I guess.
I just switched to the current Android Firefox a few weeks ago and I must say I find it very hard to go back to Chrome. uBlock and Dark Reader make the phone browsing experience a remarkable amount more pleasant.
Chrome's general UI interaction is definitely more polished and snappier all around, but browsing mobile with good ad blocking, and not getting blasted in the face by stark white pages more than covers for Firefox's warts.
It should probably be noted that this Firefox Preview they are announcing doesn't yet have Add-On support.
But I agree, uBlock Origin makes the mobile web far less painful. Also, I'll point out that you want to be using uBlock Origin, not uBlock. As I recall, Raymond Hill (the creator of uBlock) decided to hand over uBlock Firefox to one of the contributors to offload some of the maintenance burden but then the new owner immediately started trying to monetize it which prompted him to create uBlock Origin.
Last time I checked, Raymond Hill's website didn't even have a donation button. This is an incredibly generous stance for him to take but if he doesn't want money himself maybe he could collect funds for a charity. I really feel I owe someone for this software.
One thing he (rightfully) points out is that the real power of ad-blocking solutions comes from the community-maintained blocking lists. In theory one could manually block every url they run across, but in practice we can use these tools (or a tool like pi-hole) almost effortlessly.
It's free (libre) software; you don't owe anyone. Eventually you will encounter a bug or translation/documentation error in some free software; taking some time to fix that would help everyone. And so would making software to fix a problem and then releasing it under a free license.
It might not happen in the near future, but chances are eventually you'll get to contribute something. And even if you don't, just accept uBO as a gift from a nice person.
I tried switching a couple of times but every time I face the same issue - the "touch" response is just _bad_ and I can't seem to be able to fix it. For example the "[-]" link on hackernews is almost impossible to click. I have to brute-force it by clicking multiple times, same applies for other websites where it doesn't seem to pickup the closest link I click.
On the other hand, the "Firefox Focus" app and Chrome do not seem to have this issue. Is there any way to fix this, because it's literally the only thing that stopping me.
I'm aware that I'm reaching a Cartago-delenda-est situation here, but since I see some mozilla devs here I must ask: Is there any news about the deal breaker bugs that are still keeping thousands of people from moving to firefox on OSX?
I'm referring to the bugs that cause extreme CPU usage and as a consequence extreme heating and battery usage, mainly on macbooks with retina screens set to "more space" resolution.
I work in a whole building full of developers where every single mac user has stopped using firefox due to this issue, yet there seems to be a deep disconnection between how prevalent the issue is and the priority it seems to be assigned.
I hope I'm not coming off as an ass here, I'm just sad that I've had to move away from firefox and to see all my coworkers also moving to chrome.
Oh, that's why that kept happening on my Macbook pro? I thought I was loading a broken site or had too many tabs open like I always do.
For me adding "Auto Tab Disard" [1] (a Firefox equivalent of The Great Suspender for Chrome) has reduced my FF memory/CPU footprint by 10x. It defaults to 10 minutes which is usually long enough where you've mostly forgotten about the tab, then it will refresh when you focus on it. A feature fortunately becoming native to FF. I don't seem to have the previous performance issues anymore but I'll be looking for it now.
> Oh, that's why that kept happening on my Macbook pro? I thought I was loading a broken site or had too many tabs open like I always do.
That's what I thought as well, but apparently it's something to do with the compositor and FF redrawing the whole window instead of just relevant pixels or areas - which provokes a lot of unneeded calculations -something specially damaging for users that have scaling set to more space (effectively a higher resolution).
That was my understanding at least, when I first learned about the bug many months ago. I followed the development for a while with no (public) improvements and now I just wait for news about the issue or something, but all FF related news so far have been about new features or products.
I really hate to be a “works on my machine” kind of person, but I’ve been running FF Nightly for personal stuff and FF Developer Edition for work on a variety of Macs for at least three years now and have literally never had any problem.
I am not trying to cast doubt on your experience, but I just wanted to point out that it isn’t universal!
It's really weird, because some people I talk to has never noticed a problem, yet I've been able to reproduce it (unwillingly) every time I've tried to install firefox on any macbook - different machines, different OS version, clean installs, you name it. It's just a matter of installing FF and using it lightly for some minutes (different websites too, or just showing the start page in the background) and the fans are already at full speed.
It makes me really confused because my current understanding on the bug doesn't seem to be compatible with the idea of only affecting some users - and to be clear I'm not casting doubt on your experience either, it's just hard to imagine how a performance issue regarding the compositor and screen redrawing could be affecting users differently.
Make a repro checklist and file a bug, if it's so easy to reproduce for you! Write down what you do, as you do it, and maybe devs could then repro it too!
Yeah, it's a shame that Firefox is unusable on Macbooks.
Subconsciously I started using Chrome on my Desktop more regularly too, since the abhorrent state of Firefox on Macbooks trained me into using Chrome instead.
The Firefox developers don't seem to care about the state of Firefox, on macOS, to be honest.
For example - This is a bug report I made 7 months ago of an issue that would be quick to implement, yet make a noticeable difference in UI on macOS (move the Share menu to the File menu). Nobody has bothered to respond. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1512851
I run mostly with my laptop closed and two external monitors and the only time FF makes the fans run is one particular site (dailykos.com) which seems to make the CPU go nuts.
Otherwise, I've always been on FF from the Netscape days. I use Chrome when I have to (noticably Hangouts for a while), but otherwise stayed with FF without a problem.
That's odd. I'm on a 2015 MBP with Mojave, and I recently switched from Chrome to Firefox because Chrome started causing intermitted freezes (even the mouse pointer wouldn't move). I've been on Firefox (and Safari) for over a week now. No issues.
Sounds weird to me too. I've been using FF as my main driver on mac, high sierra then Mojave and I never had this problem.
If anything it's google chrome helper that often becomes crazy eating my CPU cycles for just 4 tabs.
You're probably right but, as a member of that demographic:
- I use Firefox, and have done continuously for a long time. I don't intend to switch to anything else, despite being very unhappy with the experience in many ways, as I consider it to be the "least worst"
- I genuinely believe there are very easily achievable low-hanging fruit that Mozilla could implement that would at least please a large swathe of their target demographic. Namely, not talking about privacy and then slapping Google tracking into everything they do. I understand that there's a revenue stream there, and a balance to be met between economic survival and ideal conditions, but this particilar issue is a deal tipped too far towards defying the point of the exercise.
Perhaps I'm in a bubble and this is just my "single issue", but shouting about privacy and sending all that data about their users to Google seems a fairly large deal to me.
They do use Google Analytics on their websites but they do have a contract with Google that explicitly states that Google cannot use any of that data for tracking ever for any reason at all. Would make Mozilla rich if Google violated that.
Other than putting Google Analytics on all Mozilla properties as sibling commenters have already mentioned (link to info on that here [0]), there is also the following:
- as I mentioned in another comment, Firefox Preview comes with Google as a default search engine (not a huge issue) and with "search suggestions" enabled by default (which sends everything you ever type to Google).
- Even if you disable search suggestions (or change provider), Firefox has a built-in feature called "Google Safe Browsing" which collates every URL you visit and sends bulk reports to Google. This feature is only disable-able via the "here be dragons" about:config area.
- then there's Google Location Services, which sends your WiFi router SSID, SSIDs of routers in range, and hardware details, to Google. This is less clear cut as Mozilla's use of this service has been on-off over time, and varies per device. See[1]
This amounts to far less than "slapping Google tracking into everything they do", which reasonable people would interpret to include just using the browser. Reasonable people also understand that performing Google searches sends data to Google.
> Google Location Services, which sends your WiFi router SSID, SSIDs of routers in range, and hardware details, to Google. This is less clear cut as Mozilla's use of this service has been on-off over time, and varies per device.
Mozilla has made a significant investment to try to get away from this by building the Mozilla Location Service. In the meantime it's a straight tradeoff between quality of user experience and information leakage. Experience shows that degrading the user experience for some invisible and small privacy benefit is not a winning strategy.
Safe Browsing in Firefox is nothing more than a flat list of malware-laden sites your browser downloads. It compares your current site against the list to warn you if a match occurs. It does nothing else whatsoever. Even the most basic search of technical details would show that. Firefox code is also open to be read.
> Firefox has a built-in feature called "Google Safe Browsing" which collates every URL you visit and sends bulk reports to Google. This feature is only disable-able via the "here be dragons" about:config area.
Is this not 'about:preferences' -> Privacy & Security -> Block dangerous and deceptive content ?
"One of the most persistent misunderstandings about Safe Browsing is the idea that the browser needs to send all visited URLs to Google in order to verify whether or not they are safe."
Thanks for the clarification - this is all acceptable in my eyes then. Of course I never use Google Search (prefer Qwant, StartPage and DDG) and location services are never running in my browser. Safe Browsing - I prefer not to have it enabled, but it's not such a risk if it is.
This is quite a different thing from using Chrome(-ish browsers) with the "phone home".
This is what it comes down to: I still use Firefox confidently despite being aware of these issues, as I'm aware they're still very minor compared to running Chrome, or even any other Google-engine-based project.
It's still however worthwhile probing these issues. They're still far from ideal, even if they're preferable as a "least worst" option.
I'm with you on this one. I don't think mozilla is as privacy oriented as HN would make you think.
* They pushed ad/extension for a TV show to everyone
* They silently served modified installers to a small subset of users downloading firefox which sent all browsing data to a 3rd party by default.
* Disabling experiments used for pushing the mr robot ad does not disable "normandy" - which is practically the same thing and they used to push new certificates once their old ones expired and broke addons recently. This feature is hidden in advanced settings.
And then as you say, using google analytics everywhere (giving google data), painting google indirectly as evil while having it as a default engine and collecting google money.
> I don't think mozilla is as privacy oriented as HN would make you think.
> * They pushed ad/extension for a TV show to everyone
I assume you're talking about the "mr robot" thing here as well. One can accuse it of being many things, but it wasn't a privacy violation, as no data was sent (or planned to be sent) to anybody, either to Mozilla or any third-party. (It was silly, an abuse of studies, a source of worry for those who monitor their list of add-ons for suspicious items, and a strategic error.)
I'm not sure I agree. I think everything users want is achievable. The current Firefox allows addons and ad blocking via addons. The Fenix update improves speed and adds some new features. Both the current and the new undermine Blink dominance and serve to support a more diverse, collaborative open Internet. All of these things are attainable in one browser, and I think that would satisfy most users.
Loyal. Savvy. Influential. And a userbase that speaks out to get a better product; I'd prefer a loyal userbase that provides feedback about what they care about than a fickle one that doesn't.
As it should be. If you swallow every bone you are thrown you end up with bullshit like chrome's adblocker crippling served with a fake performance concern sauce.
I have been using Firefox on Android since 2013. It's been constantly improving. I am so glad that it exists so that I am not forced to use a browser (Chrome) that doesn't respect me or my privacy and has every incentive to fuck me over.
I used it in 2013 and found it constantly degrading with each update. They removed a major feature to reflow text to fit your screen nicely, worsened the UI, and other things I don't remember anymore. After using an old version for a while, I tried another browser, and holy crap that was 10 times faster as well as being customizable the way I was used to from Firefox desktop. Not open source, not as featureful (no add-ons), but that was so much better. Since then I switched to Lightning: even fewer features, but open source, very lightweight, and great UX.
Whenever I raised issues with Mozilla about things that degraded, it was always either talking to a brick wall or a wontfix. They made the decision based on one person complaining about it being the old way, implemented the change, and no matter that other people liked the old way, it wouldn't be changed back or made configurable.
I then tried to compile Firefox for Android myself and cherry pick only security updates, but that was enough of a pain in the ass that I gave up on it.
Interesting point about reflowing text:
Why don't browsers reflow text on mobile when zooming the same way they do on the desktop? This is a mayor annoyance for me since, well, forever. As a visually impaired user, forcing me to swipe text left to right the whole time after I zoomed to a comfortable font size makes reading on smaller screens really bad.
And before you mention it, changing default font size in browser/OS doesn't really help, mostly makes things worse (Bad categories like "medium", "huge" instead of font size, page layouts breaking etc.)
Im using this add on on Firefox for Android: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/text-reflow-w.... Maybe it can help you. Be aware it's not perfect:
>This add-on is my attempt to provide the "reflow" option for text in Firefox Android. Warning: It is very limited. It will only reflow one paragraph at a time. You will have to tap/click on every single paragraph that you want to reflow.
The current version of firefox for android works very well and doesn't feel noticeably different from chrome on a several year old phone.
The newest version mentioned in this article actually feels faster than chrome although I'm not crazy about the new ui it is usable without difficultly and a work in progress.
Have you tried other browsers? I must say that the effect has gotten smaller since I got my second Android phone about a year ago (yes, the first lasted 2013-2018), I think because the webview component itself just got more bulky, but it's still very noticeable how slow Fennec is (Firefox from F-Droid) compared to a bare webview browser.
I still have Fennec (Firefox from F-Droid) installed, I didn't notice any major changes since I stopped using it. I use it when there is some web application that expects a modern browser and the webview can't handle it.
But then, I also didn't think 57 for desktop was a big update. For me, it made zero speed difference (Firefox has always been fast on my laptop), on Linux with vertical tabs there is almost zero UI difference, and the only new thing was having to throw out all add-ons with the bathwater. Somehow, it seems I always experience things differently from other people.
Watch carefully: Noone will actually commit to extension support in the new firefox for android. They're going to roll their own adblocker, probably with the same inferior capabilities as manifest v3, to try to assuage all the people who use uBlock, while leaving everyone else to rot.
Will it be continually "improving" when they drop extension support?
I would love to know whether Mozilla has resources available to port Firefox to SailfishOS (SFOS) and other non-iOS & non-Android mobile platforms. We could really use a good native browser here. I'm currently running it through SFOS' Android emulation but that has issues.
Lacking a port I would be interested in a solid, maintained Firefox-without-the-GUI base so people could port it somewhat easily.
Not to be mean, but that statement demonstrates a frankly shocking level of cluelessness. Extensions (mainly adblockers) are the critical feature that distinguishes FF mobile, and are the only reason I have ever been able to convince anyone to switch. I would almost consider adblockers functionality more critical than Javascript support, they should certainly be part of a minimum viable product. I know it's a preview version, but why would anyone in their right mind run this?
Possibly someone in their right mind would run it because they read TFA where it says "primarily aimed at developers and early adopters who want to help us improve Firefox on Android".
I would say that adblock/extension support is a pretty big deal breaker for "developers and early adopters". How are you going to get them to use a crippled browser for any significant period of time?
You're not supposed to use it for an extended period of time, that's why it has "preview" in its name.
I'll be happy to use their other browsers (mainly, Firefox Focus, my default browser) until this one gets more polished, but the moment this one becomes a bit more stable and adds a few more features (adblock support is certainly on top of that list) will be the moment when I not just switch over, but delete every other browser I have installed on my phone. I can't believe a browser (any browser) makes me feel excited in 2019, but this one does.
It's not comprehensive, but I prefer the strategy of publicly releasing the information as they have it available, even if it means it often raises more questions.
Even if they don't have the entire transition planned out, I think it was important for Mozilla to communicate their Android dev focus was gonna shift to GeckoView, from existing apps, to allow external devs, and customers to have a better plan, even if they don't have the add on strategy and timeline fully fleshed out.
The alternative is waiting a few months to know any of this was happening.
> I think it was important for Mozilla to communicate their Android dev focus was gonna shift to GeckoView, from existing apps
Focus has already shifted for quite some time, though - the current Firefox for Android ("Fennec") code base has already been in maintenance mode since the end of 2017, i.e. over 1½ years, including a few months at the start of 2018 were almost nobody was regularly working on it at all other than watching Bugzilla for any immediate priority bugs and reacting to those in case any happened.
They said they were "currently" finalising their transition plans in February, so I think it's reasonable to assume that the plans have been finalised by now.
Same here. I do not know why the heck Mozilla is tiptoeing from just hiring Raymond and making uBlock an integral part of firefox.
Note that they already included something similar, which is SafeBrowsing(TM), that is maintained by google. Technically, it is exactly the same concept. But uBlock is actively request by 99% of their users, while safeBrowser(TM) fingerprinting is mostly disabled by half.
I think the better comparison than SafeBrowsing for uBlock would be Firefox's Enhanced Tracking Protection, which is on by default. This uses data maintained by Disconnect.
Not really. Advanced users can selectively disable Javascript/frames/media etc on a per-site basis. Also the user has the control to allow trackers on site they care about and know the consequences.
I am sorry but tracking protection on mozilla as it is now (only enabled by default on private windows, and hapening with no user knowledge/information/learning oportunities) is a lame clutch.
uBlock Origin and uMatrix in particular are fantastic addons, but I think the UX is still too much for the average casual non-technical user.
I wish they'd focus more on getting the UX of containers up to snuff. They are almost there, but still far enough away to make addons like Multi-Account Containers (MAC) something I cannot recommend to my parents.
Here is what I mean: Suppose I want to keep my use of example.com separate in it's own Example container. How do I do that?
1) Click the MAC icon in the toolbar, then click the "+" button.
2) Enter 'Example', pick an icon or color, then click okay.
3) Open a new Example container.
4) Navigate to example.com in the Example container
5) Click the MAC icon in the toolbar, then check "Always open in Example"
6) Close the tab.
7) Open a new tab, and browse to example.com
8) Click "Remember my decision"
9) Click "Open in Example container"
This is nuts. I can't recommend this workflow to anybody.
What's the difference of shipping a feature off, and shipping with support for an extension (on both firefox and Google's chrome store sites!) that can be installed? At this point we are just discussing semantics. Install vs Turn on.
Pure speculation, I wonder if their contract with Google forbids them from having ad blocking as part of the browser. At least if I was a company paying another company millions of dollars I wouldn't let them block my income stream in their product.
Anyone remember when Firefox extensions broke recently? I thought it was a rather horrible experience.
If the new Firefox Preview can natively block advertisements, whitelist sites, disable third party cookies, prevent and hide social trackers, block anti-ad-blockers, etc. etc. then I agree that extensions are kind of useless, and I understand Mozilla's point.
However, I see the lack of extension support detrimental to my freedoms as a user, since it means I no longer can control what the software hides for me, nor what it broadcasts about me to the abyss of waste that is the advertising industry; I will have to trust the browser, and the lack of extension support is a rather untrustworthy property to begin with.
This release is what they termed MVP. Everything after it is post-MVP. It means minimum viable product. In my personal opinion, a lot more functionality was included than what most would call an MVP.
The big flash announcement is to get early adopters for testing. There's no reason to delay testing until the MVP is ready, as long as testers remain aware that Firefox Preview is a preview that shouldn't be expected to already have all features implemented.
It's just that, for me and a bunch of other people, we would be happy to test a preview if we could compare it against our current browsers. We can't, because
advertising is an abomination that destroys the utility of the internet
I really feel like this should be the top comment; losing addon support in FF on Android is about the only change I can envision that would cause me to stop using it. It's great as it is, and there is no amount of tinkering they could do to it that might possibly make up for the loss of addons.
Same here. I was so happy to see this and I just went ahead and installed it in a heart-beat. Tried to find the addons page, couldn't find it, found your comment instead and uninstalled it in the next.
I hope they add support for addons otherwise there isn't much use for it at least to me.
uBO is the main reason I use Firefox on Android, as well.
With that said, what sites are you visiting? It could be that I simply don't visit sites with any ads, but I gave a few of my daily sites a spin in Firefox Preview and didn't notice any ads.
Agreed. I hastily installed FF Preview and then immediately uninstalled it when I couldn't find where to install uBlock. They shouldn't have launched, or made an announcement, without some form of adblocking (native or plugin).
I understand that it's a testing release, but they stand to lose out on many testers and users. While I am perfectly willing to be a guinea pig and use this as my daily driver, I am passionately unwilling to browse with ads (especially on a mobile device where data is more expensive).
I am likely part of the vast majority of potential testers/users. There probably won't be a "hey, we support plugins/blocking now" announcement and, even if there will be, it probably won't be as visible as this announcement.
Did you actually try it on a website with lots of ads? I've been using focus for the last 6 months or so and the tracker blocking also blocks many ads for me. Also there is blockada which blocks ads system wide.
Firefox was kinda slow sometimes with too much JS on the page on my old phone but still overall usable, and that was a J3 (replaced just last week), so I'd say that's pretty good. Great and lag-free on my s10+ so far. Not convinced optimization should be a priority over features and addons.
I would also appreciate if they worked on restoring the original addon capability they had up to 2016 (where you add keyboard shortcuts) before they go showboating.
If there is one thing I miss from current mobile Firefox, it's text reflow. Opera mobile did it perfectly.
I want to be able to zoom in or out and have text reflowed to the screen width. This makes the web magnitudes nicer to use on a small screen. No cut off lines, no 10 lines per screen. Just convenient freedom over the primary tool we interact on the web: Text.
Just yesterday I thought it is really annoying that mobile browsers put the address bar on top, even worse if it is moving in and out. That way it is impossible come close to a native look and feel. Now FF puts the address bar on bottom. Quite a suprise but I think it is a pretty smart change.
Exactly. I wanted to use Firefox on mobile but Brave is so much more convenient since it puts the bar at the bottom. Reaching my hand up becomes annoying since I might have to use two hands to not drop my phone.
Another thing that annoyed me about the previous mobile Firefox was the 'x' in the URL bar closed the bar instead of clearing it like Brave. I had to unlearn months of muscle memory since it was a habit of mine. Maybe it doesn't matter since it's just an issue after switching.
I love the address bar at the bottom. It feels so much better on a mobile device. As a whole, this version is much nicer to use than the previous versions.
My two main gripes are the default search engine and telemetry. Both of these options should be set by the user on first launch. I don't want to use Google and I don't want to send data to Mozilla.
I can't understand how UX designers come up with the idea that putting stuff on the top of the screen* is a good thing, and even keep reiterating through that. That's an honest question, anybody knows what's the motivation behind that?
* or, places that are hard to reach for most users
Legacy design and use patterns. The top of the screen used to make more sense than today.
Mobile-first design really hasn't taken hold for many UX web designers (and/or the organizations haven't adapted). Relatively speaking, large phones where it's difficult to reach the top weren't popular until recently. Even mobile apps are just starting to put navigation towards the bottom.
In addition to familiarity as others have mentioned: when you scroll a site, it feels natural to "scroll away" the UI on the top. If you have UI on the bottom, and you want to hide it when scrolling, that doesn't feel as natural.
It's an unbelievably untapped aspect for differentiating browsers. However, instead of the address bar what would be the best experience would be to have navigation buttons on the bottom. Speed dials, back and forward, tab management should be front and center and at the bottom, since that's actually what you're using the most when browsing on mobile.
Don't bother sending feedback to the email address mentioned in the blog: it bounces.
We're writing to let you know
that the group you tried to
contact (firefox-preview-feedback)
may not exist, or you may not
have permission to post
messages to the group...
I'm a happy user of both Firefox Focus and Firefox mobile, I don't know what could they improve but I'll give it a look.
About Firefox focus, I love to have it as default browser when opening links, it gives me a lot of confidence to know that the session will be completely destroyed afterward. I'd miss it if it were to be discontinued.
A neat little thing I've discovered after installing the Preview is that Focus is still here.
You can toggle between the modes in one tap, and if you're in a private mode, opening links from other apps behaves just like Focus (minus the convenient "erase everything" button, at least for now).
It's the best of both worlds, I don't have to use a second one for those rare scenarios in which I want cookies (like remaining logged into HN).
One reason I like FF on Android better than Chrome:
The Chrome user agent has your device model, even in incognito mode.
If you have a relatively rare Android device in your market, I think you can be tracked fairly uniquely on that alone. I was creeped out when I discovered this.
I would say it gets worse than this though. "Moto G (5) Plus" is probably pretty common. As are Pixels and many Samsung offerings. But since android has such a broad spectrum of devices, if you happened to get one that's more rare, you are sort of advertising that all over the web, and you will be one of a small number of people doing it.
Wow, this preview is incredibly good! I was not expecting such a good quality from a preview app (given how bad some of the other tries from Firefox have been on Android).
And you know what absolutely clinches it for me? That you moved the address bar to the bottom!! Just like Edge on Windows mobile - that's the best position for address bar IMO.
I also hope you do something about better battery management on the android app.
I love containers, but the lack of ability to sync them really annoys me. Every time I get a new computer (or re-install, or setup a VPN to test with, etc) I have to manually create all my rules to always open my bank stuff in a special container, and always open my work sites in their container, etc. It seems like these rules should just sync.
Totally agree. I've also had it just completely forget all my "always open in container" settings in the past. But that hasn't occurred recently, so hopefully those days are over.
Me too - there doesn't even seem to be a way to generate a file that you could open on another computer? Having them sync via Firefox would be really good - even more so on mobile.
Me too. It is classic Mozilla. They have such big blind spots. Even after the certificate debacle, which wiped containers for some people, they still appear to have no plans to sync them.
Not fond of the bottom address bar, I guess I'm not used to it because I always tap the top-right corner to switch tabs... I just need to get it in my muscle-memory, not a big deal. I still cross my fingers this will be configurable at some point.
My main gripe is that I feel like bookmarks are now a second-class citizen in Firefox Preview, they're not as accessible. I could see my mobile bookmarks right on the new tab screen in Firefox, now I have to press ⋮ > Your Library > Bookmarks and then click the bookmark I want.
4 clicks, while it took only one (or two) before with bookmarks as the default panel on my homepage on Firefox "classic".
Bookmarks have become even more first-class now - just swipe up from your address bar anytime. Try it now ( in the Firefox preview).
Also, I feel the opposite regarding the address bar position - give it a few days, you'll absolutely love it. Edge on Windows Mobile had the same position, and it was a very nifty and time-saving UX. You can now use the phone one-handed more easily, even for small-handed people.
> Bookmarks have become even more first-class now - just swipe up from your address bar anytime. Try it now ( in the Firefox preview).
Swiping up seems to only give me the option to share and/or bookmark the page, and in Fennec those things were already possible through the main menu, so not much of an improvement (though I suppose swiping might be a little easier than precisely hitting the menu button).
Actually viewing my bookmarks has indeed become more cumbersome, though, and that is what your parent comment is referring to: In Fennec bookmarks were accessible through the about:home UI, which appears both when opening a new tab and when tapping the URL bar to enter URL edit mode, both of which feel quicker than "Open main menu -> Open library -> Open bookmarks" in Fenix.
Any UI element that you can't find by searching is not first class. In particular, if there's some gesture you have to randomly guess exists, it's a hidden feature for advanced users only.
There's a thumb that indicates dragability. They're about as hidden as a feature in a menu - that's not great, but it's a lot better than I understood before. (The preview took several hours to download and install on my phone. It's big, but it's not that big that it should've taken that long.)
Funnily enough, top-address-bar has been one of my two biggest UX gripes about Android FF. Especially since iOS FF has the bottom adddress bar (which seems like a UI decision independent of their reliance on Safari's engine), and is so much nicer to use.
With you on the bookmarks though. Especially since they're putting this new "Collections" feature front-and-centre but it seems to have no integration with Your Library. The whole "Tab Groups", etc. paradigm has been tried time and time again: the reason it never sticks isn't because it's a bad idea, it's because it's never integrated with idiomatic browser features.
I'm a huge fan of the navigation bar on the bottom. I've missed it since I had to give up Windows Phone. It's hard to believe that neither Apple or Google ever added the option. I can't think of a single reason it would be better on top, It's simply harder to reach and less usable.
Brave on Android has had bottom-bar for quite a while, it was the reason I switched from Firefox. I would switch back, but as there is no add-on support...
Some feedback: If you are going to market your browser as privacy focused, it has to block ads by default. As far as I can this one does not block ads at all. Good initial experience but please block ads.
>If you are going to market your browser as privacy focused, it has to block ads by default
A privacy-focused browser should care about the privacy part of the online advertisement, which is tracking. Completely preventing the site from showing any ads is a different feature.
Considering that advertisements are a common vector for installing spyware and malware, I think adblocking and antitracking are two sides of the same coin.
No, these are not the same and oughtn't be conflated. I'm perfectly happy seeing ads that aren't targeted to me personally based on my browsing history.
Ads on, say, Stack Overflow or HN or whatever, that target nerds ("great hosting!", "3d printing tech!", "legos!") would be perfectly doable without tracking each of us personally.
It's interesting to think about how these sorts of niche sites which have a narrow enough demographic to have valuable ad space are more or less being entirely eaten alive by networks with incredibly wide demographics. The centralized networks have to resort to building a panopticon to replicate segmenting which used to be natural at the network layer and the niche sites have to resort to playing along because of how powerful that panopticon is.
I've been using it and it has been actually pretty good. It already has Firefox Sync and ability to send tabs to different devices. Only thing I miss is the ability to open tabs in background. This was my favorite feature in the previous Firefox for Android.
I've been using Firefox Preview for a while and I like it, especially the bottom navigation bar, but one thing that I hope survives from the old app is the tab queue, which sends links opened from other apps to Firefox in the background without stealing focus from the original app. To me it's a game changer on the level of tabbed browsing and I don't know why all mobile browsers don't have it.
I agree, one of the best parts about FF on android was the queue. I hate the clicking a link, and it forces you to task switch right then to that link. I like to read things, click for more info, and then follow up when I am done. I rate it higher than add-ons and ublock (I use a DNS server that filters out many ads for me already, https://www.nextdns.io/ )
Now if they could just fix Firefox Mobile's abysmal tab management. Chrome Mobile's tab screen is a stack of pages in the Z-axis with the one closest to the user being the most recent tab and so on. Firefox Mobile's is a grid with the number of rows and columns being variable depending on screen dimensions. Figuring out which ones you opened in what order is not immediately apparent. It also suffers from the frankly amateur Android programming mistake of varying the swipe limits directly with the width of the screen, so going from portrait to landscape on a 19.5:9 phone screen means dismissing a tab suddenly requires you to swipe over twice as far as it does in portrait mode.
More than once I've found myself saying "oh my god, go away!" after trying and failing three times to swipe an unwanted tab away before remembering I have to drag the damn thing halfway to Timbuktu to dismiss it.
> Now if they could just fix Firefox Mobile's abysmal tab management. Chrome Mobile's tab screen is a stack of pages in the Z-axis with the one closest to the user being the most recent tab and so on. Firefox Mobile's is a grid with the number of rows and columns being variable depending on screen dimensions.
You can change it to a linear list easily. Settings -> General -> Compact Tabs.
Personally I strongly prefer the way Firefox does it. The order is actually pretty simple. Left to right, top to bottom is oldest to newest.
...which does nothing to address the problem of inconsistent UI experience because the setting doesn't affect landscape mode so now it's even less consistent.
- Performance is great. I'm already using it pretty much everywhere.
- Ad blocking is about to become Firefox's killer app, and it was a major PR mistake to release a preview without enough extension support for ad blockers to work. They should have delayed the release, if necessary.
- I wish the QR code reader had been released as a separate app (and on iOS too), but I'm actually quite glad to see Mozilla doing one. I look at my app store for QR code readers, and I'm confronted with a sea of questionable permissions, ads, obvious fake reviews, and tainted makers. I welcome a free QR code reader from a source I know and trust, but you can't build something like that into a browser without either bloating the browser or limiting the reader. It should be spun off into its own app, then allowed to grow.
…but I really don’t like the thing that slides up at the bottom of the screen. It takes the place of content which is 99.99% the reason I’m there. Not to share our bookmark. If I want to do that, I’ll find it in the menu.
And is it just me that really, really needs a fast way to switch tabs to use a browser?
Chrome lets me swipe across the bar at the top of the screen, but with Firefox it’s a tap, a visual scan to find the tab I want, and another tap.
Otherwise I’d switch to this browser yesterday
I like the collections concept, and the home screen.
Also, it's a joke that Google's image search is horrible on Firefox, for no good reason. If you switch the user agent it works fine.
I keep using Opera because of a few small affordances that any browser could implement (and some do, but only Opera does all of them). The main one is text-reflow on zoom. It seems so ridiculous that I have to either stare at microscopic text or pan back and forwards just to be able to read things. Surely actually reading the contents of pages is a primary feature of a browser?
The other one I just can't understand is why not implement pull-to-refresh? Surely that can't be hard?
I know this is just ranting, but it's weird to see browser makers completely re-inventing their products when small, basic things could be fixed in their current versions.
I've been using Firefox on Android for about a year now, and it is great, except one major problem. Google news site (news.google.com). News I believe uses my entire phone's RAM and starts swapping (I am totally guessing, does Android use swap?) because the app will become unresponsive for about 2 full minutes while the page is rendering. Closing and re-opening a tab in this state actually breaks the app FYI (all other tabs freeze as well). Scrolling will give low resolution visuals below the fold. Horrible experience on google news. Actually all google properties are PAINFULLY slow. Is that on purpose Google? I got around it by installing Firefox Focus, and that seems to load google news quite fast, but Focus is like a permanent incognito mode, so that is quite inconvenient in itself. So now I just use Focus for google news and regular Firefox for everything else. Hopefully there will be performance improvements to come. My phone is an older Huawei Honor 8 so maybe I should just buy a new one... but the infrared on it is so great!
Memory management on Android is awful. My music player routinely gets killed; I've tried all options available to me to prevent this.. It's just too difficult for Android to work out "you're listening to music, even though there's no visible ui, so I won't kill it". I understand that there is a whitelist of music apps which don't get killed - so intractable is this problem - but the one I use (Rocket Player) isn't on it.
The killing isn't actually the fault of Android itself, but the smartphone vendors that try to push the battery time metrics to the max. Battery management from Android isn't that bad actually, but the vendors will always find a way to fuck it up. I really liked this insight from "Zombies, Run!" developer: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18901006#18902273
In my case I usually have actually nothing else running and my phone has 4GB of RAM so I am at a loss. I just tried Firefox Preview on Andriod with google news, and it loaded in about 2 seconds. So far so good!
I can't get it to work with my custom certificate authority (which I use to analyse traffic coming from my phone every now and then to see if any apps are leaking personal info). Also, though I know better, I also have some intranet services running with a certificate signed by that authority because the domains are dynamically generated and I can't automate my DNS to get wildcard letsencrypt certificates.
Normal mobile Firefox has their own cert store, so you can import it by clicking a link to the certificate and hitting OK. Other apps use the system certificate store so I have imported my certificate into there as well. Sadly, it still doesn't work.
My specific use case may not be very common, but certificate authorities in BYOD companies aren't uncommon either. I can't use this for my daily driver until I can import my certificate :(
The new system is very interesting though, the idea of separate browsing behaviours between devices can be a game changer if they implement it smoothly.
Thanks, I just subscribed to the issue. Seems like it's blocked by a Bugzilla issue that didn't get updated in five months. I guess it's gonna be a while until I switch browsers.
Wow. Just tried it out and it is fast! It feels more than just 2x as fast as the regular firefox mobile on the same device.
Now just add proper settings (no settings menu yet to disable thirdparty cookies) and add addon support (ublock, skip redirect, cookie autodelete) and I will switch immediately even with smaller bugs
Cool, how about working on that mobile browser you already have? I've been using it for years and it's good but apparently the lack of progress on it is because they abandoned us users of it to focus on this thing.
When quantum came out addon capability on mobile severely regressed and never recovered. This issue to support the context menu API has been open for TWO YEARS.[0] I just want to be able to long press an image and reverse image search it like I used to, is that so much to ask? Yes, there's an addon to do it through the addon menu and then tap the image but it's not the same.
The amount of work to improve Firefox for Android basically meant a rewrite was needed, hence Firefox Preview being the eventually replacement when it's fully ready
We had many discussions around this. The Firefox for Android code base was not in a great condition to maintain backwards compatibility as well as accept a new rendering engine and all of the new Android Components we wanted to introduce to unify of our code bases for different Android-based products.
TL;DR: There was too much cruft built up.
Work should move faster now. We substantially grew our Android team in the last year.
I hope that works out then, I'm just frustrated with the state of mobile as it's been since the regressions. As someone who still thinks dropping XUL from desktop was a mistake (and maybe even mobile now that devices are more powerful) I wish it could've just stayed how it was but I'll just have to make the best of it.
I now have Firefox Preview, Firefox Focus, and Firefox, on my Android phone. I'm not really clear what the strategy is, and future deliverable? I read that Firefox Focus development has stopped, and Firefox Preview will become Firefox on Android. But is Firefox Preview a whole new thing or is it based on what's been learned about Focus? Or?
Also, it's kinda odd but I always have Twitter not fully loading on Firefox (on Android), where Firefox Focus always works fine. Typical is it hangs with spinners, if I reload it'll say "something went wrong" and the in-line retry/reload button doesn't work, same error, but reloading the whole page sometimes works. So far I haven't had this problem with Preview.
Does anyone suffer from degrading image/video quality on some websites while using Firefox Android? I have this issue with Facebook. I don't want the Facebook app installed on my phone (mostly to block notifications and for privacy reasons) so I access FB via Firefox but images look terrible and every video I click opens in a separate tab instead of in-page (at least I can download it tho).
Only solution I have is using user-agent switcher to change my UA to either Chrome or Firefox for iOS (which is what I picked to keep Firefox in my UA) but this breaks other stuff on some websites.
Question is, how to get Facebook and other sites to stop serving shit quality to Firefox users? How is this fair?
One option is to attempt (despite of all of the obstacles they might put in place..) to increase Firefox's market share, perhaps by spreading the word about privacy concerns and/or ux benefits.
Another might be adblocker-esque trusted and shared community-maintained lists along with an add-on (does this exist?) for per-domain user agent mocking. Hopefully with enough adoption (i.e integrated into ublock) that it reduces the value proposition of investing the time.
Thirdly, continuing to call out the companies who do this sort of thing.
But why would market share matter if the browser is more than capable of handling whatever content a site serves. I don't see this relevant to the issue.
I think the fact that Firefox doesn't announce the device's model in its UA could be a factor so some sites fall back to their lower quality version by default but it sucks that we can't force the higher quality version.
The situation didn't change with this another version of Firefox for Android (and I have all of them):
1) A webpage with many and mostly made out of grid and flex elements does tender waaaaay too slowly and ugly (low quality artifacts on scrolling)
2) Animations like of the mere max-height to unhide content perform like garbage, as if it was performed by the CPU alone
And I already did report this behaviour even with this version, let's see how it will turn out.
Out of this experience, expecting mobile web apps to perform well enough is meaningless, lag and rendering artifacts will fill your patience meanwhile on Chrome like browsers everything is waaaay smoother.
After a few years of using Brave on Android, I switched back to Firefox, since I now have a powerful enough device that the bad cold boot performance can be ignored. A few missing things:
- Chromium's zoom on tap is really more intelligent. Hitting the [-] on HN is much easier on in Brave than Firefox.
- The gesture to switch tab on Chromium is also more comfortable. That's a missed opportunity on Firefox Preview as well.
- I wish there was a way for uBlock-Origin to integrate better on a webpage. Disabling javascript makes many websites much more usable (disabling most on-load popups). It's one more tap to do that on Firefox than on Brave.
Last time I tried FF on Android, the Font Rendering was abysmal :(
I've always been a faithful FF user on Desktop and I wish it would be a good alternative on mobile too. Let's see where this Preview goes.
Most of the time it feels great already (sometimes it freezes for a few moments), but does someone know how/if it is possible to add Progressive Web Apps to the desktop with this Firefox for Android Preview?
Feedback : When you are making a new Firefox for Android, please fix this small problem but personally a big annoyance : I should not need to open a whole new page before trying to open a new tab. Just add a plus button next to the address bar, that's it. Currently the workflow just disturbs me in all Firefox browsers for mobile - you have to click the tabs button, then the 'Plus' button (or click the settings menu and then the new tab - both require two taps with some delay, for something that should be just one quick tap).
I'm confused about your comment, just was pleasantly surpised by testing this new Firefox Preview, that only one click was required to open a new tab:
1) Tap the tabs button
2) You're already on the new tab, so either
a) Search in the search bar: this opens your search results in this current new-tab (you can also type an address there and search see your recent history)
b) Click on one of the links saved in a "Collection": this opens in this new tab.
Thanks. For the old Firefox for Android that's not the case, but for the new one that's an improvement (I actually didn't notice in my quick stint with it). However, they can further improve it by having the focus on the address/search bar by default. It's currently still two taps before I can start typing. Having to tap two times is my major annoyance with almost all the mobile browsers.
Yup. Even though in Firefox Android 'regular' that's at the same page, as you noted it's not always that fast, especially for low end phones. But with this new Firefox Preview even the Plus button is not at the same 'position', and the new page opening up with animation takes even more time.
See my other comment, the "+" button is useless is Firefox Preview, there's not a single use case where you need it. It was probably added for people who didn't notice that the address/search bar is already here, or with "muscle memory" of searching for a "+"
At the time you opened the tab menu, you're already in a new tab.
Horizontal space is somewhat of a premium though, especially if things like reader mode or buttons provided by addons as available in the current Firefox will return to the URL bar once more.
And the current design for Fenix doesn't help in that regard by having quite a bit more white space - the tab counter and menu button take up approx. 50 % more width than they do in the current Firefox.
Ok, tried it. Almost no settings, no tab previews, no addons, not even about:config. So far unusable for me. And unfortunatelly as seless as Foxus - it's effectivelly Focus v2, so I uninstalled it. I hope some provacy features and speedups will eventually be backported to our awesome Firefox which I use daily. Instead of Focus v2, I would like to see Firefox as an alternative default webview for Android.
> In order to have a strong foundation for the next generation of mobile Firefox browsers and put all our efforts and resources in GeckoView, work on Firefox Focus will currently be on hold. Don’t worry though, you can still keep using our privacy browser, Focus, as well as our current Firefox for Android.
I think this is a typo, and meant to say that Firefox for Android development is on hold, not Focus.
Not a typo; we had not formally announced that Focus was on hold while we bootstrap the Firefox Preview / GeckoView / Mozilla Android Components ecosystem. Now we have. :)
With a new look and UI, a walkthrough maybe warranted. Took me a while to find the bookmark button. And the color scheme on the button itself is not as intuitive, does not present the idea on first viewing whether a page is bookmarked or not. But overall, looks great and works fast too. I am sure more devlopments are yet to come.
For now, looks promising to be a challenger to the Chrome monopoly.
You are not currently able to Sync to a custom server in Firefox Preview. Doing that requires access to about:config which is not set up in the release version.
Firefox sync is amazing and one of the reasons I never got hooked on chrome (I tried using it for a full year). I often do research on iOS for coding related topics. Send tab to device - boom, it’s there when I need it and I’ve got my text editor open.
I think FF should implement an add-blocker which allows me to say which adds I like and which I don't.
Many important services like news-papers can only survive if they get add-revenue. They also contain adds in their print-edition and people still subscribe to them.
So I don't mind adds in general just adds which have no relevance to me.
1. It doesn't properly "Follow device theme" (as per Settings) - I had to switch it to Dark manually;
2. Zooming text doesn't work on some pages, and on others it doesn't make the text rewrap. That's a pet peeve of mine as far as mobile browsers go. Only a handful gets this right (Opera, Yandex).
Preview just lost 3 opened tabs replacing them with about:blank. Could be
out-of-memory condition or smth else, but that doesn't give me trust. I'll stay with an old version for now
Very hopeful for the future when it works and supports arbitrary add-ons though (containers pls!)
So how is this new Firefox for Android different than the Firefox I have installed on my Android right now? Will I automatically get upgraded to this when it rolls out or is it a separate product? It would be nice to have that explained on the page/blog post.
Why are they breaking their own stuff over and over again?!
I updated their browser on Android and after the update it started hanging, refusing to load any website without a restart and eating up all the RAM?
Why can't they invest in testers? WHY?
Can they please provide a way to close all tabs instead of always having at least a blank one open. I'm probably just OCD on this but it's the most annoying thing I found about Firefox on Android compared to Chrome when I start using it.
Wow, usability is so much better - dark theme, support for Samsung OneUI, search on bottom. Full release will be great (and used by 0.00001% of droid users).
PS: using FF mobile for 3 years exclusively. Googlenet can go in the known direction.
Mozilla should do a deal with Huawei now when the trade war is raging. Hard Chinese money, desperate for a high quality Chrome alternative browser, might be better than wishing Google keeps paying for the default search engine spot.
Firefox Preview is dope. Hot off the shelf, and it's as swift as a fox. Maybe hopeful but I feel this browser is on fire. Now just need to work on the ux like the button for `read` mode. Bye, G.
reinventing by not even providing pull down to refresh as option? so much for Firefox customization, lacking for years such basic feature
and don't tell me about buggy add-ons as substitute
also by my experience it was crashing on regular sites and had problems with repeated words/characters and jumpy cursor in text fields making even writing comment on hacker needs impossible
I mean first fix such horrible bugs and provide basic features before you start doing something else
I use Firefox on desktop, but I am not really masochist to use it on Android
It seems highly unlikely that Google cares enough about suggestion data that they'd pay more for suggestion traffic than for just the searches.
It is much more likely that users expect search suggestions to work out of the box and some will bounce if they try a new browser that doesn't do that.
The new Firefox for Android should eventually have roughly the same feature set as the old one. It's faster because it uses a whole new technology stack, not because they decided not to add unneeded cruft, whatever that means.
I wish that were true. But from other software redesigns and improvements, I learned that new designs often come with simplifications and reduction of functionality. Missing about:config and very simple Settings page is frightening me. Firefox and Mozilla saved the world from IE monopoly and it was always targeting power users but I fear that might change. :( So far I am happy with mobile FF but so far pretty unhappy with this preview. Almost everyone talks about bottom address bar (which after clicking moves on top anyway) and the speed. I am alergic to oversimplification ala new apple designs. I fear of: "We've reinvented mobile browsing. Now there is one big blowing button and an animation of colorful unicorns where you can customize the speed of movement and size of its horn. applause It loads 2x times faster but you can't configure anything else because it's using our next-gen AI which learns your habits and automatically enables pull to refresh after after 50 swipes down (no way to disable) and starts blocking some ads (except those participating in OurSafeAD(tm) program) once it detects from your eye movement you are trying to avoid looking at them"
Like others have said, uBlock Origin ( or solid alternative; uMatrix, etc ) at this point is a prerequisite for any browser.
I am not testing something that puts me in danger and throws me into the festering garbage dumpster that internet is these days without it. It's like testing a car that doesn't have brakes yet.
Pi-hole at the DNS level, ublock origin and fingerprint protection at the browser level.
If the latter two are missing because I'm testing a beta browser which is very likely to a) deliver them and b) help defend against a chrome monoculture, I feel alright about sshing into a VPS to update pi-hole and then taking it for a spin.
Tell me how am I supposed to test add-ons on this Firefox as a developer before the release then.
Edit : And again, most of my work if not all related to Firefox, I do on the Nightly build. I expect things to break, but this preview ( of which there have been builds for a while already ) is a non-starter.
These builds have been available and in development for months now. They are announced at this time for 'early adopters and developers' ( EXACTLY us ) and still not even a hint of add-ons, or any obvious / apparent interest in them from Mozilla.
The only way to use uBlock Origin and / or uMatrix ( which again, many of us argue are essential, on top of add-on development itself ) on Android today is Firefox. Yet there have been nothing but vague replies these past months about when development from Mozilla will pay any attention to this, arguably its biggest differentiator and advantage compared to the spyware army of Chromium / Chrome clones on the biggest platform accessing the internet today.
These preview builds have been available for months, not just a couple of days.
Nothing I or my co-workers can actually test yet in them.
No official statement about add-on support which should be at the forefront of development in any Firefox version, the best we get is vague replies about it coming later.
Add extensions support and disable telemetry/remote-control by default (pushing updates where you control the code is remote control, don't even try to argue against that one).
> disable telemetry/remote-control by default (pushing updates where you control the code is remote control, don't even try to argue against that one).
They shouldn't be sending me to the Play Store ITFP.
I can't use Play because I've got no GApps in my phone, so I can't try their app unless I find a copy "somewhere" and convince myself it hasn't been poisoned. I got a reasonably up-to-date Firefox through APKPure, and later on after watching that 35C3 talk [1], I unzipped and grepped all those saved .apks to find the APKPure app itself and Firefox and LingoDeer had the same traces of Facebook's SDK in them. So that's off the table, huh? The ones that I saved from older phones after having gottten them through Play were all fine, but I can't update those without grabbing another phone and letting Google ... play in it. <ducks>
Just the other day I asked the Waterfox team for an apk and an md5sum, for the same reason-- though I'd settle for the md5sum alone! But Mozilla has resources WF can barely dream of, and it apparently intends to be a champion for privacy, so this is kinda sad.
If you have a phone without GApps, you're either in China (which has its own app store ecosystems) or not Mozilla's target audience for their binaries.
Again, resources. My workstation is still waiting to get torn down to have the smoke scrubbed out; my desk is torn down and cleaned already but still waiting for me to have a new place to put it. My room didn't burn but there's no electricity and the whole place is not habitable; by the time it is, it won't be my room anyway.
The 4GB laptop isn't very good for compiling large projects, because running WF needs much of that-- and then, just linking libxul.so needs almost all of it. On the side, maybe I also care a little bit about not wasting the energy since I wouldn't be customizing it at all. On the other side, my software compilation experience perfectly matches my desire to ever do it: 100% for Linux, 0% for Android.
Thank you for the link. I went looking for that in the past but gave up, apparently too soon.
Still no pull to refresh. They really don't want users to adopt their browser. Literally every single other mobile Web browser supports it.
Yet Mozilla has some ideological stance that it breaks web interaction (with what, the 0.0001% of browser that target Firefox above Safari or Chrome on mobile).
Pull-to-refresh certainly is catching on (I expect my smartphone-addicted parents will discover it within the next 5 years), but I can also understand if there are some reservations about implementing it.
What should happen when the user is interacting with the Android device via a non-touch input device, such as a mouse with a scroll wheel? Scroll-wheel-up-to-refresh?
One of the worst edge cases is on sites with infinite scroll. Having to scroll up 47 pages in order to refresh is not great. It is also nice to refresh a page without losing one's place on it. For these reasons, I would like to see the refresh button remain, even if pull-to-refresh is implemented.
I've been using Preview as my main mobile browser (switched from Firefox Focus as my main when Mozilla announced they've abandoned Focus).
The things I miss:
* Firefox Focus had a very quick way to send a page to a different browser "Open in " and I'm pretty sure it actually just listed the browsers there in the menu. None of the hassling with the share menu that takes forever to load and forever to search through. I really hate using the share menu on android. Somehow it's gotten even worse and side scrolls now. I don't want to sign in to my Google account in Firefox on android, but if you set firefox as your default all the login redirects go there. I think on Focus you could just tap "Open page in Chrome" and it would just punt it along and everything worked when needed.
* Lastpass app annoyances. Lastpass just matches the Firefox app itself rather than the site I'm viewing. Which is annoying but not a huge deal. I'm not sure whether lastpass worked in Focus though. Focus was like a staging area before going to a full browser.
Overall I'm pretty happy with Preview. I really liked using Focus though where it worked like a "firewall" where I could decide whether I actually wanted links opened by other apps to go into my browsing history or not.
I really liked the way I learned to use Focus and I'm sad it's been abandoned. It was like "Open all links in Private mode first and then decide if you actually give enough of a shit to go further". Focus was small and easy to learn to trust.
I've never wanted that. I really don't think this is the one think holding back firefox popularity on mobile. But luckily, firefox on android does support extensions:
Android is the standard, more or less, for touch interfaces. They have significantly more devices than ios, and no other touch device is more than a blip compared to those two.
And to anyone trying to convert your friends "mobile supports ublock" is usually all I have to say.
Edit:unblock == uBlock Origin (sorry, on my phone)