Meet the browser: Firefox Next

By bogas04
in Web Browser Discussion & Support

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Boo Berry

Posted
Posted
Just now, Gary7 said:

If so then you have no problems. It is not known if Cyberfox will permit extensions past release 56 or not? They may have to come up with their own Extension source which has been discussed.

I have no problems right now in Firefox, I only use one extension (Download Cleaner Lite) and it's already been ported as a WebExtension. :p But yeah, they might have to go the Pale Moon route and fully fork off. Waterfox will likely still be a straight re-brand.

Grand Master

+Gary7 Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted
2 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

Uhh, how? From what I'm seeing from the Cyberfox website and using the portable version is that it's still re-branded Firefox compiled in a different compiler and a different skin. Even if it has some cosmetic and feature changes, it's still largely still based on upstream code.

It is based on Firefox but the coding is different. It is not a clone.

Grand Master

Boo Berry

Posted
Posted (edited)

I didn't say Pale Moon was a clone, it's a fork. Nonetheless, I found the Cyberfox GitHiub page and will take a look at the changes they make but so far from the commits it looks like mostly upstream changes, with a few changes here and there. If anything, it's a fork too.

Grand Master

Boo Berry

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm aware of that too. Looks like Classic Theme Restorer was integrated into Cyberfox so yeah, that'll definitely give them issues by the end of 2017 unless they fully fork off like Pale Moon... or just go with the changes.

 

But there's still ample time for developers to port their extensions, if possible (which depends on the APIs), to WebExtensions... that said, XUL-based extensions like Classic Theme Restorer likely won't be coming back. Honestly, there's a chance Firefox's userbase will greatly plunge due to these changes...

 

It's not looking like a good future for Firefox users, that's for sure.

Grand Master

+Gary7 Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted

Cyberfox Web Browser is a web browser based on Mozilla Firefox with the intent of being fast, stable & reliable. It ships with many customizable options allowing you to personalize your web browsing experience. Cyberfox Features: Uses own profile system Compatible with Mozilla Firefox extensions Removed features (Telemetry, Health-report, Sponsored tiles & other components that collected information) Many new features built in. Choice between Australia or classic style. Powered by Mozilla

 

http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/cyberfox_64_bit_web_browser.html

Grand Master

oldtimefighter

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Boo Berry said:

I'm aware of that too. Looks like Classic Theme Restorer was integrated into Cyberfox so yeah, that'll definitely give them issues by the end of 2017 unless they fully fork off like Pale Moon... or just go with the changes.

 

But there's still ample time for developers to port their extensions, if possible (which depends on the APIs), to WebExtensions... that said, XUL-based extensions like Classic Theme Restorer likely won't be coming back. Honestly, there's a chance Firefox's userbase will greatly plunge due to these changes...

 

It's not looking like a good future for Firefox users, that's for sure.

I really don't understand comments like this... Firefox's user base already purged a while ago and mostly went to Chrome which already uses WebExtensions. LOL Relatively few people actually care about XUL-based extensions or the classic UX (or the forcing out of Brendan Eich). They are just a loud but small minority. Chrome won (is winning now) because of better performance and stability as they were able to implement multi-process first. Marketing is a factor also of course for Chrome. The other thing users care about? A more secure browser (perceived) which Chrome brings (in part) with signed WebExtensions which Firefox is now trying to do.

 

Personally, I will stick with Firefox because it is open source and supports an open and free Internet better than any other browser (and add-on support on mobile). The fact I am already using to many products and services from Google also favors Firefox. Firefox will also be a niche browser... They had a big start but that was only because MS dropped the ball with IE and Firefox was there to fill the vacuum.

Edited by oldtimefighter
Grand Master

Steven P. Administrators

Posted
  • Administrators
Posted
4 minutes ago, Gary7 said:

I will stick with Firefox as well as it seems that Cyberfox will be affected, just will have to wait and see. Chrome is also winning or won as Google has tons of Money whereas Mozilla does not.:)

1 billion dollars in 100 dollar bills weighs 20,000 pounds, and that equals 10 (American) tons, so your comment is correct, they do have tons of money. :)

  • Draconian Guppy and +Gary7
  • Like 2
Grand Master

Boo Berry

Posted
Posted

Sadly, there's a lot of oblivious people out there without any idea what WebExtensions are, what XUL extensions are or what any of this stuff will mean once it lands. They're the type that installs extensions they heard about, and just leave it as-is (the set it and forget it mentality). Those are the people that when Firefox 57 (or whenever the change is pushed) will get the rude awakening of their extensions getting disabled/removed and that they can no longer customize the UI like they could during the XUL/XPCOM-era of extensions.

 

A lot of the people I know that use Firefox over Chrome only for it's UI customization capabilities. Without that, what other real reason would the average user have to keep using Firefox over Chrome? That's what I meant about the userbase likely going to drop more. There's a lot of people that have stuck with Firefox for that one reason alone (as long as there is/was a workaround for Australis, e.g. Classic Theme Restorer).

 

Funny thing is, I seem to remember that the majority of revenue a few years back for the Mozilla Foundation came from Google due to the search agreement they had. When that deal expired, Mozilla went with Yahoo. I wonder if they regret that one? :p

 

Personally, this change won't have any effect on me. I only use one extension which is already available as a WebExtension - I look forward to Firefox 57 (or whenever it happens)!

Grand Master

+Gary7 Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted
23 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

Funny thing is, I seem to remember that the majority of revenue a few years back for the Mozilla Foundation came from Google due to the search agreement they had. When that deal expired, Mozilla went with Yahoo. I wonder if they regret that one?

It did but then Google came up with Chrome and that is when Firefox started to copy everything Chrome was about and now they are taking it further. On a side note The Developer of Tab Mix Plus has released the source code for his extension. The customization of Firefox will end with this. I used Slimjet for awhile, it is Chromium Based and is somewhat customization and has extensions.

Grand Master

Boo Berry

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Gary7 said:

It did but then Google came up with Chrome

The Google agreement was some years past Chrome's first release, but before Australis landed, as I recall. I'll look up the exact date.

 

EDIT: 2014, sounds about right, yeah. :p

Grand Master

+Gary7 Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted
3 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

The Google agreement was some years past Chrome's first release, but before Australis landed, as I recall. I'll look up the exact date.

It was extended until Yahoo came around.

1 minute ago, Boo Berry said:

It was the beginning (well, the Brendan Eich thing too, but I didn't really care about that). I've actually grown to like Australis. :p

I hate it. maybe I will try Edge...:D

Grand Master

oldtimefighter

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

Sadly, there's a lot of oblivious people out there without any idea what WebExtensions are, what XUL extensions are or what any of this stuff will mean once it lands. They're the type that installs extensions they heard about, and just leave it as-is (the set it and forget it mentality). Those are the people that when Firefox 57 (or whenever the change is pushed) will get the rude awakening of their extensions getting disabled/removed and that they can no longer customize the UI like they could during the XUL/XPCOM-era of extensions.

 

A lot of the people I know that use Firefox over Chrome only for it's UI customization capabilities. Without that, what other real reason would the average user have to keep using Firefox over Chrome? That's what I meant about the userbase likely going to drop more. There's a lot of people that have stuck with Firefox for that one reason alone (as long as there is/was a workaround for Australis, e.g. Classic Theme Restorer).

 

Funny thing is, I seem to remember that the majority of revenue a few years back for the Mozilla Foundation came from Google due to the search agreement they had. When that deal expired, Mozilla went with Yahoo. I wonder if they regret that one? :p

 

Personally, this change won't have any effect on me. I only use one extension which is already available as a WebExtension - I look forward to Firefox 57 (or whenever it happens)!

The move from XUL based extensions to Webextensions will have no effect on like 99% of users. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill. LOL No matter what Firefox does they will never overcome Chrome just because of Google's superior marketing position.

 

Why would Mozilla regret the decision to take Yahoo's money? I am assuming the amount was more. LOL Did you mean Yahoo? Yes, they regret the deal.

Grand Master

oldtimefighter

Posted
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

It was the beginning (well, the Brendan Eich thing too, but I didn't really care about that). I've actually grown to like Australis. :p

Dude, no one cares about Brendan Eich being forced out (he should have been).

 

52 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

Then Mozilla ended the agreement to go into the agreement with Yahoo. Which was rather dumb, IMO.

Wait... Why was that dumb?

Grand Master

oldtimefighter

Posted
Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

Because it's Yahoo. Does that not seem like a major downgrade from Google?

All that matters is the deal was more money. Downgrade? Irrelevant... Anyone just like me who still wants to use Google for search in Firefox can with two "clicks".

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing