Firefox Quantum changed the entire UI

[Nine Inch Heels]

43 minutes ago, YukiRaven said:

Once I calmed down and found replacements for most of them (some are even better than what I was using), I really started to enjoy it.

Thouroughly agreed. Though I didn't really get upset, I simply find it annoying when things update all on their own without requiring any manner of confirmation on my end. I never looked into disabling updates or anything for Firefox either, so I can't blame Mozilla for that.

[Gez]

18 minutes ago, UAC-Janitor said:

Why don't you guys just use chrome?

I feel that this is the question Mozilla is asking their users. "Stop using Firefox. Why do you persist in using Firefox? What do we need to do for you to stop?"

[Pirx]

43 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

I wonder why some morons think that reshuffling all the controls is a good idea. Makes all the improvements come with a sour taste.

And the fact that NoScript still isn't working is not good at all. This will be the deciding factor for me - if this add-on gets killed, so will Quantum.

 

 

 

 

this. i'm not concerned with various cosmetic changes, as long as the browser works as it did before. now noscript is off, and, most annoyingly, my collection of bookmarks is a mess.

 

speed-wise there is an improvement, particularly with this forum, where the old firefox slowed down to a crawl regularly. now it seems to be about on par with chrome.

[Bottomsup]

9 hours ago, UAC-Janitor said:

Why don't you guys just use chrome? Like what does Mozilla offer that Chrome doesn't?

Google is all about market share and monopolies are never good.
Also FF sources are licensed under GNU GPL, whereas on the other side we can have only chromium sources under infidel BSD-like ones.

[Remilia Scarlet]

8 minutes ago, Quadrops said:

Also FF sources are licensed under GNU GPL

Mostly MPL 2.0*

 

Which yes, is one reason I prefer it.

[Doomkid]

"The less time of day you can give Google, the better"

[snapshot]

This looks better IMO, lot looking like Chrome now which I'm used to at this point, I might even consider moving to Firefox now because chrome ...

 

[Pirx]

13 hours ago, dmg_64 said:

This looks better IMO, lot looking like Chrome now which I'm used to at this point, I might even consider moving to Firefox now because chrome ...

 

 

 

 

 

interesting. from a view of my task manager, with exactly this one thread opened in both firefox and chrome:

firefox (5 processes)  635 mb, 1.5 - 2.5 % cpu and 3.5 - 4.5 % gpu

chrome  (10 processes) 275 mb, 1.5 - 2.5 % cpu and 2 - 3 % gpu

those are average values, as the task manager shows occasional spikes up to 7 % cpu & gpu for firefox, but then the load goes down quickly to the values stated above.

however, it's remarkable that firefox uses over 2x the memory and the gpu load (in this particular instance, mind you). also the load spikes seem to be sharper.

opening this thread in 10 different tabs in each browser results in

firefox (7 processes)  1183 mb, 2.5 - 3.5 % cpu and 4 - 5 % gpu

chrome  (19 processes)  562 mb, 1.5 - 2.5 % cpu and 2 3 % gpu

now those are rough results from looking at the task manager for about 5 minutes while typing a text file, but you get the idea. firefox uses almost 2x the memory and uses more cpu & gpu resources.

 

that's on my old gaming pc which i now use mostly for web, work and whatever. amd 1090t (6-core) from 2010, gtx 670 with 2 gb (iirc), 16 gb ram @ 1333 mhz, windows 10.

 

to make it clear, i can't notice any difference in speed, which is a more important point, and 2 % vs 4 % of the power of an old pc is still insignificant.

 

i tested that before and found it surprising that chrome is said to use more resources. i'm not biased towards any of the two browsers, i just use whatever tool suits me best. i've used firefox for years. it's only this latest update which may have pissed off lots of users who had many, carefully assorted bookmarks.

 

 

also interesting: i use one of those overclockable korean monitors that were sold by overlord.com with this pc, and on it, firefox has better contrast and colors. the text seems sharper and especially from looking at my doomguy avatar, his eyes and hair on firefox are clearer. chrome blurs the image a bit. do i have wrong settings?

[hobomaster22]

I figured I was prepared to see whatever atrocity was hidden in the post. I was wrong. What was behind the curtain was an ugly mess of blue and green that made the hair on the back of my neck stand up. Images of a paperclip recommending absolute nonsense flashed before my eyes.

 

 

 

[Remilia Scarlet]

One thing I've noticed is that browser resource usage seems to vary wildly from user to user.  I'm not 100% sure why this is yet, but it may be some combination of the user's "library" size (e.g. bookmarks), add-ons, themes, an adblocker of some sort (or the lack of one), how much Javascript is blocked (if any), the OS they're using, and the CPU architecture.

 

I have 13 tabs open in Firefox right now, yet it's using between 0-2% CPU and 311 MB of RAM.

 

I haven't used Chrome in quite a while, but the last time I did, it was eating more RAM than Firefox.  It also felt slower overall.  But again, it's been a very long while since I've even considered touching Chrome.

[The Nate]

Hello, everyone. I have switched to Pale Moon, after having been notified about when I emailed news about Quantum to the infamous Nathan Lineback of ToastyTech.com. I have added a choice for Pale Moon in the poll. I recommend Pale Moon to fans of the an even older UI.

[Grazza]

Why not be hardkoar and add Tor to the poll?

[NeedHealth]

Anyone else having trouble with ublock removing its filter list and becoming worthless ?

[SaladBadger]

I can get used to this, I think, but is there any way to make the new tab preferred sites thing a big matrix like it was before? 6x2 is much less than I actually end up using in practice. ugh.

 

also I am so glad its trivial to cut out the suggested links from that page. Now if only they didn't see fit to replace the space for sites I actually like visiting with them and reduce the amount of pages I can have there. meh.

[Remilia Scarlet]

7 minutes ago, NeedHealth said:

Anyone else having trouble with ublock removing its filter list and becoming worthless ?

Mine kept all the settings on all the computers I upgraded.  The only thing that forgot some of its settings was uMatrix for certain sites, but that seems to happen occasionally.

[Manuel-K]

The first WE version of NoScript has been released.

[Wiw]

I mean... I guess it's alright, I just wish I could have that new tab grid from before...

[Manuel-K]

19 minutes ago, Wiw said:

I mean... I guess it's alright, I just wish I could have that new tab grid from before...

Open about:config and set browser.newtabpage.activity-stream.enabled to false.

[Devalaous]

*sticks with Waterfox*

[Wiw]

1 hour ago, Manuel-K said:

Open about:config and set browser.newtabpage.activity-stream.enabled to false.

Thanks, I didn't realise you could do that!

[SaladBadger]

2 hours ago, Manuel-K said:

Open about:config and set browser.newtabpage.activity-stream.enabled to false.

Ah, so much better. Thank you for this!

[The Nate]

Found out some big news, bois!

https://github.com/aris-t2/customcssforfx/releases

Downside: Still no private tabs.

[mrthejoshmon]

I'll be the only person who will ever ask this but does it work for Windows XP or am I boned?

[Tango]

why in the world are you still on windows xp

[NeedHealth]

10 hours ago, Tango said:

why in the world are you still on windows xp

Why are you not ? It is the most stable and secure platform.

[SaladBadger]

"Secure?" there's probably a large number of security holes just waiting to be exposed that will never be patched. wcry was a really great indication of that.

 

I wouldn't touch it on a live machine I use for everyday use (I'd gladly put it in a VM or a legacy box for niche purposes), and I actually loved XP. I ran it until the end of life on it. I like it but I also kind of like my files not being encrypted.

Edited November 22, 2017 by InsanityBringer

[The Nate]

11 hours ago, Tango said:

why in the world are you still on windows xp

I don't use Windows XP, I use Classic Shell.

EDIT: Oops, I thought that was for me.

[RightField]

I swapped to this from Chrome after getting annoyed by it crashing too often and being a memory hog. So far it's much faster and lighter and hasn't crashed yet.

[riderr3]

Mostly I don't care about UI, but prefer old. Mainly I worried about compatibility of addons which I've used for decade.

[Skeletonpatch]

I thought I had configured Firefox to not update to Quantum, but then it crashed the next day and updated anyway. The UI is not as bad as I thought, but even then I absolutely hate those squared-off tabs, I prefer the more rounded design... and moving the task-bar icons to nonsensical locations is extremely irritating... and I hate the new loading icon, that dot moving back and forth is so irritating for some reason... and I hate the way new tabs are handled now, I almost always start typing in the URL for whatever website I want to visit as soon as I open a new tab so that I can go immediately, but now I need to wait an extra fifteen seconds for the "suggested" options to load before it actually starts loading the thing I told it to as soon as I opened it. It is faster at least, ignoring the stupidity of new tabs, and my ad-blocker is working properly as far as I can tell.