SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the better-than-deleting-your-profile dept.
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
Mozilla Firefox may reset custom browser preferences when the web browser is updated to a newer version so that the preference is set to its default value.
I was contacted by two Ghacks readers in the past two weeks about Firefox resetting preferences of the web browser during updates.
Jern informed me that Firefox reset the block lists setting of the browser's Tracking Protection feature from strict to basic when the browser was updated to version 50 from Firefox 49.0.2.
Basic protection is the recommended and default value of the setting. It does not block as many trackers as the strict blocking list. I confirmed that the upgrade to Firefox 50 did indeed reset the preference.
Michel told me a week later that a recent Firefox update (to 50.0.1 or 50.0.2) did reset another preference. This time an URL string that Michel modified on Firefox's about:config page.
Source: http://www.ghacks.net/2016/12/05/beware-firefox-updates-may-reset-preferences/
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday December 06 2016, @06:58AM
going out of your way to alienate your long-term users.
Long term. There's the problem right there.
Why would you be loyal to a browser? Its just a tool. And in the case of firefox its a very dull tool.
Ive been playing with Vivaldi lately. (Chromium based, even runs Chromium plugins like Ublock Origin). Built by the guys that sold Opera to the Chinese. Its pretty impressive.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Tuesday December 06 2016, @07:34AM
> Long term. There's the problem right there.
Well, no. It still does what I need it to do, better than the alternatives. Barely. But there isn't anything available out there that makes me actively go out of my way to switch. Last I checked the Vivaldi people financed themselves by selling user histories, so no thanks. Chrome/chromium I trust about as much on that front these days as well. IE is cripple-ware, but less than it used to (besides not being available on Linux). Safari is weird and crippled (and also not available on Linux). Don't get me started on Edge. The UI people must've been taking some weird stuff to come up with that interface...
When the day comes, I expect Pale Moon will be the first alternative that gets evaluated. I see there's a Linux build available these days.
The sad thing is that FireFox used to be such a sharp tool, and it used to do things really well (other than not leak memory).
But for sticking with a tool that does the job, why on earth wouldn't I?
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday December 06 2016, @08:07AM
Chromium is opensource. All of it.
Vivaldi financed themselves by selling Opera.
Vivaldi privacy [vivaldi.com] statement reads surprisingly similar to Firefox's.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 06 2016, @08:49AM
But it's proprietary software with open source components; that makes it a no-go for me.
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Tuesday December 06 2016, @07:25PM
Assuming that "proprietary software" is the reason why it's "a no-go": Is the microcode in your computer's CPU free software? If so, which make and model of computer do you use?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 11 2016, @02:50PM
Yes, the microcode problem is nearly impossible to avoid. However, don't argue that because the situation isn't perfect that we should make it worse by adding even more proprietary software into the mix; that's a nirvana fallacy. I will minimize the amount of proprietary software and firmware on my machines as much as possible.
There are also issues with hard drive firmware and plenty of other things. The situation is a mess, but simply giving up is one of the worse possible actions one could take.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Tuesday December 06 2016, @09:07AM
Reason 1: Because it is better than the alternatives. Which Firefox for a long time was. And most unwanted changes in Firefox could be reversed by installing the right extensions.
Reason 2: Because there would be a considerable cost of switching. I'm using a heavily customized Firefox. So any switch would not only come with the cost of relearning things, it would also come with the cost of finding adequate replacements for all the extensions I've installed. A switch only makes sense if the cost of switching is larger than the cost of staying.
Firefox mass-invalidating extensions soon is the reason I'm now seriously considering a switch. I'm just not yet sure to which browser.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by driven on Wednesday December 07 2016, @01:56AM
On Vivaldi, double-check your search settings [tldrlegal.com].