The Vent and Rant Thread

[Dazrin]

I have a copy of V56 portable somewhere so I might revert to that.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Dazrin

I came home today to find that one of my kids updated Firefox to version 57. Which means a couple of the extensions i rely on no longer work. DOH!!!!

I have about 40 extensions installed. All of mine stop working in Firefox 57. Most are unlikely to get compatible replacements, because what they do simply can't be done using the WebExtensions API that is now mandated for extensions.

Anyone know of a good replacement for Tab Mix Plus? Really the two things I want from it is "change tab by using the mouse wheel in the tab bar" and "reopen the last closed tab by middle clicking an empty spot in the tab bar".

I don't know of a bad one.

What about Roomy Bookmarks Toolbar? It let me use a bookmarks bar that only showed the Favicons not the full title of the bookmark. Which meant I could have ~50 bookmarks visible without needing to scroll down a list anywhere.

I don't use that one, and can't comment.

There is something that works close enough to the "back to close" extension that I can get by without it.

I use the following:
Application: Firefox 52.5.0 (20171107091003)
Operating System: WINNT (x86_64-msvc)

- 404 Bookmarks 1.4.2
- Add-ons Manager Context Menu 0.4.2.1-signed.1-signed
- Addons Manager Hilite 3.0
- Application Update Service Helper 2.0
- Beyond Australis 1.4.8
- Bookmarks Organizer 1.3.0
- checkCompatibility 1.3.1-signed.1-signed
- Classic Theme Restorer 1.7.3.1
- Compact Menu 2 4.3.1.1-signed.1-signed
- Dict 0.8.5
- Download Manager Tweak 1.0.12
- Error 404 Wayback Machine 1.2
- Extension List Dumper 2 1.0.2
- FindBar Tweak 2.1.12
- Flagfox 5.2.3
- History Submenus II 4.1.1
- Image Zoom (ugly fixes) 0.1.1
- image-resizer 1.7.1
- Imagus 0.9.8.57
- It's All Text! 1.9.3
- Location Bar Enhancer 5.3
- Multi-process staged rollout 1.10
- Neo Diggler 1.0.7
- OmniSidebar 1.6.15
- Open Google Contacts in a new tab 1.0.2
- Password Exporter 1.3.4
- Pocket 1.0.5
- Puzzle Bars 2.1.17
- Save File to 2.5.5
- Save Text Area 0.4.7.1-signed.1-signed
- Saved Password Editor 2.10.4
- Session Manager 0.8.1.13
- Speed Dial 0.9.6.18
- Stylish - Custom themes for any website 3.0.1
- Tab Memory Usage 0.2.7
- Tab Mix Plus 0.5.0.4
- Textarea Cache 0.9.3.4
- uBlock Origin 1.14.18
- Viewhance 2017.917.1405
- Web Compat 1.0

None of them work in FF57, including the one that produced the above list.

The only one that has a WebEx compatible version available is uBlock Origin.

Look here for a list of most used extensions and their FF57 compatible replacements (if any.)

Look here for a list of FF57 compatible extensions.

To give myself headroom, I backed off. I run Firefox Extended Support Release, intended for organizations with many Firefox instances involved. It's based on FF 52.0.5. It will still get critical security fixes, but won't get the stuff that will disable current extensions for some time.

I have Firefox Developer Edition installed with a separate test profile using only WebEx extensions to check for progress.

Note that if you are already running FF 55 or beyond, you'll have to fiddle to revert to FF ESR. FF 55 introduced profile changes that would break stuff running in FF ESR. To revert to FF ESR, I had to download it, create a fresh profile, then recreate what I had before FF 56 broke things.

If you aren't running as many extensions as I am, it won't be as annoying to do it.

Stupid Profile Tricks
When you install FF, it creates a default profile for you. But you can have more than one, customized for different purposes, and control where they are placed.

First, DL and install Firefox ESR. Then edit the properties of desktop icon for it.

To create a new profile, run Firefox ESR as "firefox -p". The easiest way to do that is copy the Firefox desktop icon, give it a new name, and right click to get to Properties. In the Target: box, add -p to the end of teh invocation string. This will invoke the Profile Manager.

In the Profile Manager dialog box, select Create Profile, then click Next. Enter a descriptive name for the new profile, then click Choose Folder... In the next box, navigate to where you want the profile created. (I put it in a Profiles\Firefox directory under \Mozilla.)

Click done, and you can start using the clean new profile, and customize it as desired. To use the new profile, edit the Properties of the icon to make it invoke Firefox as "-p <profile name>"

(It's possible to run more than one instance of Firefox at a time, but they must be using different profiles.. To do so, copy the Firefox icon and rename it, then edit the properties to add "-no-remote -p <profile name>" for each profile you might wish to run simultaneously.)
______
Dennis

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by Dazrin

I have a copy of V56 portable somewhere so I might revert to that.

Windows Firefox Web Browser — Firefox Releases

There's a download button at end of each Release Notes page

BR

[Dazrin]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I have about 40 extensions installed. All of mine stop working in Firefox 57. Most are unlikely to get compatible replacements, because what they do simply can't be done using the WebExtensions API that is now mandated for extensions.
...
To give myself headroom, I backed off. I run Firefox Extended Support Release, intended for organizations with many Firefox instances involved. It's based on FF 52.0.5. It will still get critical security fixes, but won't get the stuff that will disable current extensions for some time.
...

Thanks for the FF ESR info, I may try that because I don't like the idea of missing out on security updates. Fortunately I don't have nearly as many extensions as you do, only 5; 2 of them work ok w/ FF57, 1 I can make-do, but the last two I mentioned above don't work at all.

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Windows Firefox Web Browser — Firefox Releases

There's a download button at end of each Release Notes page

BR

Thanks. I actually run FF portable on my work computer (they won't let me install anything so I run it separately) and will just copy that for now.

[Hitch]

So (firstly, I oughtn't be working today, so my mood is NOT effing happy to begin with...)

As background, we use a lot of canned responses, for things like "please read this article @...." or "please click this link and read about" and so forth. One of them is a short bit of text that explains to people--with images and even a video--how to use our Hightail. (YES, you have to provide instructions, don't get me started.)

Some woman emails me yesterday, asking for editing and production services. The FIRST line of the email I send back to her says:

"We don't, in fact, offer editing services here, but I know several..."

And in the email, I include our canned Hightail instructions.

Today, I get THIS:

When a 'book' company uses incorrect grammar, it kinda throws me off their trail.
Do you see anything wrong with this sentence?
Just click and you may upload files to us for free.

(in which, the last line is a line from the Hightail instructions.)

I was simply flabbergasted. What part of "we don't offer editing services" didn't she understand?

I told her the truth: it's a technical instruction, telling people that they shan't have to pay, to use our GUI FTP. It's not effing War and Peace.

I mean...WTF is wrong with people???? I have HAD IT.

Another client writes today--and this sort of coy backhanded complaint really pisses me off:

Spoiler:

Two top of mind questions

Was very careful to set facing pages and format of recipes. Now they are completely off, recipes jump to the next page and leave blank pages. Please review.

I simply wrote back, "no pages in eBooks, and no spreads," and signed off, because if I'd spent more time on it, I'd have killed somebody.

GAHD, I am sick of people, I really am.


Hitch

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Dazrin

Thanks for the FF ESR info, I may try that because I don't like the idea of missing out on security updates. Fortunately I don't have nearly as many extensions as you do, only 5; 2 of them work ok w/ FF57, 1 I can make-do, but the last two I mentioned above don't work at all.

I could actually live without the security updates. I have layered defenses, and practice "Safe Hex". I haven't been bitten by anything since the MSDOS days.

(Well, I retract that. I did once get a Word macro virus, on a diskette passed along by my then boss. But that was at most an annoyance, and an opportunity to have a discussion with him about safe practices.)

Tab Mix Plus can't be implemented using WebEx. An acceptable replacement for me will allow me to force all links to open in new tabs, and add a "close tabs to the left" function as well as "Close tabs to the right". I'm waiting.
______
Dennis

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I could actually live without the security updates. I have layered defenses, and practice "Safe Hex". I haven't been bitten by anything since the MSDOS days.

(Well, I retract that. I did once get a Word macro virus, on a diskette passed along by my then boss. But that was at most an annoyance, and an opportunity to have a discussion with him about safe practices.)

me too - 'cept mine came from a PC techie when they installed a new SNA stack from Attachmate from non original media (diskettes). Not only me, but an entire M&A DD team, which included the COO of a major financial institution.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Tab Mix Plus can't be implemented using WebEx. An acceptable replacement for me will allow me to force all links to open in new tabs, and add a "close tabs to the left" function as well as "Close tabs to the right". I'm waiting.

Try these

http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/_openlinkintab.html.en
http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/_openbookmarkintab.html.en

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir...s-to-the-left/

I use the first two, but not the third.

BR

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

me too - 'cept mine came from a PC techie when they installed a new SNA stack from Attachmate from non original media (diskettes). Not only me, but an entire M&A DD team, which included the COO of a major financial institution.

<snort>

I got a virus infecting machines I was setting up for an employer from a distribution archive from a software vendor intended to implement communications between PC workstations and Unix hosts. (I was the *nix admin for my shop, and attempting to provide access for folks that needed it.) I wound up bailing on and removing that "solution". Access was via a terminal emulator and ftp.

I started out on IBM mainframes before moving across and down, but was spared dealing with SNA.

Try these

http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/_openlinkintab.html.en
http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/_openbookmarkintab.html.en

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir...s-to-the-left/

I use the first two, but not the third.

Thanks!

I've used Piro's work before. I ran Netscape 7 and then the Mozilla Suite before moving to Firefox, and his work was quite useful in what later became SeaMonkey. I'll look at the stuff you mention.

EDIT:
And I just looked at Piro's stuff. He does good work, but it won't help in the problem under discussion.

He works in XUL. Firefox 57 uses a brand new rendering engine called Quantum, and XUL no longer exists. His extensions don't work in FF 57.

I already have extensions in FF ESR that implement what I'm looking to replace, like Tab Mix Plus.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

I expect to see more Firefox issues popping up here, so background is in order.

I've used Mozilla code since Mozilla was still the code name for a Netscape project to create the next generation browser suite, replacing the venerable Netscape Communicator 4, which was getting long in the tooth.

Instead of refactoring and enhancing the existing proven and debugged code base, Netscape chose to "throw out the baby with the bathwater", and start from scratch with a new code base. (I understand the decision was made by a VP who was not technical, and did not grasp what he was asking for, but he was the VP, so...)

Two years passed with no sign of development. We finally got a Netscape 6, bypassing 5 entirely. It was so buggy as to be unusable. As far as I could tell, the only reason it got released was to demonstrate development was occurring.

Eventually we got Netscape 7, which was usable, and I ran it for a while.

In the meantime, Netscape was bought by AOL, and the Mozilla project was cancelled and most of the developers were laid off. The code base and the servers the work was done on were transferred to the newly created Mozilla Foundation, with a couple of million in seed funding, and development continued under Mozilla. Mozilla decided most folks only wanted a browser, and the browser component of what was then the Mozilla Suite was broken out and became Firefox.

Mozilla products all used a new rendering engine called Gecko. Gecko understood and rendered HTML and CSS, and interpreted and ran JavaScript. It also understood and rendered XUL, an XML language intended for writing user interfaces. The "look-and-feel" of Mozilla products was provided by XUL, CSS, and widgets, with JavaScript doing the work when you clicked on something. If you were proficient in XUL, you could create themes that completely altered the way the products looked, and extensions that modified and extended the way the products worked.

Mozilla seems not to have learned from history. Firefox 57 uses a new rendering engine called Quantum, written in a whole new language Mozilla has been developing called Rust. They threw out the baby with the bathwater again.

The sort of things you used to do with Themes are no longer possible, and haven't been for some time. Current themes are lightweight decorations of the title bar.

Most existing extensions have simply stopped working. They were written in XUL and JaaScript, and XUL no longer exists. New extensions must be entirely JavaScript, using the Web Extensions API, and limited to what WebEx will let JavaScript do.

The good part is that it's possible to write extensions that can be installed in Google Chrome and MS Edge with minor code changes, because they support a similar model. The bad part is that a lot of things people were accustomed to being able to do with extensions can't be done in WebEx.

As mentioned, I reverted to Firefox ESR, where what I need it still supported, with a test profile in Firefox Developer Edition using only WebEx stuff to track progress.

The problem is that the changes Mozilla is making have largely removed all the reasons I ran Firefox in the first place. I didn't use it because it was more secure than others (though it was.) I used it because it was the most powerful browser. That power is being neutered in the name of security. The question is presents is why bother to run Firefox at all? Just give up and switch to Chrome, because there is increasingly little difference in looks or operation.

Firefox's share of the browser market has been steadily declining because a lot of other folks asked the same question and switched, but I've seen no evidence Mozilla has drawn any conclusions from it.

If you are just running vanilla Firefox without extensions, you won't see problems. If, like me, you make any extensive use of extensions, you'll have problems, and the above is why.
______
Dennis

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

<snort>

I got a virus infecting machines I was setting up for an employer from a distribution archive from a software vendor intended to implement communications between PC workstations and Unix hosts. (I was the *nix admin for my shop, and attempting to provide access for folks that needed it.) I wound up bailing on and removing that "solution". Access was via a terminal emulator and ftp.

<snippage>
______
Dennis

And, this is why I don't use Dropbox's "click to upload" option, for our clients. I'm always terrified that one of my clients will get god-knows-what and infect us. As it is now, the files come via server/FTP and I can check them for viruses, malware, etc. before I put them on our internal dropboxes. but Dropbox's new functionality--creating a dropbox for someone, and sending them the link to upload, seems like asking for trouble, for those of us using the synched service.

Given the way that we use Dropboxes internally, it would be BAD, boy. BAD.

(shudders).

Hitch

[cromag]

I'm in the middle of a Firefox mess myself, right now.

I upgraded to 57 three days ago. I only use a few add-ons, and there are suitable replacements for half of them right now. I had to get used to the new appearance, and I had to do a little work, but okay.

Last night Windows 10 updated itself ... and my Firefox windows shrank down to a speck on the screen. It was literally a few pixels wide by a few pixels high. I knocked myself out to the point that I could open a postage stamp sized window, then enlarge it, but it would disappear as soon as I tried to do anything with it.

I've got Chrome (and Edge, of course) but I really prefer Firefox, when it's working. I'll be playing around with it this evening to see what I can do.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Hitch

And, this is why I don't use Dropbox's "click to upload" option, for our clients. I'm always terrified that one of my clients will get god-knows-what and infect us. As it is now, the files come via server/FTP and I can check them for viruses, malware, etc. before I put them on our internal dropboxes. but Dropbox's new functionality--creating a dropbox for someone, and sending them the link to upload, seems like asking for trouble, for those of us using the synched service.

Given the way that we use Dropboxes internally, it would be BAD, boy. BAD.

(shudders).

And we get back to practicing Safe Hex.

I stopped running A/V on my old netbook. (It runs XP Home, and with a massive 1.5 GB RAM, isn't a candidate for anything later. I did set it up to dual boot XP and Ubuntu Linux.)

I had been running Symantec Corporate, courtesy of a site license from then employer. Unlike Symantec's consumer oriented solution, Norton, the corporate version installed with no issues, ran like a top, and used little resources. But the version I was running reached End-of-Life, and would not get further virus signature updates. And I no longer worked for that employer, so a new version would be on my dime.

The only thing Symantec had ever "caught" had been false positives. I asked whether I needed A/V, and concluded I didn't.

Viruses and malware are infections. Infections have vectors by which the enter the host. Ward the vector and block the infection.

The principal vector for viruses is email. I use Gmail. My mail actually resides on Google's servers. I read and reply to it in my browser. Gmail also implements viewers for most attachments, so I can open and view them in my browser. Potentially dangerous stuff never actually gets to my machine.

And I download from known-good sources that scan on their end, and most software I get is open source anyway.

I stopped running A/V and haven't missed it. I warded the vector.

Malware targets browsers. I run Firefox. By design, FF doesn't support Windows Active-X controls, which were major sources of problems for folks using IE, because bad guys learned how to by-pass the normal controls on running such things in the browser. And I have defenses in Firefox.

I have the freeware Malware Bytes scanner here. I run it occasionally, and it never finds anything. I warded the vector.

Under Win10, I use Windows built-in program, Windows Defender, but that's mostly to keep Windows happy and not complain I'm not protected.

An annoyance with Gmail back when was the Gmail wouldn't let you send EXEs as attachments, even wrapped in a Zip file. They would open the attachment on their end to see what files were in it and block any archives that included executables. I needed to do that occasionally, and had a Yahoo account specifically for he purpose. Now I just put stuff like that I want to provide to someone on my Google Drive, share it with them, and provide a link in email to get it.

In your place, I'd likely do what you've done. The alternative would be setting up a machine carefully not connected to my network such things would download to, set up to open such things on receipt and scan the hell out of them with A/V and anti-malware software, and use sneaker-net (like a USB thumb drive) to transfer stuff I was confident wasn't infected to the machine where it would be worked on.

Given the stories you tell about your clients, "Safe Hex" would be Terra Incognita to them, and I wouldn't trust anything they uploaded.
______
Dennis

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Under Win10, I use Windows built-in program, Windows Defender, but that's mostly to keep Windows happy and not complain I'm not protected.

Me too again, for the same reason.

Defender caught & quarantined the malware that got sent out with CCleaner a few months ago. VirusTotal gave it a clean bill of health, VT doesn't include Defender its scanner bag, but it does include Avast Ψ².

For me TabMixPlus became a bit of a PITA, so I moved to point solutions like those from piro. My thinking now is there's probably more chance of WebExt equivalents of point solutions turning up rather than all-singing-and-dancing, bell-and-whistle gadgets like TMP and OmniSideBar.

If my Firefox goes pear shaped I'll probably move to Edge.

BR

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Hitch

So (firstly, I oughtn't be working today, so my mood is NOT effing happy to begin with...)

As background, we use a lot of canned responses, for things like "please read this article @...." or "please click this link and read about" and so forth. One of them is a short bit of text that explains to people--with images and even a video--how to use our Hightail. (YES, you have to provide instructions, don't get me started.)

Some woman emails me yesterday, asking for editing and production services. The FIRST line of the email I send back to her says:

"We don't, in fact, offer editing services here, but I know several..."

And in the email, I include our canned Hightail instructions.

Today, I get THIS:

When a 'book' company uses incorrect grammar, it kinda throws me off their trail.
Do you see anything wrong with this sentence?
Just click and you may upload files to us for free.

(in which, the last line is a line from the Hightail instructions.)

I was simply flabbergasted. What part of "we don't offer editing services" didn't she understand?

I told her the truth: it's a technical instruction, telling people that they shan't have to pay, to use our GUI FTP. It's not effing War and Peace.

I mean...WTF is wrong with people???? I have HAD IT.

Another client writes today--and this sort of coy backhanded complaint really pisses me off:

Spoiler:

Two top of mind questions

Was very careful to set facing pages and format of recipes. Now they are completely off, recipes jump to the next page and leave blank pages. Please review.

I simply wrote back, "no pages in eBooks, and no spreads," and signed off, because if I'd spent more time on it, I'd have killed somebody.

GAHD, I am sick of people, I really am.


Hitch

Client not so bright. I certainly hope they don't pour cold water on hot pyrex.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Me too again, for the same reason.

Defender caught & quarantined the malware that got sent out with CCleaner a few months ago. VirusTotal gave it a clean bill of health, VT doesn't include Defender its scanner bag, but it does include Avast Ψ².

I use CCleaner here, but wasn't bitten.

For me TabMixPlus became a bit of a PITA, so I moved to point solutions like those from piro. My thinking now is there's probably more chance of WebExt equivalents of point solutions turning up rather than all-singing-and-dancing, bell-and-whistle gadgets like TMP and OmniSideBar.

Fair enough. The question is whether point solutions will exist to cover enough of what the all-singing-and-dancing extensions do. Some simply can't be replaced by point solutions.

If my Firefox goes pear shaped I'll probably move to Edge.

I have it here, and have been poking it in the background. It's actually usable, and decently secure. (The usability is partially a matter of it supporting an extension capability, though pickings are currently slim.) And it starts up a lot faster than Chrome or FF, because like its predecessor, it is baked into the OS, and not a layered product. That last is irrelevant to me because I don't hop in and out of the browser. I start FF when I set down at the machine and leave it running. (It's loaded from an SSD, so speed of invocation is about 4 seconds. )

But I run Linux as well as Windows, so Edge is out here. I need the same browser in both OSes. (On my former desktop, where I dual booted, Firefox's profile lived on the Windows side. Ubuntu Linux can read an NTFS file system, so I used the same profile on both sides.)
______
Dennis