Jump to content

DanR20

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    413

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    United States

 Content Type 

Everything posted by DanR20

  1. DanR20
    Was hoping that MultiFox would be a good alternative but it's got obvious bugs. One is that noscript breaks when opening a new profile in a new window, at least with google voice. I'll keep playing around with it but it's not as straightforward as container tabs. The other option is private windows, that is until that gets cleaned up too. I'm afraid if they keep doing that there will be nothing left of the browser and no reason to use it.
  2. DanR20
    Thanks, I missed that in the changelog. Curious, what exactly were they "cleaning up"? Container tabs worked good and were useful. It wouldn't be a problem if the addon could replace them but it isn't functional and I tried all their versions. So I guess for container tabs I'll have to use 52esr.
  3. DanR20
    Is anyone missing new container tabs from the File menu? Up until the latest uxp build they were there and I've been using them right along but now the option is gone. The "privacy.userContext.enabled" and "privacy.userContext.ui.enabled' prefs are set to true and they're working in 52esr so I'm guessing it's something specific to Basilisk. I tried installing the Multi-Account Containers addon but all it gives me is a thin line down below the toolbar button and nothing else.
  4. DanR20
    Same problem for me on eBay; it's especially bad when trying to scroll on certain parts of the page, it can sometimes stick for 30 seconds or more before resuming. Many sites today are script-intensive and it appears overwhelming at times, even for the most up to date browsers.
  5. DanR20
    Just tested the av1 demo in UXP for XP and it played, yay. The I tried it with a freshly downloaded 67.0 nightly and got an error message that the browser doesn't support av1 playback, please upgrade to 67.0 This is with media.av1.enabled and media.mediasource.webm.enabled" both set to true as with UXP. What a waste of time it is with the "new" Mozilla firefox, think I'll just stick to these older versions, they work better.
  6. DanR20
    So would this mean you could carry on with the weekly UXP updates?
  7. DanR20
    Wouldn't it be just a matter of changing the name? That seems to be one of the complaints. There would be no more weekly updates, we'd have to wait until the official release for any bug fixes etc. to be applied by the sound of it. Hopefully just bumps in the road rather than killing what are obviously better builds than their releases. That's probably what's eating at them.
  8. DanR20
    Moonchild takes the position that legacy addons no longer need to be updated since they will always work in their browsers. That may be true for the most part but not for all of them. Newer addons that are interactive with the site, such as Enhancer for YouTube are constantly being updated for the simple fact that google is forever changing things. Legacy addons that used to do that are now either broken to some extent or completely useless since the developers have abandoned them. And at some point Raymond Hill will end development of legacy uBO, it's just a matter of time. That's why there's a need for webextension support whether most of us like it or not.
  9. DanR20
    All extensions working well for me on Win 7 and XP in the latest build. Thanks again to Roy for reverting the unnecessary changes. As I said earlier in the thread these versions of basilisk are what Firefox 52.9 should have been.
  10. DanR20
    @Sampei.Nihira, and Mozilla said the opposite: they had to remove legacy because of security. I would imagine they both have issues but I've yet to hear many stories of where firefox has been compromised from addons, legacy or we. If it were a widespread problem then the argument can be made for changes otherwise it becomes unnecessary disruptions. @Mathwiz, I agree, legacy is dead in terms of development, their use comes in the ability to keep installing the old ones in browsers like basilisk but all of the energy today is with we and it's going to stay that way.
  11. DanR20
    Why are they so determined to take that out? Why not just let it be and not maintain it? Don't see how that would affect performance but thanks for keeping it in, at this point we need both because legacy addons are no longer in development.
  12. DanR20
    That's good news though since Roy kept it in after it was removed from the nightly. I guess he can tell us himself what the future of webextensions is for UXP but like everyone else has said hopefully the code can be maintained for it.
  13. DanR20
    Wasn't webextension support removed several weeks ago and Roy decided to keep it in the UXP builds? Hope so because there are no working alternatives for the ones I have. They're all youtube-based that set video resolution and other options so it's probably possible to use scripts but these addons work well and are convenient.
  14. DanR20
    Same here, the missing addons are back.
  15. DanR20
    @Tangy, most of mine are working but it has broken at least those two I mentioned. I even tried installing them in a new profile but they're dead. Hope it can be fixed otherwise I'm stuck on this older version since they are must have addons.
  16. DanR20
    @roytam1, this week's basilisk UXP seems to have messed up the right context menu, there are many more entries. I temporarily restored last week's version and the menu went back to normal so it's definitely something with the new one. Anyone else experiencing this? Edit: it appears this weeks' version has caused several addons to stop working: menu editor and context search x are dead even though they're listed as enabled in addon manager. I've gone back to last week's basilisk.
  17. DanR20
    In XP flash has excellent hardware acceleration in firefox with these legacy radeon drivers, even in the 52.0 version but you had to go full screen for youtube and other videos. Guess I was one of the rare ones who didn't mind flash since the quality was perfectly fine but unfortunately few sites use it anymore. Mozilla messed it up in firefox even before its natural demise since after version 42 they forced the buggy plugin-container.exe by removing the option to disable OOPP. The result was choppy videos. It's the same reason primetime videos have reduced quality as well.
  18. DanR20
    Not all of us, this is a long thread and I haven't run into any posts of your stance on XP, could you summarize? I still enjoy working W2k that blackwingcat kept going for so many years because like XP it's simple, fast and easy to use. The only complaint is that I'm unable to get video hardware acceleration going with any browser in either XP or W2k, including Firefox or Basilisk 52 probably because the drivers are blacklisted. In Windows 7 that works great.
  19. DanR20
    @Tamris, same here, don’t post there myself but do visit occasionally because of the many links to good articles. No sense wasting my time arguing about it, let them have their quantum, I suspect it’s not long for this world anyway.
  20. DanR20
    @jaclaz, the problem is no matter what you run on the internet there's a security risk. I've been using computers for 20 years and never had a problem with viruses yet. It's a matter of taking advantage of the right tools, like noscript and turning on javascript only when needed. I do upgrade software when it's worth using but not for the sake of it. My hunch is Mozilla is desperate for market share and they need people off the older versions and onto quantum and they use security fears as a way to nudge people in that direction. It used to work but it doesn't so much anymore.
  21. DanR20
    What a joke reddit.com/r/firefox/ has become. Besides the usual quantum suckups where no criticism is tolerated for anyone who even hints at still using an older version there's an auto moderator that chimes in to spank the poster. They are scolded to immediately upgrade to a newer, safer, warmer version complete with Alice in Wonderland coloring books before the big bad security bogeyman gets ya. Apparently Mozilla thinks we're all a bunch of little children who need their constant hand holding to save us from ourselves. Not even Microsoft is that much of a nanny.
  22. DanR20
    Today I booted up XP to run the latest basilisk and can't get over how fast and stable it is, that's usually my answer to those who ask why anyone bothers. Those having fits over XP are probably software developers who want it to disappear since it means extra work if they have to keep coding for it. Understandable but Microsoft is the one who has been keeping it around as much as anyone. It wouldn't surprise me if they extended POSReady for another year :--)
  23. DanR20
    What's annoying to me is the fact that those who rail endlessly against XP almost never mention that it is being updated and it's not a secret since people have been taking advantage of the PosReady 2009 hack for years. In the last four months I've downloaded and installed at least 22 security patches alone for this older system. Not only that but you can still get the latest virus programs, flash player, and thanks to this project an updated browser. It is an old OS and probably has holes nonetheless but it's not like it isn't getting support. I'm usually on something newer but millions use XP regularly for whatever reason and it works fine, always has. It's almost funny how some of these anti-XP internet freaks go on a rampage, as if they have something to lose. No matter what forum their heads act like they're about to explode at the mere mention of XP. The end of support for PosReady is next April so it will require extra locking down but I wonder how many malware/virus trolls even bother with it anymore, they probably moved on to Windows 10.
  24. DanR20
    @roytam, I know you're already doing a lot with basilisk but is anyone in this project doing anything with Thunderbird 52? I was just curious if it would be possible to apply whatever security patches that 52 basilisk might be getting to that Thunderbird version?
  25. DanR20
    Twitter is just a pain in the a** for playing their videos. Setting general.useragent.override.twitter.com with a custom agent in about:config works good for fixing the distortion with basilisk 52 but the videos still run horribly because this box doesn't handle the forced higher resolution well. Unlike with XP 60esr and Firefox 52 in Windows 7 do but they're using the built in codecs and that seems to work better since it uses hardware acceleration. Twitter has no option to adjust resolution the way youtube does that I can see so they're downloaded with downloadhelper 6.3.1, which typically offers three different resolution videos, proving they are on Twitter's server but you can only stream what they serve up.
×
×
  • Create New...