web browser choice for FreeBSD

drhowarddrfine said:
Well, I was confused and found out I was reading this out of context (get it?). I thought they were talking about 'process per tab' so silly me.
Click to expand...
That's what I first thought too, some process separation in memory like chromium. But multiple processes do appear though when turning this option on. I'm not sure I'll find this feature very useful.
 
ILUXA said:
We were talking about "container tabs", after setting "privacy.userContext.enabled" to "true" in about:config, you will be able to use container tabs
Click to expand...

Interesting. I had set the about:config option earlier when it was mentioned. Now that I check (I'd never looked before) the "New Container Tab" option is there in my menu and it works. Looks like it might be useful, so I'll keep it there.
 
To any of those that still haven't heard: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2016/11/23/add-ons-in-2017/
ELI5: Firefox will no longer support anything but WebExtensions (Chrome extensions), and is fully deprecating XUL.
So basically everything that made Firefox good to me and many others is being removed, forever. What is Mozilla thinking?
The best part is WebExtensions is totally not ready for production: it's barely half implemented and is fraught with issues, not to mention in a finished state it will offer nowhere near the amazing capability native addons have given us (even if the API has changed like 3 times now).

Using an old version of FF is of course still an option, including ESR -- but with how fast the web is evolving and growing, if you want to be able to use modern web technologies, you will probably run into issues after a while. Additionally, there is talk of deleting all incompatible (read: non-WebExtensions) addons from AMO, so you will need to either get them before that happens or get them from other sources after the fact, if they do go through with it.

As a former FF developer and lover, I am disgusted by this and previous changes. What are your all's thoughts?
 
How Otter browser works? I had installed it long time ago but there were so many problems and I didn't try anymore. NetSurf is not bad and I am using it along with Firefox. I miss the old Opera a lot...
 
Beastie said:
It depends what kind of problems you had.

It has evolved a lot. It's still under heavy development and it's very active as you can see from the commit logs. The next few months will see major additions.

You should give it another try.
Click to expand...
Thanks, it works much better but I have still problem with my photos on http://www.redbubble.com/people/lumiwa
If I click on the photo to enlarge it than I got just black. This was one of the problem which I had with early version of www/otter-browser
 
ds6 said:
Firefox will no longer support anything but WebExtensions
Click to expand...
XUL is proprietary to Firefox alone while web extensions are supported by Chrome and Opera. So it becomes a group thing and probably frees up personnel to concentrate on other things.

I'm betting that web extensions are more secure, too, which is a hassle for browser vendors trying to protect users from insecure, malware add-ons.
 
fernandel said:
I have still problem with my photos on http://www.redbubble.com/people/lumiwa
If I click on the photo to enlarge it than I got just black. This was one of the problem which I had with early version of otter-browser.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes! Now I remember when you reported it on the Otter browser forums. It was detected as a WebKit display problem caused by an overlay image used to prevent photo piracy. Not likely to ever be fixed I guess...
Even though legacy Opera can display these photos, it also displays an ugly empty photo placeholder in the background.
 
A few weeks ago I installed Dillo as a default brower. It's actually working out pretty well and I would recommend it for that purpose. I use Firefox for browsing, but it's nice if the default browser comes up fast.
 
Guys, I'm install www/otter-browser and I surprized with his speed! It subjective more faster than www/firefox and www/chromium. I will see how it work on older machines with RAM<=256 Mb and hope it will be good.

Since it very young browser, I understand that some sites can work incorrect and I will signal that on the otter-browser's forums.
 
I just installed the otter-browser and it seemed fast and looked great. Then after looking at some other desktop and coming back, it turns out to be locked up. And all other windows locked too. Eventually I could kill it and all is good again.

Edit to add: it has a nice preferences section actually. I stopped java which strangely was enabled by default. Now it seems to be working properly. We'll see. :)
 
goshanecr said:
I will see how it work on older machines with RAM<=256 Mb and hope it will be good..
Click to expand...
With that little memory I doubt much besides Dillo, Netsurf and text-based browsers will be really usable. I remember with a little more memory than that, even legacy Opera had much trouble working properly. Xorg needs quite a lot already and doesn't leave much room for anything else as it is.
If you disable JavaScript and don't open too many tabs it should work though.

goshanecr said:
Since it very young browser, I understand that some sites can work incorrect and I will signal that on the otter-browser's forums.
Click to expand...
It's WebKit-based, so most websites should work. And once we have QtWebEngine/Blink in the ports tree (see my post above) we'll have even more compatibility, as lecacy WebKit is starting to show some age.
 
OJ said:
Edit to add: it has a nice preferences section actually. I stopped java which strangely was enabled by default. Now it seems to be working properly. We'll see. :)
Click to expand...
Many bugs are being fixed every day. The version we have in the ports tree is usually based on the latest beta and sometimes misses weeks' worth of bug fixes. I suggest you get the source code and build it yourself. It's straighforward (check the INSTALL file, it's the usual stuff), doesn't require any porting and only takes a minute on modern hardware.
 
Tried it (Brave) on Android, and it insistently try to have access to my Google Account. A weird behaviour from a browser who claim privacy improvement: uninstalled.
 
I installed the www/uzbl browser. So far so good.

It seems that all these little browsers have issues but this one is simple enough that it may be OK. I'm guessing that many projects run into trouble because the developers chew off more than they can maintain.
 
OJ said:
I installed the www/uzbl browser. So far so good.
Click to expand...

Try www/surf, it is even more minimalistic. It can be configured before build, via configuration file —
/usr/ports/www/surf/work/surf-0.7/config.def.h:
cineXbd.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top