Re: 6,000 listed Web Extensions on AMO
- Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 08:37:56 +0000
- From: Jeff Layman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: 6,000 listed Web Extensions on AMO
On 15/11/17 19:06, Ron Hunter wrote:
On 11/15/2017 3:40 AM, Big Al wrote:
On 11/14/2017 06:32 PM, Desiree wrote:
On 11/14/2017 5:42 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
Over 70% of add-on users already have at least one installed
How many lines of code were touched?
Find out more here.
The 30% who don't are the ones I stand with. All great extensions are
legacy now and attempts to make web ones with the same name ends with
the user being excited until they look at the pathetic nothing that
the web version can do and they make the decision I have made - after
20 years of Netscape, Mozilla Suite and Phoenix et al, Fx 52 ESR is
the end. SeaMonkey and Thunderbird will live on for awhile, but, in
reality, Google has won.
Some place I saw a statement that the features in web extensions are
somewhat watered down as they can do much less than old add-ons did. If
this is correct then that's probably a good reason for your opinion.
I did play with 57 for the day yesterday to see how it worked.
Essentially, the web extensions are limited to the same actions as
extensions have been limited to in Chrome for years. That is, they
can't change program logic, or the interface.
I've just dumped FF57.0 after an attempt to try it as I can't stand tabs
on top, and CTR no longer works. It's Waterfox or Pale Moon for me in
I note that one of the puffs for FF57 is that it is faster. Why is that
so important? I can stream a 4k movie to my smart tv (amusingly running
the now-defunct Firefox OS) with a 10MB broadband download over wire -
no fibre here. There is no buffering. Why would I need "faster"?
general mailing list