Google looks to be fully shutting down unsupported extensions and ad blockers in Chrome, such as uBlock Origin – which might push some folks to switch to Firefox
Manifesting a future where Firefox is more successful?
Clearly, Google is serious about trying to oust ad blockers from its browser, or at least those extensions with fuller (V2) levels of functionality. One of the crucial twists with V3 is that it prevents the use of remotely hosted code – as a security measure – but this also means ad blockers can’t update their filter lists without going through Google’s review process. What does that mean? Way slower updates for said filters, which hampers the ability of the ad-blocking extension to keep up with the necessary changes to stay effective.
(This isn’t just about browsers, either, as the war on advert dodgers extends to YouTube, too, as we’ve seen in recent months).
At any rate, Google is playing with fire here somewhat – or Firefox, perhaps we should say – as this may be the shove some folks need to get them considering another of the best web browsers out there aside from Chrome. Mozilla, the maker of Firefox, has vowed to maintain support for V2 extensions, while introducing support for V3 alongside to give folks a choice (now there’s a radical idea).
You know the problem I have with Librewolf? -- Fuckall nobody knows how to spell it.
The beauty of Firefox is that even the densest idiot knows how to spell those two words. And with attention spans the equivalent of a gnat, people need to have things simplified for them as much as humanly possible.
Fortunately enough, Firefox is about the only one with a renderer that isn't controlled by Google, but - even now they're shifting to a pro-advertising stance and backing off of the privacy orientation that they took just a year or two ago.
I've been using Firefox for over a decade and have literally never once needed to open a different web browser. For anything, ever. This is a very common complaint that tons of people seem to have that I have never seen happen even once out in the wild.
There's still Vivali which is Chromium based and still supporting V2 extension (like uBlock) until June 2025. Its not a full fix, but its a stay of execution. That said, I'm a FF primary user.
I've been using librewolf for a several months. Be careful because streaming doesn't always work on it due to DRM features, and YouTube has been spotty AF. With YouTube it might start the video a couple seconds into it, buffer for no discernable reason, or just skip a few random seconds.
We’re going to have a serious problem on our hands soon with compatibility. I’m a software dev and I’m already seeing a few issues here and there where Chrome is being treated as the default expected browser and features don’t work on Firefox.
Firefox doesn’t support a fair few Chrome features because of security and privacy reasons, such as WebHID, WebUSB, etc.
Devs, please stop using those features. I know it’s tempting, but they’re basically bribes to encourage you to sell out to Google. Don’t do it.
We’re going to have a serious problem on our hands soon with compatibility. I’m a software dev and I’m already seeing a few issues here and there where Chrome is being treated as the default expected browser and features don’t work on Firefox.
Most "Chrome-only" web applications I have to use I can get around just by changing my user agent string and everything works fine. I try not to use that stuff when I can, though.
Some of the older stuff is indeed that way, but there are more and more features which Firefox can’t support. Web-based custom keyboard configuration tools, tools to flash phone firmware, and one niche MiniDisc tool all are chrome-only things I’ve had to open Chrome to use
Yeah, but that’s my point, not everything works in Firefox now - even though admittedly it’s relatively niche stuff - and my prediction is that if we continue on our current course Firefox will either have to compromise their commitment to privacy and security or will become more and more unusable.
Firefox doesn’t support a fair few Chrome features because of security and privacy reasons, such as WebHID, WebUSB
I'm very serious about my opinion that we are better off without them. If the feature does not exist, it cannot be activated by a bug in the permission system, and also the lesser technically inclined people won't allow them by reflex/accident
Google's working on fixing that for you right now. That's more people switch to Firefox and there's futures don't work they'll start complaining to the developers and then to Firefox. Microsoft road the it only works in IE train for a long time and it eventually buried them
I was pretty sure manifest v3 had already happened - but when I knew it was coming, I went ahead and switched ahead of time. Came with the extra bonus that now I'm ad free on mobile too! Mobile websites are absolutely filthy with popovers and 2 sentence paragraphs with an ad between every paragraph. I'm sick of it. And unfortunately I spend so much more time browsing the web from my phone these days than my desktop - so when I swapped on pc to Firefox, it was such a relief to have browser extensions on my phone now too.
I remember the internet before Google, and how game changing it was to have all of the internet indexed in one place (even if that wasn’t actually quite true back then). If you had asked me 15, 10, even 5 years ago if I would be cheering its downfall and yearning for a return to a simpler, far less centralized internet, I would have called you crazy. And yet here we are.
It wasn't hard to foresee. We knew these kind of things could happen. The internet used to be very out spoken about it. That ethos is long gone. What's equally disappointing is tech nerds selling out for bigger paychecks.
For those of us who work in (or love) tech - we (myself included) grossly overestimate how much the general public cares about, or cares to be informed about, this stuff. Heck, even people in tech who know better.
I wish it wasn’t the case but look how long and hard Microsoft moved on Internet Explorer and ActiveX back in the early days of the web.
Google and Chrome is just another bit of history repeating.
As an aside, I’ve been using Zen for about a week and it’s been wonderful. Easy transition from Firefox because it largely is Firefox, so all my containers, extensions, and settings carried over. Zen’s workspaces provide exactly the promise I’d hoped “tab groups” brought with Safari (but never worked right). I just wish there was an equivalent to the Hush plug-in on Safari (even after a year of full-timing FF, consent-o-matic is quite poor).
Yeah I work in tech and I'm the only one that cares enough to use Firefox. All my colleagues use chrome or chrome with makeup.
Maybe ad blocking will be what broke the camel's back, but I doubt more than a few will care enough to switch.
I kinda have to at work. Our classroom computers reset between classes and Chrome is the only browser installed. I might ask IT about that, moving forward, given uBlock getting neutered soon.
I have a similar issue at my school as well. Chrome is the only allowed browser, and each of us have to use our own school email as our login session in chrome, so we get that much of user space, and that actually works quite decently. I had ublock installed on my user account so far, but if it breaks, I'll just have to suffer. Although, the real problem is that the school I work in uses some digital books that only work 100% in Chrome, and all show some form of weird behaviour in non-chromiun based browsers. And there's a 0 chance they are changing it.
The problem here is not just Chrome (as in Google Chrome) but Chromium, the web engine behind many browsers out there (such as Opera, Vivaldi, Edge, among many many others). For now there are two main web engines available, those being Chromium and Gecko (Firefox, Palemoon and many other Firefox forks). The deprecation of Manifest v2 is a Chromium change that includes (and focuses on) Chrome.
While this will drive some users to Firefox, we all know it won't be enough. Too many people simple don't know, or don't care, it won't affect their lives in any meaningful way, or so they will believe.
Google will be harming the tech illiterate and normies (sorry for the slur) because money, bullshit, and to drive the stake deeper into the monopoly.
If you have older family members using chrome, sit them down and explain to them the dangers of the internet without adblock.
It gets me thinking. Tech literate people are the types to install blockers, and would be the same type of people both motivated and knowledgeable about how to switch browsers. On the line of thinking it seems like it is just going to drive them away from Chrome. Tech illiterate people remain unaffected since they are getting ads anyway.
But then on the other hand, if someone is tech literate then why are they even still using Chrome? Does such a person value whatever advantage Chrome theoretically provides over their ad-blocking?
as a chromium browser user - i've been meaning to switch to firefox, and i know it'll take me maybe a day, but it feels like so much workkkk. In a similar fashion i've been meaning to switch to Linux for ages too. I guess it just hasn't gotten bad enough for me to take action
as long as my adblockers & script blockers work, i'm not forced to upgrade to win11, and win10 still has security updates i don't think it's pushing on my discomfort buttons strong enough. I know the day will come, but like with a lot of things in my life - why do something today when i can do it tomorrow?
It's fine, there are open source projects underway. If any one of them gains traction, it could happen to Mozilla what happened to Unity with Godot. Here's to hoping they get their act straight sooner tan later.
People completely misunderstand this feature (which is only a temporary prototype anyways), and I think that’s entirely Mozilla’s fault. They do a really poor job explaining it.
Usually ad networks implement sophisticated tracking, which works in a highly invasive way. They need the telemetry to watch their campaigns. Firefox now offers the option to collect a minimal amount of data for them and inform the network indirectly.
This is a good thing for the end user. The trackers are not needed, you gain privacy. Disabling the option makes it so you’re instantly tracked MORE.
Mozilla shouldn’t have staged this as an opt-out of the new system. You actually OPT-IN to networks running their old scripts on your machine to collect your telemetry:
[ ] Allow ad networks to run their own telemetry
(Beta functionality, some advertisers may still run their
own trackers, even when this option is disabled.)
That would be the same thing, but communicate what it’s doing.
The fact that advertisers like Meta might be on board with this should be exciting to people. That they are even considering giving up so much data and now only receive a single number of impressions per campaign is very unexpected.
Also, none of this matters if you block ads anyways. If you don’t load the ad, neither the networks script runs its telemetry, nor does Firefox increase the counter for the campaign id.
If you're wondering what's every involved party's gain in this, an interesting read is the IPA white paper, where the overall design targets for the system are stated:
Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA), 2022
In particular:
In designing IPA, we set out to find a win-win-win solution for cross platform attribution measurement that met our goals across privacy, utility, and competition.
• Privacy: data collected about the user is minimized, protecting the end-users privacy.
• Utility: the telemetry process is unified and simplified across all platforms, reducing the costs
• Competition: it will be an open, standardized system, accessible to everyone
Just to be clear, I dislike the way Mozilla rolled this out. They already have a "Studies" checkmark that people can enable if they wish to participate in stuff like this. That Mozilla treats this prototype differently is actually not ok, and breaks trust with their users. But as far as I'm concerned, this is a completely separate topic from the update content, which I wish to be successful.
When is this happening? I've been telling my wife and kid that they need to stop using chrome for a year, but ublock is still working for them and blocking YouTube ads. They are the type that won't switch until it becomes a problem for them.
I think that's the point: Google has been shutting down Manifest V2 extensions one step at a time, and it's been experimenting with anti-ad-block tech on YouTube with one user group at a time.
I've fully switched to Firefox everywhere. The only thing I'm missing is a lightweight browser which is not based on chromium for my potato tablet. jQuarks viewer is a good one but can be dumb sometimes, it opens image instead of the link for eg.
I find it funny how so many people are switching back to firefox but its been my default since I was like 10. I had crappy laptops when I was young and it was the only one that worked, it works amazingly for my modern computer.
My biggest gripe with Firefox is that if I'm too fast and start typing into the address bar when it first launches, it'll clear the auto text selection and start prepending my input onto the URL.
A great privacy focused client for YouTube is FreeTube. Uses a native API or Invidious for playback, and you can download and share videos from it. Doesn't give any identifying info to Google/YouTube and I've never once dealt with an ad. For mobile, Grayjay and NewPipe are similar apps.
The downloading on freetube is so bad as to be functionally broken, and based on what reading I did to try to get it good, it sounds like it's gonna stay how it is forever.
Basically it should be considered a lie to advertise freetube as having a working download function, even if it can technically do it. I wish it were better because it's a neat little program for viewing without mucking up recommendations!
I sure hope so. I've been on team Mozilla for a long time, but right at this critical moment they are starting to wobble. Their CEO seems to be steering them in a direction that I don't agree with.
(I still believe Firefox is the best option right now; but I'm a little concerned for the future.)
I switched to Firefox over the summer and have been mostly happy with my decision.
However, there have been a LOT of issues with video playback on certain sites and I really don't know how to fix them. Searches have been just about useless in regards to finding a fix. The worst one is Nebula. The video often just freezes while the audio just keeps trucking along like nothing is wrong. This has happened to a more limited extent with some YouTube videos as well. And the TAB crash on some sites is quite infuriating.
The lack of HVEC/h.265 support is kind of a deal breaker in firefox (windows nightly builds don't count as done). I need it to view h.265 security cameras and the occasional movie streamed via browser.
Edit: For those suggesting multiple browsers I could just use Edge if I wanted to.. still better compatibility as it is essentially chromium.
I have a list of other things that don’t work reliably in Firefox such as various video conferencing tools so no, I am not going to switch to Firefox as my primary browser again anytime soon.
I was a Firefox user for many years but there are too many daily things I use now that prevent me from using it as a primary browser for work and causal use.
Why would I use multiple browsers if I can achieve nearly everything in one? I would much rather use Edge or Safari for everything than Firefox plus another browser.
Ad block lite does a good enough job without me changing to be honest, again the point being is that there are more problems with me using Firefox as a primary browser than ad blocking benefits.
How? If you would have said Chromium based era, then sure, possible. Internet Explorer for 64 bit was officially retired June 15, 2022 and permanently disabled through an Edge update.
Chromium based era is what I think we had around 2012 and today. But lately Chromium is not exactly equal to Google Chrome now they been getting divergent.
DNS ad blockers are not sufficient to block all ads and often overly broad. So they have much higher rate of false positives and negatives compared to in-browser ad blockers. Differentiating between ads and useful content based on domain names will become more and more difficult. Both might use some url from the same cloud provider, and blocking those breaks a lot of stuff.
porque no los dos? I use both and there are things uBlock can catch/block that AdGuard Home doesn't seem to be able to. That said AdGuard makes mobile pages readable, when most these days are a complete nightmare of ads
That's true, Mozilla's vision of ads is much better than Google's. But is there any reasons it will be one or the other? Is there any reason to believe that Mozilla's ads will displace Google's ads? Or are we just going to end up with more ads: Google's very bad ads plus Mozilla's less bad ads.
[edit]
Just to be clear - I don't want to sound any Mozilla. Mozilla hasn't actually acted on this yet. Firefox is still good right now, and will continue to be good at least in the short term. It's just that Mozilla have stated their intention to work on making ad systems. So when that actually happens, it will be bad.
Librewolf didn't take as much adjustment as I would have expected, and it even supports toning down specific security postures for QoL niceties like Firefox account sync. Made the switch just to try it out and haven't gone back. Excited to see what people come up with for more forks/hard forks in the future.
I love containerized tabs. They do break online payment for some sites but imo it's worth it. Wondering if there's similar feature / addon in brave / librewolf...
My Chromebook heard about it and a few weeks ago developed a display issue. I’m now looking for a new laptop that allows Firefox browser. It’s kind of funny how things work out.
Chromebook won’t let you get browser Firefox unless you switch to Linux but not all Chromebook’s are able to get Linux because of hardware. I was one of those people.
IIRC, they've said they'll implement V3 to maintain compatibility, but they'll also continue to maintain V2. You, the extension developer, will not be forced to use V3 if you don't want to.
educated guess: since firefox is implementing v3 support alongside their v2 extensions, there shouldn't be any issues running v2 and v3 extensions side by side in the foreseeable future
I think they are wondering if one extension can use both v2 and v3 APIs at once? As in whether v3 APIs will be "backported" to allow v2 extensions to use them
Well, looks like then I might have to start shutting down my use of Chrome.
I used to be fine with adverts, not a big deal. Until they became insanely intrusive. Noticed that YouTube recently stopped to even show the countdown to skip or the length of the actual ad on some devices/apps, so it's always guesswork when you can actually skip or how long it would run after the skip becomes available. And the amount of ads going in videos is getting disgusting as well, I know it's partly up to the creators, but fucking hell I often get ads like not even a minute into the video already, often running longer than the time I've spent actually watching the video.
Just stop destroying the www by supporting this toxic monopoly. How in the hell are all of those coping tweaks easier than just switching the freaking browser?! It's like Windows users claiming superiority when they have to have like 10 tools to tweak their operating system, with each year another new one being needed. At what point do you people realize how much you're getting duped and how you are part of the problem that makes this possible in the first place?
I relate to your Windows comment. There was a point where I was that person with a bunch of different tools to modify my OS exactly how I like it, and then I realize I’m just doing more work. If I’m willing to do that work anyway, I might as well have an OS that is more malleable.
I've seen countless of those tweaks throughout the years. You can harangue the people using them all you want, but at the end of the day they're hooked on a powerful drug. And they'll do anything to keep their supply.
Wasn't there just an article about how Mozilla is claiming ublock origin shouldn't be supported anymore and another one claiming they're starting a focus on ads?
I feel like we're entering a really shitty time for the Internet... Tie that in with Microsucks Recall feature and computing in general is going to suck...
Which is only the "lite" version (which really has no reason to be used in firefox) and was likely based on an improper scan. Which happens constantly and is usually an email and a few days of waiting rather than immediately going to the press.
If you can find something about Mozilla actually being anti-adblock or disabling manifest v2 that would be incredibly useful. But maybe be aware of what is going on before vaguely making major claims?
IIRC Mozilla doubled down on their v2 support when Chrome announced the shift to v3. But then the Chrome monopoly judgment came down and with it a lot of speculation on Google dropping their funding of Mozilla, so maybe Mozilla could be changing its tune to either protect or find a replacement for that funding? Nothing of substance is happening yet, it's still all speculation, but I do hope nothing like that does happen.
Yeah, the "lite" version should only be in the Chromium Store and its for support of the garbage better know as manifest v3 that is better off going to the scrapheap.
uBO Lite was incorrectly flagged as violating policy by someone at Mozilla, but rather than appeal that decision in any capacity at all, the developer just removed the add-on entirely without responding to Mozilla. The original decision was almost certainly just an error.
I would consider even jumping ship further away and don't land on Firefox. They have their own concerning issues as of late. The more privacy minded people may be the only group that cares and that's cool. I'm just adding that before you go to Mozilla check them out further and then decide if it fits you.
Maybe check out other browsers like Vivaldi, too. That is what I currently use now and have been satisfied with it. I use it on mobile and desktop.
Seems like others in my world think similar as me so I'm good with my choice. You do you though. I was simply just recommending that maybe people should look beyond Firefox. If you don't it doesn't bother me. I'll still sleep fine tonight.
A web extension isn't going to be that much of a game changer for Firefox. Usage is down, new profile rate is down, concerning financials towards Firefox and this issue has been ongoing for sometime with ublock. This isn't meant to diss ublock though.
I don't have much hope for Mozilla attracting more users to make userbase count impact. Hopefully overpaid execs proves my pessimism wrong about my favorite browser.
I heard that google is sending fake focus groups invites to males around your area. Yeah, it's true! Someone gullible enough to drive to their facility and sit in their special google chairs. Once they sit, the chair 💺 traps them and a small machine arm approaches in between their legs, injects local anesthesia and procedes to remove the genitalia. It was a really well done Fox News report that I heard on MPR. It's supposed to be part of alphabet's war on cancer. They will eventually have the robots smart enough to remove only cancer cells. But yeah, for now it's removing the whole thing. So be on the lookout for that. And ads! I hate the ads!
Firefox isn't far behind now. They just announced ads are coming and they know their platform is used heavily with ad blocking extensions so they'll cut it
Move, yeah. To Firefox… meh. The writing's not on the wall yet, but we're not going to ignore the very heavy signaling Mozilla has been doing for years now.
You've been hearing about it because there's been a lot of pushback at all stages of them doing it. That doesn't mean it won't happen, they've kept pushing for it and there's no indication they won't go through with it.