I have tried to find a CDN provider which would offer access control similar to Cloudfront's signed cookies but failed to find something that would match it.
This is a major drawback with these providers offering S3 style bucket storage because most of time you would want to serve the content from a CDN and offloading access control to CDN via cookies makes life so much easier. You only need to set the cookies for the user's session once and they are automatically sent (by the web browser) to the CDN with no additional work needed
IIRC its essentially the same as the aws style signed urls and header bearer token auth. I _think_ lambda@edge is only relevant if you want to do the initial sig generation in the cdn instead of your api/app endpoint.
Edit: actually GP mentioned Cloudfront already, so yes works as theyre asking for AFAICT
The "helpers" library is used to convert types to and from erlang, I plan on open sourcing it but it is not ready now. In the above example, the code is explicit but "entry" can be created with an helper comptime function. erl is simply the erl_nif.h header converted by zig translate-c.
This! One day laptop manufactures (excluding Apple) will understand that a vibrant colorful display is much desired by customers than a 1080p matt finish display.
The OLED that Lenovo is currently shipping for this and related hardware is not matte, but it's close. It's anti-glare, so it doesn't have the mirror finish of Apple panels.
When someone tells me "you know computers, is this a good laptop for me?", I usually reply along the lines of "make sure you like the picture on the screen and the keyboard/touchpad feels comfortable" - those are the things that can drive you furious or sad about the purchase sooner than anything else.
Reading this breaks my heart. I have been a Firefox user for almost a decade now and I have good and bad memories with it. Since Quantum release my experience with FF has been nothing but exceptional. On a general day I have around ~15 pinned tabs and more than 50 other tabs open and FF handles it like a breeze. The memory usage is good given the fact that my workload is heavy. On a dual-core machine, I am able to restart FF under ~3 seconds.
I have read comments in this thread suggesting that FF's performance is not that snappy but I cannot seem to notice any difference. Maybe my dev senses are not that strong ... maybe the benchmarks do show a difference but I have never felt FF to be any less performant than Chrome.
I am tired of listening to people screaming their lungs out about privacy when their actions don't reflect their opinions.
> “I am tired of listening to people screaming their lungs out about privacy when their actions don't reflect their opinions.”
Those screaming for privacy, like myself, are in fact a small minority.
Also regardless of the topic, double standards are rampant in this community.
You’ll often see people screaming against Google but still using @gmail.com because paying for a domain and the price of one coffee per month is too expensive. Or people claiming that they need ad-blockers for privacy, but then screaming against paywalls.
I have run a Zimbra server for several years now, it's a full size enterprise grade email server.
I can run it on a $10 droplet from Digital Ocean. $10 is kinda high just for my email, but the bonus is I host _all_ my family's mail. Wife, kids even mom and dad!
It's been nice not being concerned about email privacy. Zimbra is a great piece of software. I think more people should look into it.
I don't trust myself enough to run my own mail server; did you set up your own backups? What's the uptime / SLA (not that gmail has any but still)? Do you need to set up and manage security yourself?
i'm not the parent poster, but did host my mail own for a while.
99.99+ uptime for mail is generally not as important, as undelivered emails get resend if it wasn't up at the time of delivery.
it might still be a problem, because its technically possible to disable that feature, but its generally done everywhere.
the bigger problem is, iirc, that the biggest mail provider (gmail) pushes unknown mail servers to spam... so you'll probably be forced to use a relay.
thats still not a big problem, because you generally get one from you domain registrar
there are also fully functional mail implementations that you can use right away with minimal configuration such as MailInABox [0]
...still, i've switched to fastmail ~2 yrs ago and won't be going back to self hosted anytime soon, though i do own several servers i could use for that...
I am not running a mail server on DO, but I do have several other services on their VMs, and they will do automated backups for you for a few USD per month.
I'm not that bothered about the type of privacy Chrome invades. If someone put a camera in my bedroom I'm bothered but if Google knows I'm thinking of fixing my washing machine and tries to advertise to me it doesn't bother me.
But say that and you get down voted etc by the "people screaming their lungs out about privacy" crowd. So us types kind of keep quiet.
The problem with GMail is, it's too convenient to use, and relatively secure because of 2FA support.
Also, people (including me) think that some newsletters, some bills and receipts are not very personal, so people don't care.
I have two main addresses, one is from a local provider and my all financial e-mails and other stuff is coming to that e-mail address, however they don't encrypt anything.
I also just got a free Proton mail, and will upgrade the account when I'm a little better off. Paid e-mail addresses are not meaningless, but they're harder to justify in most people's eyes.
BTW, I never store anything which makes me uncomfortable, anywhere incl. my brain. That's a much better way of living. Not that privacy conscious people is hiding something, but that's my policy.
> Paid e-mail addresses are not meaningless, but they're harder to justify in most people's eyes.
It's not just paid email addresses. It's paid anything. My father constantly pesters me to tell him where he can get free movies, music, software and so on. He wanted to know where he could make unlimited online backups for free and I told him that stuff costs money. Somehow people have gotten it in their heads that if it's on the internet it's free and they shouldn't have to pay for anything.
> Somehow people have gotten it in their heads that if it's on the internet it's free
The VC funding model of investing for growth has helped to create this perception. The sad consequence is that this has made it difficult to run companies that don’t scale to sizes that interest VC investments.
The thing is that a lot of things ARE free - or, there is a free option available. Piracy is a great example, because it is (was?) free, convenient, and you have pretty much an unlimited selection. Streaming services like Netflix and digital game delivery like Steam have made it easier and more trustworthy than piracy.
Actually, for me piracy was more about availability and unfair pricing. Especially for music.
After I started my job and the prices came down with the help of online music sales and streaming, I bought a lot of CDs and digitally distributed music. Most of them were albums that I already have, because I wanted to support the artists which brought that feelings into my life.
Same is also valid for software, movies, or anything. If I can justify price of a software, I buy it. Otherwise, I use something FOSS instead.
You're right that streaming services have made things easier and more trustworthy. Some people are just cheap and don't want to pay when someone else can pay. I just tell him that he shouldn't pirate things because he doesn't know how to stay safe when doing so. After all, this is the man who has trouble finding porn on the internet.
G Suite from Google is still Gmail, but with a better terms of use and usage of your own domain and thus no lock-in. For people that like Gmail it’s a much better alternative.
My point was that people aren’t willing to vote with their wallet, but being a loud mouth doesn’t cost anything.
And that’s how we end up with monopolies.
On the topic at hand I still remember the people crying against Firefox’s Pocket integration. Well, as Chrome crushes its competition, while becoming more invasive everyday, I hope they are happy with the outcome.
I think there's a confusion, by GMail, I've pointed to the free offering, not the GSuite, sorry for being not clear.
> My point was that people aren’t willing to vote with their wallet, but being a loud mouth doesn’t cost anything.
Because I think that the same people believe that their e-mail is not that private, so they don't feel the need for voting with their wallets, however they are loudmouths because they're bothered by the breaches or privacy invasions they read/hear. They feel they are either exempt from this or not affected as much, so they're not alarmed.
I’ve been planning on ditching gmail for a while, but I can’t find a domain name for my perineal email (either taken or don’t love) that I want to use for the next 10+ years!!!
> BTW, I never store anything which makes me uncomfortable, anywhere incl. my brain. That's a much better way of living. Not that privacy conscious people is hiding something, but that's my policy.
That is a better way of living, but it’s a harder choice for a lot of people.
With recent political trends towards the far right, it could become a harder choice for even more.
> With recent political trends towards the far right, it could become a harder choice for even more.
Yes, you're right. The climate worldwide is not the kindest recently. BTW, with uncomfortable I didn't mean opinions or ideas, but anything which will embrass you or put you in a hard situation if revealed.
As a corollary, this means living an honest life and telling what you think. Generally violence doesn't born from ideas themselves, but the way these ideas are told. So talking politely and without attacking the other side results in a reasonable discourse in most cases. Disagreement is in the nature of communication, and if can be managed well, it's very beneficial to both parties.
It's lucky for you that you don't love anyone your society says you shouldn't, that you never love them in a way your society says you shouldn't, and that you are never forced into a decision your society doesn't approve of.
To be fair it does take much more than $20 worth of effort to migrate all your stuff from gmail.
How much more I don't know since I've yet to do it, even though I've been paying for another email service for more than a year.
Man, I pay $50/year for my Fastmail account. I use a custom domain, so total cost is a bit higher, probably something like $60-$70/year, not sure. Moving from gmail to fastmail, given their integrated migration process, was a complete breeze. I still have gmail forwarding set up to my new email address, but I haven't logged into the account for well over two years at this point.
This reminds me to actually check how many emails I received over the past year that came via gmail. Off the top of my head I can only recall a single one, at least from a person I know and wanted to receive email from. I swiftly replied with my new address of course.
I'm going to stop forwarding now, and set up an auto-reply to give people a new address. Not my personal one, but an alias I'll set up in a minute, so that I can shut that down eventually too. Probably useless paranoia, but it floats my boat.
I don't regret the move one bit, and the whole process of setting up my account and moving all ten or so years worth of email from gmail to Fastmail was over and done within a week. Fastmail does what it says on the tin – it's very fast. It also pretty much never fails. In the past two or so years that I've had my account I have only experienced downtime once, for a few minutes. I made myself some coffee and then service was back again.
I am not affiliated with Fastmail in any way, shape or form – just a very happy customer.
It's not the same thing. First of all lawful companies don't do anything that isn't in the terms of service, that being the legal contract that describes your relationship with the company. Otherwise you can sue them. I'm in the EU and in my country there are state agencies that protect the consumer and handle the suing. Filling a complaint for me is easy and I've had great results in the past.
This is why even an upgrade to GSuite is better, being governed by a different ToC.
Google's standard ToC says that their service:
1. may use tracking pixels, web beacons, browser fingerprinting, and/or device fingerprinting on users
2. may collect your device fingerprint
3. can use your content for all their existing and future services
4. can share your personal information with other parties
5. may stop providing services to you at any time, for any reason
6. keeps the rights on your content when you stop using it
And as we've seen, Google indeed does all of the above.
The second problem is one of lock-in. If you're using an email address that's not on your own domain, you're locked into Gmail and the cost of switching is higher, as can be seen by the people complaining about it. But that's a situation of making your bed and then sleeping in it.
And in the case of Chrome, we are already in a situation in which Google can crush its competition and impose whatever standard they want. It's the new IExplorer and the fact that it has an open source core doesn't matter that much when speaking of Google's lock-in on the market, because the Google-free forks are completely irrelevant.
> First of all lawful companies don't do anything that isn't in the terms of service, that being the legal contract that describes your relationship with the company
I'm gonna stop you right there, because a ToC can only enforce certain provisions and companies can change their ToC anytime they want, as per their ToC. It also does not explicitly prohibit them from doing anything not on the ToC, just as it wouldn't prohibit a user from doing something not covered by the ToC. I guarantee you that Fastmail has this clause.[0]
> second problem is one of lock-in. If you're using an email address that's not on your own domain, you're locked into Gmail
That's irrelevant and a false equivalency. You can use Gmail with your own domain.
> in the case of Chrome, we are already in a situation in which Google can crush its competition and impose whatever standard they want.
Again, completely irrelevant to the question that I asked.
>> "companies can change their ToC anytime they want"
It may be possible in the US, but especially if it's not in the interest of the consumer and if there is a service fee involved, then you need to be notified about such changes in the EU and an online publication won't do. Service providers in my country send me SMS messages and postmail with pickup confirmation required. If they don't have proof that I received that notification, then the new contract does not apply, by law.
Also these contracts can't be applied retroactively. So your point is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
>> "It also does not explicitly prohibit them from doing anything not on the ToC"
Indeed, but the law does. Especially in the EU companies cannot use personally identifiable information without explicit consent. And now with the GDPR, they can't track or profile users without explicit consent either.
We'll see what will happen in the following years, but guess what, Google and Facebook are still doing the same shit, without asking for consent, because they consider that a sign-up is enough, since you've read and agreed to their terms and conditions ;-)
>> "You can use Gmail with your own domain."
I already said in my previous message, along with other messages here, that "even an upgrade to GSuite is better, being governed by a different ToC" and I don't like repeating myself.
Please make an effort to read, or we're going to simply talk past each other.
>> "Again, completely irrelevant to the question that I asked."
You mean the one where you asked about jumping from a frying pan and into the fire? I assumed it wasn't a question related to cooking.
> I'm gonna stop you right there, because a ToC can only enforce certain provisions and companies can change their ToC anytime they want, as per their ToC.
At which point they tell you that they have changed their ToCs
> It also does not explicitly prohibit them from doing anything not on the ToC, just as it wouldn't prohibit a user from doing something not covered by the ToC.
Which is why you check the ToCs to ensure that main classes of poor behaviour that you want to avoid are included in there.
It doesn't scale, at all. Not when I am interacting with upwards of a hundred microservices.
And after a malicious ToC change, the company can immediately act on the policy, meaning if you're even a few minutes late to the party, or if it takes more than a few minutes to completely scrub your data from the website (it does) then your data is now subject to the new ToC.
So the ToC offers no legal protection from data abuse. It's just a nice thought.
Sure, but that's a different discussion altogether. The post I replied to was implying the effort is greater and more complex than most think, and I'm saying it probably isn't – at least not for the common cases. Privacy is a very real concern, but a different conversation.
Since I'm paying them they answer to me. They don't get income from sources other than people paying for email. If they sniff my email they don't have anything to gain from the effort, so they are much less likely to.
I finally did it this year! All the scandals (dragonfly, drone programme, auto sign-in in chrome, grabbing data through auto translate, etc.) were just too much.
Getting away from the convinient variant, for which I paid with my user data, to privacy oriented choices felt empowering.
I went with Posteo for email and calendar (EUR12/pa), went from mostly FF to all-in FFk (donated to Mozilla), from Google search to DDG and Qwant.
It's somewhat more effort. But it is worth it imv.
I am still on Android though. But I installed netguard, which reigns in Android somewhat. The only thing I struggle to find: A good alternative to the Google maps app (open street maps is decent for desktop).
There is no alternative (that I was able to find) for the "browsing what's nearby" feature of maps. It allows you to pull up the app and just look around from where you are to find stores, restaurants, museums and whatnot. You can check opening times, reviews, see pictures, all from inside maps.
But, if you are looking for a GPS navigator alternative, there are plenty, and some are much better than maps, IMO. I personally use Sygic on Android, in the free version, and I've found it more accurate than maps in many occasions. It doesn't have the live updates on traffic like maps, but it will take you from point A to point B with a few metres accuracy. While maps sometimes just gets you to the other side of a building, and leaves it to you to figure out that the actual entrance is on the other side, and to reach it you have to drive around half a block, be careful with access restrictions, and go through a traffic light. Sygic just always gets me to the correct place, on the correct side of the buildings, and even signals parking areas nearby.
On my phone I try to use OsmAnd on iOS, based on Open Street Map, see: https://osmand.net/ — my experience with this is mixed, where I live (in Bucharest Romania) it definitely has more info than GMaps on points of interest, however it's not as reliable for car navigation or public transit, so it's not as reliable for getting directions.
If you keep using Google Maps (I still do), at least disable the location tracking in your Google Account.
HERE maps has a fairly good reputation (formerly Nokia HERE, now owned by a bunch of German car companies)
Locus/Locus Pro are good for looking at maps, it's nice having half the continent available offline. Depends a bit if OpenStreetMap works well in your area or not, and not much in the way of routing/POI as far as I know.
For public transport, there's transportr and Öffi and probably a bunch of specific ones for different regions - again, coverage depends on where you are.
The smart choice would've been to not use Gmail in the first place. The fact that Google doesn't have your best interest in mind is nothing new. The fact that Gmail invades your privacy by reading your emails to show you ads has been in there from day 1.
I'm saying this, because you started with "to be fair...". As if this was a good explanation for the double-standard your parent poster mentioned. You can still fix it, even though it now takes more time than never having used Gmail at all. Complaining about "the effort" just reinforces the double-standard.
Use something like Fastmail. No hassle with setting up your own domain or email server (although you can use a custom domain) and they offer a tool to migrate your email from any IMAP server (and probably from Gmail as well).
> Complaining about "the effort" just reinforces the double-standard.
Another point of view is that this is just the reality. Loads of people are on gmail, and migrating isn't always simple. Pretending it is doesn't make it so, and pointing out that one never should have done it in the first place is a moot point.
As someone with a domain at home and a working email server, I'm still stuck with Gmail as I don't have time to make sure my setup is resilient enough to base my daily emails on...
> As someone with a domain at home and a working email server
Maintaining your own email server is crazy and not feasible unless you're passionate about email servers.
It's also a false dichotomy. Nobody with any experience and common sense suggests that you should install your own email server. Use FastMail, use Protonmail, use Office 365, heck, use Google's G Suite.
Most such services have import tools that work and the option to work with forwarded emails and external SMTP servers, so migration can be smooth.
Seeing software developers complaining about migration costs makes absolutely no sense.
Just yesterday I migrated a GSuite account to FastMail. I just changed the DNS records and imported the email via FastMail's import tool, which was automatic. And with a @gmail.com address you can just work with forwarding until everybody knows of your new address.
I migrated email addresses several times, including from my old @gmail.com address which now no longer exists. It wasn't a tragedy.
> Maintaining your own email server is crazy and not feasible unless you're passionate about email servers.
Sorry but I think this is FUD and it potentially discouraged people from taking steps to be part of the solution and not the problem.
I’ve run my own mail server for years on a $5/mo Linode VPS, and am not passionate about email servers. It was a little difficult to set up but no more difficult than a lot of weekend projects the smart people on this site undertake. It should not be scary. You can also make the switch gradually by first setting up your MX and forwarding to gmail if you want to take it slow. There’s no reason anyone with a moderate amount of Linux skills and patience can’t host their own Email.
The toughest problem I had was for a brief time, Comcast rejected mail sent from my host, but the reject log was sufficient to diagnose the problem. I just needed a fresh IPv6 address.
It's easy to say the smart choice was to avoid it, but I think that's quite a naive comment.
Hindsight is 20/20 and the email landscape is different now than it was then. At the time I got my gmail (back when invites were still a thing) most options available to me were either ISP email or free web email, and gmail was one of the best. Not to mention, I was a lot younger and probably not in a position where paying for email made sense, and certainly not running my own.
For those of us that started many many years ago with gmail and kept it out of an inertia of convenience, now it is difficult to get everything switched off of it.
The difficult part isn't moving emails over. The difficult part is all the accounts and websites online I've signed up on with gmail that I need to switch the email address on. That's going to be a nightmare.
You can keep your Gmail account forever and transition to a new email in a slow pace. By auto forwarding your Gmail to your new account, or if your new email can act like POP or IMAP client to access your old Gmail, this process is painless.
I had a Gmail in the month it was launched and I switched to my own domain (ironically, still in GSuite) in a process that took a few years. Whenever I login into a site with my old email, I would update it to the new one. My current email still connect to my old Gmail over POP3, but it’s mostly empty.
It doesn't take that much more. Office 365's base plan is something like 35£/year, plus around 10£/year for a domain. They offer IMAP import so migrating from Gmail is seamless.
After cloning the repository and installing the listed dependencies (some Perl packages available in your Brew / Ubuntu repository already), you can do:
I've used imapsync in the past to migrate thousands of mail accounts from and old decrepit IMAP environment (with some weird edge cases) to a shiny new IMAP based mail platform.
It's a hugely flexible and versatile tool and it's quite zippy as well, can highly recommend.
Effort, not money. As a Firefox/gmail user who routinely shits on Google, it's mostly the lock-in of any email address that keeps me coming back. I've actually opened a few paid accounts, but effort to switch is real. I gave up partly through switching over the dozens (100s?) of services that send me emails. I would never get to the point where all of my acquaintances and relatives actually use the new address.
This is precisely what I have done and it's worked great. All services I use (and care about) I've changed to use service specific aliases now and it works fantastically well. Effort wise I'd say I spent probably a couple of days migrating some ten odd years of email from gmail, setting up domains etc. All in all, the migration itself was done within a week. Only maintenance I do on this setup now is send receipts to my accountant, and update credit card details when needed.
> Also regardless of the topic, double standards are rampant in this community.
Most of us speak out against against Google because we like most of Google and want to continue to use their services, just not to thrilled about some things and want them to shape up, not have them cease to exist completely. It's the difference between being reasoned or extreme.
My FastMail account costs $50 / year or $130 / 3 years, thus with a monthly cost starting at 3.6 USD. That's less than the price of a Starbucks Grande Latte.
Google's G Suite, which is still better than free web mail since you no longer have the lock-in, plus a better privacy policy, is $5 per month, which is almost the price of a Starbucks Venti Latte. And this is actually an expensive offering in the business.
So no, it's not an expensive coffee, especially since we are talking about a highly skilled and highly paid demographic.
Also I'm from Romania where we have a lower cost of living and lower wages to go with it, so seeing my Silicon Valley brethren complaining about the price of paying for non-free email on your own domain is really awkward, given the importance of email.
I get it, I hate subscriptions for software too. But not when that service is essential for your profession, your security or your privacy and email is all of the above.
> That's less than the price of a Starbucks Grande Latte.
A cup of coffee is a pretty lousy indication of cost. For some people going into a Starbucks for a $5/€4,40/£3,92 gluten-free-unicorn-sprinkles-ariana-grande-latte may be part of a daily routine, but for others, coffee means using a coffee-maker to brew your own cup for a few cents, or just getting a cup to go at a some kiosk.
My point is that many of us drink such beverages every couple of days at least and in order to pay for your email address basically implies the same effort as buying a Starbucks Grande Latte.
And your email address is your online identity and has plenty of information in it that shouldn't leak, including your entire online purchasing history at least.
I am against paying for crap via subscriptions, I hate the subscriptions trend myself, but email in my opinion is fundamental to who we are and what we do online.
I think that's a pedantic detail that actually ignores the point being made. I've seen the "cheaper the the cost of a coffee per month!" type of phrasing used to commonly refer to Starbucks/etc
I almost never buy coffee out anywhere like Starbucks, but it was easy for me to understand in the context of his post
You can run your own email server via Vultr or DO for $5/month or less. You have to do some work to maintain it so there's the cost of time invested, so maybe two coffees/month. You can also opt for Fastmail or ProtonMail, or similar privacy-respecting email services, and again you're getting it for less than $5/month. I use Fastmail for my main email account and I love it.
I use Tiger Technologies (https://tigertech.net) for hosting mine and my wife's personal sites and email, they are all I need for basic Wordpress/email hosting and they have a superb support team. If I decide I want to get my hands dirty with running a server, I use Vultr.
Also the much better deal is the business edition, at $10 per month, which also gives you unlimited GDrive storage. Couple that with something like ArqBackup, Rclone, etc and it gets to be very cost effective, being cheaper than a Dropbox subscription.
Also the Terms of Service for G Suite is meant for businesses and thus much better.
Just be careful when buying apps and books from Google Play. If you don't want to be locked-in, don't purchase anything that can't be migrated.
Agreed. I'm on nightly and it has been stable - even with WR turned on. I've been pushing my family and friends to use FF - but a lot of them are Chrome loyalists. Still - one must persist.
I'd rather not have a world where only chrome and chrome clones exist - and I certainly don't appreciate that Chrome wants me to log in every time I use the browser (and getting more and more insistent at that lately from what I hear)
Firefox Quantum also nags constantly about logging in and syncing devices, not that I'm against it, it's great when you have multiple devices and don't want to install the same plugins, sync bookmarks, etc.
That's well and good but I'm replying to the comment above me which stated:
> I certainly don't appreciate that Chrome wants me to log in every time I use the browser (and getting more and more insistent at that lately from what I hear)
Did you have to disable the requests? Or are you really saying that on a virgin installation, Firefox never tried to get you to login and sync? Are you on Apple/Linux? I was able to disable most of the reminders to sync on both Android and Windows but I eventually gave in, in order to sync all my plugins and bookmarks.
> I am loving Quantum, and I don't understand why Firefox continues to slide.
Apparently a lot of Firefox installs are on older systems (think Windows XP/Vista era) from before Chrome took over the world. There's a reason Firefox was the last major browser to drop XP support (they only did so when 52 ESR left support a few months ago!). As those systems get phased out they generally get replaced with systems that come with Chrome preinstalled and that's "good enough" for most people buying them (unlike Internet Explorer back in the day) so they don't seek out alternatives.
They broke extension support. Half of the extensions disappeared (didn't migrate to Quantum). The other half works only partially. One year after Quantum i still have a blank new tab because a custom html file in new tab would require an extension AND a web server.
Sure, it is harder now for non-technical users to shoot themselves in the foot. On the other hand, Mozilla took away control from users. After Quantum I lost all hope.
There might be a problem with your session history files getting locked and therefore Firefox doesn't update them. Could you take a look here and let me know what you find:
Open your current Firefox settings (AKA Firefox profile) folder using either
"3-bar" menu button > "?" button > Troubleshooting Information
(menu bar) Help > Troubleshooting Information
type or paste about:support in the address bar and press Enter
In the first table on the page, click the "Show Folder" button.
In your profile folder, scroll down and double-click into the sessionstore-backups folder. You may see numerous files here. Of particular importance:
recovery.js: the windows and tabs in your currently live Firefox session -- if you check the modified date/time, is this fresh or is it from the time frame that keeps coming back?
recovery.bak: a backup copy of recovery.js
previous.js: the windows and tabs in your last Firefox session
upgrade.js-build_id: the windows and tabs in the Firefox session that was live at the time of your last update
Do you see any numbered files, such as recovery-1.js? Firefox may create those when it is unable to store your current session history in recovery.js. Unfortunately, at the next startup, those files are not used automatically.
I agree this was rough but things need to be taken into context with this in my opinion.
Given their small "market share", it would seem right to remove a major burden to rapid development (the old extension format, XPI) in favor of open standards (web workers).
It's more maintainable, more in-line with current standards. I am only speaking as a fly-on-the-wall here. Although I am a senior "full stack" developer, I am pretty far removed from any of the day-to-day here.
By wiping the slate clean in terms of extensions, hopefully this will be a small paint-point, quickly forgotten, and things move forward from here.
Re-reading this prior to submit, it seems like I've inserted too many items straight out of the BS generator but I'm ok with it.
"it would seem right to remove a major burden to rapid development (the old extension format, XPI) in favor of open standards (web workers)."
Perhaps. But it sure would have been better if the new extension system were as capable as the old before axing the extensions. The loss in functionality, for me, is unacceptable. At the heart of it, this is what made me give up entirely on post-57 Firefox.
It's hard to compete with a product that is being spread like crap ware bundled with other freeware or pushed through Android or the main search engine on the internet.
From my experience this is the ways most of the people I know came in contact with Chrome. Even those where I've installed FF end up with Chrome. When I ask them why they switched, they don't know. They don't even know where it came from...this is what you get from clicking "Next" without reading...
In fairness - much as I like desktop Firefox, Android Firefox has never felt as slick as Android Chrome. I'd love to switch, but it's got to be good enough.
I switched back to Chrome on Android, and will stay there until FF Mobile and LastPass start playing together nicely. I'm not sure which party is responsible, but it's a dealbreaker in general for me.
I use Firefox on Android and it's good enough. I don't even notice it's different. Additionally it's amusing to me to see just how far we have come where simply having a functional browser on a handheld device isn't enough.
(Reading this thread and writing this comment from Firefox on my phone)
I think FF Focus is absolutely brilliant an mobile and for everything else (except Facebook) I use firefox with ublock origin. It performs very well and I can nicely sync my passwords and tabs to my other devices.
True, but not very nice to use. For example, if you change the tab, all other pages get unloaded and will reload if you change back to them. Very good for loosing where on the page you where.
It is not a big issue really as FFF (as I understand it) is not meant to be used for tabbing a lot and it prevents the usual tab accumulation.
Firefox has noticeable delays and scrolling performance issues on OSX. I have a top of the line macbook from last year, with i7, 16GB RAM, etc. But even on that it's sluggish and stuttery. I've tried all sorts of performance tweaks, beta/nightly builds - nothing really makes it as snappy as Chrome or Safari. So, unfortunately, I have to go back to those.
I Ihave around 50 tabs in FF, but active only maybe 15-20. On Mac OS I see a standard problem when I connect external monitor after wakeup, FF starts to "eat" memory like crazy, until I either kill it, or it's crashed. I need to restart FF every 2 days to get my memory back. Here is screenshot from App monitor: https://www.dropbox.com/s/rh133wnhk1wgbe2/Screen%20Shot%2020...
Sometimes, after 2 days of work each worker consumes ~7Gb of RAM (on machine with 16GB of RAM)...
P.S. mostly opened documents in google doc, gmail, calendar, JIRA/Confluence...
There is a well-known bug[1] with non-standard resolutions. Try changing the resolution and see if it makes any difference. If not, please file a new bug :). Otherwise you can see if you can help fixing the issue. Unfortunately, it requires some re-engineering of core graphics processing and they are working on it, but it'll likely take a few more months to fix completely.
My problem with the new FireFox is simply that I don't like it. I like it better than Chrome, but I was never a Chrome user (I've been using Firefox since the very beginning). I'm better off using a fork that still allows for enough customization that I can make it behave the way that suits me best. Since I can use forks in a way that is no less (or marginally less) secure, they are my best option.
I have tried using Firefox several times this year, but on a Macbook with only 8gb of RAM the RAM usage was far too big compared to Chrome. It made the rest of my computer sluggish. And Firefox itself was slower than Chrome, one of the examples for me is Youtube. Yes Youtube is Google, but I use it often enough that it was too slow for me to stick with firefox.
I get your point but I often wonder if by stuffing everything through a networked document renderer hasn't caused a lot of those performance issues.
Rendering a page is expensive enough, but you have a generation of programmers who only know javascript (and for good reason, the web is an incredible software deployment system). But when everything is a web-app, then the renderer that does the parsing and execution needs to be optimised so hard that the code might as well be proprietary.
That's how I feel about chrome. Parsing and rendering websites today is /hard/ and we're not helping things by pushing more and more and more into our browsers. Of course it will become a monopoly.
well to be fair sometimes my firefox makes really really strange things.
sometimes our internal sites won't work, because firefox resolves a IPv6 address (that is also in our network but for another domain.) when the thing has no IPv6 address.
i.e. git.example.com has the IPv6 and sometimes sentry.example.com resolves the ipv6 of git besides not having any IPv6 AAAA entry at all. I could not find out why that is happing, since it's only happening in FF.
besides that, I also think the developer tools got better, but are still not on par with Google Chrome.
(At the moment I primarly use Firefox, besides when the bug occurs than I open these services in Safari or Chrome)
It's actually turned into a benefit for me that the developer tools suck. I also use FF for browsing and then Chrome for debugging. Which is nice when a coworker is watching me debug over my shoulder because autocomplete never reveals the incredibly basic shit I google on a day to day basis.
> I have read comments in this thread suggesting that FF's performance is not that snappy but I cannot seem to notice any difference.
I tried to switch from Chrome to Firefox a few months ago but I had a terrible experience using Hangouts with a customer for two hours. The Firefox degraded until a point of no return and that sucks when you are talking with a customer. I initially blamed the network but there was no signal of network issues.
> I tried to switch from Chrome to Firefox but I had a terrible experience using Hangouts
So, you're saying Google's anti-competitive tactic of degrading and not supporting other browsers worked on you. Did you know there's a name for that tactic? Embrace Extend Extinguish.
Did you consider using another, more neutral video conference system?
I use FF for normal browsing and Chrome for Google based stuff that requires an account, like Gmail, YouTube, Docs, etc. Besides not having ANY performance issues with FF I think it is good practice to separate most of your accounts from normal surfing.
Just today I ran into a weird bug in Google Drive's document editor where selecting 'paste without formatting' from the context menu resulted in a pop-up saying 'These actions are unavailable via the Edit menu, but you can still use: Ctrl+C Ctrl+V Ctrl+X'.
This is not a weird bug. It’s Google tailoring their products for their own browser and ignoring the others (Safari has the same “issue”). It’s their prerogative to do so, but I think they’re risking getting hit by antitrust for these kinds of antics in the future.
I ran into the same issue and had the same thoughts. The ironic part is Hangouts might be extinguishing Firefox, but it's also extinguishing itself. Google doesn't maintain it, it's running on autopilot and will likely be shutdown in 2019.
When using a Google property (particularly a niche/slated for death property), expect it to work better in Google's own browser.
I'm not sure which is likely to be lower ranked at Google - Edge compatibility for all those end users for whom changing browsers is too difficult or Firefox where compatibility is probably easy but the users can probably figure out the message of "works better with OEM branded components (or browsers)!"
