• yukijoou@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    1 year ago

    my list of cool features:

    Gradually rolling out in Fx119, Firefox now allows you to edit PDFs by adding images and alt text, in addition to text and drawings.

    If you’re migrating your data from Chrome, Firefox now offers the ability to import some of your extensions as well.

    As part of Total Cookie Protection, Firefox now supports the partitioning of Blob URLs, this mitigates a potential tracking vector that third-party agents could use to track an individual.

    The visibility of fonts to websites has been restricted to system fonts and language pack fonts in Enhanced Tracking Protection strict mode to mitigate font fingerprinting.

    Encrypted Client Hello (ECH) is now available to Firefox users, delivering a more private browsing experience. ECH extends the encryption used in TLS connections to cover more of the handshake and better protect sensitive fields.

    Firefox is now available in the Santali (sat) language.

    Several enhancements have been made to the Inactive CSS styles feature. This feature assists in identifying CSS properties that have no effect on an element. Pseudo-elements such as ::first-letter, ::cue, and ::placeholder are now fully supported.

    The JSON viewer is particularly useful for debugging REST APIs, as it displays formatted JSON responses. Now, if the JSON is invalid or broken, it automatically switches to a raw data view, improving the user experience.

    Grouping of items in an array (and iterables) is now easier by using the methods Object.groupBy or Map.groupBy.

    • Pantherina@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hmm, only system fonts doesnt seem to help? Wouldnt that circumvent having the browser in a fake environment like Torbrowser does that, with the same fonts?

      • El Barto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Torbrowser is based in Firefox, but it could make sure that its anti-tracking mechanisms keep working.

  • SauceFlexr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I keep waiting for better profile management. Not saying it needs to mirror chrome exactly, but feature wise it falls short (at least how I would like to use it).

      • SauceFlexr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        While they are passable, if you have used/setup profiles in Chrome, it’s a far better user experience with more flexibility. Normally, I would go into app grouping in the start menu, but I just realized I am commenting in the Linux community. 😂

      • Pantherina@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        They are completely isolates browser settings. Account, session, settings, hardening, history, everything.

        • pezhore@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          To a certain extent you can do that with multi-account containers.

          For instance, I can have Amazon always open in my “Shopping” tab to keep it separate from my “Social Networks” tab.

          • Whooping_Seal@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’d much rather use a separate Firefox (now Mozilla I think) account for my professional work. I also would prefer having separate extensions, notably Zotero connector is kind of useless for my personal browsing

          • Pantherina@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes to some extent, but no addons, settings, user account, passwords, synchronized stuff etc.

            Also afaik you can have profiles be encrypted with different master passwords

            • the_weez@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I use multiple accounts with Firefox containers, on office.com specifically. One container for my normal account and one for my admin. It works great for me but maybe there are other sites it doesn’t like.

  • tun@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you’re migrating your data from Chrome, Firefox now offers the ability to import some of your extensions as well.

    Nice.

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      35
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think this is misleading. They’re offering to match your Chrome extension with an equivalent Firefox extension. But they are not providing an extension compatibility layer to run Chrome extensions.

      • tun@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah. I agree with you. New non-tech-savvy person might misunderstand.

        However, new user rarely look at the changelog. So I think this wording does not affect much.

        • Adanisi@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And whether this is using equivalents or a compatibility layer, to the average non tech savvy person is irrelevant. They don’t care as long as it’s the extension they had and it works.

          • tun@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, agree.

            Currently the only browser (I know) that has the compatibility layer is the Orion browser by Kagi search engine. It is based on WebKit but expose API for both Firefox and Chromium extensions.

            Not total compatibility but FF web extension compatibility is higher in number than Chromium.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t. If they meant that they would’ve said it. I had no moment of misunderstanding at all. Of course it would mean “I’ll automatically match to the equivalent one so you don’t have to do it manually”. They just wanted to state it in a way it was easier to understand

      • priapus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I dont think that is misleading. They’re functionally the same extensions made by the same authors, if you trust one you trust the other.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m guessing way less than 1% of people would use mobile extensions. I personally do but I don’t think most people use chrome on mobile because of the lack of full extension support on mobile Firefox (which btw is coming). I think people use chrome because “everyone else does”.

        • koorool@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          People use whatever ‘Internet icon’ came with their device and live their ignorant, but happy life :)

        • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I think you’re underestimating how valuable tab groups are to people. I would make a full switch if Firefox could offer that feature on mobile in any reasonable way. Since it’s already a desktop extension, I’m just waiting for them to be made available on Android

          • El Barto@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think you’re underestimating the diversity of browser users out there.

            The majority simply doesn’t care about extensions. They just use whatever is already installed on their phones, as long as it’s useable enough.

    • 3laws@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can use a couple already in the nightly builds of both firefox and the respective add-on

      • TonyOstrich@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, but not even close to all. It’s been literal years since the change. I was understanding at first, but now it’s just becoming frustrating. Things that are very easy in desktop Firefox just isn’t possible on mobile Firefox. And yes, I am running Firefox nightly and custom collections for my extensions on mobile.

  • bundes_sheep@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    The visibility of fonts to websites has been restricted to system fonts and language pack fonts in Enhanced Tracking Protection strict mode to mitigate font fingerprinting.

    I’m happy to see this. It’s crazy how hard advertisers try to determine who I am when I’m actively attempting not to be shown their garbage and won’t buy it from their links. Browsers should be sending far fewer html headers, and restricting the listed fonts to a common list is a good step forward.

    • Kena@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are extensions that do that, use those along with userChrome and you can effectively replicate the look and feel of any other browser.

      • Onihikage@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I recently found Sideberry which looks like an improvement over TST, but I’ve been putting off switching to it because I would have to reorganize 431 tabs :')

      • koorool@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It should be built in at this point. It’s annoying to apply userChrome.css tweaks to remove normal tabs and sidebar header.

  • Link@rentadrunk.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Slightly odd they are opting to gradually roll out several features this release.

    If they aren’t ready then maybe push them back to the next release?

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why does it need to be limited to open source? A lot of the biggest apps out there typically roll out features slowly. I feel like once Facebook started doing it, it became widespread