Avast WEBforum
Other => General Topics => Topic started by: DavidR on October 28, 2006, 06:37:30 PM
-
Hi Guys,
I'm looking for feed back on any extensions that currently don't work with firefox 2.0 ?
I have a number of extensions that I consider essential and they must work with firefox 2.0 or I would have to wait for the extension to be updated before moving to firefox 2.0.
NoScript, DrWeb, AdBlock Plus, BBCodeXtra, DictionarySearch, Translate, Translation Panel, FlashGot, for example.
So is anyone having any compatibility issues with these or any other extensions under firefox 2.0, thanks in advance for any feed back.
-
DrWeb works OK. I use the standard AdBlock with a very minimal blocklist, and that's working OK. I don't use any of the rest. Haven't had a problem with Firefox 2.0 at all, and I've been using it since the beta- seems very stable.
-
Hi DavidR !
I use Firefox 2.0 since yesterday and following Add-ons i am using are properly ok:
- Adblock Plus
- Flash Got
- gTranslate
- No Script
All in German Translation.
Greets
Tevion
-
Hello David :)
As I don't use a lot of extensions in Firefox, I can't say much, but from what I am using the working ones are:
FlashGot, DrWeb, gTranslate, NoScript, Gmail Notifier, DictionarySearch, AdBlock Plus . ;D
The ones that are not working are:
FasterFox...don't have more that don't work :D
As Frank said Firefox 2.0 seems very stable, and I am very happy with it ;D
-
Thanks for the feed back guys.
So far looking good for update to firefox 2.0 as the more important extensions look like they are covered. I have FasterFox but didn't notice a huge improvement with that (on-dial-up) so I can live without that until it is updated.
-
Hi David an easy way around program updates FF and extension problems is quite easy to resolve.
I usually alter a small part of the install.rdf file within the extension .xpi
I open the extension .xpi file in Winzip or Rar whatever! alter this part of the .rdf (text base) file <em:maxVersion>2.0.0.*</em:maxVersion>resave the altered text file
when closing the Compression program your are asked if you want to save the changes (Yes)
I then install the .xpi file without a problem to date every extension I have altered in this way has worked
-
I just installed Firefox 2.0.
More extensions that work are:
Forecastfox
Sage
Smiley Xtra
CuteMenus Crystal SVG
IE Tab
None of mine did not work.
Ro Ro 8) 8)
-
Thanks tednelly, I have done that before with the switch to 1.5 when lots of my extensions didn't work. It isn't so bad this time there are only a couple that I consider essential and worth the manual tweak. Translate being one that I used lots on the forums.
Thanks roro, several of mine don't work but I had 27 extensions, some are now redundant like the spell checker incorporated into ff 2.0.
-
...but I had 27 extensions, some are now redundant like the spell checker incorporated into ff 2.0.
I dropped several myself, due to functions now being built in, and now run 2.0 with just the following (for now):
Adblock Plus with the Filterset G, and dutchblock lists
No Script
Gmail Manager
Searchbar Autosizer
Always liked the default 1.5 theme, and don't like the new one, so I'm now running Winestripe 1.0.
Overall, I'm very happy with 2.0. It's lean and fast, even on an old machine like mine with limited RAM.
If anyone has a favorite extension or theme, that hasn't updated yet, do check the author's website. It may be available, but is in the queue to be approved by Mozilla, and it hasn't been added to the official update list yet.
The best info on the current status of themes and extensions, is in the Mozilla forum under "Extension/Theme Releases".
-
:) Hi all :
Perhaps the views of Paul Thurrott of WindowsITPro
may interest you !? Find it at :
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/ArticleID/93992/93992.html .
-
:) Hi all :
Perhaps the views of Paul Thurrott of WindowsITPro
may interest you !? Find it at :
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/ArticleID/93992/93992.html .
Mozilla Ships Firefox 2.0 ... It's a Dud
That's one person personal opinion. Just because it appears on a blog or website doesn't change that fact. :)
It's also just a headline trying to entice readership and just as bad as some of the headlines used about IE7.
There will be those of us who will like the new version and some prefer to stay with an older version.
Just keep in mind that the newer version of any software also contains the latest security updates.
For that reason alone, and update is probably warranted. IMHO
-
Perhaps the views of Paul Thurrott of WindowsITPro may interest you!?
Not particularly. Paul's an interesting writer, but mostly, he's just a walking and talking billboard for all things Microsoft.
Like Bob says, it's his opinion, though in Paul's case, it probably "butters his bread" to downplay Firefox.
Short bio on Paul here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Thurrott
Personally, I've made my decision to support open source projects and products whenever I can, and though read and noted, no one else's opinion will probably change that.
-
No worries David
couldn't have put it better myself Bob and OC ;)
-
The article is pretty thin, if you ask me.
The criticisms of Firefox are
1) He doesn't like the new buttons,
2) Anti-phishing technology is weak
3) It not much of an improvement over 1.5
Weak arguments for calling the new version a dud for the following reasons:
1) You can add themes to the browser, and even return the old look if you like it, as the author admits,
2) The anti-phishing feature was present in beta versions, but only for testing: this gave some reviewers the impression that the technology was weak. The author of this article may well have been unaware of this. Other writers have found the anti-phishing tool as effective as or more effective than the IE7 tool:
Update 4-August, 3:40PM PDT: A representative of Mozilla’s PR agency contacted me and says that the anti-phishing feature in Firefox 2 Beta 1 "was intended to test the core Phishing Protection framework within the browser, not to provide a full list of suspected scam sites."
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=109#more-109
Finally, I remarked a couple of days ago that it would be interesting to compare the results of the anti-phishing technology built into the latest releases of both Microsoft's Internet Explorer 7 and Mozilla's Firefox 2.0 browsers. When I visited this particular site in Firefox, I received a pop-up alert from Netcraft's anti-phishing toolbar, but also from Firefox, which flagged the scam site as a "suspected web forgery" and included links I could click on to earn more about phishing scams. When I visited the Bank of America scam site in IE7, I received no such alert.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/10/phishers_respond_to_web_bankin.html
3) 1.5 was a good browser: 2.0 is better. How much better is a matter of personal opinion. Other IT writers have found it a significant improvement:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=189
What is the author's conclusion:
Firefox 2.0 is free, but it's a woefully minor improvement over Firefox 1.5 that suffers from various incompatibility problems, especially with themes and other add-ons. I wouldn't recommend this new version, to be honest. I'll be sticking with Firefox 1.5 at least for now. I recommend you do the same, or switch to the surprisingly solid IE 7.0.
Stick with 1.5 or use the surprisingly solid IE 7.0.
Do I detect a note of bias here: What are these supposed problems in Firefox 2.0? Why is there no mention of the problems people are having with IE7? (I have heard that IE7 add-ons are breaking the browser; from my own experience, I can say IE7 throws up error messages all the time, fails to load pages and breaks applications.)
http://billpstudios.blogspot.com/2006/10/ie-7-click-dont-install.html
I might say download the solid Firefox 2.0 and avoid the problems with IE7, but actually I still think it's worth downloading IE7 for the security advantages over IE6.
-
Hi FwF,
I have installed the portable version of FF 2.03. All extensions work for my in-browser security. Only thing that they have gone back on is the cookie manager or the add and edit possibilities for cookies. Well stealther works to block cookies, but what is a decent cookie manager for the FF 2.0 at the moment? Or do I have to wait until the others are upgraded to work in 2.0?
polonus
-
As far as cookies go I think that they have removed a very useful option the ability to deny third party cookies whilst accepting cookies from the originating site. I hate this third party cookie cr*p nearly as much as the third party scripts you find when you use NoScript it opens your eyes to what is going on behind the scenes.
-
Polonus, have you used this cookie manager program? Please go HERE (http://www.scorpiondb.com/firefox/extensions/cookiesafe/) to view the program. :)
-
To accept cookies from the originating site only...
Type "about:config" into the address bar in Firefox 2.0, and hit enter.
Scroll down to "network.cookie.cookieBehavior".
Set value to "1"
(If accepting cookies from the originating site was your preference is 1.5, it may already be set to "1" as part of the transfered user set.)
-
Back to topic (incompatible extensions) ...
My Show Image (0.4.1) has so far been rejected by 2.0. They've been fairly good in the past at keeping up with Firefox upgrades, typically within a week or 10 days, but the last entry in their "comments" is something like a year old so I wonder if they've abandoned new development.
Show Image is handy because I can Stop a page then view the image right in its original place-holder, so I don't have to wait for the whole page. Firefox's View Image, in contrast, insists on refreshing the window to display just the image, so I have to go Back (and possibly reload) if I decide I want to follow the thumbnail-link.
Too bad there wasn't a way to make View Image open a new window (or new tab), then I wouldn't need the extension.
-
Show Image (0.4.1)
Show Image has been updated to 0.4.2
See here:
http://showimage.mozdev.org/
-
Tried to install it but got a message in FF stating the
FF is preventing moxdev.org from asking me to install the program. ???
-
^,
As I said earlier in this thread...
"If anyone has a favorite extension or theme, that hasn't updated yet, do check the author's website. It may be available, but is in the queue to be approved by Mozilla, and it hasn't been added to the official update list yet."
That's probably the reason. Stand by...
-
Hi malware fighters,
Well lots off people say that in 2.0 they dumbed down the browser. Especially on the third party cookie thing, maybe Mozilla was in cahoots with some parties that rather saw this changes brought in. Anyway In about:config, change this line: network.cookie.cookieBehavior to 1. And install TrackMeNot this time.
polonus
-
To accept cookies from the originating site only...
Type "about:config" into the address bar in Firefox 2.0, and hit enter.
Scroll down to "network.cookie.cookieBehavior".
Set value to "1"
(If accepting cookies from the originating site was your preference is 1.5, it may already be set to "1" as part of the transfered user set.)
Thanks, yes the settings were carried forward from 1.5, that is a really poor decision to leave this out of the cookie settings when it was in the previous version.
-
Hi DavidR.
Anyway I hope the add and edit cookie add-on will be updated for FF 2.0.3 soon. There you could tamper what is being sent or the time the cookie expires or whatever. Tamper data can do that too, but that is not an extension for the light-hearted. But one thing in the routines of this world I have escaped to understand, when something is good and functional, why do they have to change and not always for the better. So when someone finds his or her favourite beer, it is time for the maker to take it from the shelves. Haven't you also experienced these ways of reality. There must be some dark dumb force that is into this.
polonus
-
Show Image (0.4.1)
Show Image has been updated to 0.4.2
See here:
http://showimage.mozdev.org/
Although it shows it has been updated there is no download link for it yet the oficial ShowImage page still shows 0.4.1. But as TedNelly mentions it is easy to do a temporary hack to get it to work. No guarantee how it will effect ff 2.0 though.
@ Bob
Yo will get a strip across the top of the web page click the button and add mozdev.org to the allowed list of sites to download and try it again, but not much point unless the download is 0.4.2.
-
Well lots off people say that in 2.0 they dumbed down the browser. Especially on the third party cookie thing...
From this thread, we know how to set the default in the about:config file to accept originating site cookies only.
Since the majority, if not all of the third party cookies are for advertising and tracking, and most of us use Adblock Plus, why would you need the option of accepting third party cookies?
Just curious...
Edit: Might this be Mozilla's reasoning for dropping the option as well?
-
But as TedNelly mentions it is easy to do a temporary hack to get it to work. No guarantee how it will effect ff 2.0 though.
Personally, I'm not a fan of hacking extensions. Unless the loss of an extension was causing me to contemplate suicide, I could probably wait until the new version is approved by Mozilla.
That's one thing I like about open source products. The extension writers seem to jump right on new versions. If the author gives me the option to download it from his website because it's in line to be approved by Mozilla, fine. Otherwise, the prudent decision might be to just wait.
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I do check the Mozilla forum often to get the latest info on extensions.
-
Well I converted two Translate, which if you click the view home page you get redirected and no link there for translate extension. So I probably have the last version, which may not get updated. I also did the same for FasterFox because on dial-up I need all the help I can get, in the short time I was without it I did notice a slight slow down. Both are working fine, but it is very much a user beware/risk.
I check for updates daily and also check the extension home page also.
-
^,
I see that "Translate" has not updated yet.
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/181/
But, there's another extension called "gtranslate" that apparently has.
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/918/
-
I think gTranslate lasted about two minutes on my system before removal, if I remember rightly it translates the whole page and not selections, e.g. a post in a topic. That was/is the beauty of Translate as you select the text, right click and select the language from and to and it opens a new tab with the results, really useful and quick. I had the 0.6.0.9 a later version (which isn't mentioned on the mozilla.org page that also didn't work with f 2.0) from the authors site before it went down.
-
...if I remember rightly it translates the whole page and not selections...
Since I have no use for it, I'm not going to install the extension to check this for sure, but your gripe may have been addressed in a later version.
From the features list:
"...but if the page (or the selected text) is detected..."
It might be worth another look, since "Translate" appears to be dead for now.
-
I tried the latest gTranslate extension. With the extension hack Translate is working fine right now so the urgency isn't an issue, I have a back-up, Translation Panel, just in case, but it isn't as flexible.
-
Here (http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/10/28/2115202.shtml) is some info at Slashdot. The "too-much-recursion" crash is still present in FF 2.0. I suspect FF 2.0 might have been rushed out to keep IE 7 in check.
BTW, I found the link to the article at Portableapps to see if FF 2.0 portable is out or not. Portable versions are recommendable when you are trying some extensions since they are easy to back up and don't make mess with your hard disks. Actually, I am using FF portable even on my own PC.
Personally, I still stick to FF 1.5.0.7 (portable) but if the portable version of 2.0 is out, I'd try it and see which fits my browsing habit.
-
^^, Sorry, I must have misunderstood. From your original post, I thought you hadn't installed 2.0.
...before moving to firefox 2.0...
The latest version of "gtranslate" (0.3.1) was released on Oct 24th (the same day 2.0 Final was released).
Anyway, I'm glad you've had an opportunity to try it, and you've got the bases covered.
-
Thanks for the info (?) on Show Image -- I'd checked for updates a few minutes ago (via Tools/Add-ons) with no luck.
Interestingly, their site shows this new one as 2 days old -- if I try to get it, I'm getting the Install Extension window OK, but it quickly gives me a "Download error -228", whatever that means. Server overload, maybe?
I guess it's just a matter of keep trying, since obviously they're still trying to keep up to date.
-
..."Download error -228", whatever that means...
I guess it's just a matter of keep trying, since obviously they're still trying to keep up to date.
I seem to remember reading that it was a bug in the RCs, but should have been fixed in the Final.
There are a couple of threads on the Mozilla forum addressing this.
From personal experience, I had the same error when I tried to download Winestripe 1.0 from the author's website. A couple of days later, the theme updated from the "Ad-ons".
-
Good news there is an update for FasterFox if you use it.
No news on ShowImage although I did the hack for that and it is working with 2.0.
-
Is Firefox 2.0 a dud? (http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=129&tag=nl.e622)
Some are even saying that upgrading to 2.0 might not be a good idea[/b] (http://listvine.com/2006/10/25/9-reasons-not-to-upgrade-to-firefox-20/[b).
So what's behind all this? Here's a quick short list of the most popular Firefox 2.0 gripes:
*Random freezes
*Poor antiphishing technology
*Confused Options dialog box
*Bulky, inconsistent theme
*Incompatibility with extensions
*Memory leaks
*CSS issues
*Buggy history bar
But if someone tells you that it's a bad idea to use Firefox on Windows Vista,
do yourself a favor and listen to them because they are telling the truth
-
Bob,
I'll let you respond to your own post...
"Mozilla Ships Firefox 2.0 ... It's a Dud"
That's one person's personal opinion. Just because it appears on a blog or website doesn't change that fact. It's also just a headline trying to entice readership, and just as bad as some of the headlines used about IE7.
I would have certainly understood someone else posting this, but I'm confused as to why you would...
-
I've responded to the original story at ZDNET: it's a pretty atrocious piece of journalism. The author lifted his main points straight from a blog, without giving us any indication of why the opinion of the blog author is especially valuable, and then adding the phrase "Here's a quick short list of the most popular Firefox 2.0 gripes." to give the impression that more than one person has these gripes, when clearly it's just one person.
Clearly journalistic standards at ZDNET can get pretty low.
-
Hi FwF.
Want to go back through (FreewheelinFrank)enFox to the old ChromeEdit, it is possible with an unofficial for Firefiox 2.0: http://webdesigns.ms11.net/FrankFox/
Enjoy,
polonus
-
No news on ShowImage although I did the hack for that and it is working with 2.0.
I went back and tried again right after my last post yesterday, and it downloaded-installed just fine. Oddly, still nothing via Tools/Add-ons, but going right to the site for it worked fine.
-
Bob,
I'll let you respond to your own post...
"Mozilla Ships Firefox 2.0 ... It's a Dud"
That's one person's personal opinion. Just because it appears on a blog or website doesn't change that fact. It's also just a headline trying to entice readership, and just as bad as some of the headlines used about IE7.
I would have certainly understood someone else posting this, but I'm confused as to why you would...
I simply passed along the information.
Please note, I didn't add any comments just supplied the links. :)
FF2 is installed on my system even though it's not the default browser.
-
I've responded to the original story at ZDNET: it's a pretty atrocious piece of journalism
I just read the responses to this article on ZDNET.
People are hammering this guy into the ground like a tent stake.
-
No news on ShowImage although I did the hack for that and it is working with 2.0.
I went back and tried again right after my last post yesterday, and it downloaded-installed just fine. Oddly, still nothing via Tools/Add-ons, but going right to the site for it worked fine.
Thanks Mike, I've got the ShowImage 0.4.2 update now, same here nothing on the regular check for updates.
-
I've responded to the original story at ZDNET: it's a pretty atrocious piece of journalism
I just read the responses to this article on ZDNET.
People are hammering this guy into the ground like a tent stake.
I don't think information about memory leak is just a personal opinion. The life of open-source is open information. Fan psychology is a threat as well as commercial journalism, which is why I introduced the link from Slashdot.
-
I don't think information about memory leak is just a personal opinion. The life of open-source is open information. Fan psychology is a threat as well as commercial journalism, which is why I introduced the link from Slashdot.
Agreed, and thank you for the link.
I don't know if the following update was posted before or after you set your link to the Slashdot article:
"Update: 10/30 12:57 GMT by KD : Jesse Ruderman wrote in with this correction...
The article claims that Firefox 2 shipped with a known security hole This is incorrect; the hole is fixed in both Firefox 1.5.0.7 and Firefox 2. The source of the confusion is that the original version of this report demonstrated two crash bugs, one of which was a security hole and the other of which was just a too-much-recursion crash. The security hole has been fixed but we're still trying to figure out the best way to fix the too-much-recursion crash. The report has been updated to clear up the confusion."
Regarding the "too-much-recursion" crash. As you can see from Jesse's response, Mozilla is certainly aware of it. (There are also a couple of threads on the Mozilla forum regarding this.)
As I'm sure you would agree, no product is ever complete. Never, ever. There's always something that needs to be refined. The road map to the release of 2.0 has been around for a long time, so I respectfully disagree with your original post, that Mozilla rushed to market.
Frankly, if a fix can be found, I have complete trust in the 100s if not 1000s of volunteers devoted to Firefox to come up with it. Unlike the majority of Microsoft employees, who work for a paycheck, these people must really love the product to devote so much time to it.
Regarding my response to FWF, which you quoted. In my opinion, the guy was simply looking for a "hook" to get readers to his books and other products. A simple Google search reveals the business he's truly in.
The article was ill prepared, not well researched, and in some cases, his "facts" were flat wrong. As a reward for publishing the article, he has been taken to the woodshed by many, and thumped. Next time, I hope he'll think before he types.
By the way, I'm not a rabid fan of any specific open source product. But, I'm a great fan of the open source concept. If something comes along that's better than Firefox, I'll move on. Same with Thunderbird. In fact, it's on my to do list to download the windows version of Evolution to take a look.
I'm also looking at a recently received disk from Ubuntu for Dapper Drake, that's sitting on the corner of my desk. That will be installed and updated on my new HP box, that they're currently building, sometime over the Christmas break.
I've also downloaded, and have started to read the documentation on Nvu, so I can finally dump FrontPage, which I use to maintain my website.
When all of that is installed, it's goodbye to Microsoft. Something I promised myself way back in the Netscape - IE browser war days...
Thank you for your comments.
Edit: Typo
-
Here's another reveiw of the two latest Browser updates:
Internet Explorer 7 vs. Firefox 2 (http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6656808-1.html?tag=nl.e415)
Remember, this is a review posted on cnet.com. Not my personal opinion. ;D
-
Hi Bob3160,
While I still prefer Flock to FF, but that is a personal feel, I want to emphasize that with IE 7.0 there was NOT a complete overhaul of IE 6.0. This again is postponed until IE 8.0. That is the disadvantage of a large platform, the ailment is called "backward compatibility", but this ailment also means backward compatibility in flaws and holes. There are holes in IE 7.0 that go back all the way to IE 5.0., and were never fixed. In other ways we are pressed forwards by MS to grow and upgrade, on the other way the browser upgrade can be partly seen as "vaporware" again.
MS made a "stand-alone" by design fit to the Internet, with NT they got a decent and secure design, why did not they do the same with their browser, but I think they are too busy doing other things.
polonus
-
I don't think information about memory leak is just a personal opinion. The life of open-source is open information. Fan psychology is a threat as well as commercial journalism, which is why I introduced the link from Slashdot.
I have no problem with anybody writing about problems they have with Firefox. My objection to the ZDNET article is that the supposed "popular gripes" come word for word from one person's blog.
"Popular" means liked, enjoyed or supported by many people (Cambridge Dictionary), so where is the evidence that these are popular gripes? The blog links to another blog which mentions problems with Firefox freezing; four people post comments saying they have the same problem. (It's worth noting that the blog was posted while Firefox was still in beta.) In support of other claims, the blog links to a forum thread where one person has a problem with the history list, and another blog which doesn't like the way FF 2.0 handles RSS feeds.
This is a grand total of eight people. By any stretch of the imagination, this is not a list of gripes "supported by many people", and to call it so is an act of journalistic dishonesty.
My other point was to question why the opinion of one blogger is especially valuable. Why does this blog deserve to be given publicity on ZDNET and now Slashdot? Has anybody actually heard of Listvine? Is his or her opinion any more valid than, say, a random citizen selected from the local bus stop? Why does this person's FUD deserve to be spread round the internet?
-
hate to rain on the parade , im as big a fan of FF as any but it seems a new problem is emerging. :-X
http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2006-5633
-
hate to rain on the parade
http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2006-5633
And when this one is fixed, there will never be another one in Firefox again. Right?
From five posts up this thread...
"As I'm sure you would agree, no product is ever complete. Never, ever. There's always something that needs to be refined."
Thanks for the heads up, I can't wait for your next post on a glitch in Firefox.
Edit:
Sorry, my response was too harsh. Just one of my pet peeves. In my opinion, it's a waste of time and bandwidth, to report every little glitch in a program. If it's a really serious problem, there will be numerous news articles referring to it. Read and react as necessary.
As for the balance of the glitches, people just need to keep their programs updated, and they'll be fine. Things are always being fixed. It's a never ending process.
My apologies.
-
Hi malware forum,
The add & edit Cookie add-on ported for FF 2.0 is here:
http://home.tula.net/cbin/addneditcookies-0.2.2.0.xpi
polonus
-
Should have mentioned this earlier. This is a great way to follow what's happening in the development of Firefox, including discussions on bugs, extensions and themes.
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox2/StatusMeetings
Also, here's the latest list of Add-ons in the queue (from the 10/24 meeting). I'm sure there are more that have been added, and many of these have been released, but I don't see a more current list.
Check a release date on the Add-ons page for one of these items, and then compare to this list. It should give you a pretty good idea, as to the lead time to release:
http://people.mozilla.com/~chofmann/addons/review-priority.txt
-
Thanks for the links OrangeCrate.
-
^, You're welcome.
-
Several nice tweaks here:
http://www.lifehacker.com/software/firefox-2/geek-to-live-top-firefox-2-config-tweaks-209941.php
And, a list of explanations on "about:config" options:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Firefox_:_FAQs_:_About:config_Entries