XYMer's Home away from Home

When http://bbs.xlr8yourmac.com is down (i.e. always)
Privacy Policy
It is currently Tue Mar 26, 2019 9:15 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 1:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
We're back. Japan was lovely as usual.

I return (as usual) with Firefox questions.

Firefox esr has always been slow since we've installed El Cap. I read somewhere that Firefox and El Cap don't always play nice.

Is it possible to install Quantum to try it out on the same account as Ff esr? (Presently we do have Safari running as well.)
I assume I can't use the same profile, but is it possible to migrate the bookmarks from esr to Quantum (and have them remain in Ff esr as well)?

I assume Quantum is the last best choice when esr gets to EOL.

Quantum will run on EC won't it???

Is there an AdBlock Plus that works OK with Quantum?
What about NoScript?


I've searched but can't find folks saying they like ABP or NS with Quantum, but I always take what I find online with a lot of grains of salt.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 1:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 8:13 pm
Posts: 10378
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Yes, you need alternate profiles because the newer versions convert the profile's databases to a format that can't be read by the older versions.

Minimum OS is 10.9, same as Google. If you want to know what Mozilla will do in a couple months just keep an eye on what Google is doing now. After Google abandoned older OSes Mozilla leaped onto the bandwagon.

I use uBlock Origin with Firefox, but AdBlock Plus runs OK. Depends on whether you want to familiarize yourself with uBO, the interface is different, and if you've fiddled with writing your own blocking filters I think that language is different. I personally appreciate uBO's element picker which basically writes filters for me based on the element I select, which is really why I haven't bothered to learn how to do it by hand. In my experience it runs faster than ABP.

Noscript has been updated for the new FF although I can't comment on its functionality. From grumblings I heard from other extension developers Mozilla bent over backwards to help keep it working in the WebExtensions world, with a lot of staff involved. Meanwhile the other devs (who were grumbling) got a my-way-or-the-highway attitude, assuming they got a response at all. Whether their griping was justified is a good question, but NS definitely got lots and lots of attention from Mozilla.

A new Firefox ESR is out based on 60. If you don't want to keep up with a constantly-changing interface you probably should try out 60ESR in case you end up sticking with it. The profile created by 60 and 60ESR are the same, its just you're on new ESR footing in case you stick with it.

If you want to sync data between profiles I'm generally sold on using Firefox Sync to do it. Just choose a very strong password. And if you're squeamish about having your data on Mozilla's servers, don't sync your passwords.

One of these days I'm going to sit down and prune back my profiles. Every time it blows up I create a new profile and keep the old one just in case I need to go back into it. I've got 5 or 6 of them on the G5 now and I just never go back to the old ones, I just create new ones when it all goes wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 6:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:02 pm
Posts: 1100
Location: Melbourne
Mrs H wrote:
We're back. Japan was lovely as usual.

I imagine it would be a nice place to visit.

Quote:
Firefox esr has always been slow since we've installed El Cap.

From using Firefox ESR on Elcapitan, one thing I have noticed, it does take a good while longer to launch. But once running, it is no faster or slower than my experience of it on Mavericks 10.9. I don't know why it takes so long to launch but that's the only difference I can see. The 'add-ons' like NoScript etc seem unaffected by 10.11. Just my view.

my version is ESR 52.8


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 7:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 6416
Location: NYC
I can't get into the details right now, but knowing how basically Terminal averse you are, I wouldn't strongly recommend you trying to run the current 52.8esr side by side with the latest Quantum 60.0.1, or even its esr version, now available. (But if you really want to try, I can give you instructions.) The NoScript version for Q has come a long way since it was revised for Q back in November, but it will still require a bit of getting used to/learning curve. As you already seem to be aware, not many of the addons were able to be moved over to Q intact, and many have simply been abandoned by their developers.

What you might want to try is Waterfox, a version ("fork") of Firefox which still supports all the older addons, now known as "legacy" addons, including the older NoScript, while incorporating the latest "improvements," some of them anyway, of FF Q 60. It will look* and function much as your current 52esr. It runs in its own Profile, so no need to use Firefox's profile manager, which runs out of Terminal, in order to run two different FF versions. It was updated just today to version 52.6.2. You may find that it runs faster than the regular FF 52esr. With some caveats, it may work out better for you than FF Q. I intend to keep both.

Writing this on iPad right now, so more to follow tomorrow, if you are interested.

*Well, in fact to get it looking just like your current 52esr will take just a timy bit of Terminal. But that's just for the initial setup.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 11:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 8:13 pm
Posts: 10378
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
You run a Terminal command once to make Firefox start profile manager and then uncheck a box in the profile manager window to always prompt you for a profile to use. No need to constantly pop into Terminal.

If you're talking about editing 60 to look like 52 that I can't comment on, but profile manager can be GUI driven once you get it to pop up.

But if you can't live with 60 then I agree that Waterfox is a great option. I just hope the one guy maintaining it doesn't feel stressed out. I worry about the TenFourFox guy for the same reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 7:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 6416
Location: NYC
I tried writing a step by step to run your current FF52.8esr side by side with the FF60.0.1. It just became hopelessly complicated, and would probably have lead to a lot of confusion for you, so I gave up on that. I agree with MB that Terminal is only involved to set up the Firefox Profile Manager, leading to a simple choice of selecting the Profile to use on open once the initial setup is accomplished. But getting to that point isn't simple at all.

Getting Waterfox to basically duplicate your 52esr does also involve a few steps with Terminal and its corresponding Profile Manager, but should be a lot less complicated. Let me know if you are interested and I can try to write a step by step. Or, even simpler, just tell you what files to move over for bookmarks, passwords, etc. With that scenario, you can would install needed addons from scratch.

EDIT: Actually, come to think of it, you can probably reproduce your current FF52esr in Waterfox without needing to use Terminal or WF's Profile Manager.

One of the benefits of WF is that it will continue to support your older addons, at least for the foreseeable future. However, one downside, as MB pointed out, is that it is basically run by a single developer--lately maybe with a few others to help with the coding. It's an enormous task for just one person, unlike Mozilla, where there is a full team. And a result of that downside is that there are lags with needed security patches, as new FF vulnerabilities are discovered. Someone who runs WF and whose judgment I trust, says that NoScript can usually prevent those vulnerabilities from being exploited.

My plan is to continue using the 52esr until its demise. I have both WF and the FF Q completely updated and ready to use, once that happens. Even now I occasionally use the FF Q, because it appears to run faster--but that might be due at least in part to the fact that I only have a limited number of addons installed there. And if I notice that WF has begun to accumulate unpatched vulnerabilities, I will use the FF Q until a patch arrives.

Waterfox https://www.waterfoxproject.org/en-US/w ... w/?scene=1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 8:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
Thanks all for your replies.
And a special thanks for remembering to whom you speak and taking into account my phobias about Terminal.

After a rethink, perhaps this is my best plan:
stay with Ff esr until its end of life
switch then to Quantum - but do so by "updating" (?) Ff esr to Quantum, so I won't be running both at once (is that how that will/should be done???)

As far as the slowness of Ff esr now - it's been the case pretty much since we went to El Cap.
Here are the symptoms:
- slow to launch as roam says
- slow to load some (but not all) websites
- lots and lots of spinning beach ball of death wait times while it gets its act together

I perhaps should ask our ISP about this, but I suspect they will tell me that we are at the end of their line (literally) for broadband - we can pay to get faster service (maybe) and next summer they are installing new lines which are supposed to increase speed. This is a new problem, though, since El Cap and shouldn't be an ISP issue.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 9:07 am 
Offline
Benevolent Dictator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:03 am
Posts: 15568
Quote:
- slow to load some (but not all) websites

What DNS numbers are you using?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
The DNS server # provided by my ISP.
I'm not sure it's a good idea to post the number here - is it?
We have a dynamic IP address (as I assume most folks do) - currently when I look at syst pref for the info the DNS Server number is greyed out.
It's the same as the Router number just above it.
The beginning of it, up until the last 3 numbers, is the same as the IP Address.

This was all set up for us by our ISP.
The top line "Configure Ipv4" shows "Using DCHP"
I don't think I should change any of this without checking with our ISP first.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 8:13 pm
Posts: 10378
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
That means your system's DNS servers are your router, which is a perfectly normal and sensible thing to do. This way the router can cache DNS information so if two systems request the same information it only has to go out to the internet once, the second request will be pulled from the router's cache.

The question then becomes what DNS servers is your router configured to use. I would guess your ISPs DNS servers, but they may not be the fastest option. In addition ISP DNS servers are kind of infamous now for replying with marketing information (sending you to a website the ISP maintains that contains advertising, usually fed by one or more ad networks which may or may not adequately vet its ads) whenever you go to a site that doesn't exist. So instead of telling your browser telling you the site doesn't exist you get your ISP's spamvertising website. Not all ISPs do this but distressingly most of them do. It started out with Comcast and ballooned from there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 1:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
MonkeyBoy wrote:
That means your system's DNS servers are your router, which is a perfectly normal and sensible thing to do....

I would guess your ISPs DNS servers, but they may not be the fastest option. In addition ISP DNS servers are kind of infamous now for replying with marketing information (sending you to a website the ISP maintains that contains advertising, usually fed by one or more ad networks which may or may not adequately vet its ads) ...


Thanks for the explanation.
This is our ISP, a small, local phone company that has grown with the times:
http://www.wcvt.com/

They have been our phone company for about 40 years.

I can ask them about their DNS servers - but I'm not sure what to ask politely.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 1:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 6416
Location: NYC
While the problem may be with you ISP, or their DNS servers, before you go down that rabbit hole, you should first see how things behave in Firefox Safe Mode. With my 52esr, I often see huge spikes in CPU, which prevent me from doing anything until things calm down. My guess is it's one or several of my addons causing this issue. Safe Mode will open Firefox with all addons disabled.

Close Firefox, then open it while holding down the option key. This will bring up the following--note, under no circumstance do you want to select Refresh Firefox. Just hit the "Start in Safe Mode button," then go to sites where you know there has been beachballing or whatever, and see if it continues or not. To exit Safe Mode, just quit FF and restart normally.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 1:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
These are the only add-ons we each have - it doesn't look like a lot to me but any one could be a problem.
Attachment:
add ons.jpg [94.38 KiB]
Not downloaded yet


I never look at Calomel findings much - it seems to distrust some trustworthy sites; I have it on your recommendation. Could it be the problem?

I'll try Safe Mode this evening.
Now it's T'ai Chi time.

Mr H has the same problem with beach balls spinning, only for him its more often and longer spins.
He has fewer of the add-ons, I think.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 1:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
WZZZ wrote:
While the problem may be with you ISP, or their DNS servers, before you go down that rabbit hole, you should first see how things behave in Firefox Safe Mode.


Thanks WZZZ for the suggestion.
Pretty much the same situation in Safe Mode or not.

I did call our ISP and learned a few tidbits --
1. We have our very own cable that connects our house to their stuff in town [remember I said local!] so activity by our neighbors shouldn't effect what we do or see, but if both of us are online at the same time, that obviously will effect it.

2. Then, in something that seemed a bit contradictory to what he said above, he said - time of day and number and activity of internet users worldwide will effect our speed (I remember the wifi company in Japan from which we rented our portable wifi device said the same thing when I complained that Google Maps took forever to load and work sometimes)

3. He had me run a speed test using their site tool - and also speedof.me
results were "right in the range I expected" he said.
We hover around these numbers and I don't know if that's the whole problem - this is not a fast connection?:
download 8.2 - 8.9 mbps
upload 880 - 900 kbps
depending on whether I run the test with adblock plus enabled or disabled - the test site says disable it for the test (but that seems weird since we have it enabled when we use the computer, so the test may not be accurate regarding that)

So, that leaves us wondering.

I did try Safari and it seemed faster on Google Maps than Firefox, maps is one site that often gives the beach ball. But, it's hard to know when the ball is rolling on the computer and then switching to safe mode and trying again - by that time maybe things have changed. I'm sort of at a loss as to where to go now.

When I did the update to 52.8, I also was offered 60esr, turned it down. I hope that was the right choice.

I don't know if Quantum will be faster and if I should just bite the bullet and install it on the travel MBP. But then that's a different computer, but the same OS and the same year as my iMac.

Thoughts???

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 2:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 6416
Location: NYC
There's a new version of NoScript* for Quantum to learn and get used to, plus not all that many replacement addons (but besides NoScript, you don't seem to have many you'd really care about replacing.) Sure give it a try, but backup/save your current 52.8 profile. You can always reinstall the 52.8, if you have that profile backed up to move over--more on how to do that if and when. The appearance of the Q is also quite different, but it's possible to tweak and customize that with varying degrees of difficulty, depending how much customization you want to get involved with.

One way or the other, either the Q or Waterfox, or both, since the 52esr is not going to be with us that much longer. Might as well see what the Q is like now, before you have to jump over abruptly.

Here's the link for the 52.8
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/rel ... 8.0esr.dmg

* Here are the basic definitions for the various options/settings--some different now from the terminology in the latest "original" NoScript 5.1.8.5.

script - JavaScript, e.g. <script> tags

object - plugin objects

media - HTML5 audio/video

frame - subdocuments, e.g. <frame> and <iframe>

font - remote fonts

webgl - WebGL

fetch - whether other sites can make XMLHttpRequest and Fetch request to this site

other - requests where Firefox cannot identify the request type (ref https://hackademix.net/2017/12/04/noscr ... ment-39964)

The actual user interface contains tooltips--brief explanations for the various options. Much more user friendly now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 11:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:02 pm
Posts: 1100
Location: Melbourne
some general comments Mrs H.

Have you heard of 'Occam's razor' ? It is the idea that the simplest explanation is most likely to be the correct one.
What have you changed? The OS, so that is most likely the cause of your slow down.
You haven't changed your ISP or the ISP's DNS, or your browser. No only Apple's update to 10.11 ElCap co-incides with the slower response.

Every yearly update seems to employ greater cacheing of data, meaning greater read and writes to disk. It is an increasing trend that seeks to minimise primary data requests thought to save time. It is a kind of 'farming out' of activity to secondary parties. Hence using other servers (the Cloud or Amazon cloud) than the proprietor's hardware saves them money/time. And this model is emulated in micro on your computer by using its hard disk to be a kind of server. But using old hardware (with comparative slower CPU and less RAM than newly available) can result in congestion of writing to and reading the ever proliferating disk caches, so counter-productively slowing your older system down.

Apple has a solution for that if you just buy a new computer from them. Using older computers trying to adapt to the latest Apple software comes at a price. I read with interest some on this board who run G5s still with Tiger and Leopard, and those systems are best with their contemporaneous Operating Systems. I still use 10.6 at times. It's fast, and I just don't connect it to the internet.

Personally, I think one's hardware has to be somewhat in alignment with the original software+2 steps (upgrades). Otherwise the demands from the latest software on the existing hardware exceed its design. In contrast new hardware with multicores and SSDs will handle those demands without beachballing. Apple has a business model and maintaining old hardware is not part of their design.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 1:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 8:13 pm
Posts: 10378
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Lately you could say Apple's business is iOS devices and they're doing their damndest to turn Macs into premium priced disposable electronics just like the rest of iOS. Non-upgradable storage, non-upgradable memory, when you exceed the limits of what you could afford to buy well you're just expected to belly up and spend more the next time around.

Lets just say I'm not very welcome at the Apple store, I ask hard questions that disturb the other customers reverie.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 8:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
roam wrote:
some general comments Mrs H.

Have you heard of 'Occam's razor' ? It is the idea that the simplest explanation is most likely to be the correct one.
What have you changed? The OS, so that is most likely the cause of your slow down.


Yes, of course I have heard of Occam's razor.
And, yes of course, it's spot on!

Mr H has been saying this all along - it started with El Cap upgrade.
It's EC that is the problem!

And, of course, the OS is all that has changed (well - newer versions of Firefox have been installed, but that hasn't made it any better or worse)

So - as I said to Mr H before we left for Japan - when we return we need to start looking for a replacement for the MBP.

Since your reply above I've been looking at macofalltrades for refurbs. I'll start a new thread to ask further about those.

Thanks for all the help!

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 5:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 6416
Location: NYC
Could be a new machine will make a difference, but I wouldn't run out and get something new before trying a different browser.

Besides, do you see any appreciable difference with other third party or Apple programs with EC? Lightroom, if you have that, or something else you use frequently enough? The slowness arising from a new OS should manifest itself elsewhere, not just in the browser.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2018 7:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
WZZZ wrote:
Could be a new machine will make a difference, but I wouldn't run out and get something new before trying a different browser...



Thanks, as always, WZZZ, for your thoughtful advice.

As my son says, it took me forever to decide on a simple protective case for the iPhone: getting a new MBP is not a move to be made quickly or without lots of research. So, don't worry! and thanks for the concerns.

I'm just looking at Safari now. Questions about security extensions - I'll be starting a new thread

WZZZ wrote:
Besides, do you see any appreciable difference with other third party or Apple programs with EC?

Yes, beach ball with Mail.

I've had a few photos not send out fully in Mail on the iMac (EC), though they appear to have sent out completely if I just look at the size of the message - nor received complete on the iMac through Mail - though they show up in full on webmail (if incoming). Don't know if it's a speed thing or what. Small copy of a photo showing the issue here - the photo shows up this way in Mail, on our webmail account with ISP the photo is fine.

Attachment:
DSC_7391.jpeg
DSC_7391.jpeg [ 22.68 KiB | Viewed 995 times ]


Rarely notice issues with TextEdit. I haven't paid much attention as the words on the screen ultimately do catch up to my fast typing.

I can't remember if Word is slower - we haven't done much computer work since we've come home - and I honestly can't remember what things were like before we left. Mr H has been complaining about beach ball since the EC upgrade last August or so.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2018 11:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 6416
Location: NYC
I hardly use Safari. Gets used mostly when Firefox balks at doing something, for example the usual "I'm not a robot captcha" never works on my FF, so no suggestions for that.

I would Install and run Waterfox, which you can run side by side with your FF52esr. Even keep both open at the same time. See if it's faster than the current FF52esr, which it probably will be. It will continue to support all your current extensions, including NoScript--the one you're used to (btw, the new NoScript version for Firefox Q isn't all that user unfriendly anymore.) WF is currently up to date on all the Firefox security needed (remember, it's based on Firefox) and with NoScript, you can mostly prevent any unpatched exploits as they may arise before WF catches up to them.)

Directions:

Get the installer, here

https://www.waterfoxproject.org/waterfox/new/?scene=1

Run the installer, which will place it in Applications, with its own profile in your user library>application support. You can open the app, let it verify and then quit it. The next steps, which will reproduce your current FF52es, will be done with it quit.

Attachment:
WF profile closed.png
WF profile closed.png [ 21.17 KiB | Viewed 982 times ]


Next, open the WF profile and highlight everything inside the profile (from first to last using Shift key) and move it all to trash. Important only what's inside the profile. Don't trash profile.ini, or anything outside. It should be now empty, you can close it up. Don't trash the enclosing profile folder.

Next, find your Firefox 52.8 profile, same location in your user library>application support. With FF quit, make a backup of that profile. Option-key copy/drag it to the Desktop, or just right-click> select "duplicate" and move the copy (should now be named as before, but now with "copy" appended) drag that to the desktop. For next steps, remember, do not work from the FF original, only the backup copy on the desktop.

Next, with the now empty WF profile still closed, highlight-select everything in the open FF backup and move everything, all the items inside, into the WF profile. Note: ONLY the items inside the profile, not the enclosing profile folder. Might be safer, easier, to move things over one at a time, as you'll be moving them into the WF profile folder closed--can get a bit tricky making sure they end up there. This should populate the WF profile with everything just as it was in the FF 52.8esr profile (backup copy), while now leaving the FF backup copy completely empty. You can now trash the now emptied FF backup. Now, open up the WF profile to see that everything's been moved over. Since the FF backup your were using is now empty and trashed, I suggest making another backup copy to open that and compare the two (always good to have a backup)--or compare the open original. Note: if one or several items inadvertently ends up outside the WF profile, in your user or user library--this can happen-- just move it into the WF profile, where it, or they, belong. Close up the WF Profile, close up application support and then your user library.

This is mine open, after everything has been moved over from FF. Can't show it all. This is just to get the idea of what items you'll be seeing. Note: what you see in mine will not match yours. I have many addons. (Note, you won't have "Profile alias.")

Attachment:
WF profile open.png [213.75 KiB]
Not downloaded yet


Next, open the WF 56.2.0 app again. That's it. Note, all your FF addons will be marked "legacy." This is normal.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 6416
Location: NYC
EDIT:

Quote:
Next, with the now empty WF profile still closed, highlight-select everything in the open FF backup and move everything, all the items inside, into the WF profile.

Thinking this through further, it will probably be just as well, and easier to leave the WF profile open when moving things inside. Just drag them into the open profile and drop them in. Less risk that items won't make it inside where they belong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 3:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
Thank you so much, WZZZ.

I'll try it tomorrow.

While poking around looking for slow things, I have noticed that my whitelist for NoScript in Firefox esr includes a lot of (so-called) tracking sites and content delivery network (?) sites. I don't know how they got there: I must have hit allow permanently when I meant to hit allow temporarily for some sites that do this sort of thing. I have to delete a lot of them and see if they come back. If I delete something I need, I expect it will show up again.

One further point, I have fussed with Safari on the iMac (doing so on my maching before having Mr H test it on his even slower MBP)
I installed adblock plus and JS Blocker using the same filters plus some as I do in Ff. Safari is markedly faster than Firefox and I don't know why! (but I don't like it)

I'm looking forward to testing your recommendation!

Thanks again.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 03, 2018 6:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
Hi WZZZ,

I haven't had a chance to install Waterfox yet.

I have been doing updates and backups on the 3 computers and trying to sort out a flash drive on which we lost 150 photos from one castle site in Japan - data recovery software isn't bringing the photos back. :(

Anyway, I did test Safari - it seemed faster than Firefox but I don't like it very much if at all. I had to experiment with JS Blocker since I couldn't find a NoScript equivalent and it is the closest I found. I read about uBlock Origin here (MB recommended it on another thread) and thinking about ABP's pay to be whitelisted scheme and seeing several forums saying ABP slowed things down, I thought to give uBO a try on Firefox. I want to say things might be faster, but it's too early to tell. uBO has more filter list than ABP in its default mode and I made sure to add the lists that I had activated in ABP so nothing is left out.

NoScript puzzled me while I was working on blockers. NS here on Ff had a large whitelist list and I wondered if when I clicked on temporarily allow things got whitelisted - but that seems unlikely - so I don't know how it happened. I deleted a bunch of whitelisted sites after Googling them and seeing they were trackers and sales gathering info things, but I'll probably have to re-temporarily allow them if sites are broken because I deleted them from the whitelist and shouldn't have - at least I'm taking control and being a little more experimental than I used to be.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 8:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 2226
A Waterfox install question first (you expected it - I'm sure!)
WZZZ wrote:
...

Directions:...

Attachment:
WF profile closed.png


Next, open the WF profile and highlight everything inside the profile (from first to last using Shift key) and move it all to trash. Important only what's inside the profile. Don't trash profile.ini, or anything outside. It should be now empty, you can close it up. Don't trash the enclosing profile folder....

This is mine open, after everything has been moved over from FF. Can't show it all. This is just to get the idea of what items you'll be seeing. Note: what you see in mine will not match yours. I have many addons. (Note, you won't have "Profile alias.")

Attachment:
WF profile open.png


Next, open the WF 56.2.0 app again. That's it. Note, all your FF addons will be marked "legacy." This is normal.


Quickie question on the directions - not sure I'm exactly clear, but intuitively I think I know what to do. My bold above.
Using your numbers - the profile folder I'm emptying from the WF install is the one you point to - labeled p14wjxmv.WF2 - with your red arrow.
I am NOT removing that folder - it's the contents of that folder that I'm removing?
I am keeping the folder p14wjxmv.WF2 which lives inside the Profiles folder (just as a similar one does in Firefox) and poplulating it with the contents of my Firefox similarly located folder which I have duplicated onto my desktop? As with the sample you show, my items begin with a folder ABE, followed by (as yours does) adblock plus (which is disabled, but not deleted - I use uBlock Origin, which I hope I still will be able to once)

Am I right and good to go?

For Firefox 60 esr for which I have just started getting the nag to update, what about the new NoScript - will it take me forever to figure it out? I assume my old settings won’t carry over when I update to the new Firefox.

I'm using uBlock Origin and am thinking I've seen a a newer version of the extension which will work with the Firefox update.
What do you use for an adblocker now?

Thanks VERY MUCH for ALL your help.

_________________
Mrs H


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group