Technology

59422 readers

3163 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

468

Google's "Manifest V2" Chrome extension phaseout next month is expected to impact the original uBlock Origin extension, which still uses the V2 framework and has 37 million users (www.theregister.com)

submitted 5 months ago by ForgottenFlux to c/technology

98 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The new MV3 architecture reflects Google's avowed desire to make browser extensions more performant, private, and secure. But the internet giant's attempt to do so has been bitterly contested by makers of privacy-protecting and content-blocking extensions, who have argued that the Chocolate Factory's new software architecture will lead to less effective privacy and content-filtering extensions.

For users of uBlock Origin, which runs on Manifest V2, "options" means using the less capable uBlock Origin Lite, which supports Manifest V3.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] micka190 26 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Not to be the guy that deepthroats Mozilla or anything, but these benchmarks show it being at worst 1 second slower.

Like, Firefox really isn't noticeably slower than other browsers in the vast majority of situations.

[–] BarbecueCowboy 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You're not wrong, but it should be noted that 'at worst 1 second slower' means a lot more when the fastest time is under 2 seconds. Saving 1 second is kind of a big deal when you only have 3 to work with. Closing that much of a gap would be a huge win for Firefox.

Also worth noting that many of the linked tests are also not directly based on time, and the difference in benchmarking is still fairly substantial. With the exception of the singular test that it came out on top on, the best case among these benchmarks is that firefox mobile is 15-20% slower than Chrome. These benchmarks even include Mozilla's own Kraken benchmark (where it still comes in last among these results).

Lastly, do want to say that I hope mobile firefox can catch up on these, but they've got a lot of work to do and the odds are stacked against them.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

Like, Firefox really isn't noticeably slower than other browsers in the vast majority of situations.

I imagine there is a bigger difference on older phones though. An imperceptable difference could easily become unbearable when the phone is a little outdated. I experience it at work using a slightly older PC on Windows 10.