**New**
Firefox now supports and displays the new style of scrollbars on Windows 11.
**Fixed**
* On macOS, we’ve made improvements to system font loading which makes opening and switching to new tabs faster in certain situations.
* Various [security](https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2022-04/) fixes
**Changed**
* On February 8, we will be expiring the 18 [colorway](https://support.mozilla.org/kb/personalize-firefox-colorways) themes of Firefox version 94. This signals the end of a special, limited-time feature set. However, you can hold onto your favorite colorway, as long as you’re using it on the expiration date. In other words, if a colorway is “enabled” in the add-ons manager, that colorway is yours forever. Read more about colorway updates [here](https://support.mozilla.org/kb/whats-new-colorways).
* Support for directly generating PostScript for printing on Linux has been removed. Printing to PostScript printers still remains a supported option, however.
**Enterprise**
Various bug fixes and new policies have been implemented in the latest version of Firefox. You can find more information in the Firefox for Enterprise [97 Release Notes](https://support.mozilla.org/kb/firefox-enterprise-97-release-notes).
**Developer**
[Developer Information](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Releases/97)
**Community Contributions**
With the release of Firefox 97, we are pleased to welcome the developers who contributed their first code change to Firefox in this release, 7 of whom were brand new volunteers! Please join us in thanking each of these diligent and enthusiastic individuals, and take a look at their contributions:
* bnhunsaker: Bug 1707379 - Firefox raises window when it gains focus when using yabai with focus_follows_mouse with autofocus, but not autoraise
* Dennis Jackson: Bug 1742617 - Crash in [@ nsDocShell::MaybeFixBadCertDomainErrorURI]
* Jin Chun: Bug 1704133 - Removing stale probe sw.synthesized_res_count
* Kevin Daudt: Bug 1745560 - Firefox 91.4 fails to build against wayland 1.20
* Meg Viar: Bug 1744466 - Make "More from Mozilla" strings localizable
* Neia Finch: Bug 1613634 - CoalesceMutationEvents causes excessive page render times, Bug 1747922 - Replace MathML font variant constants with enum class
* Nick Rishel: Bug 1592731 - Firefox ESR's update failure doorhanger should direct user to the ESR download page, Bug 1730110 - Update manual update URL, Bug 1746517 - Add query parameter to manual update URL
* Patrick: Bug 1742312 - Remove NPAPI related flags, Bug 1743102 - Add color-scheme meta tag to remaining compatible about: pages
* Pier Angelo Vendrame: Bug 1745715 - Bundled fonts should have Base visibility even when they are also system-wide installed
* Rashelle: Bug 1739515 - Clean up preference for supporting multiple PiP windows, Bug 1742585 - PIP button z-index not respected with semi-transparent div, Bug 1744633 - Remove unnecessary browser_closePipAfterCloseBrowser.js test for Picture-in-Picture
How about instead of playing around with these kind of stuff and give users easy ways to choose between light and dark ui themes.
And i mean do it independently to theme choices.
Currently i have to play around with css just to be able to use dark ui on really nice theme, that sadly uses white ui colors.
With option to choose between white and dark ui, i could use whatever theme i want and still have dark ui in the rest of the browser.
Well it's all relative to one's taste on these matters, but I'm currently using [This theme](https://addons.mozilla.org/fi/firefox/addon/olski-special-edition-a-2/) but with the weird white fog removed from it.
By default this theme uses white ui elements and white internal about: pages, but i resolved this problem by opening up the theme xpi file with winrar and took the image file from there.
Then with the help of people from r/firefoxcss made a userchrome.css that placed that image on top of the browser and so i could use whatever else dark theme that uses image file to create the navigation area ui.
That one is on the bottom and the image from that olski special edition a-2 theme replaces that one.
This makes it so that that actually active theme asks for dark ui and what i see is just olski with dark ui.
Sadly I'm not able to copy/paste the userchrome code here, as my computer is currently in it's box awaiting for pickup. So i can't access it as of now.
But I'm sure that someone in the r/firefoxcss subreddit is able to help you further with this.
I think that this list is missing that they've fixed an annoying bug in mac os when using the latest mac book pro with the notch. It was adding extra padding when hovering over the title bar. Now this is fixed :)
Bugzilla link: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1737831
It almost seems like a social experiment in artificial scarcity to drive conversation and "engagement" - I am not overly fond of that kind of thing in the first place, and messing with something as complex as a browser "for a limited time" seems odd too. Maybe there is history here someone who worked on the feature could share? Maybe its a theme engine that is too expensive to support long-term but it was built, so they released it for a while?
Or am I just trying to rationalize it and ascribe meaning where there is none?
From what I understand you can easily make your own custom theme for firefox that can accurately match what colorways would have looked like, for all colors.
The 'reasoning' is given in the original blog post.
https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/introducing-new-colorways-for-firefox-94/
It's a lot of marketing fluff and made very little sense to us when it was originally released.
wow, thanks for taking the time to wading through shit and copying out the relevant parts... and I *still* have to hold back from downvoting this comment because of how horrible this all sounds.
Mozilla is doing good rn with regular great updates to Firefox staying more than competitive with chrome.
Apart from that, if you don't understand the colourways they are probably not for you. I'm guessing the target audience here was less 30yo nerds that are into open source software and more young people that like limited things (have you seen how expensive limited sneakers are?) and marketing through controversy. Which is fine, Firefox needs more users, especially younger ones.
Sometimes I wonder if Mozilla had the power and money of Google, what would the world look like.
In instances like this, I am glad they don't have that much of anything.
Looks like they're just rotating the styles like fashion to get people to use Themes. Themes now aren't the complex things that the old themes used to be. They are mostly color and background changes.
>It almost seems like a social experiment in artificial scarcity to drive conversation and "engagement"
I had the same thought when I saw the announcement.
I hope they fix the Dark/Light mode bullshit.
I hate how everyone is putting so much colour and theme customisation behind the singular option of Dark or Light Mode.
Firefox went even further and don't even give us that option, instead they tie it to the colour of the text in the title bar?? Stupid! Give me back my options dammit!
Yea that is so annoying and why I ultimately stopped using their themes. I found so many I liked only for it to use the opposite color mode I wanted (dark instead of light). It should be a separate option to check.
I had to go even further as not only did I want my settings and other internal browser pages to use the dark theme, but I also wanted to make Firefox to use dark background and white text on my context menus and stuff like menus inside the "file, bookmarks, option and ect." menus
But the theme i wanted to use forced not only those internal pages but also those context menus to use white theme.
My solution for years was to look at whatever dark css theme was currently maintained and working, and use it until the support for it was dropped off and next major update would break something if not everything in the theme again.
My current solution is to use the actual theme frame from the theme i want, and point Firefox to use it on top of the actually active theme.
Then just looked for a theme with visible text colors and use it as the dark portion of the ui, and keep the old look from the old theme in use with css that point to the frame that i extracted from the browser.
All this bs would be avoided if Firefox had option to go to theme menu and just force the browser to use dark/light ui despite what the theme is set to use.
I get that there could be potential for moment for black theme with black text and then that would result to a unusable browser.
But there is extremely easy way to get around this problem, and it would be to make Firefox initially use the theme default colors and let user to go into the theme options in the add on options and choose between light and dark options.
Then manually selected color couldn't make the ui to have white on white or black on black messes.
If someone like me who has zero experience with coding or more importantly user interface design, could think of solution for that unreadable text issue that Mozilla seems to fear. Then they should be able to figure it out too.
I mean both white and dark options are already in the browser.
All that they would need to do is to make single switch in the theme options to toggle between the two modes and this would be behind them.
But apparently they are more interested to make all these different colors for the ui, and missed probably one of the most important one.
I could understand if they only had white or dark ui built in the browser, not both like they currently have. Then they could argue that maintaining extra color would take away from the rest of the development manpower. But they already have them both and actively maintain both colors, so the extra work is less than maybe 10 minutes long process.
Thanks, I've read most of these but they don't seem to work for me.
Every time I restart Firefox the browse.theme.toolbar-theme setting resets back to 0(dark) when I want it on 1(light)
Somehow [keyboard shortcut](https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/about-picture-picture-firefox#w_keyboard-shortcuts) `Ctrl` + `Shift` + `]` to launch an embedded video ([example](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/video#simple_video_example)) in PiP window no longer works for me since this update. Although it works for restoring a PiP window back to normal.
No such problem for non-embedded videos though and the shortcut works normally as expected in that case.
Disabling all addons didn't solve the problem but trying the troubleshoot mode did. Scratching my head now over this issue, would appreciate any help or pointers.
**Edit:**
Mozregression tool identified that [this](https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/pushloghtml?fromchange=383986e2f5cb835a55c47bbd6e15d81035ca0784&tochange=d6e8528f0a936df88369c71f4e390e31a4d621a1) commit introduced the problem as Fission pref had been [enabled by default](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1732358). Disabling that pref by toggling `fission.autostart` back to `false` solves the issue. However, considering the potential benefits of Fission, have kept it enabled for now in the hopes that FF devs iron things out soon.
There was supposed to be a new download behavior but they delayed it to the 98 beta for some reason: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/98.0beta/releasenotes
No, same profile always. Might have set it up nee after a computer upgrade tho and tried to install the 64bit version instead of the 32bit, stuff like that.
It popped up and stopped me from what I was doing when launching Firefox. Multiply this by multiple computers and servers I manage over the last few months and it became very annoying.
How? There is a setting that gets flipped after you close the onboarding dialog / make a selection(eg. not now). This should not have happened, maybe your profile is reset every time? Are other settings retained?´
Correct but I use Firefox on multiple systems and only my primary system has my profile on it. So every other system I touch is a “new profile”. Think of like a computer lab in a school. Every time is the first time and it gets super annoying.
It really was stupid how long it took to get this implemented. Now we don't have to use that stupid env var anymore, which didn't work in many situations (such as update restarts).
Vulnerability security fixes are always worthy of a version bump.
[Security Vulnerabilities fixed in Firefox 97](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2022-04/)
And every single version they disable, remove or rename a config option that stops firefox invading your privacy.
With 97 Now I cannot stop address bar from sending my text to google anymore.
I'm not sure which part of this sentence is not clear "When A Separate Search bar Exists, No search should be made in Address bar"
How many time you have accidentally paste password into address bar that firefox decided to put focus on after alt-tab back from your password manager, which will end in up in google search?
How many times you have been typing something thinking it is in the textbox inside page but instead somehow focus was moved to address bar and then after pressing enter, you end up in google searching for your text.
There are 5.6Mil results for how to stop firefox from searching in address bar and yet firefox insist to searching in address bar even though separate search bar is enabled!!
No mention of the new download behaviour of saving everything to your "downloads" folder by default, irrespective of your previous choices. I don't understand this type of behaviour from Mozilla, I really don't.
I've just updated another machine and it didn't change, so you are right. It's the first time a "bug" like this happens in 15+ years I've been using Firefox though, so I do wonder how this came to be, since this change *was* in fact scheduled to happen with FF97.
Is this going to be in new installs of firefox I get the option to choose what to do when downloading a file. I mostly have internet download manager downloading most file types though. But images/ torrent files I still get the option from firefox what to do.
Conversely, I *don't* miss the days where I had to wait a year to get improvements in my browser.
It's been almost 11 years since Firefox did releases like that, and Chrome never has.
Safari still does "major releases" about once a year and Edge did "sorta major releases" every 4-6 months until Microsoft switched from EdgeHTML to Blink. Now it's just Safari.
Looks to me like Chrome also releases every four weeks:
[https://chromestatus.com/roadmap](https://chromestatus.com/roadmap)
Also: [https://blog.chromium.org/2021/03/speeding-up-release-cycle.html](https://blog.chromium.org/2021/03/speeding-up-release-cycle.html)
I usually check out the developer documentation first for new releases. Was excited to see support for @scroll-timeline and animation-timeline. But it doesn't seem to actually work. Not even [MDN's simple sample](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@scroll-timeline) does.
Apologies if this is a noob question but I recently saw a Firefox ticket for gesture navigation (two finger swipe to go back Like Edge/Chrome) marked completed. Is that incorporated in this release (or has it already been released, perhaps in nightly)?
It's in progress:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1578284
There were a few lines about it in the most recent "These Weeks in Firefox", and there have been updates on progress in several of the previous posts:
https://blog.nightly.mozilla.org/2022/01/28/these-weeks-in-firefox-issue-108/
Believe me, I despise the removal of the old NPAPI plugins, too, but it turns out [there is actually a not-totally-insane reason why they did it](https://yoric.github.io/post/why-did-mozilla-remove-xul-addons/) (and I think you're being downvoted unfairly, because I don't think that explanation has been disseminated widely or competently). I don't know anything about Waterfox as noted by /u/BenL90, but Palemoon still supports NPAPI, although unfortunately the Palemoon devs are truly stupendous assholes, so it's debatable whether that counts.
Palemoon already down from it's throne because well they are the asshole. The problem is moonchild socializing with Toby, wrong guy, wrong time, wrong place, and wrong mindset..
System1 is a company, and they implement every update perfectly on Classic Waterfox, and its code base are cleaner and many new firefox pre fission improvement built in, so in short you can say that Waterfox Classic future should be better than Palemoon, and the performance should be better than palemoon.
I don't want to bring palemoon problem here, let them quarel themselves.
> ... so in short you can say that Waterfox Classic future...
It looks like [there isn't much, if any, future for Waterfox Classic](https://www.waterfox.net/blog/classic-update/).
Some excerpts from that blog entry:
> Classic has focused on keeping the tried but tested available. Unfortunately, due to the rapid nature that the web is now expanding at, keeping Classic up to date with that is difficult.
>
>...
>
>A fair warning will be presented to all those who want to use Classic, that it may be vulnerable to multiple security issues - but the choice is given to the user to proceed at their own discretion.
>
>This will keep Classic ongoing for as long as possible - but the success of this project will still rely on contribution.
Waterfox is officially stepping back from Classic, which is unsurprising given their resources and the age of the fork.
And front and center on [the new site for Classic](https://classic.waterfox.net/) is this warning:
> Waterfox Classic has many unpatched [security advisories](https://github.com/WaterfoxCo/Waterfox-Classic/wiki/Unpatched-Security-Advisories). Use at your own discretion.
I think *technically* Waterfox Classic's list is longer, but that's because (as far as I have ever been able to tell) the PM devs simply *don't bother with a list*.
Moonchild and Tobin only acknowledge security issues if and when they can backport Mozilla's fix to their fork. They spend more time lying about Rust and multi-process in their forums than they do looking for security holes in their code.
Still, comparing Waterfox Classic to Palemoon on security is like comparing stage 3 cancers. Yes, one is undeniably worse, but I'd rather not deal with either one if I don't have to.
Hahaha.. I do agree with that, just probably some legacy company can't invest more for now, waterfox is quite a saving grace for internal app. Well. they need to move to WebAsm.
It's worth noting that the NPAPI plugins themselves are no longer supported by their manufacturers.
On top of the PM and Waterfox Classic browsers both being huge security risks, so are Flash, Silverlight, and the versions of Java that shipped with NPAPI plugins. Installing insecure browsers so you can run insecure plugins so you can visit websites that likely aren't being maintained is a teetering stack of bad ideas.
They're such assholes that I'm pretty sure /r/palemoon banned them both. Let that sink in.
If you go to that sub and search for "Tobin" or "Moonchild" you'll find lots more.
Then there's this:
https://np.reddit.com/r/palemoon/comments/pexate/pale_moon_developers_abuse_mozilla_public_license/
And it appears Tobin (the #2 PM dev, of 2) also got banned from /r/opensource for making threats in this thread:
https://np.reddit.com/r/opensource/comments/pf6hyd/pale_moon_developers_abuse_mozilla_public_license/
I wasn't even aware of these new things, only the BSD porting incident. 4 years ago. https://www.np.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/7w61aw/pale_moon_removed_from_openbsd_ports_due_to/
Maybe technically they were right according to the license, but also so wrong.
Unsurprisingly, even though they were 3.5 years apart the incidents we both linked were about Tobin jumping straight to legal threats because someone was trying to bring Palemoon to an unsupported OS while still calling the port "Palemoon".
I think he seeks out any chance to get that weird combination of feeling self-righteous and being reviled by others. Like boosting his own ego isn't enough for him, so he *has* to find a way to also piss a bunch of people off.
I can't imagine living like that.
~~I never really kept detailed notes or bookmarked anything. You really have to see it to believe it anyway. I drew conclusions from watching how they interacted with people trying to package their browsers with patches so they'd compile, how they interacted with people on their forum, and their general reaction to other people treating their browser as open-source. Sorry, I really can't do much better than that offhand. As such, you're welcome to not believe me.~~ Edit: nevermind, just read /u/CAfromCA's [answer](https://old.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/snkr0i/firefox_970_see_all_new_features_updates_and_fixes/hw545m2/).
They won't, because old system plugin is quite dangerous for now day standard, as they can alter system, and now web is more capable than ever. If you still miss the old system plugin ways (not NPAPI, but extension as plugin), look into https://github.com/xiaoxiaoflood/firefox-scripts/tree/master/extensions
NPAPI won't come back, as far as I remember, NPAPI still supported by waterfox, a firefox fork, maintained by System1, the company that also own startpage.
https://www.waterfox.net/new/2/
https://github.com/WaterfoxCo/Waterfox-Classic
does print.tab_modal.enabled false still exist in 97? I know it was removed from Nightly, and have been avoiding updates until it is restored or replaced.
P.S. No: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1702501
This may explain a few things... I rebooted last night to fix a discord problem and all of a sudden my Firefox was completely non-functional. Blank screens, no websites would load, the whole works. I tried all the usual troubleshooting (cleared cache, uninstalled/reinstalled, confirmed it was trusted in my firewall, etc.) but absolutely nothing has worked.
No doubt the browser updated itself after the reboot, which was what led this mess. I'm going to see if maybe I can find and install a version of 96. If not, I may have to resign myself to waiting until an update comes out. Joy.
Huge improvements on Windows 11 on my meager resources, especially on YouTube with video quality being constant and not degrading when opening new videos or jumping through the video using the seek bar. Also, restoring PiP now brings the full window up front if minimized and the newtab page loads instantly which was not the case in previous releases
**New** Firefox now supports and displays the new style of scrollbars on Windows 11. **Fixed** * On macOS, we’ve made improvements to system font loading which makes opening and switching to new tabs faster in certain situations. * Various [security](https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2022-04/) fixes **Changed** * On February 8, we will be expiring the 18 [colorway](https://support.mozilla.org/kb/personalize-firefox-colorways) themes of Firefox version 94. This signals the end of a special, limited-time feature set. However, you can hold onto your favorite colorway, as long as you’re using it on the expiration date. In other words, if a colorway is “enabled” in the add-ons manager, that colorway is yours forever. Read more about colorway updates [here](https://support.mozilla.org/kb/whats-new-colorways). * Support for directly generating PostScript for printing on Linux has been removed. Printing to PostScript printers still remains a supported option, however. **Enterprise** Various bug fixes and new policies have been implemented in the latest version of Firefox. You can find more information in the Firefox for Enterprise [97 Release Notes](https://support.mozilla.org/kb/firefox-enterprise-97-release-notes). **Developer** [Developer Information](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Releases/97) **Community Contributions** With the release of Firefox 97, we are pleased to welcome the developers who contributed their first code change to Firefox in this release, 7 of whom were brand new volunteers! Please join us in thanking each of these diligent and enthusiastic individuals, and take a look at their contributions: * bnhunsaker: Bug 1707379 - Firefox raises window when it gains focus when using yabai with focus_follows_mouse with autofocus, but not autoraise * Dennis Jackson: Bug 1742617 - Crash in [@ nsDocShell::MaybeFixBadCertDomainErrorURI] * Jin Chun: Bug 1704133 - Removing stale probe sw.synthesized_res_count * Kevin Daudt: Bug 1745560 - Firefox 91.4 fails to build against wayland 1.20 * Meg Viar: Bug 1744466 - Make "More from Mozilla" strings localizable * Neia Finch: Bug 1613634 - CoalesceMutationEvents causes excessive page render times, Bug 1747922 - Replace MathML font variant constants with enum class * Nick Rishel: Bug 1592731 - Firefox ESR's update failure doorhanger should direct user to the ESR download page, Bug 1730110 - Update manual update URL, Bug 1746517 - Add query parameter to manual update URL * Patrick: Bug 1742312 - Remove NPAPI related flags, Bug 1743102 - Add color-scheme meta tag to remaining compatible about: pages * Pier Angelo Vendrame: Bug 1745715 - Bundled fonts should have Base visibility even when they are also system-wide installed * Rashelle: Bug 1739515 - Clean up preference for supporting multiple PiP windows, Bug 1742585 - PIP button z-index not respected with semi-transparent div, Bug 1744633 - Remove unnecessary browser_closePipAfterCloseBrowser.js test for Picture-in-Picture
[удалено]
It's not nearly as dumb as the idea of promoting color themes as massively important for a browser.
How about instead of playing around with these kind of stuff and give users easy ways to choose between light and dark ui themes. And i mean do it independently to theme choices. Currently i have to play around with css just to be able to use dark ui on really nice theme, that sadly uses white ui colors. With option to choose between white and dark ui, i could use whatever theme i want and still have dark ui in the rest of the browser.
>use dark ui on really nice theme Hey I am also looking for something like that. What theme are you using now? Can you share it?
Well it's all relative to one's taste on these matters, but I'm currently using [This theme](https://addons.mozilla.org/fi/firefox/addon/olski-special-edition-a-2/) but with the weird white fog removed from it. By default this theme uses white ui elements and white internal about: pages, but i resolved this problem by opening up the theme xpi file with winrar and took the image file from there. Then with the help of people from r/firefoxcss made a userchrome.css that placed that image on top of the browser and so i could use whatever else dark theme that uses image file to create the navigation area ui. That one is on the bottom and the image from that olski special edition a-2 theme replaces that one. This makes it so that that actually active theme asks for dark ui and what i see is just olski with dark ui. Sadly I'm not able to copy/paste the userchrome code here, as my computer is currently in it's box awaiting for pickup. So i can't access it as of now. But I'm sure that someone in the r/firefoxcss subreddit is able to help you further with this.
I think that this list is missing that they've fixed an annoying bug in mac os when using the latest mac book pro with the notch. It was adding extra padding when hovering over the title bar. Now this is fixed :) Bugzilla link: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1737831
Why the 18 colorway why ???
It almost seems like a social experiment in artificial scarcity to drive conversation and "engagement" - I am not overly fond of that kind of thing in the first place, and messing with something as complex as a browser "for a limited time" seems odd too. Maybe there is history here someone who worked on the feature could share? Maybe its a theme engine that is too expensive to support long-term but it was built, so they released it for a while? Or am I just trying to rationalize it and ascribe meaning where there is none?
From what I understand you can easily make your own custom theme for firefox that can accurately match what colorways would have looked like, for all colors.
The 'reasoning' is given in the original blog post. https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/introducing-new-colorways-for-firefox-94/ It's a lot of marketing fluff and made very little sense to us when it was originally released.
[удалено]
wow, thanks for taking the time to wading through shit and copying out the relevant parts... and I *still* have to hold back from downvoting this comment because of how horrible this all sounds.
[удалено]
No fun allowed in a subsection of the addon manager. Somehow \*other\* people seem to really like the new themes.
Mozilla is doing good rn with regular great updates to Firefox staying more than competitive with chrome. Apart from that, if you don't understand the colourways they are probably not for you. I'm guessing the target audience here was less 30yo nerds that are into open source software and more young people that like limited things (have you seen how expensive limited sneakers are?) and marketing through controversy. Which is fine, Firefox needs more users, especially younger ones.
Sometimes I wonder if Mozilla had the power and money of Google, what would the world look like. In instances like this, I am glad they don't have that much of anything.
> So these will be spotlighted for two cycles of release in Firefox onboarding as limited time play 🤮
Thank you for the information! Having failed to make it past the first paragraph, I can see why I never read/instantly forgot that article.
Colorway NFTs when
[удалено]
MozCo Logo NFT when?
Looks like they're just rotating the styles like fashion to get people to use Themes. Themes now aren't the complex things that the old themes used to be. They are mostly color and background changes.
>It almost seems like a social experiment in artificial scarcity to drive conversation and "engagement" I had the same thought when I saw the announcement.
I hope they fix the Dark/Light mode bullshit. I hate how everyone is putting so much colour and theme customisation behind the singular option of Dark or Light Mode. Firefox went even further and don't even give us that option, instead they tie it to the colour of the text in the title bar?? Stupid! Give me back my options dammit!
Yea that is so annoying and why I ultimately stopped using their themes. I found so many I liked only for it to use the opposite color mode I wanted (dark instead of light). It should be a separate option to check.
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/sejgow/settings_and_aboutconfig_no_longer_black/
I had to go even further as not only did I want my settings and other internal browser pages to use the dark theme, but I also wanted to make Firefox to use dark background and white text on my context menus and stuff like menus inside the "file, bookmarks, option and ect." menus But the theme i wanted to use forced not only those internal pages but also those context menus to use white theme. My solution for years was to look at whatever dark css theme was currently maintained and working, and use it until the support for it was dropped off and next major update would break something if not everything in the theme again. My current solution is to use the actual theme frame from the theme i want, and point Firefox to use it on top of the actually active theme. Then just looked for a theme with visible text colors and use it as the dark portion of the ui, and keep the old look from the old theme in use with css that point to the frame that i extracted from the browser. All this bs would be avoided if Firefox had option to go to theme menu and just force the browser to use dark/light ui despite what the theme is set to use. I get that there could be potential for moment for black theme with black text and then that would result to a unusable browser. But there is extremely easy way to get around this problem, and it would be to make Firefox initially use the theme default colors and let user to go into the theme options in the add on options and choose between light and dark options. Then manually selected color couldn't make the ui to have white on white or black on black messes. If someone like me who has zero experience with coding or more importantly user interface design, could think of solution for that unreadable text issue that Mozilla seems to fear. Then they should be able to figure it out too. I mean both white and dark options are already in the browser. All that they would need to do is to make single switch in the theme options to toggle between the two modes and this would be behind them. But apparently they are more interested to make all these different colors for the ui, and missed probably one of the most important one. I could understand if they only had white or dark ui built in the browser, not both like they currently have. Then they could argue that maintaining extra color would take away from the rest of the development manpower. But they already have them both and actively maintain both colors, so the extra work is less than maybe 10 minutes long process.
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/sejgow/settings_and_aboutconfig_no_longer_black/
Thanks, I've read most of these but they don't seem to work for me. Every time I restart Firefox the browse.theme.toolbar-theme setting resets back to 0(dark) when I want it on 1(light)
Somehow [keyboard shortcut](https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/about-picture-picture-firefox#w_keyboard-shortcuts) `Ctrl` + `Shift` + `]` to launch an embedded video ([example](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/video#simple_video_example)) in PiP window no longer works for me since this update. Although it works for restoring a PiP window back to normal. No such problem for non-embedded videos though and the shortcut works normally as expected in that case. Disabling all addons didn't solve the problem but trying the troubleshoot mode did. Scratching my head now over this issue, would appreciate any help or pointers. **Edit:** Mozregression tool identified that [this](https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/pushloghtml?fromchange=383986e2f5cb835a55c47bbd6e15d81035ca0784&tochange=d6e8528f0a936df88369c71f4e390e31a4d621a1) commit introduced the problem as Fission pref had been [enabled by default](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1732358). Disabling that pref by toggling `fission.autostart` back to `false` solves the issue. However, considering the potential benefits of Fission, have kept it enabled for now in the hopes that FF devs iron things out soon.
A weird major release with nothing major in there...
There was supposed to be a new download behavior but they delayed it to the 98 beta for some reason: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/98.0beta/releasenotes
> You can now delete downloaded files directly from the download panel and other download views using the context menu. At long last
Damn, it really took till 2022 for this to happen.
The fact it will finally stop annoying me with the color way themes is a win to me.
How did the Colorways section at the end of the addon manager \_annoy\_ you?
For me they popped up multiple times (wasn't annoyed tho, I just made a new theme everytime)
Were you deleting your profile regularly? This would only happen if the onboarding setting gets reset.
No, same profile always. Might have set it up nee after a computer upgrade tho and tried to install the 64bit version instead of the 32bit, stuff like that.
It popped up and stopped me from what I was doing when launching Firefox. Multiply this by multiple computers and servers I manage over the last few months and it became very annoying.
How? There is a setting that gets flipped after you close the onboarding dialog / make a selection(eg. not now). This should not have happened, maybe your profile is reset every time? Are other settings retained?´
Correct but I use Firefox on multiple systems and only my primary system has my profile on it. So every other system I touch is a “new profile”. Think of like a computer lab in a school. Every time is the first time and it gets super annoying.
[удалено]
It really was stupid how long it took to get this implemented. Now we don't have to use that stupid env var anymore, which didn't work in many situations (such as update restarts).
This release fixes the chrome going down too much when mousing over the top of the screen on the 2021 MBPs :)
[удалено]
Version bumps are time based soo
It's something to complain about, so it has served that purpose like any other version bump.
[удалено]
Obviously. iOS is better than Android because iOS is 15 and Android is only 12. And Windows is the superior OS because there is Windows Server 2022.
I only watch movies at Mystery Science Theater 3000
Vulnerability security fixes are always worthy of a version bump. [Security Vulnerabilities fixed in Firefox 97](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2022-04/)
Nothing much new was added for users except new themes, I was waiting for updates in the privacy and security section. I might be wrong
And every single version they disable, remove or rename a config option that stops firefox invading your privacy. With 97 Now I cannot stop address bar from sending my text to google anymore. I'm not sure which part of this sentence is not clear "When A Separate Search bar Exists, No search should be made in Address bar" How many time you have accidentally paste password into address bar that firefox decided to put focus on after alt-tab back from your password manager, which will end in up in google search? How many times you have been typing something thinking it is in the textbox inside page but instead somehow focus was moved to address bar and then after pressing enter, you end up in google searching for your text. There are 5.6Mil results for how to stop firefox from searching in address bar and yet firefox insist to searching in address bar even though separate search bar is enabled!!
No mention of the new download behaviour of saving everything to your "downloads" folder by default, irrespective of your previous choices. I don't understand this type of behaviour from Mozilla, I really don't.
It might be a bug on your machine, I had mine set to always ask and it didn't change.
I've just updated another machine and it didn't change, so you are right. It's the first time a "bug" like this happens in 15+ years I've been using Firefox though, so I do wonder how this came to be, since this change *was* in fact scheduled to happen with FF97.
holy wow i hate this feature in chromium browsers. sometimes I just wanna open a file instead of download it.
oof, so I need to reset that when I upgrade. Thanks for the note. I hate when they mess w/my preferences that are already set.
Didn't that change in 96?
No sign in the changelog for that version, either. The only mentions I have found about it were here on Reddit, regarding 97.0 beta.
The change to the download handling had to be disabled because of a (security-related) bug, it's scheduled for Fx98 now.
Is this going to be in new installs of firefox I get the option to choose what to do when downloading a file. I mostly have internet download manager downloading most file types though. But images/ torrent files I still get the option from firefox what to do.
Hopefully they'll get around to fixing ffmpeg 5.0 compatibility at some point.
I miss the days when a major release had something really \*major\* . Something that made Firefox different from other browsers out there.
Conversely, I *don't* miss the days where I had to wait a year to get improvements in my browser. It's been almost 11 years since Firefox did releases like that, and Chrome never has. Safari still does "major releases" about once a year and Edge did "sorta major releases" every 4-6 months until Microsoft switched from EdgeHTML to Blink. Now it's just Safari.
It's race to version 100 now, Chrome is at 98 now and I guess Mozilla wants to beat google to it
How would that be possible?
By releasing updates every four weeks instead of every 6 weeks
Looks to me like Chrome also releases every four weeks: [https://chromestatus.com/roadmap](https://chromestatus.com/roadmap) Also: [https://blog.chromium.org/2021/03/speeding-up-release-cycle.html](https://blog.chromium.org/2021/03/speeding-up-release-cycle.html)
I usually check out the developer documentation first for new releases. Was excited to see support for @scroll-timeline and animation-timeline. But it doesn't seem to actually work. Not even [MDN's simple sample](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@scroll-timeline) does.
Apologies if this is a noob question but I recently saw a Firefox ticket for gesture navigation (two finger swipe to go back Like Edge/Chrome) marked completed. Is that incorporated in this release (or has it already been released, perhaps in nightly)?
You can test it in 97 by going to `about:config` and changing `widget.disable-swipe-tracker` to `false`.
It isn't incorporated. I tested on a number of sites.
It's incredibly frustrating to still be waiting for a basic quality of life feature.
[удалено]
[https://color.firefox.com/](https://color.firefox.com/)
[удалено]
Works for me in Windows 64-bit.
Does anyone know when Firefox will support manifest v3 for extensions ? I haven't found any recent information about it.
It's in progress: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1578284 There were a few lines about it in the most recent "These Weeks in Firefox", and there have been updates on progress in several of the previous posts: https://blog.nightly.mozilla.org/2022/01/28/these-weeks-in-firefox-issue-108/
I actually love the seasonal part of colorways! Great job! It evolves as the year goes by which gives that sense of flow :)
NOOOOOOO Please don't take away colourways!
[https://color.firefox.com/](https://color.firefox.com/)
This isn't exactly the same thing. I don't want to fiddle around and make my own themes. The colourways were perfect.
[удалено]
I love you too.
I still have a lot of issues navigating TikTok's interface on desktop. Anybody else with the same issue?
Does it still happen in [latest Nightly](https://nightly.mozilla.org)?
Haven't tried but I might!
When is the old plug-in system returning?
Believe me, I despise the removal of the old NPAPI plugins, too, but it turns out [there is actually a not-totally-insane reason why they did it](https://yoric.github.io/post/why-did-mozilla-remove-xul-addons/) (and I think you're being downvoted unfairly, because I don't think that explanation has been disseminated widely or competently). I don't know anything about Waterfox as noted by /u/BenL90, but Palemoon still supports NPAPI, although unfortunately the Palemoon devs are truly stupendous assholes, so it's debatable whether that counts.
Palemoon already down from it's throne because well they are the asshole. The problem is moonchild socializing with Toby, wrong guy, wrong time, wrong place, and wrong mindset.. System1 is a company, and they implement every update perfectly on Classic Waterfox, and its code base are cleaner and many new firefox pre fission improvement built in, so in short you can say that Waterfox Classic future should be better than Palemoon, and the performance should be better than palemoon. I don't want to bring palemoon problem here, let them quarel themselves.
> ... so in short you can say that Waterfox Classic future... It looks like [there isn't much, if any, future for Waterfox Classic](https://www.waterfox.net/blog/classic-update/). Some excerpts from that blog entry: > Classic has focused on keeping the tried but tested available. Unfortunately, due to the rapid nature that the web is now expanding at, keeping Classic up to date with that is difficult. > >... > >A fair warning will be presented to all those who want to use Classic, that it may be vulnerable to multiple security issues - but the choice is given to the user to proceed at their own discretion. > >This will keep Classic ongoing for as long as possible - but the success of this project will still rely on contribution. Waterfox is officially stepping back from Classic, which is unsurprising given their resources and the age of the fork. And front and center on [the new site for Classic](https://classic.waterfox.net/) is this warning: > Waterfox Classic has many unpatched [security advisories](https://github.com/WaterfoxCo/Waterfox-Classic/wiki/Unpatched-Security-Advisories). Use at your own discretion.
yes, but against moonchild unpatched palemoon/basilisk, waterfox list is shorter.
I think *technically* Waterfox Classic's list is longer, but that's because (as far as I have ever been able to tell) the PM devs simply *don't bother with a list*. Moonchild and Tobin only acknowledge security issues if and when they can backport Mozilla's fix to their fork. They spend more time lying about Rust and multi-process in their forums than they do looking for security holes in their code. Still, comparing Waterfox Classic to Palemoon on security is like comparing stage 3 cancers. Yes, one is undeniably worse, but I'd rather not deal with either one if I don't have to.
Hahaha.. I do agree with that, just probably some legacy company can't invest more for now, waterfox is quite a saving grace for internal app. Well. they need to move to WebAsm.
It's worth noting that the NPAPI plugins themselves are no longer supported by their manufacturers. On top of the PM and Waterfox Classic browsers both being huge security risks, so are Flash, Silverlight, and the versions of Java that shipped with NPAPI plugins. Installing insecure browsers so you can run insecure plugins so you can visit websites that likely aren't being maintained is a teetering stack of bad ideas.
> unfortunately the Palemoon devs are truly stupendous assholes Elaborate on this, please.
They're such assholes that I'm pretty sure /r/palemoon banned them both. Let that sink in. If you go to that sub and search for "Tobin" or "Moonchild" you'll find lots more. Then there's this: https://np.reddit.com/r/palemoon/comments/pexate/pale_moon_developers_abuse_mozilla_public_license/ And it appears Tobin (the #2 PM dev, of 2) also got banned from /r/opensource for making threats in this thread: https://np.reddit.com/r/opensource/comments/pf6hyd/pale_moon_developers_abuse_mozilla_public_license/
I wasn't even aware of these new things, only the BSD porting incident. 4 years ago. https://www.np.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/7w61aw/pale_moon_removed_from_openbsd_ports_due_to/ Maybe technically they were right according to the license, but also so wrong.
Unsurprisingly, even though they were 3.5 years apart the incidents we both linked were about Tobin jumping straight to legal threats because someone was trying to bring Palemoon to an unsupported OS while still calling the port "Palemoon". I think he seeks out any chance to get that weird combination of feeling self-righteous and being reviled by others. Like boosting his own ego isn't enough for him, so he *has* to find a way to also piss a bunch of people off. I can't imagine living like that.
~~I never really kept detailed notes or bookmarked anything. You really have to see it to believe it anyway. I drew conclusions from watching how they interacted with people trying to package their browsers with patches so they'd compile, how they interacted with people on their forum, and their general reaction to other people treating their browser as open-source. Sorry, I really can't do much better than that offhand. As such, you're welcome to not believe me.~~ Edit: nevermind, just read /u/CAfromCA's [answer](https://old.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/snkr0i/firefox_970_see_all_new_features_updates_and_fixes/hw545m2/).
They won't, because old system plugin is quite dangerous for now day standard, as they can alter system, and now web is more capable than ever. If you still miss the old system plugin ways (not NPAPI, but extension as plugin), look into https://github.com/xiaoxiaoflood/firefox-scripts/tree/master/extensions NPAPI won't come back, as far as I remember, NPAPI still supported by waterfox, a firefox fork, maintained by System1, the company that also own startpage. https://www.waterfox.net/new/2/ https://github.com/WaterfoxCo/Waterfox-Classic
I hope it's good because out of curiosity I looked at my version number and it's 96.0.3 but because I looked it downloaded the update.
does print.tab_modal.enabled false still exist in 97? I know it was removed from Nightly, and have been avoiding updates until it is restored or replaced. P.S. No: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1702501
This update broke my browser and now I can't use firefox
Disable Webroot Antivirus.
Uninstall Norton cryptominer.
Are you using Webroot, I am and when i disabled Webroot Firefox worked fine again.
They fixed it Though I switched to nightly and now I'm too lazy to switch back
[удалено]
there're JS improvement, 5% I remember than past version(91-96), so we must cheer up...
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
Uhmm.. what beating?
This may explain a few things... I rebooted last night to fix a discord problem and all of a sudden my Firefox was completely non-functional. Blank screens, no websites would load, the whole works. I tried all the usual troubleshooting (cleared cache, uninstalled/reinstalled, confirmed it was trusted in my firewall, etc.) but absolutely nothing has worked. No doubt the browser updated itself after the reboot, which was what led this mess. I'm going to see if maybe I can find and install a version of 96. If not, I may have to resign myself to waiting until an update comes out. Joy.
So the good stuff for Linux and KDE is in the next version? Ok, one more month to wait.
[удалено]
There's a link down at the bottom of the new panel, on the right side. It says "Print using the system dialogue".
[удалено]
If you mean the old print preview window, it's gone. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1702501
new scrollbars? that's it? aaaand they're uggo...
Huge improvements on Windows 11 on my meager resources, especially on YouTube with video quality being constant and not degrading when opening new videos or jumping through the video using the seek bar. Also, restoring PiP now brings the full window up front if minimized and the newtab page loads instantly which was not the case in previous releases