info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Firefox 57
3 views
Skip to first unread message
Russell Hafter News
Nov 17, 2017, 6:15:29 AM11/17/17
to
I was just wondering if any FF users have seen any
significant problems following the upgrade of FF from 56 to
57.
I had an e-mail from Mozilla which contained a number of
worrying comments.
On 14 Nov, Firefox <Moz...@e.mozilla.org> wrote:
> Today we're thrilled to introduce you to our brand new
> browser - Firefox Quantum.
> What you'll notice first is that the new Firefox is
> blazing fast. In fact, you'll enjoy speeds up to twice as
> fast as a year ago. It's also more powerful.
Sounds good...
> We've rebuilt Firefox from the ground up to focus on how
> you use the Web today to watch, listen, create and play
> without limits. We're excited to deliver a browser that
> feels completely different - modern, quick and efficient.
> We think you'll agree: It's a quantum leap forward in how
> you'll experience the internet.
I rather doubt that they have focussed on how **I** use the
Web today, and given the amount of time it takes to knock a
new installation into the shape that **I** want, together
with the notification that a lot of the add-ons I consider
essential are described as 'Legacy' I am not planning to
move to 57 until I know rather more about it...
There is at least one important add-on that they have been
telling me for some weeks now will not work with 57. I have
downloaded the recommended replacement, but so far have
totally failed to see how it is supposed to work.
Of course, if it really is just a quantum leap there should
be hardly anything to see...
--
Russell
Russell Hafter
E-mail to russell at russellhafter dot me dot uk
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>
Friendly web hosting <https://www.xencentrichosting.uk/billing/aff.php?aff=7>
significant problems following the upgrade of FF from 56 to
57.
I had an e-mail from Mozilla which contained a number of
worrying comments.
On 14 Nov, Firefox <Moz...@e.mozilla.org> wrote:
> Today we're thrilled to introduce you to our brand new
> browser - Firefox Quantum.
> What you'll notice first is that the new Firefox is
> blazing fast. In fact, you'll enjoy speeds up to twice as
> fast as a year ago. It's also more powerful.
Sounds good...
> We've rebuilt Firefox from the ground up to focus on how
> you use the Web today to watch, listen, create and play
> without limits. We're excited to deliver a browser that
> feels completely different - modern, quick and efficient.
> We think you'll agree: It's a quantum leap forward in how
> you'll experience the internet.
I rather doubt that they have focussed on how **I** use the
Web today, and given the amount of time it takes to knock a
new installation into the shape that **I** want, together
with the notification that a lot of the add-ons I consider
essential are described as 'Legacy' I am not planning to
move to 57 until I know rather more about it...
There is at least one important add-on that they have been
telling me for some weeks now will not work with 57. I have
downloaded the recommended replacement, but so far have
totally failed to see how it is supposed to work.
Of course, if it really is just a quantum leap there should
be hardly anything to see...
--
Russell
Russell Hafter
E-mail to russell at russellhafter dot me dot uk
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>
Friendly web hosting <https://www.xencentrichosting.uk/billing/aff.php?aff=7>
John
Nov 17, 2017, 6:23:39 AM11/17/17
to
In article <569c5e51...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
wrote:
> I was just wondering if any FF users have seen any
> significant problems following the upgrade of FF from 56
> to 57.
For me, it has been a smooth upgrade. There is a great
improvement in terms of speed. I don't have many
extensions/plugins and all mine seem to work just fine.
John
--
John
new...@blueyonder.co.uk
j dot mccartney atte blueyonder dot co dot uk
Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
wrote:
> I was just wondering if any FF users have seen any
> significant problems following the upgrade of FF from 56
> to 57.
improvement in terms of speed. I don't have many
extensions/plugins and all mine seem to work just fine.
John
--
John
new...@blueyonder.co.uk
j dot mccartney atte blueyonder dot co dot uk
Dave Symes
Nov 17, 2017, 7:15:20 AM11/17/17
to
In article <569c5e51...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> I was just wondering if any FF users have seen any
> significant problems following the upgrade of FF from 56 to
> 57.
Well...
> significant problems following the upgrade of FF from 56 to
> 57.
An upgrade from 56.n.n to 57 should have go quite smoothly assuming you
heeded the warnings about Addons, they would have shown a Legacy
annotation.
Most of my old addons don't have 57 alternatives yet, if ever, but a
couple did which I replaced a while back, and they survived the upgrade
perfectly okay.
Yes there is some speed increase, but my thought are... much of that comes
from the lack of addons being run.
On my Work computer Firefox ESR (52.5.0) has 11 addons, the other computer
with (Now) Firefox 57 only has 3 addons.
So here the 56/57 upgrade went without a single problem.
Dave
An afterthought...
Make sure you have a copy of your Firefox profile before doing the deed.
On my work computer I'm sticking with the ESR version until it ends mid
next year, as there are addon I rely on, for which there are no (Informed
never will be) replacements.
CTR being a very important one for me among others.
D.
--
Dave Triffid
Dave Symes
Nov 17, 2017, 7:19:32 AM11/17/17
to
In article <569c63c...@triffid.co.uk>,
That should read...
An upgrade from 56.n.n to 57 should go quite smoothly assuming you heeded
Dave
--
Dave Triffid
Dave Symes <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> An upgrade from 56.n.n to 57 should have go quite smoothly assuming you
> heeded the warnings about Addons, they would have shown a Legacy
> annotation.
Idiot boy... Me. :-(
> An upgrade from 56.n.n to 57 should have go quite smoothly assuming you
> heeded the warnings about Addons, they would have shown a Legacy
> annotation.
That should read...
An upgrade from 56.n.n to 57 should go quite smoothly assuming you heeded
the warnings about Addons, they would have shown a Legacy annotation.
My apologies.
Dave
--
Dave Triffid
Russell Hafter News
Nov 17, 2017, 7:41:38 AM11/17/17
to
In article <569c5f16...@blueyonder.co.uk>, John
'Legacy' and I see that what is certainly one of the most
important, Classic Theme Restorer, says that it will not
work with 57.
<new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <569c5e51...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> wrote:
> > I was just wondering if any FF users have seen any
> > significant problems following the upgrade of FF from
> > 56 to 57.
> For me, it has been a smooth upgrade. There is a great
> improvement in terms of speed. I don't have many
> extensions/plugins and all mine seem to work just fine.
Thanks - but I have 16 add-ons, of which 9 are labelled
> In article <569c5e51...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> wrote:
> > I was just wondering if any FF users have seen any
> > significant problems following the upgrade of FF from
> > 56 to 57.
> For me, it has been a smooth upgrade. There is a great
> improvement in terms of speed. I don't have many
> extensions/plugins and all mine seem to work just fine.
'Legacy' and I see that what is certainly one of the most
important, Classic Theme Restorer, says that it will not
work with 57.
Russell Hafter News
Nov 17, 2017, 7:41:38 AM11/17/17
to
> Make sure you have a copy of your Firefox profile before
> doing the deed.
Yes, good thought! I must do that anyway!
> doing the deed.
> On my work computer I'm sticking with the ESR version
> until it ends mid next year, as there are addon I rely
> on, for which there are no (Informed never will be)
> replacements. CTR being a very important one for me among
> others.
Yes, since posting my initial question I have been looking
at some more info on some of the nine legacy add-ons I have.
Classic Theme Restorer states that it will not work with 57.
I suspect that others that I have become completely used to
and also rely on, such as 'Open Bookmarks in New Tab' and
'Show Password Field' will also fail, though there is, I
suppose, a possibility that they may become configuarable
options instead??
I do have Pale Moon, but 'Show Password Field' says that
Pale Moon is too old a version of FF for it to run.
Perhaps I should take a look at Waterfox too? do you have
any experience of that?
It looks as though FF57 is something to steer clear of for
the moment, or, at the very least, to have as a separate
app.
John
Nov 17, 2017, 11:21:04 AM11/17/17
to
In article <569c642...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
<da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> Idiot boy... Me. :-(
We've only got your word for that, Dave, and if you are an
idiot boy, what weight does your assertion carry?
Xeno's paradox anyone?
<snip>
<da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> Idiot boy... Me. :-(
We've only got your word for that, Dave, and if you are an
idiot boy, what weight does your assertion carry?
Xeno's paradox anyone?
<snip>
John
Nov 17, 2017, 11:21:04 AM11/17/17
to
In article <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
will not be purged for a while. However, with regard to the
first, surely right-clicking on the bookmark will open the
option to open in a new tab (amongst others). If this
involves one click too many, <Ctrl>left click will open the
bookmark in a new tab. Indeed, it'll do the same for any
link.
Perhaps the add-on provides other facilities of which I'm
currently unaware.
Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
wrote:
wrote:
> I suspect that others that I have become completely used
> to and also rely on, such as 'Open Bookmarks in New Tab'
> and 'Show Password Field' will also fail, though there
> is, I suppose, a possibility that they may become
> configuarable options instead??
I'm in RISC OS at the moment, so my ignorance of these two
> to and also rely on, such as 'Open Bookmarks in New Tab'
> and 'Show Password Field' will also fail, though there
> is, I suppose, a possibility that they may become
> configuarable options instead??
will not be purged for a while. However, with regard to the
first, surely right-clicking on the bookmark will open the
option to open in a new tab (amongst others). If this
involves one click too many, <Ctrl>left click will open the
bookmark in a new tab. Indeed, it'll do the same for any
link.
Perhaps the add-on provides other facilities of which I'm
currently unaware.
Russell Hafter News
Nov 17, 2017, 12:35:32 PM11/17/17
to
In article <569c7a56...@blueyonder.co.uk>, John
> If this involves one click too many, <Ctrl>left click
> will open the bookmark in a new tab. Indeed, it'll do the
> same for any link.
Never knew that either. But I do hate using CTRL-Click
combination.
And on a netbook without a mouse these things are, I find,
really clunky!
> Perhaps the add-on provides other facilities of which I'm
> currently unaware.
Not to my knowledge. But having had this installed for years
I have become completely used to the idea that a bookmark
will always, automatically, open in a new tab. There are
times when I use other browsers, and I am nearly always
caught out by the bookmarked page replacing the open page,
rather than opening alongside it.
Being able to display passwords is, for me, extremely
useful. I use a fair number of financial sites, and they all
have long passwords - usually as long as the system allows,
and again provided that the system allows, they include
random chars such as ? % & ( #. For obvious reasons I do not
allow FF to store these, so it can be very useful to be able
to check my typing.
<new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> wrote:
> > I suspect that others that I have become completely
> > used to and also rely on, such as 'Open Bookmarks in
> > New Tab' and 'Show Password Field' will also fail,
> > though there is, I suppose, a possibility that they may
> > become configuarable options instead??
> I'm in RISC OS at the moment, so my ignorance of these
> two will not be purged for a while. However, with regard
> to the first, surely right-clicking on the bookmark will
> open the option to open in a new tab (amongst others).
So it does! I never knew that!!
> In article <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> wrote:
> > I suspect that others that I have become completely
> > used to and also rely on, such as 'Open Bookmarks in
> > New Tab' and 'Show Password Field' will also fail,
> > though there is, I suppose, a possibility that they may
> > become configuarable options instead??
> I'm in RISC OS at the moment, so my ignorance of these
> two will not be purged for a while. However, with regard
> to the first, surely right-clicking on the bookmark will
> open the option to open in a new tab (amongst others).
> If this involves one click too many, <Ctrl>left click
> will open the bookmark in a new tab. Indeed, it'll do the
> same for any link.
combination.
And on a netbook without a mouse these things are, I find,
really clunky!
> Perhaps the add-on provides other facilities of which I'm
> currently unaware.
I have become completely used to the idea that a bookmark
will always, automatically, open in a new tab. There are
times when I use other browsers, and I am nearly always
caught out by the bookmarked page replacing the open page,
rather than opening alongside it.
Being able to display passwords is, for me, extremely
useful. I use a fair number of financial sites, and they all
have long passwords - usually as long as the system allows,
and again provided that the system allows, they include
random chars such as ? % & ( #. For obvious reasons I do not
allow FF to store these, so it can be very useful to be able
to check my typing.
Dave Symes
Nov 17, 2017, 2:57:18 PM11/17/17
to
In article <569c79d6...@blueyonder.co.uk>,
> John
The fully weight of my intellect plus 69 Kg at the last weigh in, and that
results in a total of 69 Kg.
Paradoxically, unlike a lot of folks I know, since retiring I have lost a
few Kg rather than, as others have done, put on a few (Many) Kg.
Dave
--
Dave Triffid
John <new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <569c642...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> <snip>
> > Idiot boy... Me. :-(
> We've only got your word for that, Dave, and if you are an
> idiot boy, what weight does your assertion carry?
> Xeno's paradox anyone?
;-) Is that the one where you take two Doctors and...
> In article <569c642...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> <snip>
> > Idiot boy... Me. :-(
> We've only got your word for that, Dave, and if you are an
> idiot boy, what weight does your assertion carry?
> Xeno's paradox anyone?
> John
The fully weight of my intellect plus 69 Kg at the last weigh in, and that
results in a total of 69 Kg.
Paradoxically, unlike a lot of folks I know, since retiring I have lost a
few Kg rather than, as others have done, put on a few (Many) Kg.
Dave
--
Dave Triffid
Dave Symes
Nov 17, 2017, 2:57:19 PM11/17/17
to
In article <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> I do have Pale Moon, but 'Show Password Field' says that Pale Moon is
> too old a version of FF for it to run.
> Perhaps I should take a look at Waterfox too? do you have any experience
> of that?
> It looks as though FF57 is something to steer clear of for the moment,
> or, at the very least, to have as a separate app.
Russell, I don't understand what you write about PaleMoon.
I have Palemoon 27.6.1 (Latest version) and it works without problems.
I also have quite a few old addons installed on that, no problems.
Dave
On my notebook (W10) I have two separate installs of Firefox, the 52.5.0
ESR version, and as a separate install, separate profile, my tester
Firefox 57.
Just in case...
Don't forget on the second shortcut to use the -no-remote flag.
C:\path to Firefox.exe -p "Profilename" -no-remote
Profile name needs the quotes, and there is a single space between
"Profilename" and the -no-remote first hyphen, but no spaces between the
no and remote hyphen.
D.
--
Dave Triffid
Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
[Snip]
> I do have Pale Moon, but 'Show Password Field' says that Pale Moon is
> too old a version of FF for it to run.
> Perhaps I should take a look at Waterfox too? do you have any experience
> of that?
> It looks as though FF57 is something to steer clear of for the moment,
> or, at the very least, to have as a separate app.
I have Palemoon 27.6.1 (Latest version) and it works without problems.
I also have quite a few old addons installed on that, no problems.
Dave
On my notebook (W10) I have two separate installs of Firefox, the 52.5.0
ESR version, and as a separate install, separate profile, my tester
Firefox 57.
Just in case...
Don't forget on the second shortcut to use the -no-remote flag.
C:\path to Firefox.exe -p "Profilename" -no-remote
Profile name needs the quotes, and there is a single space between
"Profilename" and the -no-remote first hyphen, but no spaces between the
no and remote hyphen.
D.
--
Dave Triffid
Russell Hafter News
Nov 17, 2017, 4:16:02 PM11/17/17
to
In article <569c8e0...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> Russell, I don't understand what you write about PaleMoon.
It is not PaleMoon that is complaining, it was attempting to
install the FF add-on 'Show Password Field' onto PaleMoon
that gave the error message.
It was along the lines of "Your version of FF is 27. This
add-on requires at least FF36 to run."
I cannot be certain about the exact version numbers (PC is
turned off), but the complaint was to the effect that
PaleMoon was FF2x and the add-on required 3y."
So I could not use the add-on with PaleMoon. PaleMoon itself
works fine these days. I shall have to see if it will import
my FF bookmarks sometime - earlier versions used to say that
they had imported, but I could never find them.
<da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> wrote:
> [Snip]
> > I do have Pale Moon, but 'Show Password Field' says
> > that Pale Moon is too old a version of FF for it to run.
[Snip]
> In article <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> wrote:
> [Snip]
> > I do have Pale Moon, but 'Show Password Field' says
> > that Pale Moon is too old a version of FF for it to run.
> Russell, I don't understand what you write about PaleMoon.
install the FF add-on 'Show Password Field' onto PaleMoon
that gave the error message.
It was along the lines of "Your version of FF is 27. This
add-on requires at least FF36 to run."
I cannot be certain about the exact version numbers (PC is
turned off), but the complaint was to the effect that
PaleMoon was FF2x and the add-on required 3y."
So I could not use the add-on with PaleMoon. PaleMoon itself
works fine these days. I shall have to see if it will import
my FF bookmarks sometime - earlier versions used to say that
they had imported, but I could never find them.
Dave Symes
Nov 17, 2017, 4:43:29 PM11/17/17
to
In article <569c954e...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
Firefox addons would not work with Palemoon.
While a number of Fx addons still work with PM there is a separate addons
site for Palemoon now, I think it is:
http://addons.palemoon.org/
> So I could not use the add-on with PaleMoon. PaleMoon itself
> works fine these days. I shall have to see if it will import
> my FF bookmarks sometime - earlier versions used to say that
> they had imported, but I could never find them.
I don't bother with that route anymore.
With neither Firefox and Palemoon running...
From the Firefox profile, I just copy (Ctrl + C) my Firefox bookmark file
then paste it into the Palemoon profile.
"Places.sqlite" is the file.
Bob's me wosit...
Dave
Nb: I usually delete the Palemoon "Places.sqlite" file before doing the
C&P, that way I'm certain the file has pasted in okay.
As noted previously when talking about the Firefox profile...
Make sure you have a copy somewhere of your Palemoon profile.
Dunno what version of Windows you use, but here on W7 and 10 the browser
profiles are in:
C:\Users\MyWinname\Appdata\Roaming\Moonchild Productions
D.
--
Dave Triffid
Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> In article <569c8e0...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> > Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> > wrote:
> > [Snip]
> > > I do have Pale Moon, but 'Show Password Field' says
> > > that Pale Moon is too old a version of FF for it to run.
> [Snip]
> > Russell, I don't understand what you write about PaleMoon.
> It is not PaleMoon that is complaining, it was attempting to
> install the FF add-on 'Show Password Field' onto PaleMoon
> that gave the error message.
> It was along the lines of "Your version of FF is 27. This
> add-on requires at least FF36 to run."
> I cannot be certain about the exact version numbers (PC is
> turned off), but the complaint was to the effect that
> PaleMoon was FF2x and the add-on required 3y."
Ah yes, after Australis, Fx and Palemoon started to diverge so a number of
> In article <569c8e0...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> > Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> > wrote:
> > [Snip]
> > > I do have Pale Moon, but 'Show Password Field' says
> > > that Pale Moon is too old a version of FF for it to run.
> [Snip]
> > Russell, I don't understand what you write about PaleMoon.
> It is not PaleMoon that is complaining, it was attempting to
> install the FF add-on 'Show Password Field' onto PaleMoon
> that gave the error message.
> It was along the lines of "Your version of FF is 27. This
> add-on requires at least FF36 to run."
> I cannot be certain about the exact version numbers (PC is
> turned off), but the complaint was to the effect that
> PaleMoon was FF2x and the add-on required 3y."
Firefox addons would not work with Palemoon.
While a number of Fx addons still work with PM there is a separate addons
site for Palemoon now, I think it is:
http://addons.palemoon.org/
> So I could not use the add-on with PaleMoon. PaleMoon itself
> works fine these days. I shall have to see if it will import
> my FF bookmarks sometime - earlier versions used to say that
> they had imported, but I could never find them.
With neither Firefox and Palemoon running...
From the Firefox profile, I just copy (Ctrl + C) my Firefox bookmark file
then paste it into the Palemoon profile.
"Places.sqlite" is the file.
Bob's me wosit...
Dave
Nb: I usually delete the Palemoon "Places.sqlite" file before doing the
C&P, that way I'm certain the file has pasted in okay.
As noted previously when talking about the Firefox profile...
Make sure you have a copy somewhere of your Palemoon profile.
Dunno what version of Windows you use, but here on W7 and 10 the browser
profiles are in:
C:\Users\MyWinname\Appdata\Roaming\Moonchild Productions
D.
--
Dave Triffid
SG nws
Nov 17, 2017, 5:00:24 PM11/17/17
to
Russell Hafter wrote:
> > right-clicking on the bookmark will open the option to open
> > in a new tab (amongst others).
> So it does! I never knew that!!
With a 3-button mouse, a middle click will immediately open
> > right-clicking on the bookmark will open the option to open
> > in a new tab (amongst others).
> So it does! I never knew that!!
the link in a new tab, and, of course FF itself will let you
choose whether that new tab gains focus, or not.
Whether this happens automatically or whether it has to be
configured, I have forgotten, but having looked for, and not
found any such config. option, I'd go for the former.
--
Stewart Goldwater
Tim Hill
Nov 17, 2017, 5:00:40 PM11/17/17
to
In article <569c6585...@russellhafter.me.invalid>, Russell Hafter
change. ;-)
--
from Tim Hill who welcomes incoming email to tim at timil dot com.
* Ethical? Energy: http://tjrh.eu/coopnrg Telecoms: http://tjrh.eu/phone
* Have a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* RISC OS downloads http://timil.com/riscos
News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> In article <569c5f16...@blueyonder.co.uk>, John
> <new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <569c5e51...@russellhafter.me.invalid>, Russell
> > Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> > > I was just wondering if any FF users have seen any significant
> > > problems following the upgrade of FF from 56 to 57.
> > For me, it has been a smooth upgrade. There is a great improvement in
> > terms of speed. I don't have many extensions/plugins and all mine
> > seem to work just fine.
> Thanks - but I have 16 add-ons, of which 9 are labelled 'Legacy' and I
> see that what is certainly one of the most important, Classic Theme
> Restorer, says that it will not work with 57.
Someone less kind would accuse you of being averse to all forms of
> In article <569c5f16...@blueyonder.co.uk>, John
> <new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <569c5e51...@russellhafter.me.invalid>, Russell
> > Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> > > I was just wondering if any FF users have seen any significant
> > > problems following the upgrade of FF from 56 to 57.
> > For me, it has been a smooth upgrade. There is a great improvement in
> > terms of speed. I don't have many extensions/plugins and all mine
> > seem to work just fine.
> Thanks - but I have 16 add-ons, of which 9 are labelled 'Legacy' and I
> see that what is certainly one of the most important, Classic Theme
> Restorer, says that it will not work with 57.
change. ;-)
--
from Tim Hill who welcomes incoming email to tim at timil dot com.
* Ethical? Energy: http://tjrh.eu/coopnrg Telecoms: http://tjrh.eu/phone
* Have a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* RISC OS downloads http://timil.com/riscos
John
Nov 18, 2017, 5:53:09 AM11/18/17
to
In article <mpro.ozl14h000...@ntlworld.com>, SG
I was surprised that Russell wasn't aware of the
<Ctrl>-click and right-click options and then, damn me, you
illustrate my own ignorance to me. It doesn't need
configuring - I've just tried it.
It just goes to show how ignorance can keep you blinkered!
<Ctrl>-click and right-click options and then, damn me, you
illustrate my own ignorance to me. It doesn't need
configuring - I've just tried it.
It just goes to show how ignorance can keep you blinkered!
John
Nov 18, 2017, 5:53:09 AM11/18/17
to
In article <569c887...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
14 st 4 lb for more than 10 years now. However, I've
recently been given the impetus to shed some of it. Fingers
crossed.
<da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <569c79d6...@blueyonder.co.uk>, John
> <new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <569c642...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> > <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > Idiot boy... Me. :-(
> > We've only got your word for that, Dave, and if you are
> > an idiot boy, what weight does your assertion carry?
> > Xeno's paradox anyone?
> ;-) Is that the one where you take two Doctors and...
> > John
> The fully weight of my intellect plus 69 Kg at the last
> weigh in, and that results in a total of 69 Kg.
> Paradoxically, unlike a lot of folks I know, since
> retiring I have lost a few Kg rather than, as others have
> done, put on a few (Many) Kg.
Wow! 10 st 12 lb (nearly). I feel quite jealous. I've been
> In article <569c79d6...@blueyonder.co.uk>, John
> <new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <569c642...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> > <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > Idiot boy... Me. :-(
> > We've only got your word for that, Dave, and if you are
> > an idiot boy, what weight does your assertion carry?
> > Xeno's paradox anyone?
> ;-) Is that the one where you take two Doctors and...
> > John
> The fully weight of my intellect plus 69 Kg at the last
> weigh in, and that results in a total of 69 Kg.
> Paradoxically, unlike a lot of folks I know, since
> retiring I have lost a few Kg rather than, as others have
> done, put on a few (Many) Kg.
14 st 4 lb for more than 10 years now. However, I've
recently been given the impetus to shed some of it. Fingers
crossed.
John
Nov 18, 2017, 5:53:09 AM11/18/17
to
In article <569c811b...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> > If this involves one click too many, <Ctrl>left click
> > will open the bookmark in a new tab. Indeed, it'll do
> > the same for any link.
> Never knew that either. But I do hate using CTRL-Click
> combination.
Each to his own.
> And on a netbook without a mouse these things are, I
> find, really clunky!
Yes, I see what you mean.
Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
wrote:
> In article <569c7a56...@blueyonder.co.uk>, John
> <new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article
> > <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>, Russell
> > Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> > > I suspect that others that I have become completely
> > > used to and also rely on, such as 'Open Bookmarks in
> > > New Tab' and 'Show Password Field' will also fail,
> > > though there is, I suppose, a possibility that they
> > > may become configuarable options instead??
> > I'm in RISC OS at the moment, so my ignorance of these
> > two will not be purged for a while. However, with
> > regard to the first, surely right-clicking on the
> > bookmark will open the option to open in a new tab
> > (amongst others).
> So it does! I never knew that!!
See my reply to Stewart...
wrote:
> In article <569c7a56...@blueyonder.co.uk>, John
> <new...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article
> > <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>, Russell
> > Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> > > I suspect that others that I have become completely
> > > used to and also rely on, such as 'Open Bookmarks in
> > > New Tab' and 'Show Password Field' will also fail,
> > > though there is, I suppose, a possibility that they
> > > may become configuarable options instead??
> > I'm in RISC OS at the moment, so my ignorance of these
> > two will not be purged for a while. However, with
> > regard to the first, surely right-clicking on the
> > bookmark will open the option to open in a new tab
> > (amongst others).
> So it does! I never knew that!!
> > If this involves one click too many, <Ctrl>left click
> > will open the bookmark in a new tab. Indeed, it'll do
> > the same for any link.
> Never knew that either. But I do hate using CTRL-Click
> combination.
> And on a netbook without a mouse these things are, I
> find, really clunky!
Russell Hafter News
Nov 18, 2017, 6:08:41 AM11/18/17
to
Windows browsers I have tried.
But most of can forget to use the middle button on occasions
- we would rather have the system take care of it for use,
which is why we use an add-on!
Russell Hafter News
Nov 18, 2017, 6:11:34 AM11/18/17
to
In article <569c97c...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> > I cannot be certain about the exact version numbers (PC
> > is turned off), but the complaint was to the effect
> > that PaleMoon was FF2x and the add-on required 3y."
> Ah yes, after Australis, Fx and Palemoon started to
> diverge so a number of Firefox addons would not work with
> Palemoon.
> While a number of Fx addons still work with PM there is a
> separate addons site for Palemoon now, I think it is:
> http://addons.palemoon.org/
Yes, I did look there first for a suitable dedicated add-on,
but there did not seem to be one.
> > So I could not use the add-on with PaleMoon. PaleMoon
> > itself works fine these days. I shall have to see if it
> > will import my FF bookmarks sometime - earlier versions
> > used to say that they had imported, but I could never
> > find them.
> I don't bother with that route anymore. With neither
> Firefox and Palemoon running... From the Firefox profile,
> I just copy (Ctrl + C) my Firefox bookmark file then
> paste it into the Palemoon profile.
> "Places.sqlite" is the file.
[Snip]
Thanks for this tip...
> Nb: I usually delete the Palemoon "Places.sqlite" file
> before doing the C&P, that way I'm certain the file has
> pasted in okay.
... and this one.
> As noted previously when talking about the Firefox
> profile...
> Make sure you have a copy somewhere of your Palemoon
> profile.
> Dunno what version of Windows you use, but here on W7 and
> 10 the browser profiles are in:
> C:\Users\MyWinname\Appdata\Roaming\Moonchild Productions
Thanks.
Recently upgraded from XP to a Win 7 64 Pro box. It has a
half-decent processor, demonstrated by the fact that it is
the first Windows machine I have had that boots up
significantly faster than my RPC!
<da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <569c954e...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> wrote:
> > In article <569c8e0...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> > <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>, Russell
> > > Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> > > [Snip]
[Snip]
> In article <569c954e...@russellhafter.me.invalid>,
> Russell Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid>
> wrote:
> > In article <569c8e0...@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> > <da...@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <569c6635...@russellhafter.me.invalid>, Russell
> > > Hafter News <see...@russellhafter.me.invalid> wrote:
> > > [Snip]
> > I cannot be certain about the exact version numbers (PC
> > is turned off), but the complaint was to the effect
> > that PaleMoon was FF2x and the add-on required 3y."
> Ah yes, after Australis, Fx and Palemoon started to
> diverge so a number of Firefox addons would not work with
> Palemoon.
> While a number of Fx addons still work with PM there is a
> separate addons site for Palemoon now, I think it is:
> http://addons.palemoon.org/
but there did not seem to be one.
> > So I could not use the add-on with PaleMoon. PaleMoon
> > itself works fine these days. I shall have to see if it
> > will import my FF bookmarks sometime - earlier versions
> > used to say that they had imported, but I could never
> > find them.
> I don't bother with that route anymore. With neither
> Firefox and Palemoon running... From the Firefox profile,
> I just copy (Ctrl + C) my Firefox bookmark file then
> paste it into the Palemoon profile.
> "Places.sqlite" is the file.
Thanks for this tip...
> Nb: I usually delete the Palemoon "Places.sqlite" file
> before doing the C&P, that way I'm certain the file has
> pasted in okay.
> As noted previously when talking about the Firefox
> profile...
> Make sure you have a copy somewhere of your Palemoon
> profile.
> Dunno what version of Windows you use, but here on W7 and
> 10 the browser profiles are in:
> C:\Users\MyWinname\Appdata\Roaming\Moonchild Productions
Recently upgraded from XP to a Win 7 64 Pro box. It has a
half-decent processor, demonstrated by the fact that it is
the first Windows machine I have had that boots up
significantly faster than my RPC!
0 new messages