20 Must-have Firefox Extensions 341
An anonymous reader noted that Computerworld is running a story on the 20 must have Firefox extensions. Several of my favorites are in there so I'm looking forward to playing with the ones I haven't heard of.
Adblock? (Score:5, Interesting)
*fires up internet explorer, browses tfa*
Oh.
Two flash ads & an animated gif (along with the pop-up). Not surprised they didn't mention ad block plus [mozilla.org] and filterset g [mozilla.org].
Install them & never see another ad again. Ever. (without any sort of configuration).
Re:Adblock? (Score:1, Interesting)
Addons memory usage (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Adblock? (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't know, I think that if it comes to an arms race between the ad makers & the ad blockers, the ad blockers would win. For example, the TV stations had to do deals with tivo et al to stop ad-skipping tech.
It's easier for people to control what's displayed on their computer than most think.
APT-get Extensions? (Score:3, Interesting)
The APT dependency management would also make it easier to install, say, a GreaseMonkey script and automatically install GreaseMonkey, because it's the script I want and GreaseMonkey is incidental.
A reverse dependency tool in Firefox would let me install FireFox on a host, then get suggestions of all the extensions I have installed elsewhere. But that's more of a reach than just including the extensions installs in APT packages.
Re:Aren't articles like this bad for Firefox? (Score:3, Interesting)
What about IE? They weren't even going to include tabs in IE7 originally. The evolution of IE has been mostly in its core rendering and ActiveX, and not the interface or functionality of the application. Internet Explorer has basically always been just a bare shell for MS's HTML handling engine. It's the bare minimum!
Re:20 is too many (Score:2, Interesting)
Before I'm modded as a troll I'm not saying "Opera rulez, FF sucks", there are features that are superior to Firefox too, like the kick ass Web Developer extension. I just think it would do better to have certain key extensions brought into the core browser.
Re:And add in flashblock while you're at it. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Adblock? (Score:2, Interesting)
127.0.0.1 ad.site.com
in my hosts file.
Here's a list of mine... (Score:3, Interesting)
I've posted my list [gnu-designs.com] back about a year ago, and I still use every single one of them every day... (I also describe how to get around a "bug" in FF that forbids non-standard port connections). Check it out here [gnu-designs.com]. I also spoke at my local LUG about the same thing in January.
Here's a list of the extensions I'm currently using in my Firefox build (you can see how I have it tricked out [gnu-designs.com] with all of my theming and extensions over here [gnu-designs.com]):
Re:20 is too many (Score:3, Interesting)
Rather than putting things in the core, what about two classes of extensions: core extensions, which are heavily cross validated and unit tested by core developers; and add-ons, which are what they are now -- a collection of random itches that people scratched. This would allow a set of stable extensions that almost everyone uses, flexibility for those who don't want to use core extensions (since they can be removed), and the current ability to scratch an itch with a less thoroughly tested extension or even just an extension with very narrow use (e.g. only with a single website).
Needed: Nuke Everything Else (Score:3, Interesting)