Firefox Users May Import Chrome Extensions Now (ghacks.net) 41
Mozilla has implemented the WebExtensions system in its browser, allowing Firefox users to import select extensions from other browsers like Chrome. gHacks reports: The feature, which is in testing at the moment, can be enabled by all users of the latest stable version of Firefox.
1. Load about:config in the browser's address bar.
2. Confirm that you will be careful to continue.
3. Search for browser.migrate.chrome.extensions.enabled.
4. Set the feature to True, which enables it.
5. Restart Firefox.
Mozilla has integrated it into the browser's import functionality, which users may use on first run or at any time from the Settings page. To do so, select Menu > Settings > Import Data (button), or load about:preferences#general in the browser's address bar and activate the import data button on the page. Select Chrome from the list, expand the available import options and make sure extensions are checked. Imports are usually limited to some data, such as bookmarks or the browsing history. Firefox is the first major browser, maybe the first browser at all, that adds extensions to the list of supported imports.
The feature is limited at the time to Google Chrome and select extensions. Even though Firefox and Chrome extensions use the same framework, WebExtensions, they are not compatible immediately. Firefox users who attempt to install extensions from Chrome's Web Store may notice that this is not working. Mozilla decided to create a list of extension pairs for extensions that are available on the Chrome Web Store and the Mozilla Add-ons Store. Instead of importing the Chrome extension directly, Firefox is installing the Firefox version of the extension from Mozilla's own extension store.
1. Load about:config in the browser's address bar.
2. Confirm that you will be careful to continue.
3. Search for browser.migrate.chrome.extensions.enabled.
4. Set the feature to True, which enables it.
5. Restart Firefox.
Mozilla has integrated it into the browser's import functionality, which users may use on first run or at any time from the Settings page. To do so, select Menu > Settings > Import Data (button), or load about:preferences#general in the browser's address bar and activate the import data button on the page. Select Chrome from the list, expand the available import options and make sure extensions are checked. Imports are usually limited to some data, such as bookmarks or the browsing history. Firefox is the first major browser, maybe the first browser at all, that adds extensions to the list of supported imports.
The feature is limited at the time to Google Chrome and select extensions. Even though Firefox and Chrome extensions use the same framework, WebExtensions, they are not compatible immediately. Firefox users who attempt to install extensions from Chrome's Web Store may notice that this is not working. Mozilla decided to create a list of extension pairs for extensions that are available on the Chrome Web Store and the Mozilla Add-ons Store. Instead of importing the Chrome extension directly, Firefox is installing the Firefox version of the extension from Mozilla's own extension store.
Edge (Score:1, Offtopic)
The sort of stuff Edge should be doing, but instead they're focusing on nagging you to the point you simply refuse to ever open the fucking thing. So we're stuck with extremely poor versions of Chrome plugins, which is the real reason no one is willing to switch away from Chrome!
And ruining their UI. Their new layout is friggin awful. I can't imagine how many people they need to fire before Edge stands a chance.
Re:Edge (Score:5, Insightful)
>"The sort of stuff Edge should be doing, but instead they're focusing on nagging you to the point you simply refuse to ever open the fucking thing. So we're stuck with extremely poor versions of Chrome plugins, which is the real reason no one is willing to switch away from Chrome!"
Either way, you are still using Chrom*. The solution is to install the other browser, Firefox. And in doing so, you can lessen MS's and Google's control while increasing YOUR control and privacy, and helping to ensure open standards and actual browser/web diversity.
Or you can just keep lamenting over the Edge flavor of Chrom* or install one of the many other flavors of Chrom*'s, pretending something meaningful has changed.
Re: (Score:3)
Edge is not Chrome. It uses the Chromium renderer, but that's just one component of a browser.
For me, Firefox kind of sucks. Its UI is poorly designed.
I'll switch to something else when they make it worth my while.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Edge is not Chrome."
Right. That is why I call them Chrom*.
>"For me, Firefox kind of sucks. Its UI is poorly designed."
Granted, I am talking about desktop, but can you give an example of what you don't like about the UI. Especially compared to some other browser?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand where firefox doesn't respect privacy and security, as that's been part of what has seperated them from the chrome/IE echo system.
And more specifically, whats this about?
Especially security. For example Firefox forces upon you who Mozilla trusts, and you have little to no say so in changing this.
Is this about the list of CA's and such, like every web browser? Or the fact that it trusts to run from it's Mozila sites?(like how google/chrome does?)
Please explain as I am unaware of what specifically I am to search for.
Re: (Score:3)
I wish it was easier to run two different installs/profiles of Firefox at the same time. Then I could have a "clean" one for sites that break with privacy enhancements, mainly airline sites for some reason.
For now I reserve Edge for that purpose only.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you mean?
I type:
firefox -no-remote -ProfileManager
Then you can choose a different profile to start, create new ones etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I checked there was a long list of caveats, to the point where they recommended using a separate install of the portable version. Is it better now?
One other feature I'd like to see is to be able to have different window icons for different profiles. You can do it with Firefox Portable and some hacking.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no non-portable version of Firefox. You can just copy the install directory to anywhere. It gives zero fucks on any platform.
On Linux I install the tarballs and then take a ZFS snapshot (I created a zfs filesystem from my root pool and mount it on /opt/firefox.)
I read the canonical post on the subject [mozillazine.org] and it's clear that you don't have to do ANYTHING special, and in fact it is dumb to do so. Just use the command line options.
Re: (Score:2)
What are these window icons of which you speak?
I've no idea, probably not and I'm the worst person to ask. My preferred style of window management diverged a long time ago grim the main stream. It would look familiar to a CDE user and not completely foreign to a windows 3.11 aficionado.
I organise by virtual desktop you see.
So probably not then!
Re:Edge (Score:4, Insightful)
I like firefox, but any plugin worth downloading needs that stupid permission that gives it full access to everything you type in to any web page, including user names and passwords.
I imagine that something deep in the architecture of Firefox makes it difficult to give a plugin access to everything the page serves up, but nothing that the user types back in. But it SURE would be great if that were possible, because that would require a lot less trust on my part when installing plugins.
Like adblock plus, for example. It requires that level of access, meaning the plugin will know all of my passwords. I want to block ads, but do I trust the makers of adblock plus THAT much?
No.
I wish there was a better way.
Re:Edge (Score:5, Informative)
Stop using AdBlock Plus and go for uBlock Origin instead
Re: (Score:3)
Why are you even using crap like AdBlock? uBlock Origin is faster, more versatile, and fully open source.
Add-ons are like any other software on your computer. You need to trust them somewhat. Like you trust Firefox. It sounds like you need to spend a bit of time looking into which ones are worthy of that trust. For reference, I recommend (but do your own checking):
uBlock Origin
Privacy Badger
Cookie AutoDelete
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for the suggestions, however I am NOT using AdBlock, for the reasons given. It was just one example. These other add-ons you have suggested also require that same stupid permission that grants access to my passwords, so they are just as bad. uBlock Origin in particular, which seems to be a favorite given the other posts in this thread, requires that same God-level permission.
That was the crux of my point: that this permission is bad.
I agree that trust is necessary. It is inescapable, open-sour
Re: (Score:2)
Argh, I am shifting topics but I am getting seriously annoyed. Even as I type this, slashdot is serving me ads with images that are not safe for work. And no, I don't do the kind of browsing that would justify this, its completely unwarranted. Furthermore, I have "disable ads" checked, and it is STILL serving up ads, and on top of that, I keep getting that damn popup for the slashdot newsletter.
Slashdot has become awful again. We pushed back before when they did this so they just changed their strategy
Wow! @ 4.40% use this will make FF the top dog (Score:1)
Oh, may we *please*?? (Score:2)
Then again, we may not.
Most Firefox users don't want Chrome extensions (Score:2, Insightful)
FWIW I would want tree style tabs or similar from Firefox to work on Chrome or Opera. So it's more of the other direction.
Re: (Score:2)
I would take any time old FF extensions over those imported from Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
THIS. I left Firefox because of their war against the extensions. It somehow resembles Google's war against general storage (or shall I say file access) in Android. All the time "can't access this or that" for your own safety, frameworks that change from versions to version or even play store API version, performance that got SO bad that even basic programs that need a few MBs of files for minutes or tens of minutes
Re: (Score:2)
Couldn't agree more. I've been exclusively using Firefox since 2004. Sure, Mozilla made bonehead decisions here and there, but I've never had an issue with the browser, ever. Microsoft browsers? LOL ROFL Chrome reminds me of a creep sitting in the corner watching you. Yuck.
Firefox rules the extensions niche (Score:3)
It's true: There's very few Chrome extensions that aren't available in Firefox. Alas, the best Firefox add-ons are not available in Chrome. It's strange the world's most popular browser doesn't have the most personalization. Firefox rules that niche but only has 4% of the mind-share. Look at the dumbest personalization, themes: Google Android has live wallpaper, Firefox has live themes, Google Chrome has neither. Chrome is showing its for-corporate-use past.
Re: (Score:2)
Encourage others to install Firefox on their desktop and mobile. It's not a hard sell.
Re:Firefox rules the extensions niche (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not at all. After I install FF for friends and family I then install the following extensions: uBlock Origin, New Tab Override, Google Analytics Opt-out Add-On, Ghostery, Disconnect, and ClearURLs. People are AMAZED at an Internet experience with ZERO ads and minimal Google intrusion. Web site load times are fantastic.
Re: (Score:3)
Recommend EFF's Privacy Badger instead of Ghostery.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll check it out, thanks for the tip.
Why ???? (Score:2)
Still no good replacement for Scrapbook : ( (Score:2)
Handy (Score:2)
How is this different from Opera? (Score:2)
Opera has a chrome-ext compat addon -- how is the new Firefox feature better than simply being able to agnostically install chrome addons/
I am installing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)