X
Tap here to go to the mobile version of the site.

Support Forum

I do not want certain unsigned addons to be disabled

Posted

When - Now IF I update to 4.3 How can I overide your decision to tell me what to do Messrs free web? I appreciate Mozilla is being protective, but that is exactly how the 'others' have invaded our privacy.

I would rather be told how to protect myself, and have enough information to assess the risk.

The extensions I want to keep working are little simple helpful tools that the developers don't have the time or resouces to get your approval. In fact they might not even be active developers any more...

I have been using some of them for years. I have also used and loved Firefox for years and don't want to change to something else. I can use them but I don't like them.

Now I daren't update. I don't want to update to 4.3 because it says in the help area that I will no longer have the choice to keep using them. ( the unsigned plugins/extensions) I refer to this page: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-signing-in-firefox?as=u&utm_source=inproduct

Oh Dear - what-am-I-to-do?

Can anyone confirm that I will indeed be unable to allow unsigned addons?

Oh and the 'educated guesses' about my system are correct but incomplete, in that it doesn't show that several of those plugins are have been disabled for a long time and have no way of uninstalling them - odd really. Nor does it list the offending extensions of which I speak.

I jusr read this over and it sounds a bit fierce - I don't mean to be rude. I have been trying to find out how to overcome this ever since I first read about it AGES ago. Didn't want to bother anyone. But it occurred to me that others might have the same concerns.

Thanks for reading this far, Would be great if I'm wrong about this...

Christina.

When - Now IF I update to 4.3 How can I overide your decision to tell me what to do Messrs free web? I appreciate Mozilla is being protective, but that is exactly how the 'others' have invaded our privacy. I would rather be told how to protect myself, and have enough information to assess the risk. The extensions I want to keep working are little simple helpful tools that the developers don't have the time or resouces to get your approval. In fact they might not even be active developers any more... I have been using some of them for years. I have also used and loved Firefox for years and don't want to change to something else. I can use them but I don't like them. Now I daren't update. I don't want to update to 4.3 because it says in the help area that I will no longer have the choice to keep using them. ( the unsigned plugins/extensions) I refer to this page: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-signing-in-firefox?as=u&utm_source=inproduct Oh Dear - what-am-I-to-do? Can anyone confirm that I will indeed be unable to allow unsigned addons? Oh and the 'educated guesses' about my system are correct but incomplete, in that it doesn't show that several of those plugins are have been disabled for a long time and have no way of uninstalling them - odd really. Nor does it list the offending extensions of which I speak. I jusr read this over and it sounds a bit fierce - I don't mean to be rude. I have been trying to find out how to overcome this ever since I first read about it AGES ago. Didn't want to bother anyone. But it occurred to me that others might have the same concerns. Thanks for reading this far, Would be great if I'm wrong about this... Christina.

Additional System Details

Installed Plug-ins

  • Adobe PDF Plug-In For Firefox and Netscape 15.9.20069
  • Citrix Online App Detector Plugin
  • Google Update
  • Intel web components for Intel® Identity Protection Technology
  • Intel web components updater - Installs and updates the Intel web components
  • NPRuntime Script Plug-in Library for Java(TM) Deploy
  • Next Generation Java Plug-in 11.66.2 for Mozilla browsers
  • Office Authorization plug-in for NPAPI browsers
  • The plug-in allows you to open and edit files using Microsoft Office applications
  • np-mswmp
  • The QuickTime Plugin allows you to view a wide variety of multimedia content in Web pages. For more information, visit the QuickTime Web site.
  • Shockwave Flash 20.0 r0
  • VLC media player Web Plugin

Application

  • User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0

More Information

Michal Stanke
  • Moderator
182 solutions 990 answers

Hi Christina.

It is still possible to use signed add-ons after changing some hidden preference using about:config, but this will be removed in future versions too. What concrete add-ons have been disabled, you want to use even if not signed and verified?

I would advise you to look, if there is really no signed updated version, and if no, try to get them signed via AMO yourself.

Hi Christina. It is still possible to use signed add-ons after changing some hidden preference using about:config, but this will be removed in future versions too. What concrete add-ons have been disabled, you want to use even if not signed and verified? I would advise you to look, if there is really no signed updated version, and if no, try to get them signed via AMO yourself.
the-edmeister
  • Top 25 Contributor
  • Moderator
5411 solutions 40287 answers

Overall, you really need to contact the developers of your un-signed extensions and encourage them to get their products 'signed' by Mozilla to ensure your continued satisfaction. There is no requirement that 'signed' extensions be hosted at the official Add-ons website; Mozilla is perfectly agreeable to 'signing' self-hosted or side-loaded [thru another application] extensions; they will verify and 'sign' the extension and return it to the person that submitted it.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-signing-in-firefox#w_what-can-i-do-if-firefox-disables-an-installed-unsigned-add-on

xpinstall.signatures.required preference toggled to false

But come Firefox 44 at the end of January that pref will be gone. You choice at that time would be to switch to an un-branded version from Mozilla that would be called something other than "Firefox" that would have different logos and other "branding". That "un-branded" version will be built without the "signing" feature, from what I have read. But until I actually can download the "un-branded" version I will remain skeptical that happen.

Overall, you really need to contact the developers of your un-signed extensions and encourage them to get their products 'signed' by Mozilla to ensure your continued satisfaction. ''There is no requirement that 'signed' extensions be hosted at the official Add-ons website; Mozilla is perfectly agreeable to 'signing' self-hosted or side-loaded [thru another application] extensions; they will verify and 'sign' the extension and return it to the person that submitted it''. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-signing-in-firefox#w_what-can-i-do-if-firefox-disables-an-installed-unsigned-add-on '''xpinstall.signatures.required''' preference toggled to '''''false''''' But come Firefox 44 at the end of January that pref will be gone. You choice at that time would be to switch to an un-branded version from Mozilla that would be called something other than "Firefox" that would have different logos and other "branding". That "un-branded" version will be built without the "signing" feature, from what I have read. ''But until I actually can download the "un-branded" version I will remain skeptical that happen.''
cor-el
  • Top 10 Contributor
  • Moderator
17567 solutions 158879 answers
See also: *http://www.ghacks.net/2015/12/16/what-you-do-when-firefox-disables-installed-add-ons/

Question owner

Michal Stanke said

Hi Christina. It is still possible to use signed add-ons after changing some hidden preference using about:config, but this will be removed in future versions too. What concrete add-ons have been disabled, you want to use even if not signed and verified? I would advise you to look, if there is really no signed updated version, and if no, try to get them signed via AMO yourself.

Thank you Michal,

I will try your temporary solution in about:config while I try to encourage the makers to get them signed. Trying to get them signed myself may be a possible solution - If i can manage it. I am a user, not a developer.

How techy do I have to be, I wonder.

''Michal Stanke [[#answer-819567|said]]'' <blockquote> Hi Christina. It is still possible to use signed add-ons after changing some hidden preference using about:config, but this will be removed in future versions too. What concrete add-ons have been disabled, you want to use even if not signed and verified? I would advise you to look, if there is really no signed updated version, and if no, try to get them signed via AMO yourself. </blockquote> Thank you Michal, I will try your temporary solution in about:config while I try to encourage the makers to get them signed. Trying to get them signed myself may be a possible solution - If i can manage it. I am a user, not a developer. How techy do I have to be, I wonder.

Question owner

cor-el said

See also:

Thank you cor-el,

That page is helpful in providing temporary solutions.

It also mentions the developer versions of firefox but, as I understand it, those versions update every night (which might not be night at my location) and use a lot of resources including a fast internet connection. Please do correct me if I'm wrong about that.

By the way, the page you linked to appears to have a lot of script running and it froze firefox for me for several minutes - repeatedly as I tried to read the (helpful) article. Probably the ads. Yes, I know that the provider needs to make a living, but if the page freezes it rather defeats the object.

''cor-el [[#answer-819809|said]]'' <blockquote> See also: *http://www.ghacks.net/2015/12/16/what-you-do-when-firefox-disables-installed-add-ons/ </blockquote> Thank you cor-el, That page is helpful in providing temporary solutions. It also mentions the developer versions of firefox but, as I understand it, those versions update every night (which might not be night at my location) and use a lot of resources including a fast internet connection. Please do correct me if I'm wrong about that. By the way, the page you linked to appears to have a lot of script running and it froze firefox for me for several minutes - repeatedly as I tried to read the (helpful) article. Probably the ads. Yes, I know that the provider needs to make a living, but if the page freezes it rather defeats the object.

Question owner

the-edmeister said

Overall, you really need to contact the developers of your un-signed extensions and encourage them to get their products 'signed' by Mozilla to ensure your continued satisfaction. There is no requirement that 'signed' extensions be hosted at the official Add-ons website; Mozilla is perfectly agreeable to 'signing' self-hosted or side-loaded [thru another application] extensions; they will verify and 'sign' the extension and return it to the person that submitted it. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-signing-in-firefox#w_what-can-i-do-if-firefox-disables-an-installed-unsigned-add-on xpinstall.signatures.required preference toggled to false But come Firefox 44 at the end of January that pref will be gone. You choice at that time would be to switch to an un-branded version from Mozilla that would be called something other than "Firefox" that would have different logos and other "branding". That "un-branded" version will be built without the "signing" feature, from what I have read. But until I actually can download the "un-branded" version I will remain skeptical that happen.

Thank you the-edmeister,

I will try to get the developers to 'do the right thing'. If I can get in touch with them I will quote your advice. Since I have a paid licence for my addon, verified by my email address, I can't see how I could have the addon verified myself.

Yes, I had heard mention of the 'unbranded version' but no info on how to get it. I guess you have your ear to the ground and might be in the know faster than most of us... Your sceptisim does not make me all that hopeful that it will be released:) and I'd be sorry to lose the fiery fox icons:)

Thank you too, for the name of the entry to search for to edit in about:confing It will give a little extra time to investigate further while having the updated version of Firefox.

I may have to consider blocking updates after that. NOT a good solution, I know.

''the-edmeister [[#answer-819592|said]]'' <blockquote> Overall, you really need to contact the developers of your un-signed extensions and encourage them to get their products 'signed' by Mozilla to ensure your continued satisfaction. ''There is no requirement that 'signed' extensions be hosted at the official Add-ons website; Mozilla is perfectly agreeable to 'signing' self-hosted or side-loaded [thru another application] extensions; they will verify and 'sign' the extension and return it to the person that submitted it''. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-signing-in-firefox#w_what-can-i-do-if-firefox-disables-an-installed-unsigned-add-on '''xpinstall.signatures.required''' preference toggled to '''''false''''' But come Firefox 44 at the end of January that pref will be gone. You choice at that time would be to switch to an un-branded version from Mozilla that would be called something other than "Firefox" that would have different logos and other "branding". That "un-branded" version will be built without the "signing" feature, from what I have read. ''But until I actually can download the "un-branded" version I will remain skeptical that happen.'' </blockquote> Thank you the-edmeister, I will try to get the developers to 'do the right thing'. If I can get in touch with them I will quote your advice. Since I have a paid licence for my addon, verified by my email address, I can't see how I could have the addon verified myself. Yes, I had heard mention of the 'unbranded version' but no info on how to get it. I guess you have your ear to the ground and might be in the know faster than most of us... Your sceptisim does not make me all that hopeful that it will be released:) and I'd be sorry to lose the fiery fox icons:) Thank you too, for the name of the entry to search for to edit in about:confing It will give a little extra time to investigate further while having the updated version of Firefox. I may have to consider blocking updates after that. NOT a good solution, I know.
cor-el
  • Top 10 Contributor
  • Moderator
17567 solutions 158879 answers

There is no info available at the moment about unbranded Firefox versions that support xpinstall.signatures.required to allow using unsigned extensions because there hasn't been released such a version yet, even the current Beta release (44.0b1) still supports this pref.

There is no info available at the moment about unbranded Firefox versions that support xpinstall.signatures.required to allow using unsigned extensions because there hasn't been released such a version yet, even the current Beta release (44.0b1) still supports this pref.
HootOwl 0 solutions 2 answers

Helpful Reply

I found a solution to this farcical signed/unsigned app situation. I rolled back and locked off my FF version at 42.

I have more than enough AV, anti-malware and anti-hijack solutions installed on my computers to prevent problems. I do not need to have my hand forcibly held by my browser too.

This is a massive retrograde step by FF. You started losing your way around 12 months ago when we were getting "updates" on an almost daily basis. I do like FF, I am loath to migrate completely to using Chrome - but jeez, you do make it hard to stay loyal.

I found a solution to this farcical signed/unsigned app situation. I rolled back and locked off my FF version at 42. I have more than enough AV, anti-malware and anti-hijack solutions installed on my computers to prevent problems. I do not need to have my hand forcibly held by my browser too. This is a massive retrograde step by FF. You started losing your way around 12 months ago when we were getting "updates" on an almost daily basis. I do like FF, I am loath to migrate completely to using Chrome - but jeez, you do make it hard to stay loyal.
the-edmeister
  • Top 25 Contributor
  • Moderator
5411 solutions 40287 answers

Cbwebwallah said

Thank you the-edmeister, ..... Yes, I had heard mention of the 'unbranded version' but no info on how to get it. I guess you have your ear to the ground and might be in the know faster than most of us...

As cor-el mentioned already, there is no info available at the moment about unbranded Firefox versions . "Building" that version might take only minutes on an available "build server", so I don't expect to see one until well into January, close to the Jan 26th release date for Firefox 44.0.

My "ear is close enough to the ground" that my "mind" is telling me to move to the Extended Support Release version (currently based upon Firefox 38) for now, and to switch to a different browser by (say) this coming March when the new ESR version comes out or maybe when "support" for the current ESR ends next June (ESR versions overlap by two Firefox Release versions.) ESR is made for the institutional userbase, like large companies and schools; (or anyone who wants "stable" for more than 6 weeks at a time, IMO).

For me this "signing" thing is a minor bump in the road, but the removal of the "old Search Bar" is a major obstacle to my continued use of Firefox "Release". I have been using Firefox almost exclusively since Aug 2002 - years before it was "officially released to the public" - but it looks like the "ride" is coming to an end shortly.

''Cbwebwallah [[#answer-820048|said]]'' <blockquote> Thank you the-edmeister, ..... Yes, I had heard mention of the 'unbranded version' but no info on how to get it. I guess you have your ear to the ground and might be in the know faster than most of us... </blockquote> As cor-el mentioned already, there is no info available at the moment about unbranded Firefox versions . "Building" that version might take only minutes on an available "build server", so I don't expect to see one until well into January, close to the Jan 26th release date for Firefox 44.0. My "ear is close enough to the ground" that my "mind" is telling me to move to the Extended Support Release version (currently based upon Firefox 38) for now, and to switch to a different browser by ''(say)'' this coming March when the new ESR version comes out or maybe when "support" for the current ESR ends next June ''(ESR versions overlap by two Firefox Release versions.)'' ESR is made for the institutional userbase, like large companies and schools; (''or anyone who wants "stable" for more than 6 weeks at a time, IMO''). For me this "signing" thing is a minor bump in the road, but the removal of the "old Search Bar" is a major obstacle to my continued use of Firefox "Release". I have been using Firefox almost exclusively since Aug 2002 - years before it was "officially released to the public" - but it looks like the "ride" is coming to an end shortly.

Question owner

HootOwl said

I do not need to have my hand forcibly held by my browser too.

That is how I feel too

I do like FF, I am loath to migrate completely to using Chrome - but jeez, you do make it hard to stay loyal.

I don't want to move to chrome either. It tries to control me.

I resent being bullied by anything on my computer. I thought I could rely on Mozilla never to do that, but now I am having doubts.

I posed my question out of a love of using Firefox not to shoot it down. I hope to prod them into a better solution - to keep my choices open.

I am not closing this as solved because all the solutions are only temporary or require me to mess about with code - or to stop getting updates.

That's like using sticking plaster to mend a broken leg.

I am grateful for the suggestions and temporary solutions but let's keep making a noise.

Thanks, C

''HootOwl [[#answer-821510|said]]'' <blockquote> I do not need to have my hand forcibly held by my browser too. </blockquote> That is how I feel too <blockquote> I do like FF, I am loath to migrate completely to using Chrome - but jeez, you do make it hard to stay loyal. </blockquote> I don't want to move to chrome either. It tries to control me. I resent being bullied by anything on my computer. I thought I could rely on Mozilla never to do that, but now I am having doubts. I posed my question out of a love of using Firefox not to shoot it down. I hope to prod them into a better solution - to keep my choices open. I am not closing this as solved because all the solutions are only temporary or require me to mess about with code - or to stop getting updates. That's like using sticking plaster to mend a broken leg. I am grateful for the suggestions and temporary solutions but let's keep making a noise. Thanks, C

Question owner

the-edmeister said

Cbwebwallah said
Thank you the-edmeister, ..... Yes, I had heard mention of the 'unbranded version' but no info on how to get it. I guess you have your ear to the ground and might be in the know faster than most of us...

My "ear is close enough to the ground" that my "mind" is telling me to move to the Extended Support Release version (currently based upon Firefox 38) for now, and to switch to a different browser by (say) this coming March when the new ESR version comes out or maybe when "support" for the current ESR ends next June (ESR versions overlap by two Firefox Release versions.) ESR is made for the institutional userbase, like large companies and schools; (or anyone who wants "stable" for more than 6 weeks at a time, IMO).

Thank you, I'll check out the Extended Support Release version if I need to after the next update. And yes the new search icons instead of the written labels is also annoying. Too many (search engins) use the same icons e.g. regional versions of google, so it's not helpful. It's worth mentioning but that probably belongs in another thread:)

''the-edmeister [[#answer-821567|said]]'' <blockquote> ''Cbwebwallah [[#answer-820048|said]]'' <blockquote> Thank you the-edmeister, ..... Yes, I had heard mention of the 'unbranded version' but no info on how to get it. I guess you have your ear to the ground and might be in the know faster than most of us... </blockquote> My "ear is close enough to the ground" that my "mind" is telling me to move to the Extended Support Release version (currently based upon Firefox 38) for now, and to switch to a different browser by ''(say)'' this coming March when the new ESR version comes out or maybe when "support" for the current ESR ends next June ''(ESR versions overlap by two Firefox Release versions.)'' ESR is made for the institutional userbase, like large companies and schools; (''or anyone who wants "stable" for more than 6 weeks at a time, IMO''). </blockquote> Thank you, I'll check out the Extended Support Release version if I need to after the next update. And yes the new search icons instead of the written labels is also annoying. Too many (search engins) use the same icons e.g. regional versions of google, so it's not helpful. It's worth mentioning but that probably belongs in another thread:)
the-edmeister
  • Top 25 Contributor
  • Moderator
5411 solutions 40287 answers

I have 31 Search engines installed. Can you imagine how much room that takes up in the new Search panel? And many have the same icon for different types of searches from the same actual search page on the web. Some of my search engines I modified myself using different parameters so that I didn't to type them in every time I wanted to do that type of search; couldn't see the point in coming up with separate icons, what with the "name" (which can be edited) showing in the Search bar. While other I got from the MyCroft website. In Firefox 43 without that "name" next to the search enginw I would need to wait for the delay with "cursor hover" for the name to "popup". That stupid little feature (or lack thereof) is what is driving me away from Firefox; and even "if" that would be fixed, I'm still gone.

To me "signing" is just a bump in the road. I have had similar problems with "lost" extensions 3 or 4 times over the last 12 years, with Firefox major updates "killing" extensions. But before signing "we" might have been able to "breathe more life" into an old extension with "bumping" the maxVersion or even fixing it by updating the internal coding; but now if the "seal" for signing is broken, Firefox won't allow a "bumped" extension to be installed. And I ain't gonna wait in the queue for signing an extension that wish to have "signed" - I have had too many rejected (that I wanted to share with other users) by the Add-ons website that worked fine for me. I ain't a programmer, but I just found similar extensions and swapped in what code worked in a "good" one for what was broken. In total I wasted a lot of time, but it kept me out of the local watering hole and helped keep my aging mind agile. Hell, I was out of college two decades before Al Gore "invented the internet".

Hey, I understand the benefits to users as a group of "singing", so I don't fault Mozilla for "going there". But overall, I do wonder if Mozilla had gotten a handle on the "malware" situation with extensions getting installed without the users express permission many years ago, if "signing" would be so strictly enforced? I have been seeing a "not verified" message appear every time I installed an extension for the last 8 to 9 years - "something" inside of Firefox "knew" the extension was "not verified", so IMO Mozilla waited too damn long to complete that "system" and I feel that "sooner" wouldn't have been with such a draconian system as we are faced with now!

I have 31 Search engines installed. Can you imagine how much room that takes up in the new Search panel? And many have the same icon for different types of searches from the same actual search page on the web. Some of my search engines I modified myself using different parameters so that I didn't to type them in every time I wanted to do that type of search; couldn't see the point in coming up with separate icons, what with the "name" (which can be edited) showing in the Search bar. While other I got from the MyCroft website. In Firefox 43 without that "name" next to the search enginw I would need to wait for the delay with "cursor hover" for the name to "popup". That stupid little feature (or lack thereof) is what is driving me away from Firefox; and even "if" that would be fixed, I'm still gone. To me "signing" is just a bump in the road. I have had similar problems with "lost" extensions 3 or 4 times over the last 12 years, with Firefox major updates "killing" extensions. But before signing "we" might have been able to "breathe more life" into an old extension with "bumping" the maxVersion or even fixing it by updating the internal coding; but now if the "seal" for signing is broken, Firefox won't allow a "bumped" extension to be installed. And I ain't gonna wait in the queue for signing an extension that wish to have "signed" - I have had too many rejected ''(that I wanted to share with other users)'' by the Add-ons website that worked fine for me. I ain't a programmer, but I just found similar extensions and swapped in what code worked in a "good" one for what was broken. In total I wasted a lot of time, but it kept me out of the local watering hole and helped keep my aging mind agile. Hell, I was out of college two decades before Al Gore "invented the internet". Hey, I understand the benefits to users as a group of "singing", so I don't fault Mozilla for "going there". But overall, I do wonder if Mozilla had gotten a handle on the "malware" situation with extensions getting installed without the users express permission many years ago, if "signing" would be so strictly enforced? I have been seeing a "not verified" message appear every time I installed an extension for the last 8 to 9 years - "something" inside of Firefox "knew" the extension was "not verified", so IMO Mozilla waited too damn long to complete that "system" and I feel that "sooner" wouldn't have been with such a draconian system as we are faced with now!

Question owner

the-edmeister said

I have 31 Search engines installed. Can you imagine how much room that takes up in the new Search panel?
> snipped

In Firefox 43 without that "name" next to the search enginw I would need to wait for the delay with "cursor hover" for the name to "popup". That stupid little feature (or lack thereof) is what is driving me away from Firefox; and even "if" that would be fixed, I'm still gone.


> snipped to the end>>

the-edmeister, You're right. The search mess is related to my 'plugin signing' issue and it's annoying. It's more than annoying. But please, Don't go from here just yet - I'm enjoying your input!

And I'm hoping the frustration expressed will ultimately make a difference. I have been using Firefox since the demise of Netscape, so I'm fairly long in the tooth too.

Now I'm signing off to attend to seasonal festivities...

I'll be back!

With warm wishes for joy, love laughter and peace to all. Christina

''the-edmeister [[#answer-821698|said]]'' <blockquote> I have 31 Search engines installed. Can you imagine how much room that takes up in the new Search panel? ----> snipped In Firefox 43 without that "name" next to the search enginw I would need to wait for the delay with "cursor hover" for the name to "popup". That stupid little feature (or lack thereof) is what is driving me away from Firefox; and even "if" that would be fixed, I'm still gone. ----> snipped to the end>> </blockquote> the-edmeister, You're right. The search mess is related to my 'plugin signing' issue and it's annoying. It's more than annoying. But please, Don't go from here just yet - I'm enjoying your input! And I'm hoping the frustration expressed will ultimately make a difference. I have been using Firefox since the demise of Netscape, so I'm fairly long in the tooth too. Now I'm signing off to attend to seasonal festivities... I'll be back! With warm wishes for joy, love laughter and peace to all. Christina
jscher2000
  • Top 10 Contributor
8784 solutions 71841 answers

Cbwebwallah said

And yes the new search icons instead of the written labels is also annoying. Too many (search engins) use the same icons e.g. regional versions of google, so it's not helpful. It's worth mentioning but that probably belongs in another thread:)

I posted a custom style rule to show the search engine names after the icons, but after reading that the-edmeister has 31 search engine plugins, I'm thinking I might need to add a scroll bar! Anyway, if you want to take a look and give feedback, here's a sneak peek and the link:

https://userstyles.org/styles/122214/firefox-search-bar-show-engine-names-firefox-43

''Cbwebwallah [[#answer-821671|said]]'' <blockquote> And yes the new search icons instead of the written labels is also annoying. Too many (search engins) use the same icons e.g. regional versions of google, so it's not helpful. It's worth mentioning but that probably belongs in another thread:) </blockquote> I posted a custom style rule to show the search engine names after the icons, but after reading that the-edmeister has 31 search engine plugins, I'm thinking I might need to add a scroll bar! Anyway, if you want to take a look and give feedback, here's a sneak peek and the link: [https://support.cdn.mozilla.net/media/uploads/images/2015-12-21-19-30-01-37d9e8.png <img width="500" src="https://support.cdn.mozilla.net/media/uploads/images/2015-12-21-19-30-01-37d9e8.png">] https://userstyles.org/styles/122214/firefox-search-bar-show-engine-names-firefox-43
the-edmeister
  • Top 25 Contributor
  • Moderator
5411 solutions 40287 answers

jscher2000 said

I posted a custom style rule to show the search engine names after the icons, but after reading that the-edmeister has 31 search engine plugins, I'm thinking I might need to add a scroll bar! Anyway, if you want to take a look and give feedback, here's a sneak peek and the link: https://userstyles.org/styles/122214/firefox-search-bar-show-engine-names-firefox-43

As that Style is written, I get 22 Search Engines in the drop-down list.

If you're taking requests - I would prefer much tighter line spacing so that 31 search engines wouldn't get forced in to scroll mode - but I suspect that is asking too much, a ~1/3 reduction overall.

With the old Search Bar the 31st search engine was exactly at the bottom of the browser window with the Tab strip at the top of the browser window, as when in Full Screen mode - I have Firefox set at a 680 px high browser window. I keep Firefox locked to 1192 x 680 using an older version of Custom Geometry that I hacked just after Firefox 4.0 was released. I did my own "bump" and mod for compatibility, before the original developer updated it.

''jscher2000 [[#answer-821768|said]]'' <blockquote> I posted a custom style rule to show the search engine names after the icons, but after reading that the-edmeister has 31 search engine plugins, I'm thinking I might need to add a scroll bar! Anyway, if you want to take a look and give feedback, here's a sneak peek and the link: [https://support.cdn.mozilla.net/media/uploads/images/2015-12-21-19-30-01-37d9e8.png <img width="500" src="https://support.cdn.mozilla.net/media/uploads/images/2015-12-21-19-30-01-37d9e8.png">] https://userstyles.org/styles/122214/firefox-search-bar-show-engine-names-firefox-43 </blockquote> As that Style is written, I get 22 Search Engines in the drop-down list. If you're taking requests - I would prefer much tighter line spacing so that 31 search engines wouldn't get forced in to scroll mode - but I suspect that is asking too much, a ~1/3 reduction overall. With the old Search Bar the 31st search engine was exactly at the bottom of the browser window with the Tab strip at the top of the browser window, as when in Full Screen mode - I have Firefox set at a 680 px high browser window. I keep Firefox locked to 1192 x 680 using an older version of Custom Geometry that I hacked just after Firefox 4.0 was released. I did my own "bump" and mod for compatibility, before the original developer updated it.
jscher2000
  • Top 10 Contributor
8784 solutions 71841 answers

Hi the-edmeister, currently each plugin take 25 pixels including one border. 4px is top spacing and 4px is bottom spacing. Cutting that down to 1px top and bottom would return almost 25%. Removing the gray bar that says "Search for ... with:" would provide some more pixels.

Seems feasible, but likely would look cramped on a high resolution display so I need to think about whether I can create rules in the alternative, i.e., using CSS media queries.

Hi the-edmeister, currently each plugin take 25 pixels including one border. 4px is top spacing and 4px is bottom spacing. Cutting that down to 1px top and bottom would return almost 25%. Removing the gray bar that says "Search for ... with:" would provide some more pixels. Seems feasible, but likely would look cramped on a high resolution display so I need to think about whether I can create rules in the alternative, i.e., using CSS media queries.
Kimminatrix 0 solutions 1 answers

Cbwebwallah said

HootOwl said
I do not need to have my hand forcibly held by my browser too.

That is how I feel too

I do like FF, I am loath to migrate completely to using Chrome - but jeez, you do make it hard to stay loyal.

I don't want to move to chrome either. It tries to control me.

I resent being bullied by anything on my computer. I thought I could rely on Mozilla never to do that, but now I am having doubts.

I posed my question out of a love of using Firefox not to shoot it down. I hope to prod them into a better solution - to keep my choices open.

I am not closing this as solved because all the solutions are only temporary or require me to mess about with code - or to stop getting updates.

That's like using sticking plaster to mend a broken leg.

I am grateful for the suggestions and temporary solutions but let's keep making a noise.

Thanks, C

Pretty much echoing what I've quoted above. I went to Mozilla's Firefox because it was so user friendly and without much of the negative factors that IE and others have. This is the latest of several changes that is making Firefox EXACTLY like those others that I stopped using, for exactly the reasons I stopped using them.

What gives, Firefox developers? Let us choose for ourselves, and if we crab about getting our fingers burnt, well, you can tell us we did it to ourselves and feel all superior, okay? I am not a developer, it's apparently a bit of a hassle to get an add-on signed with you guys, from what I hear from a recent add-on's developers.

PLEASE, DON'T TAKE AWAY MY CHOICES ON WHAT ADD-ONS I USE! Don't make me have to change things in the config whatever it is, because I don't know what I'm doing! You used to be better than this, Firefox. Please, use your powers for good, huh?

''Cbwebwallah [[#answer-821665|said]]'' <blockquote> ''HootOwl [[#answer-821510|said]]'' <blockquote> I do not need to have my hand forcibly held by my browser too. </blockquote> That is how I feel too <blockquote> I do like FF, I am loath to migrate completely to using Chrome - but jeez, you do make it hard to stay loyal. </blockquote> I don't want to move to chrome either. It tries to control me. I resent being bullied by anything on my computer. I thought I could rely on Mozilla never to do that, but now I am having doubts. I posed my question out of a love of using Firefox not to shoot it down. I hope to prod them into a better solution - to keep my choices open. I am not closing this as solved because all the solutions are only temporary or require me to mess about with code - or to stop getting updates. That's like using sticking plaster to mend a broken leg. I am grateful for the suggestions and temporary solutions but let's keep making a noise. Thanks, C </blockquote> Pretty much echoing what I've quoted above. I went to Mozilla's Firefox because it was so user friendly and without much of the negative factors that IE and others have. This is the latest of several changes that is making Firefox EXACTLY like those others that I stopped using, for exactly the reasons I stopped using them. What gives, Firefox developers? Let us choose for ourselves, and if we crab about getting our fingers burnt, well, you can tell us we did it to ourselves and feel all superior, okay? I am not a developer, it's apparently a bit of a hassle to get an add-on signed with you guys, from what I hear from a recent add-on's developers. PLEASE, DON'T TAKE AWAY MY CHOICES ON WHAT ADD-ONS I USE! Don't make me have to change things in the config whatever it is, because I don't know what I'm doing! You used to be better than this, Firefox. Please, use your powers for good, huh?
the-edmeister
  • Top 25 Contributor
  • Moderator
5411 solutions 40287 answers

Helpful Reply

Please let Mozilla know how you feel about "signing" here: https://input.mozilla.org/en-US/feedback

Please let Mozilla know how you feel about "signing" here: https://input.mozilla.org/en-US/feedback