About Google Chrome's "This extension may soon no longer be supported" (2024)

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/About-Google-Chrome%27s-%22This-extension-may-soon-no-longer-be-supported%22

by 0x000042 • 1 year ago

278 171 1 year ago

deanc5• 1 year ago

I see people reporting that the extension has already been forcefully removed (or disabled in some cases) from their Chrome. This hasn't happened to me (v133 on MacOS).

I have primarily been using Chrome up until this point as I was under the impression that performance (and therefore battery life) is bad with FF on MacOS. Recent results seem to indicate that Chrome is in fact the worst offender [1].

Yesterday I uninstalled Arc as they have all but abandoned their browser to work on some AI crap browser (after saying they planned to support manifest v2 for the forseeable future).

Today I installed Orion Browser [2]. It's using webkit under the hood and seems to be far lighter on battery life than Chrome, Arc (Blink) and Firefox. They fully support FF and Chrome extensions and therefore UBO seems to be working (on the whole) very well.

[1] https://birchtree.me/blog/everyone-says-chrome-devastates-ma...

[2] https://kagi.com/orion/

mk17b• 1 year ago

What part of Arc feels abandoned? I still use as my primary browser.

deanc5• 1 year ago

The part where they say they are not developing it further. CEO discussing it further here: https://x.com/joshm/status/1850717644779110643

They have not shipped anything but browser updates and minor fixes for months.

nicce• 1 year ago

Orion is great. There are some websites that for some reason don’t work as well as with Safari/Firefox (like Github), but otherwise it is pretty good.

AndrewDavis• 1 year ago

It is a shame that Orion is Mac and iOS only. I found this statement[1] in response to a request for it on other platforms

We are getting a lot of repeat questions about windows/linux/android version and sometimes it appears that users think that the team is choosing not to work on these platforms. The situation is quite different and simpler - we do not have the resources to hire a new team to do any of these platforms yet.
And since Orion is funded by its users only, it is entirely up to the number of subscribers and Orion+ sales we have that will enable funding a new team to make Orion for any new platform. And building a browser is not cheap, especially one on top of WebKit.
Ways you can help accelerate this is: Contribute to Orion development with your time Help spread the word about Orion to attract more users Get Orion+ and financially support developmet

This is a tricky situation to be in. A lack of resources to support multiple platforms, but the solution being more subscribers. But the incentive structure is perplexing. Those supporting development going to be those already using Orion. And those not on Mac/iOS are unlikely to financially support a browser they can't use in the hopes it might one day come to a platform I use.

[1] https://orionfeedback.org/d/2321-orion-for-windows-android-l...

TheSpiceIsLife2• 1 year ago

Also remember Apple users are much more lucrative, they tend to be way more willing to pay for software than Windows users.

prox• 1 year ago

Maybe do a crowdfunding effort?

skinkestek3• 1 year ago

I happen to be in the target audience:

Orion user on Mac (but I think of it as a better Safari if anyone saw me writing I only use Safari and Firefox), but would like to have it available on my non Mac machines as well.

freehorse• 1 year ago

They announced they are planning linux release in 2025 in their end of 2024 event, and down in the thread you linked they hint apparently it is now in active development.

jamesy0ung• 1 year ago

Orion looks pretty interesting, it's not like any of the other alternative browsers (opera, vivaldi, brave, arc etc) which just wrap Chromium in more junk. It uses WebKit which is optimised for Apple platforms, giving more battery life, while also integrating uBlock Origin.

Angostura• 1 year ago

I'm happy with 1Blocker in Safari

qyckudnefDi5• 1 year ago

I like Wipr. Simpler design IMHO.

frizlab• 1 year ago

1Blocker is really good

qwertox• 1 year ago

Do they really remove it? Because I've had several extensions get disabled and was only able to re-enable them after enabling developer mode (toggle at top-right).

I believe that most say "remove" because they get removed from the plugin-bar when disabled.

I'll ditch Chrome without a second thought if they really remove it. They'll lose access to my browsing history, so I don't see what they have to gain with it. What about the ads which are blocked at network level via PiHole?

Have they even considered that PiHole might then catch on and start blocking ads on mobile devices in households which would otherwise not use it?

lewispollard• 1 year ago

I can confirm that I got the "extension disabled" notification for uBlock Origin, clicked to re-enable it in developer mode, and then had to also toggle it to enabled after it had been added to the list - still works fine after that.

aryonoco5• 1 year ago

After 17 years of using Android, with building my own kernel and ROMs in the early days, I finally gave up on it and finished my de-Google journey and reluctantly switched to iPhone.

The fact that Orion on iOS existed was a major reason I was able to this. On Android I was a Firefox user since Firefox was the only browser with the ability to run proper uBo.

Orion is not without its bugs, but it does support a lot of Firefox and Chrome extensions. But you don’t even need to install uBo as an extension,it’s got built in ad blocker with the ability to add or remove filter lists. Even without installing uBo, in terms of ad blocking, it instantly matched Firefox on Android. That I can install things such as Tapermonkey or Bypass Paywall Clean as extensions is a huge bonus.

It’s amazing how Google is pushing its early adopters and cheerleaders away by one anti user move after another.

I still wish Apple would remove some of the restrictions on iOS, allow other browser engines etc. Installing unknown software from unsigned developers on macOS is really difficult these days but still doable if you know where to look. If only iOS was the same. The potential lost revenue from loss of control would be more than made up by new people who would be brought on to the platform.

gman83• 1 year ago

Anyone looking for a similar experience to Arc, I recommend Zen Browser, based on Firefox: https://zen-browser.app/

Traubenfuchs2• 1 year ago

Firefox is fine as daily browser and the few websites that don‘t work in it start working if you enable the chrome mask plugin for them.

trallnag2• 1 year ago

If only Firefox would properly support PWAs. I know that there are workarounds like installing the PWAs in Chrome and setting up an extension that redirects links clicked in a PWA to be opened in Firefox, but it is a hassle.

johnny22• 1 year ago

i saw somebody mention they are going to do something about that soon, but I don't remember where i saw it.

aryonoco5• 1 year ago

It’s funny/tragic how Firefox used to be so far ahead in these areas which it has now fallen so far behind. Before PWAs or installing web apps was a thing, Firefox allowed you to basically achieve the same using “chromeless” tabs. Then they gave up on that and disabled it

Before anyone had ever heard of Electron, you used to be able to embed gecko into other apps and it could render html in other applications (that’s how Firefox itself started cause the old monolithic Mozilla suite separated the engine into gecko so other apps could use it, and then a bunch of Mozilla engineers started developing a new UI around it as their side project). Of course they gave up on that, and look where we are now.

Testament to its engineering team really that despite so many own goals and false directions from its leadership (Remember Firefox OS?) the project is still alive.

Traubenfuchs2• 1 year ago

Which PWAs do you use?

haunter• 1 year ago

Google and Cloudflare basically owns the internet

bflesch• 1 year ago

only because we let them

baq• 1 year ago

It’s pax cloudflara. We let them in exchange for peace on the web.

(Pax nubem would probably be too obscure…)

lifthrasiir2• 1 year ago

Sounds very good if it were actually true! (And I think it is partly true, not entirely though.)

ben_w• 1 year ago

How about "Pax Nubis Lucifera"?

stavros• 1 year ago

At least Cloudflare has no network effects. They offer good services that I can migrate off of if I need to. Google owns my life and it's really hard to go elsewhere, even if I want to.

Liquix3• 1 year ago

if cloudflare flags your IP/VPN/fingerprint/useragent/haircut good luck accessing 60% of the internet. their invisible turnstyles and captchas are everywhere

pjc50• 1 year ago

Cloudflare is the network. You have no control over whether other sites use it.

robin_reala2• 1 year ago

It’s not that difficult to migrate from Google, there are plenty of good alternatives in every area. You just will probably not find everything integrated into one system, and you might have to pay for parts (but that’s OK, as you’re no longer the product). The trick is to start with the easy areas and gradually migrate bit by bit.

precommunicator2• 1 year ago

I already had Manifest v2 extensions, specifically uBlock removed from Chrome. There are solutions to extend this to mid-year, and I can report that they work (search for ExtensionManifestV2Availability)

Liquix3• 1 year ago

why not just switch to a less hostile browser now instead of drawing it out for a few more months?

nickjj3• 1 year ago

My machine is 10 years old. With Firefox video playback on YouTube is choppy even at 1080p. With Chrome it's perfectly smooth.

If Firefox performed better for me I would have switched to it long ago. This is on Windows 10 btw.

precommunicator2• 1 year ago

Stuff can change. Who knows. I might switch platforms until then so my choice might become invalid. I might die. No reason to do it now, when there is plenty of time.

I'm a happy Firefox user on mobile though (yeah, I know, I know the recent changes in their legal stuff)

a1371• 1 year ago

Right now uBlock Origin Lite is "featured" on Chrome web store and so far navigation has been ok in the "complete" mode.

Funnily enough, it made me review the block lists of the extension and I realized that I could select more of them. Too early to jump to conclusions.

deanc5• 1 year ago

The main issue is going to be around the corner. As more and more people use CNAME cloaking to do server-side tracking using GTM (etc.), it will be a cat and mouse game to block it (and other networks). uBlock Lite cannot uncloak these CNAMES and you're going to see a pretty bad experience in due course.

chippiewill• 1 year ago

On the positive side, those of us on Firefox are going to have a great time as companies switch from trying to workaround ublock, to trying to workaround ublock lite

moho• 1 year ago

uBO never had the ability to do CNAME decloaking in Chrome though, the required API (browser.dns/chrome.dns) wasn't there even in MV2. It was always a Gecko-only feature (and a big one!). IIRC Brave rolled its own CNAME decloaking mechanism in its Shields blocker, without exposing a chrome.dns API.

orphea• 1 year ago

Does it block YouTube ads?

TiredOfLife2• 1 year ago

yes

patates• 1 year ago

I couldn't find a good timeline of all the developments in the extension space. I started first installing extensions on Firefox with their super powerful but dangerous XUL system, then they watered it down and many extensions died, then Chrome took over the internet, then extensions could just block the ads and nothing more interesting, then suddenly for Chrome, they even can't do that? I remember Google also trying to ship some tamper protection (like DRM) for web sites... I wonder how this all will end up. I also wonder why people keep installing Chrome but not Firefox, but I digress. I really think the web needs a detailed documentary on how Google played Microsoft's EEE scheme on the whole web.

Kye2• 1 year ago

Chrome took over long before Firefox dumped XUL. It was sticking to XUL with all the performance issues that let Chrome take over. Losing all the extensibility of XUL, and it being too late to take a thoughtful approach to design something that maintained that extensibility with performance and security, helped solidify Chrome's lead. A lot of people didn't see a point in using Firefox without extensibility beyond what Chrome allowed.

forvelin• 1 year ago

regardless of what people complain of, firefox is still an awesome daily driver. nobody likes the direction the MF is taking the browser to but at least we can influence it, unlike google.

skinkestek3• 1 year ago

Best thing we can do to influence it is probably to use and fund forks such as LibreWolf, hoping that they are in a position to continue development once Google decides to tell the manager of Mozilla to finally destroy it completely.

(Yes, that is a joke I hope, but if I compare what I think a puppet controlled by Google would do to destroy the Mozilla brand to what Mozillas CEO has been doing, I think there is a lot of similarities.)

Idesmi• 1 year ago

Librewolf merely applies a few patches on top of Firefox. It is in no position to maintain Firefox without Mozilla.

bad_user4• 1 year ago

Thinking that funding forks, like LibreWolf, would save said forks from dying if Mozilla goes under, is naive.

The development of Firefox costs around half a billion $ per year. Estimates for Chrome range from 1 to 2 billion $ per year. In other words, take the donations of something like Wikimedia, which is arguably very successful in asking for donations, and you'd still be very short on the money needed to fund a web browser. And if you bring those costs down to something more manageable, like say, 100 million $, and assuming you can convince people to donate (IMO, when pigs will fly), then you'll have a browser that may be completely unable to compete with Chromium.

All the browser “forks” survive because Google and Mozilla are doing the hard work.

bambax2• 1 year ago

It also works flawlessly on Android, with uBlock Origin blocking everything, including ads on youtube (provided one stays in the browser of course, and not use the app).

cpach3• 1 year ago

I tried uBlock Origin Lite for a very short time. Then I realized that in Lite, the user can’t add custom rules[0]. That’s when I had enough. So now I’m using Firefox instead, where I can use uBlock Origin.

[0] See https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1in2ls4/ubloc...

xattt• 1 year ago

It’s only a matter of time before the modern Phoebus cartel starts blocking Firefox.

KronisLV• 1 year ago

It’s only a matter of time before the modern Phoebus cartel starts blocking Firefox.

I feel like nobody will have to consciously do anything in particular, with the current way how things are going.

- Chromium is the modern IE and developers will primarily be on the hook for supporting it, Firefox support will be an afterthought so some sites will just be broken, moving more users over to Chromium.

- The Firefox marketshare is dwindling, it's likely that the users with proper ad blocking will eventually be a rounding error and therefore quite inconsequential. Especially if there are any more ad-related APIs pushed by Chrome that make users more profitable (e.g. Topics API).

- Even among tech enthusiasts, Mozilla in particular doesn't have very good reputation (e.g. how much they spend on actually improving the browser vs other initiatives) and I don't see the marketshare of Firefox skyrocketing, unless something big happens. New competitors like Ladybird are also niche, though it's a really cool project.

- If Apple ever moves over Safari to Chromium, like Edge did, then that effect will only be amplified.

cpach3• 1 year ago

I hope you’re wrong but yeah, who knows. I’m glad that Ladybird is under active development and seems to be making progress.

mykhamill• 1 year ago

We were seen as failing a security audit recently for having firefox installed on some of the development laptops and got ordered to remove it by IT who conceeded that it was stupid but had to check boxes for insurance is ISO standards.

This causes the majority of people to only be exposed to Edge/IE or Chrome at work, and use their phones the rest of the time.

jocoda• 1 year ago

I can live with that. By blocking Firefox they would self identify as user hostile in the same way that google has done with V3. I think this would a huge step forward, a massive shit filter.

brylie• 1 year ago

They mention "other browsers" in addition to Firefox that will continue to support Manifest v2, but I can't find a list. Does anyone know off-hand the additional browser options for Manifest V2 and multiple-OS support?

lionkor• 1 year ago

Anything based on Firefox, like LibreWolf, as well

mort963• 1 year ago

I think some Chromium-based browsers like Brave have pledged that they'll keep v2 around for as long as it's practical? Though IMO, people who depend on Manifest v2 with Chromium forks are running on borrowed time, Chromium moves fast and I can't imagine that keeping the Manifest v2 code working will be very easy. Especially if Google takes advantage of the limited access extensions now have to the HTTP request flow to do major refactors in that area.

homebrewer3• 1 year ago

Brave and Vivaldi will continue to support it for some time. Brave also does not really depend on MV2 as they have their own adblocker (which is about as effective as uBO, I believe).

edit: link to their adblocker: https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust

deanc5• 1 year ago

Arc (until they completely abandon it), Firefox, Orion.

yuvalr12• 1 year ago

I simply cannot give up the option of zapping distractions off of my screen. I really cannot understand how people can use Youtube or even a Youtube embedded video without zapping away the distractions. There is no way I'm coming back to Chrome if they don't support manifest V2. It's Firefox for me.

bonoboTP3• 1 year ago

I'm also using it to remove distractions from stack exchange sites like hot network questions. I can stay focused on solving my problem much better if my eyes can't wander to interesting unrelated stuff.

cpach3• 1 year ago

Just for the record: uBlock Origin Lite can block ads, but the user can’t add their own custom rules.

TiredOfLife2• 1 year ago

I use uBlock origin lite and there are no ads on youtube or embedded youtube videos

bookofjoe2• 1 year ago

And yet 99% of YouTube's users use it as is.

muixoozie2• 1 year ago

For anyone else like me that hasnt tried uBO lite wondering what features are missing: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...

RamRodification• 1 year ago

There seem to be quite a lot of other nice features which also do not work on Chromium-based browsers even with the v2 version of uBO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock_Origin#Limitations_in_C...

klabb3• 1 year ago

Many years ago I switched to chrome because ff felt sluggish. That’s all fixed since a long time. Not sure why so many seems to be choosing chrome today.

QuantumGood• 1 year ago

Chrome with Ublock origin works through June 2025, via "browsers using the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy will be exempt from any browser changes until June 2025". Discussion on how to enable: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41812638

1vuio0pswjnm7• 1 year ago

After trying both, I prefer Matrix to Origin.

However I do not rely on extensions/add-ons as I believe extensions/add-ons are not the right solution. Unless the computer user is compiling the browser herself, extensions/add-ons can be crippled/disabled/etc. by whomever is distributing binaries. When the distributor is supported by online advertising as is the case for both Chrome and Firefox, and all the other so-called "modern" graphical browsers, this possibility cannot be ignored.

zb32• 1 year ago

The solution on linux should be to install system-wide "policy" extensions - they support webRequestBlocking. Possibly via system package manager.

elvircrn• 1 year ago

How would one go about doing this?

zb32• 1 year ago

For UBO, first they'd need to implement MV3 while still keeping webRequestBlocking.. it seems that there's currently no information about this, so I asked them: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/discussions/35...

In general it involves setting ExtensionInstallForcelist, but I haven't tried it in practice yet, it's a concept..

tyler33• 1 year ago

brave browser is the only way, now even firefox sell our data

Liquix3• 1 year ago

lol but brave is chromium with some bloat and a crypto scheme bolted on. it'll be unable to block ads with anything but crippled MV3 solutions when the flag is disabled in July

jannes• 1 year ago

Brave has a built-in adblocker (not an extension)

homebrewer3• 1 year ago

https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust

m4r1k• 1 year ago

About time to move back to Firefox. Manifest v3 is only accelerating DeGoogle.

whstl2• 1 year ago

Ad blocking is the one thing that pushed me over the edge to move to Firefox from Safari.

I already knew the same change was coming to Chrome so I went directly to Firefox.

I will burn my computer to the ground before I watch any kind of intrusive non-contextual advertisement online.

philistine2• 1 year ago

1Blocker on Safari is an excellent experience, and available for iPhone as well where it can remove ads from inside other apps. Letterboxd for example.

postepowanieadm3• 1 year ago

Google is milking a dying cow.

LLMs are much better in searching for information than advertisement-exposure optimized google.

People are paying for LLMs, consumers are no longer a commodity.

Internet will change, maybe creators will be paid for their content? But what will happen with advertisers?

h4kor• 1 year ago

IMO it's only a matter of time before LLMs will include ads. Current pricing isn't covering the costs of running LLMs and brands will pay a high price for being favored in responses.

postepowanieadm3• 1 year ago

But how such adverts would look like?

Kye2• 1 year ago

Perplexity has occasional ads. They're unintrusive and clearly marked the way Google's ads started out.

maccard2• 1 year ago

LLMs are much better in searching for information than advertisement-exposure optimized google.

Completely disagree. Just this morning I've been trying to search for how to pair a wireless headset that I own to a new receiver. Gemini tells me there is no need to pair the adapter, but if I do need to do it I should press <button that doesn't exist on the model I specifically searched for>. It also pushes the PDF and TS articles that the manufacturer provides off of my main search window.

This is my example from today, but I have consistently found Gemini suggests outdated, or inaccurate information and cites "sources" that don't match what it says.

ffsm8• 1 year ago

They're better at it if you don't actually care about the truth of the result though.

I.e confirming your opinion, compiling a report about something you're not gonna take action on etc

daliusd• 1 year ago

People are paying for LLMs, consumers are no longer a commodity.

Ask your LLM: "How many percents of world populations is paying for LLMs? Any estimates how many will never pay for it?"

pron• 1 year ago

My experience with LLM has been that if the question/search is basic or common (in any particular subject), the results are no better than an ordinary search, and if it isn't, the responses are too frequently wrong. The problem isn't so much hallucination, but gullibility. The LLM appears "intelligent" but stupid. It seems to lack introspection, i.e. applying good sense in evaluating its sources and conclusions. You can ask an LLM how to properly evaluate sources and come to conclusions, but it doesn't apply these lessons to its own operation.

In other words, LLMs work well when you don't really need them and don't work well when you do. I have yet to see an LLM give a good result when a better result, written by a human, isn't available.

webspinner6• 1 year ago

I don't use that crap for search, or anything for that matter. I also don't use Google lol.

zerof1l• 1 year ago

So the time had come to finally move from Chrome. I already have Firefox as my secondary browser, but I'm thinking of using this opportunity to take a look at LibreWolf as well. Also going to have a conversation with my non-tech-savvy family members to do the same. Once you get used to having clean websites without ads and pop-ups, its hard to go back.

absqueued• 1 year ago

So the only viable options left are LibreWolf and Waterfox?

These will die if Firefox dies as well. Its a dire situation!

molticrystal2• 1 year ago

What is the best way to migrate retaining as much as possible to a fork, like Brave or Iridium, or whatever is probably the best privacy based one with an emphasis on retaining Manifest V2/ ublock support?

Already migrated my Firefox to Librewolf, just need to find something for Chrome, as I don't really follow the scene close.

muixoozie2• 1 year ago

I migrated today as well from Firefox to LibreWolf. I'm curious why you need a chrome based at all? I mean I have ungoogled Chromium on my desktop just in case I want to see if a broken site is only broken for Firefox, but that's rare.

molticrystal2• 1 year ago

I have a few extensions on Firefox that perform page transformations for privacy and other reasons. Instead of troubleshooting whether a broken site is specific to Firefox (with or without extensions), I often opt to use an incognito Chrome with uBlock Origin for sites where I don't want to mess with configuration and the normal mode of Chrome for the google related websites.

moogly• 1 year ago

Still works on Ungoogled Chromium 133.

sam_goody• 1 year ago

Just when there might be a whole pile of people considering to move to FF, Mozilla decides that FF should be selling your privacy.

hosteur6• 1 year ago

Yeah, an odd coincidence, right?

avipars• 1 year ago

A whole host of useful but forgotten extensions will be removed.

elAhmo• 1 year ago

This is a clear example of conflict of interest Google has.

It makes money almost exclusively from ads, and people want to block ads. No matter how they try to portray decisions like this - it is obvious they are moving in direction where people are unable to do what they want.

I am sure if Google from today would launch a browser, it would fail to gain traction knowing all the state of their core business and negative sentiment users have.

Let's hope Mozilla doesn't go the same route, but it seems they are also not under good leadership and are slowly loosing the trust of users.

Ferret7446• 1 year ago

Kind of? There's absolutely a justifiable reason for v3, that is not "because we want to kill ad blockers". It is likely that some higher ups pushed for v3 for ad reasons, just as devs pushed for v3 for technical reasons.

HelloUsername• 1 year ago

Already posted and discussed back in august 2024, 45 comments:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41140185

hosteur6• 1 year ago

Relevant now as Chrome recently started force-removing/disabling uBlock Origin in Chrome.

(at least is has been force-removed on one of my machines. On another machine, it hasn't happened yet)

boredhedgehog• 1 year ago

It's sad that every thread about this topic turns into simplistic Firefox proselytism.

My observation is that the developers who spearheaded the MV3 transition did so for understandable technical reasons and without any consideration for marketing concerns, yet their explanations get downvoted in favor of conspiracy theories.

It's in fact the other browsers who try to market sticking to MV2 as a unique feature, even though they too will abandon it sooner rather than later.

fsflover• 1 year ago

My observation is that the developers who spearheaded the MV3 transition did so for understandable technical reasons and without any consideration for marketing concerns

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...

aryonoco5• 1 year ago

It doesn’t require believing in conspiracy theories to see a clear conflict of interest.

Ad blocking was one of the original reasons people switched from IE to Firefox in the 2004-2008 era. Hopefully, history will repeat itself again.

In the long run, the answer will not be Chrome. The world needs a browser engine that’s not tied to an ad company

aryonoco5• 1 year ago

Anyone looking for a new browser on the desktop, also give Floorp a look.

It’s a fork of Firefox by some young developers from Japan who seem to have good values and ideals. It’s been my daily driver for 6 months now (on Mac, Windows and Linux).

I originally found it because I wanted to easily have vertical tabs in Firefox (without the horizontal tab bar being left over) and got tired of manually editing Firefox’s chrome.css file (which acts differently on different platforms). Floorp allowed me to do this out of the box with no dramas.

I then discovered its many other cool features and Mozilla’s telemetry and their other sneaky advertising are also disabled by default. As a Firefox fork, it of course supports all Firefox extensions including proper uBlock origin.

tim3333• 1 year ago

While I was reading this I had an update and Chrome turned off uBlock origin and bypass paywalls. I was able to to go to manage extensions and turn them on but I guess if that stops working it's on to Firefox.

By the way does anyone know if you can just turn off updates on Chrome and have it keep working in its present state?

hosteur6• 1 year ago

but I guess if that stops working it's on to Firefox.

It will stop working. Why not get ahead of the curve and move to Firefox now?

tim3333• 1 year ago

I quite like Chrome but I have both open on the laptop so I guess it's not a huge deal.

OptionOfT• 1 year ago

If only Firefox would implement /some/ sort of Adblocker on iOS. I know they can because Edge does so. And yes, I'm aware that it is merely a skin on top of Safari's WebView, but any adblocker is better than none.

I wonder if Google asks them not to implement one because of the search engine deal?

EasyMark2• 1 year ago

Have you tried upping to the highest level of ad tracking in settings? I haven't used it in so long I'm not sure. Orion works pretty well for me with adguard installed, plus it's built in blocking

About Google Chrome's "This extension may soon no longer be supported" (2024)

Related Stories