Firefox 38 released

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/38.0/releasenotes/

by AshleysBrain • 11 years ago

137 127 11 years ago

serve_yay• 11 years ago

Interesting, I had not heard of ruby before! (more info here, as linked in TFA https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/03/ruby-support-in-firefox-de... )

wodenokoto2• 11 years ago

I was really surprised to see this wasn't implemented much earlier. Chrome apparently had support for XHTML 1.1 Ruby since 2010!

I am also surprised to see how verbose actual ruby markup is.

Better examples of mark-up on wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_character#HTML_markup

threedaymonk• 11 years ago

Its absence has been a persistent irritation to me. I'm glad that I can now retire this:

https://github.com/threedaymonk/furigana-shim

w1ntermute• 11 years ago

It's been possible to add support with an extension[0] for a long time.

0: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/html-ruby/

malka• 11 years ago

At first, I thought they added support for client side scripting in Ruby.

dubcanada• 11 years ago

Anyone have any insight on why they removed autocomplete from username & password fields?

phireal• 11 years ago

Presumably this: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=956906

I think it means that sites can't overrule the browser's inclination to store passwords. The argument seems to be the browser makers will store passwords safely.

dao-2• 11 years ago

The argument seems to be the browser makers will store passwords safely.

Not quite. Unless you set a master password, whoever owns your computer will own the passwords stored by your browser.

The argument is that disabling autocomplete makes users choose poor passwords that are easy to remember, or write passwords down somewhere, which is at least as bad as having passwords stored in your browser profile.

sandstrom• 11 years ago

There are some valid use-cases, e.g. in web-apps with an user-admin section. It's useful that when adding user 2 (or N) it won't auto-fill with details from the previous user (that you just added).

If anyone has that issue, a workaround is to add multiple email/password inputs (dummies) around the real-one, and hide them. In Chrome, this causes it to 'give up' and not try to auto-fill the fields.

gear54rus• 11 years ago

They removed the ability of a site maker to tell user if they should use password manager on their website. A much needed feature aka 'no, I do not care about password for your stupid site'.

aroch2• 11 years ago

IMO, what's even more annoying are sites that detect whether you've used a password manager to fill your credentials and then 1) won't log you in, 2) frequently require you to clear your cookies and 3) sometimes make you change your password.

hobarrera4• 11 years ago

They also removed the ability of a site maker to tell the browser "no, this isn't the user's login form, it's where he inputs the username of somebody else".

riquito• 11 years ago

From the bug tracker https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=956906#c100

Summary of the change, so people don't have to wade through a long discussion:

  - This change makes it so that `autocomplete=off` does not stop the Password Manager from working. Normal form autofill can be disabled as usual.
  - The password manager *always* prompts if it wants to save a password. Passwords are not saved without permission from the user.
  - We are the third browser to implement this change, after IE and Chrome.
  - This can be undone locally by flipping the `signon.storeWhenAutocompleteOff` pref (from about:config) off.
  - The rationale behind this change was the widespread abuse of the `autocomplete` attribute to prevent password saving where no prevention is required. This change gives users full control over password saving, without compromising on security (again, the user is always prompted).

Touche4• 11 years ago

Mac OS X: Implemented a subset of the Media Source Extensions (MSE) API to allow native HTML5 playback on YouTube HTML5
Implemented Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) API to support encrypted HTML5 video/audio playback (Windows Vista or later only) HTML5
Automatically download Adobe Primetime Content Decryption Module (CDM) for DRM playback through EME (Windows Vista or later only)

:( Notice which OSes are left off the list. I don't blame Mozilla as they were just following inevitability but it's a sad day for the web as there's now a lot of content that, by design of W3C, only works on certain OSes.

Of course the EME champions promised us that this wouldn't happen and they are apparently silent for the moment.

TazeTSchnitzel13• 11 years ago

Mac OS X: Implemented a subset of the Media Source Extensions (MSE) API to allow native HTML5 playback on YouTube HTML5

Media Source Extensions, while compatible with Encrypted Media Extensions, the DRM system, are not DRM. They let JavaScript manipulate the byte streams of the video data before it goes to the video codec, so you can handle streaming and such from JS.

acdha5• 11 years ago

What video could you watch before that you cannot watch now? I also wish we lived in a world which didn't need EME but it's not like the status quo was video which played for everyone. It just meant that everyone had to download monthly updates to avoid security problems with the massive plugin they used to play video and Linux, etc. users were largely still screwed.

bad_user• 11 years ago

There's a big difference - before these moves, DRM delivery of video had to be done using shitty nonstandard plugins or native apps, right?

Whenever this happens, usability suffers as well. And we had a real opportunity here to give users an open and non-broken standard as an alternative, on top of which alternative platforms for content delivery could be built, alternatives that could have won simply because of the ubiquitousness of the standard browser.

Besides, DRM is technically and fundamentally broken. All my respect for W3C has gone down the window.

amyjess• 11 years ago

Honestly, I'd rather developers move their DRM-encumbered video services to native apps and leave the web alone.

portaljacker4• 11 years ago

Does EME being implemented finally mean that I can uninstall Silverlight for watching Netflix in Firefox in the near future?

Touche4• 11 years ago

That depends on which OS you use.

k-mcgrady2• 11 years ago

Don't do it. I've been using the non-silverlight Netflix in Safari and it's such a nightmare I switched back. Constantly fails to load content.

wldcordeiro• 11 years ago

I believe that now you can use the HTML5 player on Netflix if you're on OS X or Windows. Linux still can't however.

mwfunk• 11 years ago

I'm not sure how this is any different from following the ongoing development of any other feature that requires platform-specific code to be written (WebGL, etc.). You will periodically see updates that only pertain to one platform or another, especially during bringup. No conspiracy there.

wmf• 11 years ago

Mozilla can implement/port WebGL for whatever platforms they want, but they can't implement Adobe Primetime DRM; they have to take whatever Adobe gives them.

javaun• 11 years ago

Hey Touche, I work on Firefox at Mozilla. We launched EME on Win32 (Vista+) first because that is by far the biggest share of Fx users. We will keep rolling out new platforms, the work will be long and hard. Streaming providers want to move off of Silverlight and Flash but will still support them for the foreseeable future, so content is still available.

yarrel2• 11 years ago

You should be ashamed of doing the work of adding EME to Firefox.

Please don't add it to other platforms. Remove it from Windows.

If the work will be long and hard there are better uses of your time than working to ensure that "streaming providers" can oppose Mozilla's vision of an open web.

Touche4• 11 years ago

I don't doubt you will add EME to other platforms, but that doesn't mean anything if there are no supported DRM for that platform.

venomsnake2• 11 years ago

Well ... I have found that thepiratebay works flawlessly to deliver videos on any platform. It is sad that we are moving backwards. Right now I WANT to give netflix money for Daredevil ... and there is no legal way for me to do so ...

coldpie• 11 years ago

Hmmm? What OS do you run? Netflix works great on the Linux version of Google Chrome. Yes, you have to use proprietary software, but it does work.

TazeTSchnitzel13• 11 years ago

Ruby annotation support

Finally! After only 24 years, East Asian languages get some attention.

Perhaps next Western browser makers might consider vertical text support.

sigh

ramy_d• 11 years ago

the syntax is really confusing though. Duplicating characters? I thought it was hard to follow what would end up where https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/03/ruby-support-in-firefox-de...

TazeTSchnitzel13• 11 years ago

The syntax isn't that bad. It's written in a style that gracefully degrades: strip out the HTML tags, and it's perfectly readable, but the furigana shows up inline rather than above.

Portions are duplicated to ensure graceful degradation. You type 振り仮名(ふりがな) (with tags demarcating the sections, of course), repeating the り, so it'll show up properly if the browser lacks ruby text support. But if the browser does have ruby text support, it can hide the り from the furigana because it's redundant:

  振 仮名
  ふりがな

robin_reala• 11 years ago

Vertical text support is coming on quickly in Firefox. There’s still a bunch of blockers, but they’re being knocked off fast: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=145503

TazeTSchnitzel13• 11 years ago

That's great to see!

AdmiralAsshat• 11 years ago

CRITICAL Vulnerability can be used to run attacker code and install software, requiring no user interaction beyond normal browsing.

Uh, glad they fixed this one, but it sounds pretty bad. I'd kinda like to see the actual CVE/bug report.

joshmoz• 11 years ago

You're looking at the key which defines what CRITICAL means. Look further down the page for info about actual vulns. I believe they're running a bit late posting the vulns for 38 today.

xixixao• 11 years ago

So I got momentarily excited that there are new "tab preferences" (like having new tab open next to the current one), but unfortunately it's just a UI revamp of the settings pane, which since I'm on OS X I cannot care for much (the UI is a bit too flat and generally not as familiar as the native box, although who cares...)

hobarrera4• 11 years ago

I fail to see why Mozilla chose this direction. Firefox now looks more alien on all platforms with no real functional benefit.

kasabali2• 11 years ago

Because this way you recognize Firefox everywhere when you see it, that's their reasoning. There was a presentation about it few years ago but I'm too lazy to hunt after the link right now.

y0ghur7_xxx• 11 years ago

What happened to opportunistic encryption? I loved that feature but it was disabled because of a bug. I hoped it would be enabled again in the next major release, but no mention of it. Can someone from Mozilla tell me more?

lmandel• 11 years ago

Opportunistic encryption is being tested again in Firefox 39, which is scheduled to release on June 30, 2015.

quadrangle2• 11 years ago

Looks like (haven't tested yet), this will finally support meet.jit.si for true free/open group video chat!

etimberg• 11 years ago

The broadcast channel support looks promising. Does anyone know if Chrome plans to support it in the future?

McGlockenshire• 11 years ago

CanIUse pointed at a proposal for Chrome support which eventually points at this bug:

http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=161070

There are some work-in-progress patches posted there.

0x03• 11 years ago

Could this be abused on iframed ad network domains / facebook like buttons / tweet buttons to track real time browser state and acitivity across all active tabs?

kasabali2• 11 years ago

autocomplete=off is no longer supported for username/password fields

Super cool. Don't tell me what not to auto complete!

whatsgood22• 11 years ago

Improved page load times via speculative connection warmup

turning into chrome!

acquacow4• 11 years ago

Anyone else having issues with the bookmarks toolbar in 38? Mine draws blank when you open a window. I have to hide/show it before it draws correctly.

This occurs each time a window is opened.

acquacow4• 11 years ago

My menu button on the right of the address/search bar doesn't work anymore either. (OSX 10.10.2)

Gonna uninstall/reinstall

acquacow4• 11 years ago

Was still doing it on a clean install, it didn't like something in my profile... renamed it, and re-installed my addons in a new profile and it's fine now.

Unamused.

justinph• 11 years ago

srcset! Finally, responsive images are gaining ground.

nominated12• 11 years ago

Can someone explain why Mozilla is not signing gmpopenh264.dll and now eme-adobe.dll? These are executed from AppData (a folder with read/write permissions). Executing dll's from AppData is generally a bad idea but if I'm going to allow it I at least want a Publisher rule attached. Google signs their CDM (WideVine) dll delivered with Chrome that executes from AppData, why isn't Mozilla?

hsivonen4• 11 years ago

Firefox checks SHA-512 hashes at download time. If you have local malware that changes the GMP DLLs thereafter, the malware might as well change Firefox itself.

duaneb2• 11 years ago

If you have local malware that changes the GMP DLLs thereafter, the malware might as well change Firefox itself.

Well hopefully firefox itself is signed. This is exactly what signing is designed to prevent.

conductor• 11 years ago

It can't change Firefox itself if it has no administrative privileges but it can change anything in the user's directories.

nominated12• 11 years ago

I'm approaching it like this - I need to execute unsigned binaries from a location that does not have execute permissions. How can I manage this? The lack of a signature is at best an administrative burden and at worst an attack vector depending on how the Admin handles it ("let's just add a wildcard exeception"). Mozilla should recognize this and sign the dll's. I still haven't seen a reason for NOT signing them. We don't use WebRTC so ignoring gmpopenh264.dll was not a problem. However, now we're talking about "necessary" Adobe code. Need I say more? Chrome performs the same functions and adheres to common sense. This is one of those things that gets a package removed from offering. I like and use Firefox myself but I don't like the position Mozilla has put me in. Should I open a bug report or do you speak for Mozilla in an official capacity?

yarrel2• 11 years ago

Firefox is now a malware installer?

Awesome!

anonbanker• 11 years ago

Your post may seem snarky, but I upvoted you for truth. Many of us consider Adobe's DRM software to be nothing but malware.

_lce0• 11 years ago

Honest question to Firefox dev's:

I want to keep using firefox, but not the DRM thingy. I'd rather not see any video on the web, to be forced to use DRM technology.

Do you plan to support a DRM-free version?

cpeterso4• 11 years ago

To disable EME, go to the Firefox Preferences menu and uncheck the "Play DRM content" checkbox. That will disable EME and delete the Adobe CDM binary if it has been installed. This preference doesn't disable DRM in Flash and Silverlight, however.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/enable-drm

acdha5• 11 years ago

They already have releases without EME at all if you don't even want to disable it:

http://download.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/firefox/releases/38.0/wi...

dao-2• 11 years ago

There's a "Play DRM content" checkbox in about:preferences#content. If I remember correctly, unchecking it will completely remove the CDM, checking it installs it again.

chimeracoder2• 11 years ago

I want to keep using firefox, but not the DRM thingy. I'd rather not see any video on the web, to be forced to use DRM technology.
Do you plan to support a DRM-free version?

Iceweasel (the version of Firefox shipped with Debian) will always be DRM-free, as per the Debian policies on free software. It's almost the exact same as Firefox, except the logo and the name - all the other functionality is identical.

dublinben• 11 years ago

You might be interested in GNU Icecat[0]. It is a spinoff of Firefox that does not include antifeatures like DRM.

[0]https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/

bzbarsky• 11 years ago

Yes, we do. https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2015/05/12/update-on-digital-r... has links to the following:

1) Instructions for disabling the DRM bit without uninstalling it.

2) Instructions for uninstalling the DRM bit (and having Firefox never install it again).

3) A link to a version of Firefox 38 that doesn't have the DRM bits.

It's worth reading the whole blog post, but the tl;dr is https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/enable-drm and http://download.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/firefox/releases/38.0/wi... (with the latter sadly not as user-friendly as it might be).

dd99902• 11 years ago

The Readinglist feature seems to have disappeared from the Desktop build. I really liked using it in Nightly and on Android.

I briefly looked at Bugzilla and can't figure out its future. Is it really being replaced with a tie-in to a closed source US based startup company, Pocket? Can any devs comment?

soganess• 11 years ago

This worked, so I imagine its being silently developed

http://www.ghacks.net/2015/02/07/mozilla-starts-to-push-read...

dd99902• 11 years ago

Worked for me too. Thanks for the pointer.

Lost1337• 11 years ago

Uninstalled. I have enough of you guys copying Chrome and turning Firefox into a DRM and social media browser. Get lost!

At least the Seamonkey guys know that advanced users also have the right to have their Options inside of the browser's code, something what you Mozilla guys are unable to understand these days!

What is good for Chrome is not equal as good for Mozilla Firefox!

Firefox 38 released

Related Stories