Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Gene
 

I've seen occasional comments about add-ons being unusable in Firefox Chrome by blind users.  I had hoped that there would be improvbement in time but today, I tried to run Noscript and found it completely inaccessible.  I am not using a recent version of NVDA but I doubt that matters.  If it does, I'd like to know.  If the lack of access to these and other add-ons is as extremely poor, nonexistent, to call it what it is, that I experienced today, where does one report such matters or try to get something to be done? 
 
I did a Google searche for something like add-ons not accessible Quantum Chrome and a few other searches but I didn't find one relevant result.  I didn't even find messages from user discussion pages I would have thought likely to show up in results.
 
So I have two questions:
Are things as bad as they seem, complete inaccessibility for add-ons, and is any of this improved when using newer versions of NVDA?  I can't use recent versions because none of my machines support them.  I could make my Windows 7 machine support them by installing Service Pack 1, but I'd lose access to a program that is dconvenient to have now and then.  I also almost never use that machine online.
 
Gene


 

Gene,

          Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions (Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.

           I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome.  Chrome and Quantum are unconnected.

           Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going to get any attention is what is current or upcoming.  They'll never go back to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763  

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep.

          ~ Saul Bellow, To Jerusalem and Back

 

 


Hope Williamson <isepic@...>
 

That all depends on the add-on itself. Some are accessible and some aren’t. Noscript has it’s own website. https://noscript.net


Gene
 

I just found something interesting.  I am using firefox Portable and I uninstalled version 63 and then reinstalled it.  I had updated it before, from the first Quantum version through perhaps two others.  On reinstalling, I can see things in the extensions section I couldn't before.  Perhaps updating doesn't change things that need to be changed for better accessibility.  I'll see if browsing is better. 
 
I still don't know how accessible extensions are but I'll test with noscript again.  But now, I can get to the part of the dialog to disable or uninstal the add-on, which I couldn't before.
 
What I'm saying may apply to the installed version of firefox as well. 
Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Gene
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:42 PM
Subject: Firefox Quantum and add-ons

I've seen occasional comments about add-ons being unusable in Firefox Chrome by blind users.  I had hoped that there would be improvbement in time but today, I tried to run Noscript and found it completely inaccessible.  I am not using a recent version of NVDA but I doubt that matters.  If it does, I'd like to know.  If the lack of access to these and other add-ons is as extremely poor, nonexistent, to call it what it is, that I experienced today, where does one report such matters or try to get something to be done? 
 
I did a Google searche for something like add-ons not accessible Quantum Chrome and a few other searches but I didn't find one relevant result.  I didn't even find messages from user discussion pages I would have thought likely to show up in results.
 
So I have two questions:
Are things as bad as they seem, complete inaccessibility for add-ons, and is any of this improved when using newer versions of NVDA?  I can't use recent versions because none of my machines support them.  I could make my Windows 7 machine support them by installing Service Pack 1, but I'd lose access to a program that is dconvenient to have now and then.  I also almost never use that machine online.
 
Gene


Gene
 

I had thought that when Quantum was introduced, it might have degraded add-on accessibility even if the add-ons should be accessible but that might not be the case.  I've seen very little discussion of this and the very little I'd seen seemed to imply that but as I said, that may not be the case.
 
Gene

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons

Gene,

          Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions (Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.

           I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome.  Chrome and Quantum are unconnected.

           Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going to get any attention is what is current or upcoming.  They'll never go back to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763  

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep.

          ~ Saul Bellow, To Jerusalem and Back

 

 


Gene
 

Here's what I found out.  Uninstalling and reinstalling didn't change anything.  The problem was that I was using a very slow connection for a bit and I didn't realize how slow it was.  I was notified that Noscript had been added but it hadn't been.  When I went through the procedure again, it was and it is accessible.  So I now know that Quantum itself doesn't cause accessibility problems if the add-ons are designed to be accessible.
 
Gene

----- Original Message -----
From: Gene
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons

I had thought that when Quantum was introduced, it might have degraded add-on accessibility even if the add-ons should be accessible but that might not be the case.  I've seen very little discussion of this and the very little I'd seen seemed to imply that but as I said, that may not be the case.
 
Gene
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons

Gene,

          Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions (Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.

           I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome.  Chrome and Quantum are unconnected.

           Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going to get any attention is what is current or upcoming.  They'll never go back to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763  

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep.

          ~ Saul Bellow, To Jerusalem and Back

 

 


 

hi gene.
i subscribed to
www.bugzilla.mozilla.org
and requested anything that i wish to add to firefox.

On 11/14/18, Gene <gsasner@gmail.com> wrote:
I had thought that when Quantum was introduced, it might have degraded
add-on accessibility even if the add-ons should be accessible but that might
not be the case. I've seen very little discussion of this and the very
little I'd seen seemed to imply that but as I said, that may not be the
case.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Brian Vogel
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:57 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Gene,

Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions
(Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.

I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are
disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when
Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome. Chrome
and Quantum are unconnected.

Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going
to get any attention is what is current or upcoming. They'll never go back
to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for
illusion is deep.

~ Saul Bellow, To Jerusalem and Back








--
By God,
were I given all the seven heavens
with all they contain
in order that
I may disobey God
by depriving an ant
from the husk of a grain of barley,
I would not do it.
imam ali


Gene
 

I'll keep it in mind.
 
Gene

----- Original Message -----
From: zahra
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 10:25 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons

hi gene.
i subscribed to
www.bugzilla.mozilla.org
and requested anything that i wish to add to firefox.

On 11/14/18, Gene <gsasner@...> wrote:
> I had thought that when Quantum was introduced, it might have degraded
> add-on accessibility even if the add-ons should be accessible but that might
> not be the case.  I've seen very little discussion of this and the very
> little I'd seen seemed to imply that but as I said, that may not be the
> case.
>
> Gene
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Brian Vogel
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:57 PM
> To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons
>
>
> Gene,
>
>           Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions
> (Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.
>
>            I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are
> disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when
> Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome.  Chrome
> and Quantum are unconnected.
>
>            Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going
> to get any attention is what is current or upcoming.  They'll never go back
> to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.
>
> --
>
> Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763
>
> A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for
> illusion is deep.
>
>           ~ Saul Bellow, To Jerusalem and Back
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


--
By God,
were I given all the seven heavens
with all they contain
in order that
I may disobey God
by depriving an ant
from the husk of a grain of barley,
I would not do it.
imam ali



Brian's Mail list account <bglists@...>
 

You will have to have service pack 1 for most software updates to windows 7. Are you sure that the program you are talking about does not have an update to run on windows 7sp1? As you say, you are restricting yourself to loss of many things while attempting to preserve just one. What is this software?
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@gmail.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 2:42 AM
Subject: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


I've seen occasional comments about add-ons being unusable in Firefox Chrome by blind users. I had hoped that there would be improvbement in time but today, I tried to run Noscript and found it completely inaccessible. I am not using a recent version of NVDA but I doubt that matters. If it does, I'd like to know. If the lack of access to these and other add-ons is as extremely poor, nonexistent, to call it what it is, that I experienced today, where does one report such matters or try to get something to be done?

I did a Google searche for something like add-ons not accessible Quantum Chrome and a few other searches but I didn't find one relevant result. I didn't even find messages from user discussion pages I would have thought likely to show up in results.

So I have two questions:
Are things as bad as they seem, complete inaccessibility for add-ons, and is any of this improved when using newer versions of NVDA? I can't use recent versions because none of my machines support them. I could make my Windows 7 machine support them by installing Service Pack 1, but I'd lose access to a program that is dconvenient to have now and then. I also almost never use that machine online.

Gene


Brian's Mail list account <bglists@...>
 

Well yes but some useful add ons are simply no longer made for the new one. One is navigational sounds. To my mind it would be trivial for Mozilla to insert optional sounds in their own code, particularly for click a link/button etc, and page loaded and end of download.
Thiose are the main reason I use Waterfox.
brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@gmail.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Here's what I found out. Uninstalling and reinstalling didn't change anything. The problem was that I was using a very slow connection for a bit and I didn't realize how slow it was. I was notified that Noscript had been added but it hadn't been. When I went through the procedure again, it was and it is accessible. So I now know that Quantum itself doesn't cause accessibility problems if the add-ons are designed to be accessible.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Gene
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 10:01 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


I had thought that when Quantum was introduced, it might have degraded add-on accessibility even if the add-ons should be accessible but that might not be the case. I've seen very little discussion of this and the very little I'd seen seemed to imply that but as I said, that may not be the case.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Brian Vogel
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:57 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Gene,

Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions (Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.

I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome. Chrome and Quantum are unconnected.

Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going to get any attention is what is current or upcoming. They'll never go back to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep.

~ Saul Bellow, To Jerusalem and Back


 

Well its why I still use waterfox, some sites complain about old engines like github but they still work.

On 11/15/2018 12:17 AM, Brian's Mail list account via Groups.Io wrote:
Well yes but some useful add ons are simply no longer made for the new one. One is navigational sounds. To my mind it would be trivial for Mozilla to insert  optional sounds in their own code, particularly for click a link/button etc, and page loaded and end of download.
Thiose are the main reason I use Waterfox.
brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene" <gsasner@gmail.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Here's what I found out.  Uninstalling and reinstalling didn't change anything.  The problem was that I was using a very slow connection for a bit and I didn't realize how slow it was.  I was notified that Noscript had been added but it hadn't been.  When I went through the procedure again, it was and it is accessible.  So I now know that Quantum itself doesn't cause accessibility problems if the add-ons are designed to be accessible.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Gene
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 10:01 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


I had thought that when Quantum was introduced, it might have degraded add-on accessibility even if the add-ons should be accessible but that might not be the case.  I've seen very little discussion of this and the very little I'd seen seemed to imply that but as I said, that may not be the case.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Brian Vogel
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:57 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Gene,

         Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions (Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.

          I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome.  Chrome and Quantum are unconnected.

          Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going to get any attention is what is current or upcoming. They'll never go back to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.


Gene
 

There is an update but I don't like it as muchh.  Though I seldom use it, I want it just in case.  I'm also not restricting myself in any way.  I almost always use the computer offline, using it online only rarely perhaps for Youtube or while on vacation for browsing and e-mail.  That being the case, I'd rather leave it as it is.  I don't think I'd have any problems with Service Pack 1, but for my purposes, it works flawlessly and I don't want to taike even minor risks of problems for no advantage that means anything.
 
One of these days, I may get curious enough about the new NVDA interface that I install Service Pack 1 but that hasn't happened yet. 
Gene

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 5:13 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons

You will have to have service pack 1 for most software updates to windows 7.
Are you sure that the program you are talking about does not have an update
to run on windows 7sp1? As you say, you are restricting yourself to loss of
many things while attempting to preserve just one. What is this software?
 Brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@...>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 2:42 AM
Subject: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


I've seen occasional comments about add-ons being unusable in Firefox Chrome
by blind users.  I had hoped that there would be improvbement in time but
today, I tried to run Noscript and found it completely inaccessible.  I am
not using a recent version of NVDA but I doubt that matters.  If it does,
I'd like to know.  If the lack of access to these and other add-ons is as
extremely poor, nonexistent, to call it what it is, that I experienced
today, where does one report such matters or try to get something to be
done?

I did a Google searche for something like add-ons not accessible Quantum
Chrome and a few other searches but I didn't find one relevant result.  I
didn't even find messages from user discussion pages I would have thought
likely to show up in results.

So I have two questions:
Are things as bad as they seem, complete inaccessibility for add-ons, and is
any of this improved when using newer versions of NVDA?  I can't use recent
versions because none of my machines support them.  I could make my Windows
7 machine support them by installing Service Pack 1, but I'd lose access to
a program that is dconvenient to have now and then.  I also almost never use
that machine online.

Gene







Gene
 

I'm not writing this to try to convince you to not want these sounds.  I'm going into it because I want to make the point to others following the thread that if you become so dependent on sounds that you don't use, other methods when sounds become or never are available, then, in most cases, you are too dependent on one way of doing things.  the more adaptable a blind computer user is, the more likely he or she is to be able to use the most number of programs and to cope with unexpected accessibility problems. 
 
Here are examples of how to use Firefox efficiently without sounds.  When a page finishes downloading, NVDA starts reading automatically.  When you press enter on a link, if it doesn't do anything you'll know.  You may not know instantly, but you'll know and this is seldom a problem. 
 
If you open the library during a download, you can hear the estimated time a download should take.  You can then go back and check the window later to see if it has finished after that time has passed. 
 
I'm not saying there are no efficiencies lost by not having sounds, but they are minor. 
 
Gene
----- Original Message -----

Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 5:17 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons

Well yes but some useful add ons are simply no longer made for the new one.
One is navigational sounds. To my mind it would be trivial for Mozilla to
insert  optional sounds in their own code, particularly for click a
link/button etc, and page loaded and end of download.
 Thiose are the main reason I use Waterfox.
 brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@...>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Here's what I found out.  Uninstalling and reinstalling didn't change
anything.  The problem was that I was using a very slow connection for a bit
and I didn't realize how slow it was.  I was notified that Noscript had been
added but it hadn't been.  When I went through the procedure again, it was
and it is accessible.  So I now know that Quantum itself doesn't cause
accessibility problems if the add-ons are designed to be accessible.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Gene
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 10:01 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


I had thought that when Quantum was introduced, it might have degraded
add-on accessibility even if the add-ons should be accessible but that might
not be the case.  I've seen very little discussion of this and the very
little I'd seen seemed to imply that but as I said, that may not be the
case.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Brian Vogel
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:57 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Gene,

          Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions
(Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.

           I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are
disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when
Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome.  Chrome
and Quantum are unconnected.

           Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going
to get any attention is what is current or upcoming.  They'll never go back
to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for
illusion is deep.

          ~ Saul Bellow, To Jerusalem and Back












Hope Williamson <isepic@...>
 

Unfortunately, Waterfox will be based on ESR releases so it will get Quantum at some point. https://blog.waterfoxproject.org/waterfox-its-legacy-and-looking-to-the-future

    I really do like Waterfox. However, I don't want the Quantum stuff because every time I've attempted to use it, it seems slower and more unstable than what Firefox used to be without Quantum.


 

hi shaun.
can you please test for me working github with old engine firefox or waterfox?
for example: when i open
https://github.com/nvaccess/nvda/milestone/42
and i press h many times to go to the position that nvda says:
nvda 2018.4
and go down until nvda says:
77 closed and press enter on it, nothing happen!
it means that i cant follow nvda progress, new features, changes and
bug fixes anymore on github!
also, when i sign in to my account and wish to edit my written
comments, i cant edit them and editing does not work for me.
whenever i open github, nvda says that the version of my firefox is
not up to date and github does not support older versions of firefox
anymore!
i did not have such problems last week.

On 11/15/18, Hope Williamson via Groups.Io <isepic=lavabit.com@groups.io> wrote:
Unfortunately, Waterfox will be based on ESR releases so it will get
Quantum at some point.
https://blog.waterfoxproject.org/waterfox-its-legacy-and-looking-to-the-future

    I really do like Waterfox. However, I don't want the Quantum stuff
because every time I've attempted to use it, it seems slower and more
unstable than what Firefox used to be without Quantum.





--
By God,
were I given all the seven heavens
with all they contain
in order that
I may disobey God
by depriving an ant
from the husk of a grain of barley,
I would not do it.
imam ali


 

Well the difference is that quantom will eventually get better, the difference though is that waterfox will still be able to run classic code and the classic engine.

In fact while its based on mozilla firefox, eventually its going to be its own animal.

The issue with quantom, is that to be more secure, registry access, and a lot of things that couled become security risks are gone.

That means no linking to any os function at all, everything must be redone from scratch.

In a way it makes sence, no os links means you are secure, but that basically makes it a custom program.

Any custom program that doesn't use os spaciffic libraries is just that bit harder to access, you can't rely on the os, and the issue is that most readers are os dependant.

Nvda is heavily os dependant.

Every addon author has to reinvent the wheel.

I spoke to the developer of nav sounds for example and because of mozilla securing the program, he would have to set sounds indevidually, its harder to do, and he just couldn't be bothered at that point.

For noscript's authors, they like others would have to use the new web engine.

Eventually in the long run its probably going to be faster especially with the newer faster cpus and memmory chips.

Not much good for the lower grade cpus, but with most newer units being 6th gen and up, and now its like 7th gen and mainly amd and 8th gen in theory we shouldn't have issues at all.

The spanner in the works is of course the intel spcter issue which cuts cpu processing in half till a new gen is out.

From some reviews thats basically wrecked the new 8th generation processer group.

Mozilla has also added extra security features which have slowed down things, so who knows.

Eventually waterfox will be its own system, with its own addon store able to take advantage of the classic but also quantom engines side by side as I understand it.

So technically we should all be fine.

They aren't pushing for it right now but eventually that will happen.

On 11/15/2018 2:57 PM, Hope Williamson via Groups.Io wrote:
Unfortunately, Waterfox will be based on ESR releases so it will get Quantum at some point. https://blog.waterfoxproject.org/waterfox-its-legacy-and-looking-to-the-future

    I really do like Waterfox. However, I don't want the Quantum stuff because every time I've attempted to use it, it seems slower and more unstable than what Firefox used to be without Quantum.




.


 

I am getting the same issue with waterfox to.

Could be a page issue who knows.

On 11/15/2018 4:46 PM, zahra wrote:
hi shaun.
can you please test for me working github with old engine firefox or waterfox?
for example: when i open
https://github.com/nvaccess/nvda/milestone/42
and i press h many times to go to the position that nvda says:
nvda 2018.4
and go down until nvda says:
77 closed and press enter on it, nothing happen!
it means that i cant follow nvda progress, new features, changes and
bug fixes anymore on github!
also, when i sign in to my account and wish to edit my written
comments, i cant edit them and editing does not work for me.
whenever i open github, nvda says that the version of my firefox is
not up to date and github does not support older versions of firefox
anymore!
i did not have such problems last week.

On 11/15/18, Hope Williamson via Groups.Io <isepic=lavabit.com@groups.io> wrote:
Unfortunately, Waterfox will be based on ESR releases so it will get
Quantum at some point.
https://blog.waterfoxproject.org/waterfox-its-legacy-and-looking-to-the-future

    I really do like Waterfox. However, I don't want the Quantum stuff
because every time I've attempted to use it, it seems slower and more
unstable than what Firefox used to be without Quantum.






 

but i tried many pages in github and many nvda milestone and cant
access them anymore.
how can i fix the problem to use firefox 52 with github?

On 11/15/18, Shaun Everiss <sm.everiss@gmail.com> wrote:
I am getting the same issue with waterfox to.

Could be a page issue who knows.



On 11/15/2018 4:46 PM, zahra wrote:
hi shaun.
can you please test for me working github with old engine firefox or
waterfox?
for example: when i open
https://github.com/nvaccess/nvda/milestone/42
and i press h many times to go to the position that nvda says:
nvda 2018.4
and go down until nvda says:
77 closed and press enter on it, nothing happen!
it means that i cant follow nvda progress, new features, changes and
bug fixes anymore on github!
also, when i sign in to my account and wish to edit my written
comments, i cant edit them and editing does not work for me.
whenever i open github, nvda says that the version of my firefox is
not up to date and github does not support older versions of firefox
anymore!
i did not have such problems last week.

On 11/15/18, Hope Williamson via Groups.Io <isepic=lavabit.com@groups.io>
wrote:
Unfortunately, Waterfox will be based on ESR releases so it will get
Quantum at some point.
https://blog.waterfoxproject.org/waterfox-its-legacy-and-looking-to-the-future

    I really do like Waterfox. However, I don't want the Quantum stuff
because every time I've attempted to use it, it seems slower and more
unstable than what Firefox used to be without Quantum.







--
By God,
were I given all the seven heavens
with all they contain
in order that
I may disobey God
by depriving an ant
from the husk of a grain of barley,
I would not do it.
imam ali


Brian's Mail list account <bglists@...>
 

If you do not do it soon Windows 7 will be end of life and then you won't be able to install it. to be honest I've never found anybody have problems with it. Its the standard install and has been for many years now.
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@gmail.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


There is an update but I don't like it as muchh. Though I seldom use it, I want it just in case. I'm also not restricting myself in any way. I almost always use the computer offline, using it online only rarely perhaps for Youtube or while on vacation for browsing and e-mail. That being the case, I'd rather leave it as it is. I don't think I'd have any problems with Service Pack 1, but for my purposes, it works flawlessly and I don't want to taike even minor risks of problems for no advantage that means anything.

One of these days, I may get curious enough about the new NVDA interface that I install Service Pack 1 but that hasn't happened yet.
Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Brian's Mail list account via Groups.Io
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 5:13 AM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


You will have to have service pack 1 for most software updates to windows 7.
Are you sure that the program you are talking about does not have an update
to run on windows 7sp1? As you say, you are restricting yourself to loss of
many things while attempting to preserve just one. What is this software?
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@gmail.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 2:42 AM
Subject: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


I've seen occasional comments about add-ons being unusable in Firefox Chrome
by blind users. I had hoped that there would be improvbement in time but
today, I tried to run Noscript and found it completely inaccessible. I am
not using a recent version of NVDA but I doubt that matters. If it does,
I'd like to know. If the lack of access to these and other add-ons is as
extremely poor, nonexistent, to call it what it is, that I experienced
today, where does one report such matters or try to get something to be
done?

I did a Google searche for something like add-ons not accessible Quantum
Chrome and a few other searches but I didn't find one relevant result. I
didn't even find messages from user discussion pages I would have thought
likely to show up in results.

So I have two questions:
Are things as bad as they seem, complete inaccessibility for add-ons, and is
any of this improved when using newer versions of NVDA? I can't use recent
versions because none of my machines support them. I could make my Windows
7 machine support them by installing Service Pack 1, but I'd lose access to
a program that is dconvenient to have now and then. I also almost never use
that machine online.

Gene


Gene
 

Your version of Firefox, may no longer be supported by the site.  Or it may be that you are using the site with JAVA script support turned off.  Many pages will have limited or very little functionality if JAVA scripts are off.
 
If using the site with JAVA script on doesn't solve the problem, using a newer Firefox portable version for the site should do so. 
 
Gene

----- Original Message -----
From: zahra
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons

hi shaun.
can you please test for me working github with old engine firefox or waterfox?
for example: when i open
https://github.com/nvaccess/nvda/milestone/42
and i press h many times to go to the position that nvda says:
nvda 2018.4
and go down until nvda says:
77 closed and press enter on it, nothing happen!
it means that i cant follow nvda progress, new features, changes and
bug fixes anymore on github!
also, when i sign in to my account and wish to edit my written
comments, i cant edit them and editing does not work for me.
whenever i open github, nvda says that the version of my firefox is
not up to date and github does not support older versions of firefox
anymore!
i did not have such problems last week.

On 11/15/18, Hope Williamson via Groups.Io <isepic@...> wrote:
> Unfortunately, Waterfox will be based on ESR releases so it will get
> Quantum at some point.
> https://blog.waterfoxproject.org/waterfox-its-legacy-and-looking-to-the-future
>
>      I really do like Waterfox. However, I don't want the Quantum stuff
> because every time I've attempted to use it, it seems slower and more
> unstable than what Firefox used to be without Quantum.
>
>
>
>
>
>


--
By God,
were I given all the seven heavens
with all they contain
in order that
I may disobey God
by depriving an ant
from the husk of a grain of barley,
I would not do it.
imam ali