Anonymous · original post · 2026-07-11 04:46:57
Just re-add the code? Copy paste. Voila
>Vivaldi's latest update shows them deprecating Manifest V2 extensions as well …
LOUNGE · Back to threads · Report thread
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 04:51:46
>>22211
There are a billion speed dial addons, https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/groupspeeddial/ is my favorite but I advise experimenting with them all
But to be fair, Vivaldi's speed dial really is amazing and I've yet to find someone as good as it
There are a billion speed dial addons, https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/groupspeeddial/ is my favorite but I advise experimenting with them all
But to be fair, Vivaldi's speed dial really is amazing and I've yet to find someone as good as it
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 10:39:53
>>22162
Why do people dox themselves like this
Why do people dox themselves like this
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 10:52:46
>>22214
>Why do people dox themselves like this
Huh?
>Why do people dox themselves like this
Huh?
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 11:14:25
>>22162
>>109217000
>>109217000
>>109217000
>>109217000
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 11:44:22
>>22162
>It's over Chromium bros
I don't give a shiieeeet, everything I need is working on Chromium
>It's over Chromium bros
I don't give a shiieeeet, everything I need is working on Chromium
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 11:53:20
>>22208
I doubt it works better. I have an extension that I ported to V3 and all the manifest change really does it heap a bunch more restrictions onto what you want it to do. It brings no benefits to the end user.
Reduced access to web content, short-lived workers with no persistence, greater lockdown on dynamic code.
Ostensibly it forces extensions to behave better, but in practice it wipes out a bunch of capabilities you actually want your extensions to be able to have.
I doubt it works better. I have an extension that I ported to V3 and all the manifest change really does it heap a bunch more restrictions onto what you want it to do. It brings no benefits to the end user.
Reduced access to web content, short-lived workers with no persistence, greater lockdown on dynamic code.
Ostensibly it forces extensions to behave better, but in practice it wipes out a bunch of capabilities you actually want your extensions to be able to have.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 11:54:01
>>22174
mv3 userscripts api for userscripts is only as usable as mv3 is for adblocking: if you're an abject retard you wouldn't know the difference.
mv3 userscripts api for userscripts is only as usable as mv3 is for adblocking: if you're an abject retard you wouldn't know the difference.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 11:54:41
FireChads win again.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 17:45:26
>>22177
You can still re-enable it on vivaldi, not sure for how long.
You can still re-enable it on vivaldi, not sure for how long.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 18:06:22
>>22219
And If you are not an abject retard you will know only GM.webRequest is missing from mv3 userscripts.
Not even supporting mv3, I'd rather still have mv2 on chromium and xul/xpcom on firefox (or a proper alternative)
And If you are not an abject retard you will know only GM.webRequest is missing from mv3 userscripts.
Not even supporting mv3, I'd rather still have mv2 on chromium and xul/xpcom on firefox (or a proper alternative)
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-11 23:27:15
>>22162
>noOOoooooOOOooo my deprecated api!!!!
>noOOoooooOOOooo my deprecated api!!!!
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 04:20:36
>>22162
This is how you lose your 0.001% market share Vivaldi.
This is how you lose your 0.001% market share Vivaldi.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 12:06:12
so is adguard mv3 just a better version of uBOL?
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 12:09:46
>>22221
>>22202
>>22162
Vivaldi warns you that its no longer supported but it will never disable support and you can always re-enable. CEO said this a long time ago.
>>22202
>>22162
Vivaldi warns you that its no longer supported but it will never disable support and you can always re-enable. CEO said this a long time ago.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 12:11:35
All browsers disable it by default for "security". You can bypass it but you are giving up security. It's like running Thorium browser yeah its the fastest browser but its also outdated and full of security holes.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 12:24:56
>>22226
they might remove it at some point, also mv2 support without a mv2 extensions "store" is less than ideal and they already said they don't have resources to maintain one.
I'm thinking on going to a ff fork once they drop support but I've to see if it's still possible to inject an userchrome.js (js not css) on ff.
they might remove it at some point, also mv2 support without a mv2 extensions "store" is less than ideal and they already said they don't have resources to maintain one.
I'm thinking on going to a ff fork once they drop support but I've to see if it's still possible to inject an userchrome.js (js not css) on ff.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 12:28:36
>>22228
I doubt any browser even if one should emerge to actually support MV2 long term will have a MV2 extension store. Besides "compiling" an extension from source is laughably easy in any chrom* based browser. Literally just enable dev mode and select source dir. What really sucks is that its not unlikely that all browsers will eventually give up on MV2 legacy support.
I doubt any browser even if one should emerge to actually support MV2 long term will have a MV2 extension store. Besides "compiling" an extension from source is laughably easy in any chrom* based browser. Literally just enable dev mode and select source dir. What really sucks is that its not unlikely that all browsers will eventually give up on MV2 legacy support.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 12:43:11
>>22229
And there's already a release page on github to donwload precompiled stuff, but that's not the point, I doubt any browser will maintain mv2 just for people that know how to install extensions from outside the store.
And vivaldi team is making pretty clear they won't support it forever.
And there's already a release page on github to donwload precompiled stuff, but that's not the point, I doubt any browser will maintain mv2 just for people that know how to install extensions from outside the store.
And vivaldi team is making pretty clear they won't support it forever.
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 13:02:24
>>22162
>Will Edge be the only one that will keep Manifest V2
Most likely yes because Microsoft wants to give a fat middle finger to Google and has the resources to fork chromium themselves to maintain it.
>>22163
Literally have never experienced this at all. Have you tried not being poor?
>Will Edge be the only one that will keep Manifest V2
Most likely yes because Microsoft wants to give a fat middle finger to Google and has the resources to fork chromium themselves to maintain it.
>>22163
Literally have never experienced this at all. Have you tried not being poor?
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 13:18:12
>>22163
wtf r u talking about lol. we use edge at work on pretty old thinkpads, no problems whatsoever
wtf r u talking about lol. we use edge at work on pretty old thinkpads, no problems whatsoever
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 14:40:10
109256723 (no you)
>shitjeet rape rat comes out of the woodwork to write a microshart fanfic
in reality microsoft will just follow upstream because its cheaper, requires less dev time, and the users of edge (old people and shitjeets) wont notice/care
>shitjeet rape rat comes out of the woodwork to write a microshart fanfic
in reality microsoft will just follow upstream because its cheaper, requires less dev time, and the users of edge (old people and shitjeets) wont notice/care
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 16:14:30
>>22165
it's literally the only 2 mandatory extensions
fuck this gay world
it's literally the only 2 mandatory extensions
fuck this gay world
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 16:37:12
>>22234
>using gay as an insult in 2038
>using gay as an insult in 2038
Anonymous · reply · 2026-07-12 16:41:52
>>22228
>I've to see if it's still possible to inject an userchrome.js (js not css) on ff.
I've seen anons mention working with it in the past so I assume that it is possible, but I don't really have a use case for it, unlike .css where I've made some really useful changes such as disabling the close (x) button on tabs to prevent misclicks and adding scrollbars to all bookmark folders.
>I've to see if it's still possible to inject an userchrome.js (js not css) on ff.
I've seen anons mention working with it in the past so I assume that it is possible, but I don't really have a use case for it, unlike .css where I've made some really useful changes such as disabling the close (x) button on tabs to prevent misclicks and adding scrollbars to all bookmark folders.
‹ Newer posts Page 2 of 2
Reply to this thread
Posting requires a durable account or a TripPass. Reading remains available.
Sign in or create or attach a TripPass to post. Browsing is open.