How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?
-
@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Wow, this sounds very bad, I have never heard of an extension using so much RAM? Then Adguard definitely is no option for me.
It is very heavy, they have no choice because one of MV3 policies is service workers of extensions not to stay alive.
So Adguard MV3 is using workarounds to keep waking up and waking up and waking up the service worker.
It is the only way for Adguard MV3 to support custom filter lists and quick fixes that can auto update.
uBOL is entirely declarative, meaning there is no need for a permanent uBOL process for the filtering to occur.
CSS/JS injection-based content filtering in uBOL is performed by the browser itself rather than by the extension.
But this means it can't support custom filter lists and quick fixes that can auto update.
Google when they get rid of uBO once and for all (not being installable in any way) will likely start a new fight like it did before and will break YouTube filtering daily. Unfortunately uBOL can't fight that, because it can not apply quick fixes by using custom lists that auto-update.So you're saying that Brave Shields is more advanced? Didn't know about this, I guess I should check this out.
Brave Shields support all the syntax of UBO and Adguard.
Shields use under the hood the uBO filters.And by the way, I know that uBlock Lite and Vivaldi's adblocker do successfully block most ads/trackers, but that's not the problem. You also sometimes need to block/unblock specific scripts and need to be able to block page elements/objects in order to get rid of all annoyances, and/or make the webpage load correctly, I believe that's what certain people don't get.
Vivaldi's ad blocker in a way already supports custom filtering.
It doesn't have a GUI for it, so it's not easy to add the elements/objects, but the support is there because it supports custom filters.
If you know the basic syntax of a filter, with the help of devtools to find the elements/objects, you can create the filters and add them to your own custom filter list.
Your own custom list can be local, it doesn't have to be uploaded.
I am using Vivaldi's ad blocker for custom filtering.
It is not easy to apply the filters because there is no GUI to find the elements/objects like uBO and Shields and Adguard MV3 have and automatically create them.
You need to know how to find them with devtools and create them yourself, but it is doable. -
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Adguard MV3 is a very heavy adblocker and not easy on CPU and RAM.
It uses constantly 300 MB RAM all the time just for waking up the service worker.
If you add that to the existing resources Vivaldi uses, it is not a "light" Chromium browser because a whole GUI is built on top of Chromium, you basically end up with a chromium browser which needs x2 the resources Brave+Shields use for example.
Even Gecko based browsers with uBO end up being lighter on resources.I've definitely read, perhaps here but perhaps also elsewhere, similar sentiments about it as even compared to the lighter uBO Lite (which operates on somewhat of a different principle).
About the app, I have a lifetime license for it, but honestly I have ended up not using it, because it needs even more resources than Adguard MV3.
But can you be more specific about resources with their proxy solution? What specific resources do you mean given that it's a Windows app? I'd be surprised if it's the same as what you're talking about above with the ambitious MV3 extension, since the extension that the app uses is optional and very ancillary to core functionality.
The main rap I've heard about the full Adguard is a) there's a speed penalty and b) its default driver can cause BSODs if it mixes poorly with a similar driver that you already have (and switching to the other Adguard driver choice may slow things more).
-
Said:
It (Adguard) uses constantly 300 MB RAM….
What does it matter, if 4 tabs of Vivaldi's forum add up to 289 MB.
-
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Adguard MV3 is a very heavy adblocker and not easy on CPU and RAM.
It uses constantly 300 MB RAM all the time just for waking up the service worker.Don't you think this is quite ridiculous to complain over 300MB, while your usual PC has 16384MB (or at least half of that) available? The saying is "Unused RAM is wasted RAM". Don't want to defend Adguard, just think about that most web pages use about 80MB per Tab. Now, there are 12 windows and +26 Tab opened here...
-
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
It is very heavy, they have no choice because one of MV3 policies is service workers of extensions not to stay alive.
So Adguard MV3 is using workarounds to keep waking up and waking up and waking up the service worker.
It is the only way for Adguard MV3 to support custom filter lists and quick fixes that can auto update.OK thanks for the info, this all sounds pretty bad.
-
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
It uses constantly 300 MB RAM all the time just for waking up the service worker.
Yes, a much consuming extension.
-
Said:
Don't you think this is quite ridiculous to complain over 300MB,,,,
I hadn't meant to say it but it's so ridiculous to be fixating on nonsense.
Colorario of all these nonsense is:
There is no alternative but to continue with uBO in Firefox or one of its forks.
This is basically what they want to transmit and establish as the only truth.
-
Said:
If you add that to the existing resources Vivaldi uses, it is not a "light" Chromium browser because a whole GUI is built on top of Chromium, you basically end up with a chromium browser which needs x2 the resources Brave+Shields use for example.
Dear users, disregard Vivaldi because it is the biggest “extension” (App) after Adguard, using an incredible, completely unacceptable, insufferable, offensive, unsatisfactory, unnecessary?, very heavy, almost one ton and never seen before, 139 MB on top of the browser itself (Chromium):
Chrome:
Vivaldi: (Chromium):
-
@wolden said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Adguard MV3 is a very heavy adblocker and not easy on CPU and RAM.
It uses constantly 300 MB RAM all the time just for waking up the service worker.Don't you think this is quite ridiculous to complain over 300MB, while your usual PC has 16384MB (or at least half of that) available? The saying is "Unused RAM is wasted RAM". Don't want to defend Adguard, just think about that most web pages use about 80MB per Tab. Now, there are 12 windows and +26 Tab opened here...
No. Especially when we are talking about browsers which already need as much resources as possible to be available.
Vivaldi already consumes more resources than other chromium browsers for the GUI. But complaining about that is ridiculous.
There is no magical way building 1 MORE GUI on top of chromium and expect that GUI not to consume any resource and Vivaldi to be as fast as other chromium browsers which just change some colors and icons in chromium's existing interface.
But consuming more resources when it could be avoided if Vivaldi made their ad blocker powerful because "Unused RAM is wasted RAM" makes no sense. -
@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
There is no alternative but to continue with uBO in Firefox or one of its forks.
This is basically what they want to transmit and establish as the only truth.
No, there will be many alternatives, not only Firefox.
Floorp (they will keep having powerful and easy on resources ad blockers available)
Zen (they will keep having powerful and easy on resources ad blockers available)
Brave (they have Shields which are powerful and they said they will keep MV2 too)
Opera (they said they will keep MV2).
Also ungoogled chromium devs have said they will take care of the problem, if they don't make it to keep MV2 they have said they will integrate a powerful ad blocker built in. -
-
@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
So you don't have any meaningful to reply?
But you do have a point. Most power users who are not just Vivaldi fanboys will eventually look for other browsers if Vivaldi won't have a powerful and easy on resources ad blocker available.
It doesn't matter if it is an extension or built in, it has to be powerful and easy on resources.
Vivaldi users are mostly power users and very different than Chrome's userbase. -
@electryon Perhaps they will continue to use Vivaldi not because they are fanboys but because all the other browsers do not offer all the features that Vivaldi offers and with the Vivaldi ad blocker + uBOL they browse happily. The few instances of suboptimal experience are offset by all the other merits that only Vivaldi offers.
-
@Folgore101 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@electryon Perhaps they will continue to use Vivaldi not because they are fanboys but because all the other browsers do not offer all the features that Vivaldi offers and with the Vivaldi ad blocker + uBOL they browse happily. The few instances of suboptimal experience are offset by all the other merits that only Vivaldi offers.
uBOL is a lite ad blocker which won't be able to handle sites like YouTube in future. Google when they get rid of uBO once and for all will most likely start daily messing with YouTube. uBOL can't handle that because it can't auto-update its filters.
Sure, they will have to make a choice if Vivaldi won't offer a powerful and light ad blocker. I seriously doubt the majority will tolerate when they were using uBO for years to settle with inferior ad blockers. You believe they will, I believe they won't. We'll see.
Let's hope we won't have to see what will happen in that case and Vivaldi to really develop their internal ad blocker, because currently they don't seem to do it. -
Honestly as long as Vivaldi improves the adblocker its fine.
the only thing that matters is being light on CPU.
i want to use it ram , Heck i would be happy if it uses 500mb or 1gb of ram to cache the lists to access them faster and load pages faster.
Empty ram is wasted ram and windows is luckily smart enough to smart page ram.Cpu usage thats the thing that needs to be highly optimized.
@electryon the issue with firefox forks is , if Mozilla goes belly up the firefox forks will also go away, and lets say... Mozilla isnt as healthy as they were before.
-
You can easily turn to the AdGuard extension which works fine under MV3, as far as I know.
I wouldn’t chose the extension first and my browser second, as the browser for me is the far more important tool.
Anyway, Brave and Opera have promised to uphold some MV2 extensions somehow.
-
@DerSchlingel, only as long as the devs are willing to maintain their extensions for both versions.
Sooner or later Mv2 will disappear just as in 2013 Mv1. Technology advances and standards change. It is Google who dictates the rules, and others will have to follow, if they want to or not. Unfortunately it has been left too much time on Google as a reference on the web. Monopolies are never good -
this thread has moved thru various phases, but is now firmly stuck at the vroomfondel & majikthise phase of navel introspection & speculation.
-
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
No. Especially when we are talking about browsers which already need as much resources as possible to be available. Vivaldi already consumes more resources than other chromium browsers for the GUI. But complaining about that is ridiculous. But consuming more resources when it could be avoided if Vivaldi made their ad blocker powerful because "Unused RAM is wasted RAM" makes no sense.
Yes, I totally agree, people seem to forget that not all users have got 16GB of RAM, and that they may use multiple apps at the same time, so not just the browser.
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
So you don't have any meaningful to reply? But you do have a point. Most power users who are not just Vivaldi fanboys will eventually look for other browsers if Vivaldi won't have a powerful and easy on resources ad blocker available.
Yes, this is some new trend, if he rans out of anything useful to say, he starts posting images.
-
@Folgore101 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@electryon Perhaps they will continue to use Vivaldi not because they are fanboys but because all the other browsers do not offer all the features that Vivaldi offers and with the Vivaldi ad blocker + uBOL they browse happily. The few instances of suboptimal experience are offset by all the other merits that only Vivaldi offers.
You do have a point, Vivaldi is simply the best browser. But if the adblocker stays this basic, and they won't support uBlock Origin MV2, then I seriously wonder how this is going to affect my browsing experience. I don't see myself switching to Brave, Opera or Firefox because they suck, but others may not be as picky as me.
