Multi-Account Containers
-
@venix said in Multi-Account Containers:
@zinetx SessionBox has been discussed before. I myself prefer and in-house, in-browser solution. I wouldn't trust my precious accounts cookies with third party like this.
I've nothing against SessionsBox, they have not given any reason to be mistrusted, that I know of, but their approach to this solution, is one I don't agree with. I might as well just keep using my modified FF for said convenience.
Honestly not having FF's multi account containers is the one thing stopping me from making Vivaldi my full time browser,
It's the one thing for me that puts FF above every other browser.
-
Please implement this feature. I know it has been mentioned that it will not be simple, but Ghost Browser is also chromium based and has a really good implementation. Especially with the new sidebar! If Vivaldi could do this you would win over many users who are still using Firefox or Ghost Browser for this specific feature.
-
I SECOND THIS! Only thing that keeps me from using Vivaldi as my primary browser. I still depend mainly on firefox because of THIS ONE feature. This was requested back in 2018, come on! Let's consider and implement it:)
-
I also 'vote' yes to implement this feature
-
i work with multiple accounts of ms powerapps. the containers firefox approach to cookies is absolutely a killer app.
Managing that with profiles is a pain.
Please consider to develop this feature.
-
Another vote to implement in Vivaldi. I use FF as my primary browser for Multi-Account Containers. I would use Vivaldi in a heartbeat if it had the same capability.
-
Having chosen to more or less ignore this thread historically, i decided now to belatedly read it, from top to bottom. I've found it mildly amusing.
More than many other long-running threads in the forum, IMO this one arguably "best" illustrates a typical tribalism in browserlandia.
- Hardcore Vivaldifarians who for whatever reason seem to have chosen to remain in wilful ignorance of the powerful utility of Mozilla's MAC, hence keep raising easily debunkable "arguments" for why it's unnecessary in V.
- Hardcore Foxxers who are intimately familiar with Mozilla's MAC's advantageous raison d'être, but seem to have chosen to remain in wilful ignorance of the substantial [at least] technical challenge in recreating it in the alien chromium codebase per se, & explicitly complicated by V's comparatively minuscule Dev team & resources.
- Dualers [no, not duelers] familiar with both V and FF+MAC, who valiantly attempt to explain & bridge the comprehension gap. As represented specifically in this thread [as opposed to the wider forum], this group might be deserving of the label "endangered species".
IMO MAC, along with native Nix DoH, Total Cookie Protection, Fission (Site Isolation), Enhanced Tracking Protection, & just
about:configgenerally, keep FF ahead of V / chromia re innate user privacy provisions. Much as i truly want V to gain these, i simply doubt that several of them will be technically possible, or at least pragmatically deliverable. For those peeps who value such matters above V's unquestionable UI personalisation advantages [with the singular huge exception of TreeStyleTab / Sidebery], i predict a very long time before we can have our cake & eat it.
ERRATUM.
31/12/21: Wrt native Nix chromia DoH, i am delighted to acknowledge that i was wrong, as finally... at long last... we do now have it! -
@guigirl You reply is refreshing and most welcome.
You truly dissected this thread in a single post and nailed every point, even the treestyletabs.
An "Endangered Species" indeed.
I know it wasn't the intention of your post -perhaps it was- but thank you for the big smile.
-
Hi! I discovered MAC on FF a few days ago, I'm a V fan but I'll probably switch to FF for necessity at work, and for convenience on my PC. Is there's a feature request that I can upvote? [ EDIT: this thread IS the feature request. ] (I do know it's challenging, I've read guigirl's post, two posts above mine)
(Just imagine MAC on V, with the endless theming options
) -
Hello.
I say vote for the features/options that are useful for everyone and that truly improve the browser's navigation/browsing/multitasking experience.
I believe MAC to be one of those features yet given what is does, its implementation requires much work.
Vivaldi already is a killer browser but with the level of cookie management that MAC would introduce to Vivaldi, it would make it The Browser for the casual interwebs surfer to the hardcore interwebs warrior.
-
Please stop suggesting session box. It doesn't even work properly and you are trusting your valuable data to third-party company? When companies like LastPass are being screwed can we really trust the session box?
I have used session box but it's buggy that's why I don't like it. And Vivaldi used to have a container feature but they removed it, unfortunately. I generally use firefox but a sometimes rogue website that doesn't work and using multiple windows is so painful.
I understand it's not a trivial feature but I think it is essential for privacy and many other things. Like I have two discord account one for gaming and one for work and managing two window is so hard.
-
Actually there is nothing buggy about Sessionbox. Before I stopped using Firefox I used Sessionbox without issue.
-
i have also started a Reddit post about this, since Multi Accounts Container is the only feature missing in Vivaldi that i can think of.
Vivaldi has everything a simple user and a heavy user needs. But the lack of this feature is a big issue for Web Designers, Community Managers, Social Workers and everyone that has to deal with multiple e-mail accounts, social media accounts and administrative logins ... -
@blackmedicine said in Multi-Account Containers:
i have also started a Reddit post about this, since Multi Accounts Container is the only feature missing in Vivaldi that i can think of.
Vivaldi has everything a simple user and a heavy user needs. But the lack of this feature is a big issue for Web Designers, Community Managers, Social Workers and everyone that has to deal with multiple e-mail accounts, social media accounts and administrative logins ...SPOTON
-
I would count the following points as bugs:
- There is high latency. The session box has to do a lot of things if you look at obfuscated code.
- Sometimes when I use the session box it uses cookies from the base browser.
Other issues with the session box:
- Not a well-known company and giving your bank credit information/private data etc that syncs in their server seem to be outright bad and cause debacle.
- MAC means you can use right-click on + (that opens a new tab) and choose containers.
- It's not free and uses too many techniques like internal session management, cookies, etc.
Why Profile is not for me?
- Can't sync properly. Multiple accounts mean multiple sync and it's hard to manage.
- Two windows are hard to manage than one window. And not everyone has the privilege of three external monitors just for vivaldi.
- Profile always annoys me as I have to choose multiple profiles each time I boot up Vivaldi. I gave up.
FF has solved this problem without any hesitation so I don't know why Vivaldi can't. Maybe they got more important issues. But it would be nice to know the official stance on this feature request.
-
@shirshak55 I used SessionBox for too many years without any issues, so you can post what you want but it doesn't make your points valid. As for Windows just in Linux you can create as many virtual desktops as you like and open a new instance in each one if that is what you wish to do. No need for a 2nd, 3rd, or more monitors.
-
What if containers could be forced per website? Cookies could be heavily restricted to just the first party website or similar with the option to allow more cookies, though blocked by default?
It seems like a solid way to massively reduce tracking and remove carryover between sites, while probably breaking many sites without some configuration. A lightweight mode that allowed everything on a site and contained that, with very limited things like the signed cookies being allowed to move between containers at times, though perhaps not on a stricter mode.
I'm no web developer so this may be less workable than I'm thinking!
-
@nickyname sorry but no. I think most of us would instantly disable it being setup that way. Containers need to be evoked only when the browser user wants them.
-
@locutusofborg it may be a solid privacy approach that could be enabled, while perhaps taking some management.
Containers being included as feature is a solid addition for sure, that should be a priority and could be in combination with my suggestion.
Some users go so far as to use additional privacy extensions for enforced HTTPS, blocking social elements and ads, blocking scripting and various other elements, in addition to the privacy settings with Vivaldi. -
@nickyname said in Multi-Account Containers:
@locutusofborg it may be a solid privacy approach that could be enabled, while perhaps taking some management.
Containers being included as feature is a solid addition for sure, that should be a priority and could be in combination with my suggestion.
Some users go so far as to use additional privacy extensions for enforced HTTPS, blocking social elements and ads, blocking scripting and various other elements, in addition to the privacy settings with Vivaldi.Again simply NO to having containers active upon launching the browser. YES to having a button to start a container. As for what peeps do to protect their privacy I'm well aware cause I go out of my way to protect mine. That said I added and Implemented most of the protections. The ones I didn't I still have control over.
