Multi-Account Containers
-
@V In order for it to be a "core functionality," Vivaldi would have to change the architecture of Chromium altogether. Because of this architecture, Vivaldi desktop also can't have private tabs. It creates significant problems for trying to incorporate features that Chromium doesn't support.
I personally log in to multiple users on the same website all the time, but Google (so far) is the only one that supports my being logged in under three users in the same window. Ironic - because their website can support it, but their browser can't support it on any other website.
-
I am glad to see the interest for Multi-Account Container has been and keeps on going strong. Sadly, a while back after going over the documentation of how this Mozilla Technology works, I and some others, came to find that this technology is at the core of Firefox. This can't just be easily introduced to Vivaldi for this needs to be done at the core of Chromium itself.
It would be easier for the Vivaldi Team to release a Vivaldi-Gecko browser than for them to bring Multi-Account Containers to Vivaldi-Chromiun.
And to be hones, a Vivaldi-Gecko would be a killer browser. All the security one can muster for a Gecko-based browser with the GUI/versatility/ease of use/aesthetics of Vivaldi. Delightful.One can only dream.
-
@VENIX said in Multi-Account Containers:
It would be easier for the Vivaldi Team to release a Vivaldi-Gecko browser than for them to bring Multi-Account Containers to Vivaldi-Chromium.
Look at Floorp: one man work with some help from the community.
... a Vivaldi-Gecko would be a killer browser.
A Firefox based, hardened, rich Vivaldi browser? What a dream!
-
@Ayespy said in Multi-Account Containers:
@Hatlerish Extension builders have tried to ape the functions of multi-account containers, but have not been entirely successful.
I wouldn't consider sessionbox unsuccessful.
They managed to get the job done and they even made a business model out of it.
There are people who pay for sessionbox for a reason.
I don't like sessionbox, shady collection of user data, ridiculous prices, but I wouldn't call sessionbox unsuccessful.
Sessionbox is not user friendly too, but that's understandable considering they are limited with the extension GUI for a feature like that.
But sessionbox does the job, although I would never pay them, their subscription prices are ridiculous. -
@stilgarwolf said in Multi-Account Containers:
@VENIX said in Multi-Account Containers:
It would be easier for the Vivaldi Team to release a Vivaldi-Gecko browser than for them to bring Multi-Account Containers to Vivaldi-Chromium.
Look at Floorp: one man work with some help from the community.
... a Vivaldi-Gecko would be a killer browser.
A Firefox based, hardened, rich Vivaldi browser? What a dream!
Whoa. Very interesting browser/team history.
I was not aware of this browser existence at all.Thanks
-
@VENIX said in Multi-Account Containers:
This can't just be easily introduced to Vivaldi for this needs to be done at the core of Chromium itself.
Are you sure this is the case? Polypane, a Chromium-based browser with a single developer, has implemented this feature exactly like Firefox: https://polypane.app/docs/session-management/
-
@cbirdsong said in Multi-Account Containers:
@VENIX said in Multi-Account Containers:
This can't just be easily introduced to Vivaldi for this needs to be done at the core of Chromium itself.
Are you sure this is the case? Polypane, a Chromium-based browser with a single developer, has implemented this feature exactly like Firefox: https://polypane.app/docs/session-management/
Have you tried it? They say "Each session will have its own cookies, cache and local storage." This is what a container does.
I also like how it seems to be implemented based on their screenshots.
I would try the browser but an account is needed to download the trial. If it works, then it is doable to make it work in chromium.
A single developer has made it work. -
@electryon Yes, I verified it works as expected.
-
@cbirdsong said in Multi-Account Containers:
@VENIX said in Multi-Account Containers:
This can't just be easily introduced to Vivaldi for this needs to be done at the core of Chromium itself.
Are you sure this is the case? Polypane, a Chromium-based browser with a single developer, has implemented this feature exactly like Firefox: https://polypane.app/docs/session-management/
As per date on which I made the OG post, the responses we have gotten over the years, the scope and development direction of the Chromium project, the scope and development direction of the Vivaldi:
Yes, I dare say it would be easier for Vivaldi Team to work on Vivaldi-Gecko. I don't think Vivaldi team wants to fork, develop MAC for it and maintain this away from Chromium itself. Though this would be most welcomed and greatly appreciated by so many that know, as well as, those who don't know.With that said, I'm no software developer so I can only imagine the complexity of these processes where forking is easy but development & maintenance is where the handwork is at.
...With that said, Impressive piece of software/tool that goes galaxies away from a mere web-surfing browser. Without a doubt one of the best front-end development tools that I've ran into. I have to make time to test this one out for sure.
Also, a great testament to the talented developer behind it. Respect.
Fellow Vivaldi user, you brought a 20' tall sea wave to a summer water-slide encounter
-
(Not having) This feature is literally what keeps me from moving permanently to Vivaldi.
-
This post is deleted! -
But how has arc browser managed to do it which is also based on chromium? They have not the same functionality as firefox multi account container. But they have a way to connect seperate profiles to different workspaces.
-
@Veddu likely using a non-standard Browser window instance.
Vivaldi seems to still be basically a Chromium App with (fancy) iframes.But these are details only Vivaldi (or Arc) devs are qualified to answer.
-
Multi-account containers like Firefox leads to more disorganization and confusion... so I don't think the solution is that.
But Workspace tied to different profiles similar to Arc seems really something deal breaker to have in a browser.
Workspace without different sessions / profiles is actually not useful... you will basically open another browser / window than use Workspace at all.
-
There's a new ish Chromium request for this that was assigned for triage this year.
https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40896879
If people make some noise and let the Chromium team that we want this, perhaps we stand a chance of Vivaldi Workspaces getting the same isolation.
Vivaldi continue to say this isn't possible, but we've seen implementations from WaveBox, Sidekick, Arc, and others.
Perhaps Vivaldi just don't see the value
-
@rawkode then where did listening to the users go? Why did community get thrown out of the Window? Why does a one-man dev have to beat an entire Company?
Perhaps Vivaldi Technologies is telling me never to trust a company. Perhaps. Especially closed-source. -
@rawkode said in Multi-Account Containers:
Perhaps Vivaldi just don't see the value
As I have said elsewhere (and which is stated in the Chromium bug you linked to) Chromium's (and therefore Vivaldi's) cookie handling is so closely tied to the Application Window the website is loaded in that it is currently impossible to have separate cookie stores for different tabs in the same Application Window.
Implementing that will require MAJOR redesign of Chromium's Window, Tab, Profile, and Cookie storage to make something like that possible, and that assumes that one can come up with a solution to how to prevent user confusion about which tab is associated with which website account.
I would be very surprised if implementing something like that takes less than a year and not remotely surprised if it takes more than 2 years from actually starting the project.
As for Vivaldi trying to implement this on our own, that is not practical. We already spent several years trying to implement our own implementation of what later was standardized (and implemented in Chromium and Vivaldi) as Partitioned Cookies (a site limited third-party cookie), and while early versions were close to achieving it, as Chromium made changes to the code, more and more of the code we had added could no longer be applied and was lost, and eventually the task would have been started all over again. By that time Partitioned Cookies was becoming usable.
@Kjala There are limits to how much we can change the Chromium source, especially since we have to maintain those updates. For an impression of what is involved see this article
Chromium's source code is available here.
Vivaldi's adaptions to the Chromium code are available here
Developer and Security Expert at Vivaldi.
-
@yngve thanks for the clarification.
Knowing it would require a long, technical and complicated effort, which would then be essentially a Fork of Chromium it makes sense that this is a bottom-of-the-pile request, a reasonably justified flat-out denial.But I'm confused, because cookies appear to be shared between windows (e.g., I can't open a new window and sign into a different Gmail account than the first window as whatever account I'm signed in on in the whole session is the account that's used in all windows... among a million other examples)
Would it not at least be possible to divorce the windows' sessions from each other?Not trying to attack it nothing, just looking to understand, because it Would be nice... At least to be able to use separate windows so we don't need to keep multiple browsers/extensions/settings/preferences installed, active and up to date
-
@CovenStine said in Multi-Account Containers:
Would it not at least be possible to divorce the windows' sessions from each other?
That is what different profiles (and/or standalone installs) are for.
Tabs can be moved freely between windows sharing the same profile, so you cannot change the profile without removing that capability.
When selecting "New Window" or "Move tab(s) to New Window" the new Window is automatically associated with the profile of the Window in which the action is requested.
Selecting Open Profile X, creates a new Application window, associated with that profile, and thus have a separate cookie store.
The standard Window(s), the private window(s), and the Guest Window/profile are all different profiles. That also applies when you create and open a different profile in a new Application Window.
-
@yngve ok so let me rewrite that to make sure I understand
The tab would be nested in the tab group, which is itself nested in the workspace, which is in turn nested in the window, which is nested in the profile.
In order to save all browsing data in the profile, the data retention occurs at the profile level.Trying to insert foreign profile material into the window/workspace/tab would require almost a parasite within the nesting structure- creating a contained virtualized profile that's wholly separate from the profile/window/workspace it's displayed within, except for the UI portion. A call to an external system from 3++ layers deep in the UI.
Good luck fitting a second whole doll into one of those Matryoshka Dolls†eh?
That sounds like a fun challenge for a graduate student, but a huge waste of resources at the full on developer level- for a free product at that...
That about right?Thanks for explaining!
†See wikipedia[dot]org/wik/Matryoshka_doll, apparently I can't post links anymore
