Whole page blocking support – Vivaldi Browser snapshot 2001.3


  • Vivaldi Translator

    @floweringmind If I were to make a guess, it's one of:

    • They haven't managed to identify the root cause of it yet.
    • It turned out to be a big bug requiring a large amount of work so they haven't finished it yet.
    • People are still on vacation, and whoever is best suited for fixing that bug might not be back yet.


  • Just on another note, while trying to figure out the origin of the bug I mentioned earlier, I closed one Vivaldi window which had seven pinned tabs on it; and when Vivaldi moved the pinned tabs to the other window I had open, one of the pinned tabs (the very first one) disappeared entirely. Doesn't even appear in closed tabs. I remembered which site it was so easily recreated the tab, but I'm not sure why Vivaldi would just "forget" a tab like that...



  • @npro It’s not really my problem what he uses? Don’t really know what you’re getting at. Using one or the other or none is simply a matter of preference. I never really looked into µMatrix, but µBlock allows for blocking or allowing each individual domain on a per site or global basis.



  • @luetage Though in my last post i mentioned my return to uM, later today i intend to still play some more with uBO [coz my curiosity is piqued]. In the meantime, i'd be interested pls to learn if you manage to use uBO successfully with https://www.smh.com.au/ ... not merely its front page [too easy], but after following maybe ~4 - 6 articles, which seems to then cause the soft-paywall to activate [unless bypassed with uM]. Maybe it can indeed also be done in uBO & i've just not yet reached the right skill level with it.



  • @Steffie Do what feels comfortable to you. As to the matter of news sites… either you respect that they want to earn money through subscriptions or the disabling of adblockers or whatnot (heavily depends on the site in question, every site is different), or you don’t. Personally I don’t use an adblocker to circumvent soft paywalls at all. I just disable javascript for the site and read words on a page. Without scripts all soft blocking is gone. Doesn’t matter to me whether I lose functionality over it, my time is more precious. Adblocking will never be my hobby. But as said, that’s a matter of taste.



  • @Steffie Ok, I checked it out, that’s really soft blocking, they just save cookies to count the number of articles you read. Delete cookies and the articles will display, no adblocker needed, just do it with site settings.



  • @luetage I was not seeking a philosophical contemplation of paywall-dodging rights & wrongs, though i readily agree it is a meritorious topic. I was merely engaging with you on a matter you initially raised, that you felt uM was obsoleted by its Dev in favour of uBO, & then latterly you contended [or rather, more like implied] that uBO can do what uM can. I thought it was an interesting topic for discussion, but i should have known better.



  • @luetage I know that, but my point was that with uM the solution is 100% self-contained, whereas in uBO [so far anyway, for me] it cannot be done solely by uBO but also needs the external intervention per your post. IMO therefore uM remains my preference.



  • @Steffie I’m not trying to convert you ^^



  • OK, i have upgraded stable to snapshot on Win 10, it's my test system anyway, i prefer Ubuntu now.

    BUG: Try to open Avast.com, use back page and it closes Vivaldi.



  • @iPristy said in Whole page blocking support – Vivaldi Browser snapshot 2001.3:

    BUG: Try to open Avast.com, use back page and it closes Vivaldi.

    Ouch... 😕
    Looks like the same issue as the Lichess and USA Today sites.

    Please report it and include crash report from AppData\Local\Vivaldi\User Data\Crashpad\reports\:
    https://vivaldi.com/bugreport/


  • Moderator

    @iPristy I can confirm that bug.



  • Please send it, i'm not collecting pet bugs. I have found it but it's my it's from Vivaldi.


  • Moderator

    @iPristy Done.

    VB-70552 "Navigating Back crashes Vivaldi"



  • @Gwen-Dragon Might as well update the issue with domains:
    https://www.avg.com/
    https://www.hidemyass.com/

    As these are Avast companies... 🙄



  • @pathduck: I was going for https://www.avast.com/hackcheck but since can't be opened in Vivaldi, is no good.


  • Moderator

    Crash of Avast page is related to issue with "Cross Origin Opener Policy" as happens on usatoday, lichess and others.
    Very bad bug! Needs a fix by Vivaldi devs!



  • @luetage said in Whole page blocking support – Vivaldi Browser snapshot 2001.3:

    @npro It’s not really my problem what he uses? Don’t really know what you’re getting at. Using one or the other or none is simply a matter of preference. I never really looked into µMatrix, but µBlock allows for blocking or allowing each individual domain on a per site or global basis.

    I'm getting at a rhetorical question meaning that gorhill could be using anything, since he as a dev knows probably all the syntax and more for blocking anything via uBO, which he could very much support more than uMatrix, as uBO is targeted primarily to casual users who want an efficient ad-blocker without much hassle, but for the rest of mortals uMatrix is easier for blocking specific parts (cookie, css, images, media, scripts, XHR, frame, others) of webpages and scopes of domains via GUI than uBlock, which has simplistic "global" pluses and minuses for doing "unknown, global" work via the GUI. Maybe you should give it a try to see for yourself! Cheers.

    alt text



  • @npro Teehee, i strongly endorse/support/concur. 😊

    I have stubbornly persisted on & off for the past few days to go through most of my large suite of regular fav sites, one by one tuning uBO to them. In most cases i was pleasantly surprised that i seemed able to control these sites nearly as well as with uM ... but there's now three of my favs that simply refuse to work as well in uBO as they do in uM. The granular matrix component control available in uM is simply superb.

    Then, once i was done, i decided to take a sticky-beak at the comparative resource consumption. I assumed they would be more or less the same, hence i was pretty surprised to discover that as well as its surgically-precise tuning control [or more likely, exactly because of it], uM wiped the floor with uBO. Whilst i'm not, anyone running on limited hardware should like this uM advantage.

    alt text

    Though it's taken a fair bit of effort & a lot of time to reach this point, i'm actually pleased to have done it, because now i have a renewed quantified rationale to explain to myself, anytime in future that i start wondering anew why am i using uM rather than uBO.

    There is only one thing for which uBO would be a better choice in Vivaldi than uM, for anybody who likes using a UI Zoom < 100% ... uBO's UI seems not to break as badly as uM's UI does.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.