How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?
-
-
@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
If you read the article, you can clearly see that Vivaldi might try to keep supporting MV2, that's what you guys refuse to understand.
For me that reads (sorry, my restricted english practising): "we try to support Mv2 but can not guarantee that we get a workaround."
But, who knows, in next months we might get a 7.999 Stable or 8.0 Beta which saves us from Google forcing Mv3.
-
@DoctorG said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
For me that reads (sorry, my restricted english practising): "we try to support Mv2 but can not guarantee that we get a workaround."
But, who knows, in next months we might get a 7.999 Stable or 8.0 Beta which saves us from Google forcing Mv3.
Nowhere in this article it's said that Vivaldi has no interest in supporting MV2 extensions. In fact, it's said that they still need to see how exactly this MV3 API removal will play out. But I'm sure that by now Vivaldi has got more info about this, since Google is planning to remove support for MV2 in June 2025. And again, if Brave and Opera can patch Chromium, so can Vivaldi.
In the comments you can also see certain suggestions from users, like the ability to side load extensions from GitHub, so you don't even need the Chrome Web Store. And some user suggested that Vivaldi can perhaps simply copy uBlock Origin features. But not a word from Vivaldi since this post of 2,5 years ago. So it's not weird that users keep discussing this issue.
-
@DoctorG said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
For me that reads (sorry, my restricted english practising): "we try to support Mv2 but can not guarantee that we get a workaround."
But, who knows, in next months we might get a 7.999 Stable or 8.0 Beta which saves us from Google forcing Mv3.
And of course I forgot to mention this article from 9 months ago, which is also a longtime ago, where it's said ''they may or may not keep supporting MV2 for a longer time.'' So I'm asking for more clarity in a way that Brave, Opera and Firefox have done, that's all. Nothing more, nothing less.
-
@RasheedHolland, sooner or later, all are going to stop the support for Mv2, just as left in the past, they left the support of Mv1.
No many devs can keep the development of extensions for Mv2 and Mv3 - especially with the different management of cookies in web pages, at least those which use Google APIs (sadly the most) that invalidates Mv2.Google - The Ring which rules them all, browsers only can limit the damage, irrelevant which browser or engine.
-
@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
And of course I forgot to mention this article from 9 months ago, which is also a longtime ago, where it's said ''they may or may not keep supporting MV2 for a longer time.'' So I'm asking for more clarity in a way that Brave, Opera and Firefox have done, that's all. Nothing more, nothing less.
You dropped the part where it says,
We expect to drop support in June 2025, but we may maintain it longer or be forced to drop support for it sooner, depending on the precise nature of the changes to the code.
So, everything depends on upcoming Google code. Do you really expect each and every Chrome based Browser to maintain a seperate own Store for MV2 Addons? The Addon devs surely don't want to work for each seperated store, just to satify your greed. From where else do you get these abandoned Addons for a reinstall? Firefox is another case, based on it's own browser engine.
For my part, I wait what comes out of all this manifest mess. What I really miss in MV3 Adblockers is a whitelist button, so I don't have to put each site onto the whitelist manually.
-
@wolden, it' not depends only the Webstore, if they offer Mv2 extensions, when most webpages include Google APIs which invalide Mv2 extensions.
-
@Catweazle
Yes, true.
And, all Chrome based browsers try to put former Addon code into their own browser skin, after asking the Addon dev (hopefully). -
Said:
I wait what comes out of all this manifest mess.
There are no uncertainties or doubts. The cards of the poker hand are already open on the table.
There are only 3 alternatives:
1.- uBOL: Simple and efficient even on YT. Gorhill quality.
2.- Adguard: The closest to the potential of uBO. My choice for July 1.
3.- Improved built-in adblocker: That will undoubtedly improve with time, with uBO's features as its north. How long will it take? 6 months, 1 year, who knows?
Said:
What I really miss in MV3 Adblockers is a whitelist button, so I don't have to put each site onto the whitelist manually.
You don't have to.
Allowlist:
-
@barbudo2005
I may try Adguard at a later time, too. Thanks.
But I found how to not filter a page with uBo Lite, just shifting the bar to the left margin.
-
@Catweazle said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@wolden, it' not depends only the Webstore, if they offer Mv2 extensions, when most webpages include Google APIs which invalide Mv2 extensions.
Can you give more information about this? Since when can websites interfere with extensions?
@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
3.- Improved built-in adblocker: That will undoubtedly improve with time, with uBO's features as its north. How long will it take? 6 months, 1 year, who knows?
Exactly my point, I would like to get more clarity. If Vivaldi ends up not supporting MV2 extensions, then at least improve the adblocker, but not a word about this either.
-
@wolden said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
You dropped the part where it says....
No, I did not drop this part. They basically say ''they may or may not extend support for MV2.'' Brave said they they will at least try to support a couple of popular adblockers for as long as possible. No such word from Vivaldi, we need clarity.
@wolden said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
So, everything depends on upcoming Google code. Do you really expect each and every Chrome based Browser to maintain a seperate own Store for MV2 Addons?
I believe Brave won't open its own extension store, I assume it will let you sideload extensions via GitHub. And if Chromium is patched, it may stop Google from disabling MV2 extensions, so then you don't even need to reinstall extensions that already work. Actually, now that I think of it, why not open a small extension store like the one from Opera?
https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/category/privacy-security/?order=popular
-
-
@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Said:
I do not know why this is endlessly discussed if Vivaldi will keep MV2.
Don't you understand? It's crystal clear. There is a user who:
- Is not willing to understand
- Does not want to understand
- Is not interested to understand
- Is not in the mood to understand
- Is not willing to spend 5 minutes to read the posts
Let's see how I put it so that it is well understood and once and for all.
Ding Ding Ding Nailed It, Give The Doctor A Exploding Cigar.
-
This post is deleted! -
@Catweazle said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
What Mozilla said
https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2024/03/13/manifest-v3-manifest-v2-march-2024-update/
"And even if we re-evaluate this decision at some point down the road, we anticipate providing a notice of at least 12 months for developers to adjust accordingly and not feel rushed." There is nothing safe on the Mozilla side, either.
Looking into my Brave Browser setup, MV2 is supported only for 4 addons: NoScript
, uBlock Origin, uMatrix, AdGuard. To be installed direct by Brave.There's no need for Vivaldi to be ashamed of how they handle the change, and to get nerved by a certain someone, who tries to test it's LLM (there's no KI, really) while always advertising the same story. Luckily, there is a button in this forum to get rid of that.
Good night for now.
-
I belive all adblockers should be burn with fire. Why? Becouse they change original website, and the owner of the portal can block adblocker users.
Vivaldi can use beter solution. Blacklist webpage adresses or picture urls on proxy level, not html render level.
I have problems with webpages that open up in new tab without my permission. When I have my personal proxy blacklist, I will see only blank webpage that don't iritate my nerves and don't waste mobile internet data plan.
-
@wolden said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
There's no need for Vivaldi to be ashamed of how they handle the change, and to get nerved by a certain someone...
Fact of the matter is that many people agree with me, that's probably what unnerves you. I expected more from Vivaldi as the number one ''power browser''. With only 3 months to go, it seems a lot like they won't support MV2, OK cool, but what about improving the built-in adblocker? It's because of people like you that I keep advertising the same story, because it seems you still don't get it.
-
@neonix1 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
I belive all adblockers should be burn with fire. Why? Becouse they change original website, and the owner of the portal can block adblocker users.
Vivaldi can use beter solution. Blacklist webpage adresses or picture urls on proxy level, not html render level.
I assume this is some April Fools joke? I have been using adblockers for the last 15 years or so without any major problems. It's because of adblockers that most websites load smoothly. Of course if there were only static ads (no animation) and without the tracking, I wouldn't even be using adblockers. So the online advertising industry brought this upon themselves.
-
Honestly, I don't care that much about MV2 anymore, as long as Vivaldi's adblocker will be improved, surely it will do the job almost like uBO.
For me the YouTube ads are the biggest problem...
