How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?
-
@Catweazle
I do not disagree. Vivaldi needs to impove the native ad blocker. It needs to support the advaced syntax of uBO and it needs to support scriptlets.
I expect in the future when I add as custom lists the uBO lists to work and not having non working rules.
An element picker like the one uBO has in my humble opinion is too much to ask and this functionality can be replaced anyway with userscripts.
Also a native userscript manager would be more than welcome:)
Btw, in the native adblocker I tried the following and it looks very promising.AdGuard Tracking Protection
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AdguardTeam/FiltersRegistry/master/filters/filter_3_Spyware/filter.txtFanboy Social Blocking list
https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/fanboy-social.txtFanboy Ultimate List (This includes Easylist, Easyprivacy, Enhanced Trackers List and Annoyances List)
https://fanboy.co.nz/r/fanboy-ultimate.txtHagezi Multi Pro++
https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/hagezi/dns-blocklists@latest/adblock/pro.plus.txtI scored 99% in adblock tester:)
-
Said:
Also a native userscript manager would be more than welcome:)
I am asking for a little consistency.
I imagine that you consider uBO to be the best ad blocking extension out there, and if the MV3 issue hadn't happened, you would still be using it forever.
Since MV3 happened, you want the built-in ad blocker to be as close to it as possible.
So if there is a very powerful userscript manager extension like Tampermonkey, then what's the point of wanting Vivaldi to develop a built-in one?
On top of that, if the team created it, then you would be asking the team to develop it just like Tampermonkey.
PS: It would be different if MV3 did not allow Tampermonkey to maintain its current power.
-
@barbudo2005
I personally consider AdGuard Home the best adblocking solution. I have a lifetime license.
AdGuard Home includes not only a system wide ad blocker, it also includes a system wide userscript manager.
I use PWA's, secondary profiles etc and a system wide solution is a better solution than having to install extensions multiple times.
But that's not the point, it's not only about me and what I want. -
@barbudo2005, inbuild Tampermonkey would be so easy, because Tampermonkey is proprietary soft, but Greasymonkey, Violentmonkey and its improved fork LibertyBear are full FOSS.
>Laptop Lenovo V145 15AST, AMD A9- 9425 Radeon R5 - 5 cores 3,1 GHz RAM 8GB, GPU 2+1 GB SSD 256GB -Win10 64 v22H2| Vivaldi last stable|
-
If you replaced the word "Tampermonkey" with any of these words "Greasymonkey", "Violentmonkey" or "LibertyBear", my approach would be just as valid.
-
@barbudo2005
Vivaldi already supports installlation of local userscripts.
https://forum.vivaldi.net/topic/66719/userscript-installation
And when you install them they load faster than loading them though an extension.
It is not only about MV3, native loading of a userscript is a better option than loading it from an extension. It is faster.
MV3 just makes it a good opportunity for developing even more and polishing a feature Vivaldi already has. -
@electryon, yes, I know that you can install userscripts directly as extension, but it's not the same. For this, like also with extensions from other sources than the webstore, you need to download the script or the extension first to your HD in a folder and drag it from there to the extension page in dev mode to install it.
But with this, the script or extension don't point to the source/homepage and because of this they are not updated automatically, you must update the localfile by hand on every new release. That is the difference to use it without an script manager.
It's certainly a option, even to backup the scripts, but it's way easier to handle it from the extension, where you can update it, if needed, with a click, without the need to search and download the script again.Imagine having to download the uBO filters to your disk to use them and deal with updating them, which is now almost daily.
@barbudo2005, of course, I only mentioned it because Tampermonkey cannot be forked as a function in Vivaldi, since many people do not know that Tampermonkey is proprietary closed source, unlike the other UMs.
-
@Catweazle
Yes, it supports only local userscripts that can't be updated, can't be managed and they need to be re-installed.
If it supported everything and online userscripts we wouldn't having this discussion:).
What I am trying to say is that userscripts even in the very basic support already exists.
And having native support for easy installing, updating and unistalling userscripts opens new possibilities for Vivaldi.
It's like having a new store inside Vivaldi without Google's monitoring on it.
Let;s not forget also that it would be easier for the end user too since MV3 usercript manager extensions would need to have Vivaldi always in developer mode. Not only when you install the usercript, but always. A native userscript manager could avoid that. -
@electryon, that is the idea, going to be independent from the Chrome Store and Google, at least for privacy and security related extensions (most others are anyway redundant in Vivaldi)
>Laptop Lenovo V145 15AST, AMD A9- 9425 Radeon R5 - 5 cores 3,1 GHz RAM 8GB, GPU 2+1 GB SSD 256GB -Win10 64 v22H2| Vivaldi last stable|
-
Said:
(most others are anyway redundant in Vivaldi)
Please tell me where I can find in Vivaldi the functionalities that Stylus (to name an example) gives me?
PS: And please don't tell me that you can inject CSS into the web page via a User.JS.
-
@barbudo2005, MOST, not all certainly. It's clear that also some extensions not related to privacy and security are still valid, eg, the Linguist extension which I use, at least until the Vivaldi translator works as it should, which until now isn't the case, or the OCR extension which Vivaldi don't have.
-
@luetage said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@RasheedHolland You can do this with the devtools element picker. Find the element selector, write the rule, save it to file. It’s not noob friendly, but the feature is there.
@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Follow @luetage suggestion and use the extension Stylus:
https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/stylus/clngdbkpkpeebahjckkjfobafhncgmne
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@RasheedHolland
For removing elements I am using Violentmonkey.
Not as easy as uBO emelent picker, but more powerful.Have you guys ever actually used uBlock's element picker? It's way more easy than Stylus and Violentmonkey so not comparable at all. This feature should be implemented in Vivaldi, end of story!
-
@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
This feature should be implemented in Vivaldi, end of story!
I hope that will come.
-
@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@luetage said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@RasheedHolland You can do this with the devtools element picker. Find the element selector, write the rule, save it to file. It’s not noob friendly, but the feature is there.
@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Follow @luetage suggestion and use the extension Stylus:
https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/stylus/clngdbkpkpeebahjckkjfobafhncgmne
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@RasheedHolland
For removing elements I am using Violentmonkey.
Not as easy as uBO emelent picker, but more powerful.Have you guys ever actually used uBlock's element picker? It's way more easy than Stylus and Violentmonkey so not comparable at all. This feature should be implemented in Vivaldi, end of story!
Yes, we have tried uBO's element picker.
But there is nothing more powerful than using a userscript for that. With a script you can do stuff you can't with an element picker, like hiding an element, not only removing it, change styles to it, the dimensions of it, use regex to hide elements with idiotic ids that change all the time, select to keep only some elements in a page and hide the rest.
Element pickers are for newbies
Vivaldi is for power users. I am joking, don't get me wrong, it would be nice if they add an element picker, but even if they don't, we still can do it with a userscript manager. -
Said:
But there is nothing more powerful than using a userscript for that.
It is true that you can inject CSS with a JS script, without any problem.
But you will agree with me, that the handling of various styles, ease of use, editing the CSS code with CSS Linter, not applying to certain subdomains, turn all styles off, etc, etc, etc, etc. is much better with the Stylus extension that was designed specifically for that.
-
@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Said:
But there is nothing more powerful than using a userscript for that.
It is true that you can inject CSS with a JS script, without any problem.
But you will agree with me, that the handling of various styles, ease of use, editing the CSS code with CSS Linter, not applying to certain subdomains, turn all styles off, etc, etc, etc, etc. is much better with the Stylus extension that was designed specifically for that.
You are right, but it also has to do with user's experience.
If it takes me to do it let's say 30 seconds in Stylus, it takes me 45 seconds in Violentmonkey.
Because I have existing templates to use that take care of subdomains etc. I do agree it's not for everybody.
Btw, with uBO's style element pickers you can't even hide someting just to a specific subdomain.
It has to be applied to the whole domain. -
@electryon, with the WebEraser script it cost me an Ctrl+Left click to eliminate any crap from the page.
-
@Catweazle said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@electryon, with the WebEraser script it cost me an Ctrl+Left click to eliminate any crap from the page.
Thank you Catweazle I didn't know about this script.
I will check it out. -
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
Yes, we have tried uBO's element picker. But there is nothing more powerful than using a userscript for that. With a script you can do stuff you can't with an element picker, like hiding an element, not only removing it, change styles to it.
Yes, I'm sure you can do other stuff with these user scripts, but uBlock's element picker gets the job done in a second or so. Although I do have to admit that it can not remove everything. But using Stylus and Violentmonkey is not a serious option for me.
-
@electryon said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@Catweazle said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:
@electryon, with the WebEraser script it cost me an Ctrl+Left click to eliminate any crap from the page.
Thank you Catweazle I didn't know about this script.
I will check it out.BTW, would you be able to get rid of the annoying ''failed to load script'' error on Yahoo Finance? You get to see this when you block scripts from brightcove.net via uBlock Origin. I block it because you will get to see these annoying autoplay videos, and Yahoo Finance refuses to take them down.
