Manifest v3 update: Vivaldi is future-proofed with its built-in functionality
-
Said:
….Vivaldi drops Mv2….
Isn't it assumed that when things are done inside the browser they are not affected by the lack of MV2, which would only affect the extensions?
-
@barbudo2005 not sure, maybe you will find answer in previous Manifest V3 blog post: Manifest V3, webRequest, and ad blockers
https://vivaldi.com/blog/manifest-v3-webrequest-and-ad-blockers/
-
Please provide more opinions from users or team members who understand the subject.
-
It's a bummer, not supporting ublock will be a deal breaker. Vivaldis own adblock is worthless at best.... Perhaps time to ditch chromium and rebuild Vivaldi on Gecko...
-
@Gelantious Worthless at best? When the switch to manifest version 3 got serious last year I switched from ublock to the internal adblocker to give it a fair test. I haven't used anything else since. I run a custom set of filter lists and load a bunch of rules from file. Vivaldi's implementation is capable. Moreover ublock will continue to work for the foreseeable future, enough time for Vivaldi to develop additional functionality to make it easier to use for casual users.
-
@Gelantious sagte in [Manifest v3-Update: „Vivaldi ist mit seiner integrierten-in-Funktionalität zukunftssicher] (/post/761761):> Vielleicht ist es Zeit, auf Chrom zu verzichten und Vivaldi auf Gecko wieder aufzubauen...
That wouldn't solve the problem. It would certainly be too elaborate and too expensive And what if development of Gecko is stopped?
-
If ublock ends the v2 version as it becomes hard to maintain and not many people are left to use it, there's nothing you can do. But actively deciding to remove v2 support knowing ublock wont work with your browser anymore is plain stupid.
The most used extension is not working with your browser anymore? Really, that's your strategy for future-proofing vivaldi?
If you want to save costs, remove your own adblocking and just ship vivaldi with ublock builtin.
edit: just tried the 3 sites I visit most with vivaldis adblock enabled and ubo disabled and all of them showed ads or modal popup banners preventing me to scroll. not surprised.
edit2: I now tried 10 sites and saw less ads on 1, on 9 it did not work at all, preventing me from accessing the site completely on 7. I hope this is just a hobby project that didn't bind many company resources because its effect in the real world is close to unrecognizable. Calling it an alternative ready to use is insane.
-
@barbudo2005 integrated as in bundled with would rely on the API
to not be reliant on that they'd need to reimplement the whole engine and the way it communicates with the GUI part at least -
@Mikka maybe you need to adjust the filter lists of the build in adblocker
-
As said before, since I use the Vivaldis own adblocker withadjusted filterlists, I had seen never more an ad, nor cookie advices. The ONLY site is YT where the adblocker cause the "No Permit adblocker" advice and where the script I use do an excelent work instead, getting rid of any crap in YT. I understand that some user prefer to use uBO, which for sure also works well, but also for sure in it's v3 it will be a schadow of that what is until now.
Of course, it would be great if Vivaldi manages to incorporate functionality similar to that of the current uBO and it will surely improve its functionality a lot in the future, which is also necessary, since the extensions in the store, including uBO, do not have it. I have a lot of confidence in our devs, who have already shown that they know very well what they do, with a marginal browser from a small company that plays in the same league as the big ones and even surpasses them in inovation and func
-
I tried using the built-in adblocker for months, writing my own rules for many sites which Vivaldi's built in rules were not covering. It was pretty hellish. Despite giving Vivaldi's content blocker a very big chance, I ultimately ended up installing uBlock Origin (which I previously used with Chrome).
In many cases, it's simply not possible to block content with basic rules because they cannot target dynamically generated CSS attributes designed to thwart them. DOM elements unavailable to basic rules often need to be targeted, and sometimes regular expressions need to target actual page content. This problem is why advanced rules emerged in the first place, and also why uBlock Origin became so successful.
I understand that many sites need ad revenue to exist, so I only use an adblocker where the ads become problematic. But even though I am probably more forgiving than most users with ads, I still think Manifest v3 is going to be a problem for me, and it wouldn't surprise me if the situation becomes so annoying within a couple of months that I end up moving from Vivaldi to Firefox.
Time will tell. I'm not going to do a knee-jerk flounce. If the situation becomes annoying then I will just move on. Like I did almost two years ago when I switched from Chrome to Vivaldi.
-
@oudstand said in Manifest v3 update: Vivaldi is future-proofed with its built-in functionality:
@Mikka maybe you need to adjust the filter lists of the build in adblocker
I've selected all filters that seem relevant, even though many I use in ubo are missing. Not sure where those rule definitions come from that are not working/missing for my tested websites, but I'm in no mood to check if it's the feature gap between ubo and vivaldi or the filter list itself.
Regardless, I thought the point of the vivaldi devs was that their adblock is a ready to use replacement?
-
For me Vivaldi's own adblocker is working fine.
To accompany it I have also Adguard's MV3 extension, which helps me block elements on some websites, but all ads are taken care of by Vivaldi's own adblocker.
-
@Mikka
Hi, the internal blocker cant compete with the best ad block extensions.
I test Opera and Brave on critical pages and they cant either.
The team have now several month to keep up until all V2 extension stop working.Cheers, miv
-
The documentation only tells me why extensions are inferior to the built-in blocker but I can't seem to find any tutorial on how you write and test your own rules on sites not supported? Where do I even find the element picker for the vivaldi ad-blocker?
The whole initiative to announce the built-in blocker as the successor to ubo seems to come straight from the marketing department, not from development.
-
@ljredux said in Manifest v3 update: Vivaldi is future-proofed with its built-in functionality:
In many cases, it's simply not possible to block content with basic rules because they cannot target dynamically generated CSS attributes designed to thwart them. DOM elements unavailable to basic rules often need to be targeted, and sometimes regular expressions need to target actual page content. This problem is why advanced rules emerged in the first place, and also why uBlock Origin became so successful.
Yeah, uBlock Origin is not only built-in filters but much much more. You can block connected ads/telemetry domains per site (or globaly) with powerful advanced mode
It also has Element picker mode!
-
@barbudo2005
FWIW, to extend the v2 usage for Vivaldi + Chromium on Linuxcreate a policy file "ExtensionManifestV2Availability.json" containing:
{ "ExtensionManifestV2Availability": true }
in /etc/chromium/policies/managed/
Verify via: vivaldi://policy and vivaldi://management
I had found that at: https://www.tampermonkey.net/faq.php?locale=en >> "ExtensionManifestV2Availability"
P. S.: Chrome had never been an option for me -"Leave me alone, Google!"- but it's sad to see a fine ChromIUM-based browser such as Vivaldi, because of the Faustian bargain, ceasing to exist as an option for me.
-
@RogerWilco, it's irrelevant if it's Chromium or Gecko, as said, Chromium is 100%FOSS and can be modified to your like. Good example is Edge, also Chromium, independent that M$ filled it with own trackers, same as Vivaldi don't have nothing to do with Google or Chrome. The problem with Google isn't the browser, but the webformat used by most pages, which will be a problem for any browser sooner or laterto surrond the Google norms, independend of the engine. The problem is that Google has control over 80% of the internet. The failure is to leave Google too much hands-free time, causing it to be the one that now dictates the rules in the web. Vivaldi, like also Edge has less relation with Google than Mozilla, which will have more problems in the future than Chromium browser.
-
wow, this thread is the best example for shoot the messenger
Because I thought, what this article is about, I didn't read it. I have now made up for it.After the comments here I thought, Vivaldi had written, that's the internal adblocker is as practical as (f.ex) uBo. but that's not the case! In summary, it says: we are aware of the general mv2 change and we will upgrade our blocker in the near future.
so the whole disappointment about "not supporting" uBo is IMO absolutly pointless because it should be adressed towards Google and their plan and not towards vivaldi, which have to handle what chromium can offer.
beside this, I setup the internal blocker yesterday with some additional blocklists, which now has a blocklevel from 96% as stated at this testpage (99% with uBo).
and, oh wow, after enabling the internal blocker and disabling uBo, websites load way more faster and have beside some cosmetic errors more or less the same blocklevel!I'm curious to see how the blocker will develop over the next few months. I'm definitely hoping for a element picker.
and so long I test the internal blocker if it's fit my needs -
I can even get 100% on the test page with the built-in ad blocker and it works exactly as it should for me. If anyone has any doubts about this, I would be happy to post a screenshot.
And I also think that if Google makes questionable decisions, you can't blame Vivaldi.