|User since||Aug. 21, 2008|
|Number of add-ons developed||0 add-ons|
|Average rating of developer's add-ons||Not yet rated|
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
This is main reason I'm running firefox. I love this app, and just counted to 18462 .maff files on my laptop.
Of course it is totally unacceptable with software changes which makes such an essential add-on incompatible.
However, I'll continue to run firefox 56 as long as I'm here and haven't got another browser to work with the tremendously fantastic maff format. The so called MHTML or MHT is simply not an alternative. I don't like it, and there are no tools for handling it (only count free open source tools).
So from firefox version 57 firefox is dead as long as MAFF format is not supported.
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
The MAFF format is fantastic, and is the single reason I only run firefox. I consider it shameful that that the MAFF format no longer will be supported. This implies that I will stay at maximum firefox 56, which I'm running now for the rest of my life.
I save all interesting pages with MAFF, and there simply are no alternatives. The MHT/MHTML format is tremendously ugly and I haven't even seen any tools to handle that format (I only count open source free software, I do not bother about any proprietary).
MAFF is simple and elegant. The only acceptable web archive format I've seen.
I currently have 18589 .maff files on my laptop.
Now if either firefox or the maff-extension would have been proprietary software, then it it would be like the biggest insult you can do against a person, where a format suddenly would stop working. Fortunately I have downloaded all versions of maff and its source code as well as essential firefox versions in source code so I will manage.
This add-on doesn't work Rated 1 out of 5 stars
When you try to download a video you are just sent to a site for downloading public facebook videos. Where it says "Could not find video". That is, this is a useless add-on.
Almost there Rated 3 out of 5 stars
Two things annoys me:
1) I can not search for folder names, only bookmark names.
2) when I remove the search term the hieararchy and the bookmark found is lost, so I have to find the folder in some other way.
All what I want is bascially the search tree. I want that the only difference when removing the search term should be that the tree expands to match the emtpy string, but the found folder and/or the found bookmark should be selected and visible.
Clear improvement Rated 3 out of 5 stars
This is a good start. There are few annoyances though:
1. it does not search for folder names
2. it does not show where in the hierarchy a name found is (instead it has two windows, so I have first to carefully find the folder by using the right button, then use the arrows, to find the folder)
3. when I remove the search word, the folder is gone, so I still have to try to find the folder manually.
If it could just leave things are they are after the last search, i.e. hiearchy for the bookmark visible with the bookmark found still marked it would be perfect.
An optional option, would be to e.g extend the search syntax, like
Firemacs best browsing improvement since Mosaic Rated 5 out of 5 stars
I would say that five stars is not enough.
Firemacs is the single most important feature that has increased
my browsing experience significantly since Mosaic.
If it wouldn't be for Firemacs I wouldn't be using Firefox 3 now. When I installed Firefox 3 and found that my gtk key settings were ignored my only choice would be to abandond Firefox3. But thanks to Firemacs I can continue to use Firefox and now Firefox start becoming real frindly.
On the other hand, setting basic keys, like editing keys and such should be done centrally per user, not per application.
In all GUIs you should be able to set key preferences like emacs, vi or the brain dead windows keys. In GTK this is possible since long time and also in KDE, but there are applications that ignores them (which firefox3 did...).
This type of add on like Firemacs should be available in for all types of applications, to fine tune user preferences, but the fundamental problem should be dealt with centrally.