Yet, even after adding Fanboy's two extra lists, hpHosts's Ad and tracking servers, uBlock Origin still has a lower memory footprint than other very popular blockers out there.ДЄlso, be aware that selecting some of these extra lists may lead to higher likelihood of web site breakage - especially those lists which are normally used as hosts file. Of course, the more filters enabled, the higher the memory footprint. More lists are available for you to select if you wish: Out of the box, these lists of filters are loaded and enforced:

It applies to the current web site only, it is not a global power button.ДЇlexible, it's more than an 'ad blocker': it can also read and create filters from hosts files. Garren, some sites work consistently to get around ad blockers. Usage: The big power button in the popup is to permanently disable/enable uBlock Origin for the current web site. It would have to be browser based for Ublock to affect it, so same goes, add it to the trusted sites. IMPORTANT: uBlock Origin is completely unrelated to the site ''.ДЄn efficient blocker: easy on memory and CPU footprint, and yet can load and enforce thousands more filters than other popular blockers out there. Speak of myself, I don't mind switching to Chrome, if these add-ons I used are gone, because they're the major reason I use Firefox to begin with.Finally, an efficient blocker. But I really think it's not that hard to understand why some people dislike the recent changes of Firefox. People choose Firefox for various reasons, and most of them are still held true (more features as mentioned by gorhill, security and privacy, etc.). Among them, the loss of uc.js scripts is the worst (for people who don't know, this is NOT user.js, check ).ДЄlso keep in mind, this also means people can't change the UI of Firefox dramatically any more, which is back to my point one. And half of them, is not even theoretically possible with the new APIs. In my addon list, I have at least 10+ that I can't even find a replacement that supports e10s, let alone webextensions. However, this doesn't mean I don't feel very disappointed of losing of features that I'm very used to in those years. Firefox's practical performance (by that I mean with a realistic profile with loads of addons and whatnot) is really hitched by its XUL based add-on system for too long time (the slow progress of E10s, for example). Lots of people choose Firefox merely for its extensive addon possibility, myself included.ДЄgain, I totally agree this is a hard decision Firefox team has to make, and transit to WebExtensions is absolutely necessary. uBlock Origin alternatives are mainly Ad Blockers but may also be. Other interesting iPad alternatives to uBlock Origin are AdGuard, Blokada, Ghostery and AdBlock. This is not really something 'Chrome-like' per se, but at least that's something I used to use to 'bash' Chrome. If that doesn't suit you, our users have ranked more than 50 alternatives to uBlock Origin and many of them are available for iPad so hopefully you can find a suitable replacement. Second, Firefox's addons' ability and possibility is more restrictive with the drop of XUI-based add-on system.

But Firefox currently does look more similar to Chrome, compared to what Firefox used to look like (I'm talking talking about 1.5 to pre-australis), which some people don't like. Actually, I think it's more about that browsers nowadays started to have a 'standard' UI, than Firefox is copying Chrome.

While I agree all his points, and I personally will not call Firefox a 'Chrome alone' (not even close), I'd like to point some reasons why some people think so.ДЇirstly, The UI is more and more similar to Chrome.

Ublock origin developers