NoScript review on http://kb.mozillazine.org/Problematic_extensions:
“Causes an illegal operation in the Windows Media Player plugin if it is blocking JavaScript on a page with embedded Windows Media”

NoScript plug-in is most likely technically a better option if we do not want any script at all running on our web browser. I never tried it so I said most likely, and most likely is.

Unfortunately, the percentage of internet user knowledgeable enough to understand how Flash or JavaScript effected their internet experience is probably less than 20%. My estimation is based on the number of internet user aware of web browser other than Microsoft Internet Explorer and actually named them. The average internet user aren’t able or aware that they can turn off the image option let alone having to deal with illegal operation on windows cause by NoScript. On the other hand, those who download, install by themself, and browse the web with Mozilla Firefox are proof that they have the capability to handle those illegal operation provided that they have the time and interest to do it.

As for me, I actually do not mind of JavaScript, as they do not affect my browsing speed that much, therefore I opt for Flashblock. I’m using 56kbps modem so 30 additional kb on every web page I visit surely drive me insane.

Before that let me go thru the KB, perhaps there might have some good page that worth to introduce to the user.

Thanks for your comments

Thanks for your swift reply and for your update to the article.

The problematic extensions page of the KB seems to get very little attention and is thus little known save to those who tend to be likely to know most of its content anyhow…maybe you could consider an article featuring it at some stage?

Like most parts of the KB (and of KBs in general) the average user only ventures into it when all else fails at a time when they are having some annoying problem or other yet more people using a page tends to lead to the page being both more up to date and more accurate…perhaps greater use of that KB page might lead to some more additions being made to it and less users being saddled with poor quality extensions. Anything you can do to make it better known can only be to the good.

Regards,

David

BTW, I’ve added the a notes on the post to remind user that some firefox extension might cause problem, use it at their own risk.

1) http://kb.mozillazine.org/Problematic_extensions shows that the extension you mention has problems and there is official advice on record saying that users should opt for the No-Script extension instead.

2) Seeing as each extension one runs adds an extra instance of the G.R.E. (Gecko Runtime Environment) and thus makes Firefox’s RAM footprint larger as well as slowing it’s load times (although most extensions don’t make that much difference) it is only sensible to maximise what you get for each addition and thus the No-Script alternative is a better choice seeing as it simple does more that the one you mention.

BTW I have no vested interest in these products.