61–70 of 97 posts
long answer, firefox have a strong community and solid product but lacking a sustainable business model and a comeptitive pr team. their tech is really good, the people in charge just really suck.
So many people don't seem to know the difference between Chrome and Chromium.
This "you can use Chrome without Google tracking" is an illusion. Sure, right now, you can have ungoogled Chrome, but what happens a few years down the line when Firefox is dead and we only have one engine, mostly backed by a questionnable corp, to use the internet?
You can trust or distrust whoever you want, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Firefox. They now have updated the wording of their TOS that caused so much uproar and confusion (in part fueled by Brendan Eich, who runs a competing browser) and are pretty clear about what they do. Firefox also still supports Manifest V2, which lets you use the full, ultra-powerful version of uBlock Origin. There's no better privacy…
I don't get why you needed to mention this, when the story became viral before Brendan Eich communicated it.
Do you feel that people misunderstood that, in fact, Mozilla does intend to sell user data?
Note that I'm still using and advocating for Firefox, I just found this offtopic attack odd.
OP here. I never intended to "rage bait" or something. With "Chrome-ish" i ment Chromium-based browsers. That's what i ment by "it feels like basically everything is Chrome nowadays". My question was: Taking FF out of the equation, which browsers except Chromium-Based ones are out there?
You can trust or distrust whoever you want, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Firefox. They now have updated the wording of their TOS that caused so much uproar and confusion (in part fueled by Brendan Eich, who runs a competing browser) and are pretty clear about what they do. Firefox also still supports Manifest V2, which lets you use the full, ultra-powerful version of uBlock Origin. There's no better privacy…
> in part fueled by Brendan Eich I don't get why you needed to mention this, when the story became viral before Brendan Eich communicated it. Do you feel that people misunderstood that, in fact, Mozilla does intend to sell user data? Note that I'm still using and advocating for Firefox, I just found this offtopic attack odd.
Mozilla is apparently run by corporate drones who made a blunder (as drones do). It happens. They corrected it. No need to attack or dismiss Firefox in general. Firefox is excellent.
The rhetoric around Firefox is so exhausting. They change some wording while having made no actual technical changes to the browser and the internet is on fire for days calling them the devil incarnate, meanwhile Chrome gutted uBlock and other extensions a week ago and there was barely any noise about it. What causes this phenomenon where the project with significantly less resources is held to a higher standard than…
From long experience we expect Google and hence Chrome to act against our interests. We have not expected that of Mozilla and Firefox. Google did give us a lot of warning that they would greatly restrict ad-blocking and tracker-blocking, so most of that angst has already been and gone.
HN used to gush over how great Chrome was. Some of us were saying, um guys, you know google is in the business of selling advertising right? Nobody seemed to care. Now mozilla's lawyers have them change some legalese and they are instantly the bad guys.
The trust in Mozilla went from 70 to 60. The trust in the google monopoly is approximately -99999999999999999, give or take a few points. You just can't compare them.