481–490 of 733 posts
For me, privacy was always a large advantage of Firefox but now I also trust Apple, Safari, and Apple’s privacy stance.
Honest question: what privacy advantages does Firefox have over Safari?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously, when we talk so much about the Web's portability, why is a major feature from a major website not even working on identically on the two biggest browsers? Since it's Facebook we can't accuse them of browser favouritism as they're browser neutral. I wonder what APIs are missing from Firefox that makes FB Live Video broken?
> Since it's Facebook we can't accuse them of browser favouritism as they're browser neutral Favoritism isn't the only reason for these things. What often happens is that the website devs all use one browser and nobody tests it. It's not like Google wants their sites to be broken on other browsers either (I presume), it's just that many teams at Google aren't bothered. IIRC Firefox has the same WebRTC APIs as Chrome,…
That is exactly the point the GP post makes. These things are supposed to be standardized and the standards well described, so basic things should work everywhere without any testing. But somehow for web, it is acceptable and accepted as status quo, even after years and years of smashing our heads against the wall of nonstandard, browser-specific features.
I was very critical of Mozilla in the past about all their "science projects" like Rust. While I appreciate Rust, I thought it was wrong for Mozilla to be wasting resources on it, instead of focusing on Firefox. I was so harsh with them only because I strongly believe that Firefox is my only hope for a free web. But then I tried 57, and I must admit, boy was I wrong. This thing is fast! I haven't stopped recommending…
So you are one of those that "Open Web" == performance only and you look the other way on things like EME, Pocket, and various other things that lower Privacy and betray the very foundation of the "Open Web"
And staying true to their mission, Mozilla bought Pocket and is now releasing it as open source [1].
You're speaking of "betraying the foundation of the Open Web", but Mozilla is the only one out of the big players that isn't guilty of betrayal, the only big player that tried opposing patent encumbered video codecs or DRM, that have been promoted by Google, Microsoft and Apple, the W3C being basically a charade.
If you're upset of W3C EME, your anger should be directed at the parties responsible for it, which are Google, Microsoft and Netflix and which now control the industry, with a majority market share I might add, which would make all resistance moot.
So I hope you're boycotting Google, Microsoft and Netflix, because otherwise it's unfair to expect that from Mozilla, an organization with a responsibility towards its employees, users and customers.
[1] https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/02/27/mozilla-acquires-po...
Just switched to Firefox beta to test this out. Looking good so far! The other thing that I've been waiting for is better multi-profile support. You can get a (pre-release) version of that now by opting into the Containers experiment: https://testpilot.firefox.com/experiments/containers
Firefox containers are heading in the direction, after using them for a couple of hours though I ended up missing the window-based system which Chrome uses. I have one Chrome profile for my personal apps, and one for work -- creating a new tab in one of the windows will automatically open it with the same context as the rest of the window. My experience with Firefox was that I'd have to manually choose which profile…
Never forgive never forget.
Worth looking at this resource, which seems to suggest that Chrome still leads in some of the benchmarks, even in memory usage: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=firefox-... Just one study among many, but, worth keeping in mind. Firefox is making strides, but Mozilla still has work to do if they want to stop losing market share. I say this as a Firefox user.
But yeah, while the technical crowd sees Mozilla as favorable at roughly equal performance, the vast majority of unknowing users are probably more influenced by the world's most popular webpage, video portal, e-mail service, operating system etc. all nudging them to use Chrome.
It'll be interesting to see, if Firefox 57 can generate another major bump in that user graph like it happened with Firefox 48, or if 48 was at sort of the sweet spot where Firefox became acceptable again for most of the tech crowd and now we'd be digging into the non-tech crowd, which is much harder to pull away from what they're habitually using.
Tried chrome but never switched to chrome. What feature were you missing in firefox that made you switch to chrome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The amount of work, the extent for how long they've been doing so, all relative to the funding they got.. it's even painful to think about. Chrome shadowed them overnight, had Google infinite wallet and started from scratch. Mozilla became the old slug.. Since then they got Rust off ground, servo yielding good fruits, firefox cool n quiet. Once again kudos.
That is not representative of either the time frame or the resources available to Mozilla. Mozilla has had Hundreds of millions of annual income through their search associations [1]. It’s surprising how they’ve wasted that amount of money to finally in 2017 build a browser that can compete again. This is 9 years after google chrome was released! They have absolutely no excuse for falling this far behind. They squand…
I belive, that some tasks cannot be accelerated by additional money. There are tasks that needs time. Money may allow to deal with subtasks in parallel by many developer teams, but in complex system it leads to a lot of conflicts between parts of system, and only time can allow to settle them.
Browser is such a complex system. Old browser with massive amount of legacy is more so. Moreover if you develop the hole new language for upgrading, it becomes surprizing that mozilla have done it in less than 10 years.