Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 340 posts

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#61

Post by Grazester »

infogulch wrote: post #39
zerocrates wrote: post #2

> I can't use the Conde Nast CMS in anything other than Chrome, so I can't switch completely. Highlight of the article tucked in at the end there.

I always wondered why they branded Chromecast with Chrome, it has almost nothing to do with a browser besides the funny gimmick where you could show a web page through it. Maybe an implementation detail. I suppose I get it now. It was originally just branding to promote a Chrome monopoly, and now it's an artificial exclusive feature. I love the idea of Chromecast but it's sad that it's still so closed off.

Closed off how if I may ask? Is it not free for anyone to implement in their applications?

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#62

Post by scotu »

lol768 wrote: post #47
schemathings wrote: post #21

I'm a pretty heavy user of Chrome profiles .. definitely doesn't feel as well thought out in Firefox.

As someone who's not really used Chrome aside from browser testing (which used to involve a lot of cursing because flexbox min sizing was broken), can you explain what Chrome profiles offer over e.g. container tabs? Are you using them as separate cookie jars, to install different extensions or something else?

they allow different sets of extensions (and cookie jar and so on) and they are basically segregated by window (no tabs with different profile in the same window).

In the end they are different from containers in the general purpose (they are geared towards having a multi user experience more than firefox's multi identity/privacy) but chrome's take is much less frustrating to manage in my experience because you can't open the wrong type of tab involuntarly.

That said I switched to firefox and this (and lack of U2F 2nd factor auth) is the only pain point so far

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#63

Post by jayd16 »

userbinator wrote: post #54
chrstphrhrt wrote: post #22

Anyone have thoughts on the opt-out telemetry default? I had to read the privacy notice they open on start to find out that telemetry was enabled by default.

Unfortunately telemetry is everywhere now, and it disgusts me greatly. Personally, I find the idea that software should continuously phone home about its use, and this silent data collection/monitoring, extremely abhorrent. Some apps that really do not need to interact with the network at all do it, and those can be easily firewalled, but not so with a browser. Edit: Wow, downvotes for opposing pervasive telemetry. N…

Every app and app developer could use crash/bug reports. I can understand your paranoia that something else is being sent but I would hardly call the idea of asking to send back bug reports abhorrent.

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#64

Post by kevinh »

catshirt wrote: post #53
kevinh wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fake news is a distinct category of story that is easily quantified. It is a real problem that the United States faces and if we don't attempt to combat it, discourse will suffer. Since you're a fan of Wikipedia articles, try reading this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news_websites_in_the_Unit...

ok. read the whole article. and i understood you right off the bat just fine. you want to block fiction from the internet. specifically, political fiction. and to be really generous, more specifically, political fiction with a certain intent. now. who gets to arbitrate what is "political"? who gets to arbitrate what is "fiction"? who gets to arbitrate someone else's "intent"? Clinton? Trump? Bezos? Huffington? pick y…

I don't understand why you're treating this as a partisan issue. Fake news affects every political affiliation, and it isn't limited to political issues. I don't want incorrect information that agrees with my point of view any more than incorrect information that agrees with it.

As for how they'd decide what websites to block or put a warning in front of, that seems fairly straightforward. Have a committee that represents different demographics, and require a unanimous vote to take action against a site.

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#65

Post by firloop »

Grazester wrote: post #61
infogulch wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always wondered why they branded Chromecast with Chrome, it has almost nothing to do with a browser besides the funny gimmick where you could show a web page through it. Maybe an implementation detail. I suppose I get it now. It was originally just branding to promote a Chrome monopoly, and now it's an artificial exclusive feature. I love the idea of Chromecast but it's sad that it's still so closed off.

Closed off how if I may ask? Is it not free for anyone to implement in their applications?

To implement Cast support in an application, you have to link a closed source binary to your project. Google only provides binaries for iOS and Android (via Play Services), and has a closed source implementation in Chrome.

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#66

Post by blaze33 »

dheera wrote: post #46
inimino wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is kind of a strange complaint. You’re using Linux but you don’t want to use the version packaged by your distro, yet you’re uncomfortable opening a standard tarball and following the intructions within? Yet you’re complaining that Mozilla didn’t go the extra mile for your obscure situation.

I'm used to the assumption that my package manager is out of date. It usually is (e.g. it still has only OpenCV 2.4). I have a huge pile of PPAs to solve that ...

On Ubuntu 17.10 I got the update to Quantum only a few days after the official release, works quite well, no need to look for a PPA.

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#67

Post by mcny »

NiceGuy_Ty wrote: post #60
dheera wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm used to the assumption that my package manager is out of date. It usually is (e.g. it still has only OpenCV 2.4). I have a huge pile of PPAs to solve that ...

I on Fedora and the latest version is available via dnf. But still I use nightly, and all I had to do to j install it was untar it into my opt directory and symlink the binary.

> I on Fedora and the latest version is available via dnf. But still I use nightly, and all I had to do to j install it was untar it into my opt directory and symlink the binary.

What is your strategy with updates? Do you give yourself permission to write to opt or do you run Firefox Nightly as root once a day so it can update iself? I tried the latter for a few weeks and grew tired. I can't wait for containers to come to Firefox stable (which is the feature I am looking forward to the most in nightly).

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#68

Post by krrrh »

k__ wrote: post #27
ocodia wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of great email, contacts and calendar services out there, you just need to pay for them. I went with FastMail and it’s been absolutely painless.

I fear the actual migration, not the alternatives

Fastmail does the email migration in the cloud. It’s relatively quick and painless, and you can trial things for a period by setting up your gmail account as an alias (send from the fastmail web interface through gmail’s smtp servers etc) so you can always switch back if you don’t like it. When satisfied, set up an auto-responder and forwarding to let people know to stop emailing your @gmail account.

Fastmail has a decent calendar, but you may prefer to use iCloud or something else for that. Calendar clients on desktops and phones tend to be pretty good at supporting multiple providers so that is a lot easier to migrate.

Re: Ciao, Chrome: Firefox Quantum Is the Browser Built for 2017

#69

Post by catshirt »

kevinh wrote: post #64
catshirt wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ok. read the whole article. and i understood you right off the bat just fine. you want to block fiction from the internet. specifically, political fiction. and to be really generous, more specifically, political fiction with a certain intent. now. who gets to arbitrate what is "political"? who gets to arbitrate what is "fiction"? who gets to arbitrate someone else's "intent"? Clinton? Trump? Bezos? Huffington? pick y…

I don't understand why you're treating this as a partisan issue. Fake news affects every political affiliation, and it isn't limited to political issues. I don't want incorrect information that agrees with my point of view any more than incorrect information that agrees with it. As for how they'd decide what websites to block or put a warning in front of, that seems fairly straightforward. Have a committee that repre…

dude. i get it. you are only further articulating everything i have already accused you of.

you want a company or government to decide what content gets blocked. that is what's partisan.

remember this conversation when the guy you don't like gets control of that company or government. cheers mate. i mean well.

Post reply on HN