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

Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

robert.ocallahan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 310 posts

Re: Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

#31

Post by kitsunesoba »

sverhagen wrote: post #24
gjjrfcbugxbhf wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only ms would just make their software available cross platform.

Wasn't it just released for Android and iOS? (I get that that might not be what you meant...)

The iOS version is a WebKit wrapper by necessity (Apple mandates that all alternative browsers use the system-bundled WebKit for user experience reasons), and while it’s possible they’ve ported Edge’s engine to Android I’d bet that Edge for Android either wraps WebKit or Blink/Chromium. The primary value proposition for Edge on mobile is syncing of tabs/bookmarks/history/etc, not its engine.

Re: Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

#32

Post by Jaepa »

jstewartmobile wrote: post #15
scrollaway wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mozilla has many flaws, lack of transparency is not one of them. I don't even know where to start with your comment. You're linking the Mozilla Corp wikipedia page, insinuating they're "not terribly open" (and putting Google in that basket), on a subject you give almost no hints about, but hey Opera is a thing? And somehow this comment means that Mozilla is not independent?

Read again. I doubted Mozilla Corp's "independence" in the first sentence. "not terribly open" in the last paragraph was in reference to the WHAT-WG group, which is "[m]ostly Google and Mozilla guys". From the posts in that group, those guys seem more like co-workers than competitors. For anyone who believes money to be some kind of motivating thing , it isn't hard to come to the conclusion that Mozilla is Google-by-…

Would you rather have people in standards groups to act more like competitors instead of coworkers? Cause that seems like a really bad idea.

As for:

> For anyone who believes money to be some kind of motivating thing, it isn't hard to come to the conclusion that Mozilla is Google-by-proxy > edit: And apparently I have to have "hits" to my name to state that getting 85% of your revenue from Google puts your independence into question???

You aren't bring its independence into question, you are stating its an easy conclusion that Mozilla is Google-by-proxy.

The 85% was from 2011. As of 2015 Mozilla stop receiving cash from Google inpart to them changing there default searches (why google paid Mozilla). That may have changed recently with Firefox 57 as they change the default search back, but even then google announced a while back they were cutting how much they were going to pay, so I doubt it will be the same 85%.

Re: Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

#33

Post by colehasson »

nrhk wrote: post #20
baddox wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder: who could even feasibly introduce another browser today? The task seems almost impossible.

Well you could also fork Chromium I guess.

And with Puppeteer/Devtools programmers can stay in text editors.

Re: Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

#34

Post by languageiunvs »

LocutusOfBorges wrote: post #9
steve19 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox on Android is so frustrating. Things like no swipe down to refresh, despite all other apps implementating that pattern. On my phone, scrolling by swiping is slow, it scrolls such a short distance. Meaning going down a long NH page takes many swipes. All other Android browsers seem to get it right. Fonts also seem "off". It's these small things that make the experience frustrating. I truly want to use it, but…

Things like no swipe down to refresh This is the thing that made me switch to it from Chrome. Something as experience-breaking as refreshing the page isn't something that the user should encounter just through energetic scrolling.

How did this even become a thing???? I absolutely hate it

Re: Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

#36

Post by jstewartmobile »

Jaepa wrote: post #32
jstewartmobile wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read again. I doubted Mozilla Corp's "independence" in the first sentence. "not terribly open" in the last paragraph was in reference to the WHAT-WG group, which is "[m]ostly Google and Mozilla guys". From the posts in that group, those guys seem more like co-workers than competitors. For anyone who believes money to be some kind of motivating thing , it isn't hard to come to the conclusion that Mozilla is Google-by-…

Would you rather have people in standards groups to act more like competitors instead of coworkers? Cause that seems like a really bad idea. As for: > For anyone who believes money to be some kind of motivating thing, it isn't hard to come to the conclusion that Mozilla is Google-by-proxy > edit: And apparently I have to have "hits" to my name to state that getting 85% of your revenue from Google puts your independen…

If they paired up with a search provider other than Google, does that make them any more independent? If they only get 70%, or 50%, of their income from a search engine, does that make them independent?

A non-profit that has a taxable subsidiary and receives the bulk of its funding from the search industry does not strike me as being particularly independent.

Re: Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

#37

Post by manigandham »

lucaspiller wrote: post #10
Santosh83 wrote: post #2

A reminder that, as article points out, a healthy web needs multiple independent client implementations and we're already down to less than a handful major ones. Ideally they should hold equivalent usage share which implies that as currently usage is heavily tilted towards Google Chrome, the best way in which you can help Mozilla is to use their browser and get your friends and family to use it too, unless there's a…

There is a third major independent option: Microsoft Edge. I assume (like me) a lot web of developers aren’t using Windows, but we can at least help people out by making sure our applications work fine on those browsers. Since IE 9, with a polyfill, most things just work unless you need some very recent HTML5 APIs. Microsoft provides free VMs for testing different browsers here: https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/…

Except Edge doesnt even support basic things like Server-Sent Events: https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/platfor...

They also haven't actually replaced IE11 which still has plenty of usage out in the wild. MS had a good start but they continue to stumble in their efforts today. Firefox has done much better with 1/1000th of the resources which should say something.

Re: Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

#38

Post by tempestn »

mijowi wrote: post #8
cknight wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched back to Firefox 57 about a decade after abandoning it for Opera. I remember the advocacy movement around Firefox 1.0 which I was quite involved in. I thought (and still think) it was great. I don't plan to go quite as far this time, but do plan to try and convince all my friends and family to get on board. It'll be a harder task for sure since Chrome is not IE6, but as the resident IT guy that everyone ask…

Check out FF nightly on Android. It has the new features. I use it and it's great

You're not going to install a nightly build on your friend's or mom's phone though. Your parent is already sold on FF; just waiting for Quantum to be released on Android before pushing it.

Re: Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive

#39

Post by moz23 »

rtpg wrote: post #21
steve19 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox on Android is so frustrating. Things like no swipe down to refresh, despite all other apps implementating that pattern. On my phone, scrolling by swiping is slow, it scrolls such a short distance. Meaning going down a long NH page takes many swipes. All other Android browsers seem to get it right. Fonts also seem "off". It's these small things that make the experience frustrating. I truly want to use it, but…

Yeah, I'm a heavy Firefox for Android user and I _really_ want to use it but the performance is really rough. I wish I had the sort of skills to help contribute to performance, but the whole thing is so huge I wouldn't even know where to begin. At this point if Chrome implemented the "open tab in background" feature (when I click on a link in an e-mail I don't want to switch directly to the browser) I would probably…

Mozilla don't really care about mobile. The (too) small mobile teams do care, but the company as a whole doesn't - which mostly explains why it's so rough.
Post reply on HN