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

Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

robert.ocallahan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 343 posts

Re: Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

#61

Post by ekianjo »

Yoric wrote: post #46
ekianjo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Yes, Mozilla has made missteps with Pocket and Mr. Robot. and the removal of RSS support. So much for the champions of the Free Web!

It was removed because - pretty much nobody was using it; - it's pretty easy to reimplement as an extension. Championing the Free Web is harder if you also need to champion the dead web. edit "nobody" => "pretty much nobody"

> - nobody was using it;

You'll need a source for that, since most Wordpress sites which constitute a HUGE part of the web have pretty much by default rss feeds. It's not because you are not using it that nobody is.

And even you premise was true (which is debatable), it cost absolutely nothing for Firefox to keep a functional RSS reader without putting much effort into it (or instead, you know, putting efforts in pushing ads to people who never wanted them).

Re: Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

#62

Post by trendia »

Yoric wrote: post #46
ekianjo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Yes, Mozilla has made missteps with Pocket and Mr. Robot. and the removal of RSS support. So much for the champions of the Free Web!

It was removed because - pretty much nobody was using it; - it's pretty easy to reimplement as an extension. Championing the Free Web is harder if you also need to champion the dead web. edit "nobody" => "pretty much nobody"

And it competed with Pocket.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

#63

Post by weinzierl »

nindalf wrote: post #9

Just so we can avoid rehashing the discussion whenever a post encouraging the use of Firefox is posted. - Yes, Mozilla is still the better browser when it comes to privacy. - Yes, Mozilla has made missteps with Pocket and Mr. Robot. - Yes, it is slow/resource heavy on certain Macs with non-default resolutions. Yes, Mozilla is working on a fix. - Yes, it has become really fast for most users after Quantum improvements…

> - Yes, Mozilla has made missteps with Pocket and Mr. Robot.

These are forgivable in my opinion. At least this steps are somehow understandable.

What I‘m really miffed about is their partnership with Cliqz. If Google is the devil then Cliqz is Beelzebub. I don‘t understand what they were thinking...

Re: Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

#64

Post by Yoric »

ekianjo wrote: post #61
Yoric wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was removed because - pretty much nobody was using it; - it's pretty easy to reimplement as an extension. Championing the Free Web is harder if you also need to champion the dead web. edit "nobody" => "pretty much nobody"

> - nobody was using it; You'll need a source for that, since most Wordpress sites which constitute a HUGE part of the web have pretty much by default rss feeds. It's not because you are not using it that nobody is. And even you premise was true (which is debatable), it cost absolutely nothing for Firefox to keep a functional RSS reader without putting much effort into it (or instead, you know, putting efforts in pus…

> You'll need a source for that, since most Wordpress sites which constitute a HUGE part of the web have pretty much by default rss feeds. It's not because you are not using it that nobody is.

I'm not making it up. I don't remember the exact details – you'll have to look at the archives of the Mozilla dev-platform mailing list if you want them – but I seem to remember the usage was below 0.001% of users.

I personally read RSS with Thunderbird, which is a much better experience anyway.

> And even you premise was true (which is debatable), it cost absolutely nothing for Firefox to keep a functional RSS reader without putting much effort into it (or instead, you know, putting efforts in pushing ads to people who never wanted them).

It actually does. Every piece of software that you need to maintain is a tax. Paying the tax makes sense if the code is useful, not if it isn't.

Also, frankly, this implementation didn't bring anything to users. It wasn't nice to use. There are much better RSS readers than a browser – starting with RSS WebExtensions.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

#65

Post by Yoric »

trendia wrote: post #62
Yoric wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was removed because - pretty much nobody was using it; - it's pretty easy to reimplement as an extension. Championing the Free Web is harder if you also need to champion the dead web. edit "nobody" => "pretty much nobody"

And it competed with Pocket.

Not really. People use Pocket. People don't use RSS in their browser.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

#66

Post by Yoric »

lagadu wrote: post #55
Yoric wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intellectually, I agree, but - it actually doesn't hurt; - market research indicates that most people actually love it.

Market research, in this particular case adoption rate, also indicates that people love giving all their privacy away to google.

Good point. But Pocket isn't harmful, especially if you don't use it. In the worst case, it makes the Firefox installer a few kb larger, that's about it.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

#68

Post by Jonnax »

craigsmansion wrote: post #58

Well, maybe if Mozilla hadn't alienated their early Freedom/Open web oriented users with their web hostile actions (or inaction). You know, the kind of users that would stick with "inferior" software because of values. That mountain ahead, Mozilla, is the accumulation of all the "hills not to die on". You got the clout you wanted by selling out, but now those users are flocking to technically better solutions as you'…

Okay. So they sold out and the alternative is a browser from an advert company.

How do you think Mozilla should fund the development of Firefox?

Re: Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

#70

Post by tapland »

ekianjo wrote: post #61
Yoric wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was removed because - pretty much nobody was using it; - it's pretty easy to reimplement as an extension. Championing the Free Web is harder if you also need to champion the dead web. edit "nobody" => "pretty much nobody"

> - nobody was using it; You'll need a source for that, since most Wordpress sites which constitute a HUGE part of the web have pretty much by default rss feeds. It's not because you are not using it that nobody is. And even you premise was true (which is debatable), it cost absolutely nothing for Firefox to keep a functional RSS reader without putting much effort into it (or instead, you know, putting efforts in pus…

No. Not literally noone was using it. Just a colloquial 'noone' as in 'noone is using Firefox'.

Additional features that the average user does not want to use or care about creates confusion and a feeling of bloat. An official extension would be nice though.

Post reply on HN