Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers • Hacker News Board

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#131

Post by pferde » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 7:22 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #102

Causality1 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly isn't me. I'm still salty about Firefox 2 removing the "close current tab" button and putting an X on every tab instead. It was nice having that muscle memory instead of having to hunt down whichever tab you're currently focused on.

I've never used Firefox 1.x so haven't used that UI, but it sounds like something they could've made configurable but didn't want to, for whatever reason. However, in all the tabbed browsers I've used, Ctrl+F4 closes the current tab.

Ctrl+W also does that, and is much easier on the fingers (unless your hands are huge).

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#132

Post by lol768 » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 7:25 AM UTC

modzu wrote: post #65

paulgb wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an extension developer who recently got one of these offers, your analysis is a good verbalization of my gut feeling on the matter. I turned it down, of course. While users may feel bad about extension developers not being compensated, I feel like the larger story here is that: - Companies are buying extensions for nefarious purposes, which presents a huge security risk. - Evidently, app stores are sufficiently ba…

app stores are toxic wastelands. there's on the order of 1000 useful legitimate apps yet the app store is packed with 2,000,000 (ie 99.9% spyware)

This should not apply to AMO, at least not to the same extent per https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/AMO....

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#133

Post by Santosh83 » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 7:33 AM UTC

The basic issue is people do not want to pay for software if a 'good enough' free replacement is available. Hence Mozilla having to source money from whomever is willing to give them, and hence the race to the bottom. This has been particularly true in browser space. We usually pay for using programs of similar complexity like PS or AutoCAD etc., but we have always taken it for granted that browsers should be free and/or bundled. This works to the advantage of big players who can sink in the millions involved, which Mozilla is only alive today because of former momentum (user base). Forget about a browser startup or a community-maintained alternative. It has become too huge and complex an undertaking for anyone to bother as long as Chrome/Edge/Safari/Firefox will be available, no matter if they turn into user-hostile mess.

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#134

Post by giancarlostoro » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 7:35 AM UTC

feanaro wrote: post #127

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That does show up one area that Chrome still eclipses Firefox - the Shift Esc task manager that will usually reveal which tab or extension is cratering things. Firefox is much more opaque about memory and especially CPU use, making it far harder to pin down.

Do you know about about:performance?

Firefox has a task manager now. They should improve on this to compete with Googles. Nobody wants to type a URL when they can hit an easy shortcut.

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#135

Post by pferde » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 7:38 AM UTC

Mathnerd314 wrote: post #61

If it's open source then anyone can fork, right? So sell the extension, fork it, publish a new non-shitty version, and let users know via some non-official means. The only losers are the ignorant people who don't switch and the people you sold it to.

Those ignorant people are your users too, and you're still being a dick by selling them out, no matter how you try to rationalize around it.

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#136

Post by imhoguy » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 7:51 AM UTC

stuartd wrote: post #86

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s also a typical third way to compensate browser extension developers: Can’t. Take the developer of uBlock Origin and uMatrix, Raymond Hill, for example. He continues to refuse payment / donations.

Indeed: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Why-don't-you-accept-...

Excellent answer. "no donations = no expectations"

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#137

Post by unionpivo » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 7:59 AM UTC

michaelmrose wrote: post #73

kibwen wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how one would automatically detect such a thing as a browser extension changing hands. If you require signing extensions to make a release, there's nothing stopping a developer from selling their keys. And even without changing hands, the threat to users remains the same if the company just goes from "we'll give you $10k for your extension" to "we'll give you $10k to link this library into your extension…

Just never allow such a transfer force a new user to create a new name. Ensure this is part of the terms of service. Prosecute violators that is to say buyer and dev under cfaa and ensure a hefty fine is levied with prison time. Nefarious parties will find few sellers thereafter.

\s

Right that solved pirating, torrenting and hacking.

None of the above happens on internet any more since cfaa was passed.

Shady people will do shady stuff, no mater what law says. And you will never catch all or even most of them.

So if it's all the same it would be better if we come with solution, that prevents abuse from happening in the first place

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#138

Post by thepangolino » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:15 AM UTC

pteraspidomorph wrote: post #107

zaat wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>BUT - extensions are also often the cause of a slow and frustrating Firefox experience, which then leads folks to talk about how Chrome is better-performing/faster IE (used to?) have this bottom notification warning about 'X plugin is slowing IE, would you like to disable it?'. Perhaps Firefox should add similar feature and notify users about slow plugins, maybe even with some actual data instead of a vague slowness…

Your extensions are listed along with their resource usage in about:performance !

There’s a real discoverability issue with those kind of pages. They should be listed somewhere in some submenu. You can’t expect people to go through all the documentation like they used to go through manuals in decades past.

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#139

Post by a9t9 » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:17 AM UTC

throwaway5389 wrote: post #37

bduerst wrote: post #20

>The Chrome Web Store and the Microsoft Store do not offer features for supporting extension developers. That doesn't seem right - doesn't Google let developers monetize extensions in the chrome web store? You can publish Hosted Apps, Chrome Apps, Chrome Extensions, and Themes in the Chrome Web Store. Collectively these are called simply "Items". You have many choices when it comes to making money from items that you…

> it's also why Chrome cracked down on extension APIs recently by restricting what is shared with the extension It'd be nice if they had 'trusted devs' or similar. Even if they provided a paid meatbag extension review service, I'd pay to get the plugins I use reviewed!

Very nice idea. As an ISV with a freemium open-source extension, I would happily pay for an official security review that I could present to our users. Our extension is secure by design but having a 3rd-party expert (e. g. Google or Firefox reviewer) confirm this and get a "Reviewed" badge would be great. The drawback is that this could slow down extension updates, as you do not want to loose this badge with the next update. But that is manageable.

Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers

#140

Post by michaelt » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:23 AM UTC

michaelmrose wrote: post #73

kibwen wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how one would automatically detect such a thing as a browser extension changing hands. If you require signing extensions to make a release, there's nothing stopping a developer from selling their keys. And even without changing hands, the threat to users remains the same if the company just goes from "we'll give you $10k for your extension" to "we'll give you $10k to link this library into your extension…

Just never allow such a transfer force a new user to create a new name. Ensure this is part of the terms of service. Prosecute violators that is to say buyer and dev under cfaa and ensure a hefty fine is levied with prison time. Nefarious parties will find few sellers thereafter.

As long as an extension can be owned by a company, you can bypass restrictions on transferring the extension by transferring ownership of the company.

Unless you think plugins for HTTPS Everywhere, Google Translate, and LastPass should be signed by an individual developer - in which case you'll have to solve the problem of what to do when that developer moves between jobs :)