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.
Surely there's an extension for that?
Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers
191–195 of 195 posts
Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which browser extension is responsible for making Firefox slow as a slug when deleting large numbers history entries? I've not checked the source, but my guess is firefox stores the history in a SQLite db and when you select 500 history items then delete them, it's doing 500 DELETEs, maybe even without a proper index. It's seriously slow. There seems to be a lot of low hanging fruit in Firefox, but not being employed…
I think it’s not 500 deletes, but it’s certainly not great. There is definitely an index. If you can repro this, you should file a bug for it, I’ve noticed it being slow too, but couldn’t repro it recently. If you file a bug for this, you can CC me (tcsc at mozilla dot com).
Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers
#193> It is a regular occurrence to hear about open source developers selling their browser extensions, only for their users to be exploited later on by the new owners. ... We are witnessing the failure of browser vendors to recognize the value of our labor and the important role it plays in a healthy browser ecosystem. So this is an interesting philosophical question - the market value of the extension is the value of "…
$10K’s doesn’t “wildly overvalue” the developer time that goes into a successful browser extension. At almost $200k/year, a starting google developer makes ~$4K a week (pre tax, but also ignoring health care, facilities, etc). The browser extension offers are comparable to months of developer time, but since they are made after an extension succeeds, they’re not accounting for the probability that a new extension won…
I do think that $200K/year is a wild overestimate of the value of the extension, on the ground that Google and other similar companies assign very few new hires to write browser extensions. But yes, the amount of skill and time and focus that goes into the average extension and the average new hire project is at least within the same order of magnitude.
We are generally bad at finding ways to compensate/monetize people for skilled labor that does useful things for the world but isn't directly profitable, so I think trying to tackle that for the case of extensions is a harder problem than is reasonable to demand.
Re: Google and Mozilla are failing to support browser extension developers
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be honest I don't know too much about what's been added but I can only assume new functionality must account for the increased bloat. I imagine it's support for things like "Chrome Apps" or more generally the desire to get websites to be able to do the same things as native apps. I suspect there's also the fact that Chrome has to support Chrome OS as well. But I am new to Chrome OS so admittedly I am not too famil…
Chrome OS was my thought as well. I'm not sure how much of that is included in Chrome itself, and how much is bundled separately as part of the OS though. For some reason I thought Chrome Apps were deprecated. PWAs can do most of the same things today.
That being said, I am not familiar with the technology so this is very much an uninformed opinion!