Firefox 70

Post by michaelmrose » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 5:25 PM UTC

pmoriarty wrote: post #182

rusk wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Without Google's ad business Firefox wouldn't exist Really? My recollection of events 15 years ago is a little hazy, but wasnt FF a browser-only release of Mozilla, itself Netscape which has been around as long as time itself (~25 years?) What are we talking about here? There was very definitely a push around 2003 to get FF adopted en masse, and I guess Google probably were a big factor in this ... Bit of a stretch…

Yeah, I have to ask what percentage of Firefox developers are paid for by Google's money? I was somehow under the impression that Firefox was developed mostly by volunteers, and so Firefox development would be largely unaffected if Google was out of the picture.

Post by michaelmrose » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 5:27 PM UTC

calvinmorrison wrote: post #192

bad_user wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd rather we live in a world where customers paid directly for the product and I was the customer (not the product). Out of curiosity, what services and products are you paying for? I'm willing to bet that a vast majority of HN users are still using a @gmail.com email address. And I'm actually in that super small minority that pays for services such as FastMail, Dropbox, Newsblur, 1Password, or YouTube (premium).…

> Are your taxes funding browsers? If no, then are you s uggesting that only the privileged should have access to a good, modern browser? Jesus Christ reddit, stop.

Post by frogpelt » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 5:31 PM UTC

Majestic121 wrote: post #180

rusk wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right ... It really isn’t inconceivable that they wouldn’t have got funding from somewhere else. It was a marketing opportunity for Google, them being the David to Microsoft’s Goliath. Remember that whole ”don’t be evil” thing? Turns out it was jusy a ruse to be abandoned once the market had consolidated.

The triple negative in your sentence makes it confusing. I expected that you wanted to say : It is conceivable that they would have got funding from somewhere else

Post by johnchristopher » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 5:35 PM UTC

FreeFull wrote: post #155

johnchristopher wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, please. You make it sound like Mozilla is equivalent to Facebook. Is that a smear campaign ? You can donate to the Mozilla foundation. Have you ? Have you convinced your company or your friends to do so ? Because that's a better alternative than outright singling Mozilla out for their ties to Google. Which last time I checked didn't make the user the product of Google like Chrome or Android does.

Firefox is developed by the Mozilla Corporation (a subsidiary of the Foundation). Money donated towards the Foundation doesn't go towards Firefox development. The Corporation has it's own income sources (including money from Google), and actually a lot of money from the Corporation ends up going to the Foundation, to further the mission of "Making web free".

Post by billiam » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

munmaek wrote: post #130

freediver wrote: post #111

I am not a Firefox user but know that matching Webkit performance on macOS is going to be very hard. So just fired a test on my Macbook Air - Safari 13 vs Firefox 70. Opened top 10 links from techmeme. Both windows in background. Firefox 70: Energy use 30-200; CPU 20-25%; Threads 82 Safari 13: Energy use 0.1-5; CPU 2-5%; Threads 11 If this is to celebrate I can only imagine what the things looked like before this rel…

Test: open 10 tabs of techmeme.com, on OSX Catalina (10.15 Beta), on a 2015 retina 13" macbook pro. Firefox: Threads 71, %CPU 2.5. Energy: 0.4. Opening the tabs all at once took up ~68% CPU. Energy went up to 75. Safari: threads: 8, %CPU: 0.7-2. When opening the tabs: %CPU: 28%. Energy usage: 2.4. Firefox grew sluggish when opening that many tabs at once. Safari handled it like a champ. Pretty bleak for firefox.