Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 70

hacks.mozilla.org

451–460 of 468 posts

Re: Firefox 70

#451
post #380
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems about right, except for Mitchell's involvement. As I remember it, it was more Brendan's call than Mitchell's. She did not ask for his resignation. At least from what I heard, he decided that the backlash was doing too much damage to Mozilla and stepped down.

How do you think Brendan arrived at that decision? Of course you saw the public product of their conversations, it's natural to think that.

And it's natural to assume that things match your preexisting biases, as well.

All I will say is that I do have quite a bit more to go on than public announcements. I have worked for Mozilla for a long time, including during that event (but not the original uproar over prop 8 donations) and was familiar with the people involved, and am basing my opinions on body language and insider knowledge. But much of that is not mine to share, and there's no reason for people to believe a rando like me anyway, so I'd rather not get into details. It would just lead to accusations of spin or insincerity (justifiably so; you have no reason to trust me.)

Re: Firefox 70

#452
post #280
post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, back in the day, I believe you were supposed to pay for Netscape. That changed once the Mozilla Foundation was started and Netscape's codebase was open sourced.

Netscape was "free for educational use" and anyone could download it free of charge. According to one old hand at Netscape (JWZ? Eich?) they checked their server logs for which corporate IPs downloaded it most often and had their sales team contact the freeloading companies. I think they were also planning to sell licenses to ISPs and modem vendors for use as pack-in software. Then MS released IE for free, no strings…

Yes, you are correct. IE was "built" into Windows, and Microsoft strong armed OEM's to not pre-installing it for fear of losing a Windows License. Downloading Netscape was a lot different when most people had only 56k Modems as their connection. Most people didn't bother and just stuck with the pre-installed IE.

Re: Firefox 70

#453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are other options (paid ones) that are equal —or even better since they are quite automatic— than ublock. The only two things I'm missing in safari to be hones are: - A no-script extension or similar. - Sync part of my work is on a no macOS machines I don't have safari there, so no sync. I partially overcome this with bookmaster for bookmarks, but I still missing tabs and read it later list. However, firefox do…

Firefox Sync syncs your tabs, bookmarks, passwords, etc. Your read it later list is synced through Pocket (which is owned by Mozilla). They exist on desktop and mobile.

Pocket sucks big time!

Re: Firefox 70

#454
post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On Windows I've been testing the new MS Edge because I've noticed my laptop has significantly higher CPU usage running FF. The reduced battery life is one thing, a hot laptop is another. Currently the new Edge is not as well optimized as the original, but there's more to come on that front. I've been using FF since it was in beta, never left but I'm starting to come around to the reality that native browsers are best…

Yes, I also observe much more power drawn even on a single page (especially if it contains animations) opened in Firefox vs any other browser, and on Windows, IE is significantly less power hungry. I've also checked this newest version, 70 on Windows and my measurement of the power use give practically identical results to the measurements I've done almost two years ago. I see that the power drain comes from the brow…

I hate to followup with a 2nd response but I wanted to add, it really would be a poor priority anyway because they'll never be able to beat Apple or MS at optimizing a browser for their OS.

My advice to Mozilla would be to continue on the customizability and privacy route, and get Firefox on iOS in better shape. It's been freezing on me for as long as I can remember using it. Very buggy, and has played a significant role in losing some confidence in Mozilla.

This message and all of my messages in this thread posted from Microsoft Edge 78.0.276.20 (Official build) beta (64-bit).

Re: Firefox 70

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also use Brave browser, it's basically Chrome with the ad tracking removed. With that, almost no reason to switch to another browser.

Interesting. Any downside of Brave? Small userbase, etc ?

I use it in my Android, because it allows me to have an ad blocking browser without rooting and without installing any additional software.

My gripe there is that it started showing push notifications of ads!!! Once I blocked all its notifications everything went to normality.

Re: Firefox 70

#456
post #328

Please excuse my ignorance, but why is this being published from "hacks.mozilla.org"? Is that just the name of their technical blog? It sounds like a platform that's more clandestine / unofficial to be used to announce a public release.

You do realize that you are writing this comment on a site literally called "Hacker News", right? (and yes, that is simply their technical blog)

Yes, the irony of my comment did not escape me :) I guess I was just seeking confirmation. Cheers.

Re: Firefox 70

#457
post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I also observe much more power drawn even on a single page (especially if it contains animations) opened in Firefox vs any other browser, and on Windows, IE is significantly less power hungry. I've also checked this newest version, 70 on Windows and my measurement of the power use give practically identical results to the measurements I've done almost two years ago. I see that the power drain comes from the brow…

If you would share any of your findings, I'd be interested to see that. From what I've read, Mozilla can't really optimize rendering to the level of Safari & Edge. I found this article[0] on WebRender to be very interesting on this front. The author noted- "Note: Painting and compositing is where browser rendering engines are the most different from each other. Single-platform browsers (Edge and Safari) work a bit di…

My notebook happens to have a fan calibrated to turn on when the CPU gets "too hot" where the point is above of what is consumed by IE to show the pages with more videos, so I actually hear the power consumption of Firefox and I simply don't hear it for the same page when opened in IE.

So for me is simply: open some page, hear the fan for as long as the page remains open. Do the same with IE, silence.

BTW I otherwise haven't IE used for daily browsing, but I did a lot of tests with the same pages to see that it's not an accident and that IE does show the same content, but with less power used.

For somebody with a different computer: find any web page with more media playing on the page (you should see the videos playing or pictures "animating"), open the task manager (this is a Windows example) then switch to the graph view and compare the browsers while looking at the graph view. The task manager area "under the curve" reflects the power used -- the more CPU used for a given amount of time -- the more power used. In my observations the area drawn by Firefox is more that twice as big as the one by IE.

That's what drains the battery faster: taking more CPU to keep the "animations" on the page. Moreover Firefox has some consumption created by some of its background tasks even when the pages aren't animated, but the animations are really wasting a lot of power.

From my look at the behavior, having some experience in evaluating the performance of the software, and spending some time trying to figure out what's happening there, my impression is that the source of that power drain is in the Firefox code which is not platform specific which explains why they have problems on every platforms with that.

I've concluded they simply never actively tried to minimize overall CPU and GPU use (both will use more power unless somebody measures and tries to improve the code): even when they did move some pieces of processing to the GPU, their motivation was speeding up what's visible, actively minimizing the power used was simply not the part of their process.

You can also search their Bugzilla to see how they handle the problems with the CPU, GPU use and the power drain. This can be a part of the workflow, measuring that at least for every release and acting to fix the issues, but I just don't see that anywhere.

Re: Firefox 70

#458
post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's slight difference in that in Firefox's case tech journals will be writing about it, everyone else will be talking about it and it will be on front page of HN. In the case of random extension going rogue it will likely get unnoticed for years and when it is finally noticed there's a small chance it will be picked by HN if planets align.

Maybe. Take a look at my exchange with u/LoSboccacc a parallel branch of this thread. If what he claims is correct (I don't know, but he seems pretty confident) then there is already a huge gaping security hole in FF that no one is talking about (AFAICT).

not only is factual, it comes with linked sources for all the claimed points

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21336440

Re: Firefox 70

#459
post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. Take a look at my exchange with u/LoSboccacc a parallel branch of this thread. If what he claims is correct (I don't know, but he seems pretty confident) then there is already a huge gaping security hole in FF that no one is talking about (AFAICT).

not only is factual, it comes with linked sources for all the claimed points https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21336440

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

Yes, the text on that page can be interpreted as supporting your position. Still, "Offer a password manager..." is not quite the same thing as "silently read all of your passwords and do whatever the extension wants with them..." I have a very hard time believing that the latter is the case and that no one has sounded the alarm on this yet.

Also, add-ons have been deprecated in favor of extensions.

Re: Firefox 70

#460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Any downside of Brave? Small userbase, etc ?

I use it in my Android, because it allows me to have an ad blocking browser without rooting and without installing any additional software. My gripe there is that it started showing push notifications of ads!!! Once I blocked all its notifications everything went to normality.

This would be a showstopper for me. Turning off the notifications addresses only part of the issue, I would never trust them again.

Why not use Firefox?

Post reply on HN