41–50 of 67 posts
Older versions of I.E are nimble and fast compared to it.
This is the same rant one said about windows many years ago, one should not bloat and add more and more features. The answer is still the same, things need to evolve if it gives meaning and give improved user experience and value. It is only natural to bundle more and more functionality in a product. Many years ago IE 6 won the browser war and was set in maintenance mode for many years, but no progress made it easy f…
I don't think critics disagree with this notion. Rather they disagree that the bloat gives meaning/improved user experience/value. It admits the existence of incompetence and perverse incentives. The latter seems like a natural consequence of profit-driven development when user satisfaction is only loosely and partially tied to profit.
> Enough is enough. What I don't like about this post is too much emotion, not much action. > If you’re a Google engineer who is still working on AMP, you are a disgrace to your field. Really? Career shaming? That's very low of the author to do. Why are they a disgrace?
Other than the fact that they work for Google, I assume?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We live in an unethical economy. Do you expect everyone to be able to live off founding an ethical startup?
This, and if all the devs shun a particular company as large as Facebook, it will just increase the salary offer until someone take it. There's always a price for someone to bend their ethics.
That doesn't make it any more OK for you (ie, any specific developer) to bend your ethics.
Also, increasing the cost for unethical practices will at least discourage some corporations from engaging in them.
It is a fair criticism of Apple that they limit new experimental features to promote native apps, but looking at this a user perspective (OK, just my perspective) is that I want functional web apps that perform a service (good examples our the web interfaces for ProtonMail, FastMail, and Gmail) for use cases that truly need a web app, but for most "content centric" web sites I want great content and pleasant looking layout - things that can be achieved with HTML and CSS.
To continue my little rant, the noise to signal ratio is getting so bad on the web that I now try to find people who really have something useful to say (Ryan Holiday, Azeem Azar, Matt Taibi) and pay for content.
I think tech like WASM is cool, but its proper use cases are few and far between.
> Enough is enough. What I don't like about this post is too much emotion, not much action. > If you’re a Google engineer who is still working on AMP, you are a disgrace to your field. Really? Career shaming? That's very low of the author to do. Why are they a disgrace?
In all seriousness I think it's fair to judge people by their actions and tell them in simple terms that you don't approve of them. Not just fair; I think it's fundamental to society that we are able and willing to do so, and that the recipients are able to feel shame as a result. This curbs antisocial behavior.
The argument that browsers should stop trying to become an OS on top of the OS (e.g. webUSB) deserves better than this overly emotional rant. The browser that has been holding the line in this respect, Safari, is dismissed without explanation.
Mobile safari has intimate links into the OS, intercepting links and sending them to apps, and no real ability to filter content. (content blockers are opt-out - and you have no ability to even know what is loading)
> Enough is enough. What I don't like about this post is too much emotion, not much action. > If you’re a Google engineer who is still working on AMP, you are a disgrace to your field. Really? Career shaming? That's very low of the author to do. Why are they a disgrace?
I don't understand this assumption that "x shaming" is inherently a negative thing. Shame is an essential social emotion. I don't see what's wrong with shaming people for unethical or immoral choices they choose to make.
This is the same rant one said about windows many years ago, one should not bloat and add more and more features. The answer is still the same, things need to evolve if it gives meaning and give improved user experience and value. It is only natural to bundle more and more functionality in a product. Many years ago IE 6 won the browser war and was set in maintenance mode for many years, but no progress made it easy f…
- the web is technically open but the browsers are the gatekeepers.
- browsers are FUCKING HARD to build. Very very hard. So many details. And you are the #1 target for malicious hackers.
- Rewriting the renderer for things like Firefox Quantum takes a lot of work, because every freaken webpage has to work on firefox. Every single one ever. That has been a HUGE challenge.
So at the end, yeah, lots of companies are trying to make money making a browser that everyone else (especially google) is giving away for free. So of course they are gonna try to do anything in their power to make money. Of course Mozilla is gonna start positioning themselves as the "privacy focused" browser and sell a VPN. The list goes on.
The question is: What can we do differently?