81–90 of 405 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IE made life miserable for developers. I am not sure we would have cared if it were not moribund.
Whereas Chrome makes life miserable for users not using Chrome, because of the sheer amount of non-standard, Chrome-only features used in current webdev.
I have to say this is one of the instances where I’m glad Apple’s hunger for profit and privacy engineering intersect. On Mac at least with Safari there is a privacy oriented browser left. Maybe Apple could revive Safari on Windows?
What about Chromium isn't privacy focussed? It was my understanding that all of Google's grubby code isn't present.
It's Chromium with ad-blocking / anti-fingerprinting built in, so even more privacy preserving by default.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google’s business is search engine and advertising, not browser market share. Also helps with an anti-trust case.
If you don’t think Crome is a substantive part of google’s core business, I think we’re gonna talk past each other this whole time.
The mentioning of DoD contractors made we wonder: would the EU help fund the development of Firefox, in order to secure competition in the browser market? Mozilla would need to restructure and move Firefox to the foundation, but MDN, Firefox and possibly Rust could be funded by donations, corporate sponsors and perhaps the EU, assuming the money could be directed correctly. It would require a management skilled in se…
I'm all stoked for publicly funded open-source software, but somehow The EU and most governments seem to be pretty bad at doing this. I recall numerous initiatives that aimed to create open-source ecosystems with massive amounts of public money (billions of euros for some projects) in the past, each and every one one of them ended up as a big disaster. The latest attempt at publicly funded software is Gaia-X, the EU'…
Who appoints the board of Mozilla? What will it take for them to be replaced? Can they even be replaced? It's apparent they're protecting a CEO who in any other organisation would have been canned years ago.
Personally and strictly my own ignorant and informal opinion, Firefox and by extension Mozilla Corp. was doomed the moment it decided to compete with Chrome by being more like Chrome. Firefox built its userbase by being different than the dominant browser, then decided the only way to not die was to be exactly like the dominant browser except with less icky behind-the-scenes privacy behavior. That was a fundamental m…
To be fair, part of what distinguished Firefox from the original Mozilla browser was that it was more similar to Internet Explorer, e.g. supporting alt+D to focus the location field and that kind of thing. But I agree that becoming too much like Chrome is a bad idea - if I wanted Chrome, I would use Chrome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This would likely require the bulk of Mozilla to be based in Europe. It could be achieved for sure, but it would take years to transfer the relevant knowledge. I don't expect MoFo and MoCo leadership to be willing to entertain such possibilities, considering how "valley" their outlook seems to be.
>but it would take years to transfer the relevant knowledge. A) The people with the knowledge just have been fired and are free to move and to be hired B) Thanks to corona, remote work is a fully accepted option Something new can be running next week or even tomorrow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the constant deprecation of power features and customizability They made ONE switch to a superior and standard extension model, and HN loses its minds. Do you really think you're in the majority here? Making it a more secure, faster and just better browser is just the only way forward. Without that Firefox would just be slow as hell, wouldn't play YouTube or Netflix videos, and not have any extensions left because…
> They made ONE switch How many plugins work with the new Firefox on Android? > standard extension model One were Google already declared that APIs used for ad blockers are considered deprecated and might be dropped at any time? With one major browser vendor being actively hostile towards a large amount of plugins that "standard" doesn't do much. It certainly doesn't guarantee portability unless Mozilla completely ju…
Personally and strictly my own ignorant and informal opinion, Firefox and by extension Mozilla Corp. was doomed the moment it decided to compete with Chrome by being more like Chrome. Firefox built its userbase by being different than the dominant browser, then decided the only way to not die was to be exactly like the dominant browser except with less icky behind-the-scenes privacy behavior. That was a fundamental m…
> the constant deprecation of power features and customizability They made ONE switch to a superior and standard extension model, and HN loses its minds. Do you really think you're in the majority here? Making it a more secure, faster and just better browser is just the only way forward. Without that Firefox would just be slow as hell, wouldn't play YouTube or Netflix videos, and not have any extensions left because…