Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft fixes 5-year-old Defender bug, reducing Firefox-related CPU use by 75%

bugzilla.mozilla.org

1–10 of 443 posts

Re: Microsoft fixes 5-year-old Defender bug, reducing Firefox-related CPU use by 75%

#4
post #3

I would like anyone that considers Microsoft to be a recent champion of Open Source to reflect on corporate doublespeak. It's plausible that this bug was engineered as an attack on Firefox.

Devils advocate, why then did they fix it?

Re: Microsoft fixes 5-year-old Defender bug, reducing Firefox-related CPU use by 75%

#5
post #3

I would like anyone that considers Microsoft to be a recent champion of Open Source to reflect on corporate doublespeak. It's plausible that this bug was engineered as an attack on Firefox.

Very interesting point. They might have had the intentions of pushing everyone to use Edge, and it is not surprising after their so many consistent nags and misleading messages to think its the "better" browser compared to anything else.

Re: Microsoft fixes 5-year-old Defender bug, reducing Firefox-related CPU use by 75%

#6
post #4
post #3

I would like anyone that considers Microsoft to be a recent champion of Open Source to reflect on corporate doublespeak. It's plausible that this bug was engineered as an attack on Firefox.

Devils advocate, why then did they fix it?

slow walk.. or.. in comparison, have you contacted your local city government to fix obvious holes in the road recently? Around here, a two-year wait time to fix it is common.

Re: Microsoft fixes 5-year-old Defender bug, reducing Firefox-related CPU use by 75%

#7
post #4
post #3

I would like anyone that considers Microsoft to be a recent champion of Open Source to reflect on corporate doublespeak. It's plausible that this bug was engineered as an attack on Firefox.

Devils advocate, why then did they fix it?

Because it became public knowledge that it was happening?

Re: Microsoft fixes 5-year-old Defender bug, reducing Firefox-related CPU use by 75%

#9
That's one way to look at it, but a very biased take. An equally valid take is that Firefox was calling an expensive platform feature too often, and even though it has been killing performance for years (possibly, for the entire history of the project) nobody noticed or bothered to fix it on the application side.
Post reply on HN