551–560 of 602 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IE was hated for being unreliable, lax on security and lacking in modern features. Safari / WebKit is incredibly performant and reliable with a modern feature set. Personally I’m not a fan of the UI but I guess it gets the job done.
I said "also hated", as in "in addition".
The problem is there are almost 0 alternatives beyond Firefox so if you don’t like their UX you’re stuck. All the “new” browsers are just chromium skins (edge, arc, etc.) Are there any real competitors building a new browser?
This a problem for me. I've been a long time Firefox user, but the UI/UX has stagnated (like all browsers) for so long. I'm enjoying using Arc at the moment because it's rethinking a lot of things that bug me about the traditional browser UI paradigm but I also know that it's a trendy startup that could either: explode, decide to change features radically at the drop of a hat (pivot), or simple do something distastef…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm curious what "its own vision" was Well, back in the late 90s it was all about ActiveX and integration with other Windows components and applications in order to shove all other browsers out of the marketplace, gain dominance over the web, and further bolster the Windows hegemony by doing so. So, as one trivial example, you could export a Word document as a web page, open it up in IE and it would look great. But…
In the 90s many things were only possible with ActiveX or Java Applets. ActiveX just had the nice side effect of only running on Windows and IE. But, it's important to remember browsers were much much less capable than they are today. I was writing 'webapps' and manipulating the dom and javascript was sloooow (on both IE or FF). One hack I did was have the server dynamically writing js code (instead of doing somethin…
It also had the nice side effect of being the security equivalent of a sucking chest wound. Flash and Java Applets were bad too (c.f. the famous Java classloader vulnerability, which could be exploited by loading a malicious applet), but they didn't seem to be nearly as bad as the horror that was ActiveX. Perhaps it was because ActiveX was intentionally designed to integrate with the host OS, or because it was more deeply integrated into the browser, but my recollection of ActiveX is that Microsoft never managed to get security right for ActiveX, and the way that ActiveX security was "solved" was by ditching ActiveX entirely.
What is the excuse of all people reading this thread in agreement and still using Chrome? As I mentioned elsewhere, this is preaching to the choir. A choir of Chrome users. Google wouldn't be so dominant if tech people like us would stop making lazy excuses to continue its hegemony. In Dante's Divina Commedia , there is a circle of hell for those too lazy to take a stance [1]. If it were written today, it would inclu…
Remember the "Safari is the new IE" narrative? Just because Safari doesn't support some API doesn't make it IE, IE wasn't an inferior browser at the beginning either. What made IE the IE everyone hates was its departure from standards(?) and enforcing its own vision of the web thanks to its enormous market share. On IE's case, MS probably stagnated it to prevent competition against its desktop Apps business and on Go…
"Chrome is the new IE" is laughable. Apparently you know nothing about history. Chrome has its sins but it is no where near comparing the evil of MS shoveling their OS and Office to peoples throats.
Private mail servers becoming near impossible to setup on our own because of GMAIL and DKIM witchcraftery with mail servers?
With the main online media tracking the user preferences on music and video too, minus the porn?
They cut down Gtalk/Jabber integration, too.
Heck, Google is what we were afraid of MS in late 90's/early 2000's on galaxy levels.
What is the excuse of all people reading this thread in agreement and still using Chrome? As I mentioned elsewhere, this is preaching to the choir. A choir of Chrome users. Google wouldn't be so dominant if tech people like us would stop making lazy excuses to continue its hegemony. In Dante's Divina Commedia , there is a circle of hell for those too lazy to take a stance [1]. If it were written today, it would inclu…
I use Firefox at home, but my work (large company) has standardized on everyone using Chrome to the point of writing custom Chrome extensions. So at work I use Chrome because it is essentially required. I wonder how many enterprise workers are in the same boat, even just due to security folks wanting to focus on a single browser and thus getting the company to mandate the use of Chrome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IE was absolutely hated for not evolving. I'm curious what "its own vision" was, other than "do as little as possible, while Mozilla and Opera keeps pushing forward." Now, this is from the perspective of the web developer. I don't think IE was ever hated the same way from the end-user perspective. Chrome is still innovating, but now end-users hate it, because it's trying to be too much. The "new IE" hat still belongs…
No it was not hated for evolving. It was hated because it made banks and many web sites enforcing people to use Windows. Chrome is nowhere near it.
For all IE's weaknesses, it didn't "make" banks do any such thing. They chose that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
(I'll just copy/paste from a previous comment) 1. Under her leadership Mozilla has lost virtually all of its users. It has been reduced to less than 10% of what it had before, maybe worse - I haven't kept up. 2. At the beginning of Covid, a time when remote work was on the rise and tech valuations were through the roof, a time when the browser was more important than ever, she took her largest payout and fired hundre…
Oh come on now, that's a ridiculous statement. That's AT BEST one year for a small team of 5 people working anywhere near Mozilla's headquarters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Need to mention WebUSB[1] too since it's only implemented and forced on Chromium. [1]: https://caniuse.com/webusb
WebUSB is a hostile move? It's pretty awesome tbh.
WebUSB is an open standard. Other browsers will eventually support it. Is Google supposed to wait around until Mozilla and Apple decide to do the work before they are allowed to release a feature? Its actually good that Google implements standards quickly because it puts pressure on the other vendors to do so as well.