Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ladybird browser spreads its wings

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 319 posts

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#211

Post by Aachen »

manuelmoreale wrote: post #33
nutrie wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what is wrong with Firefox. It is open-source, highly configurable and reasonably secure (if you have the time to configure). Yes, it has shortcomings, but what doesn't.

Nothing, it’s my default browser for dev work but it’s only alive because Google keeps paying them to exist basically so I’d love an alternative.

How's that alternative funded? Shouldn't Mozilla want to replace their Google payment with that instead? Or, failing that, wouldn't it be much lower budget to fork Firefox code instead?

And then to do it in C++ when other browsers and kernels are flirting with things like Rust. How long will it take for people to trust this new C++ code? I applaud the effort but am worried it'll be in vain. Then again, with how many projects I start not because they make sense but because I enjoy them, perhaps I should see it more in that way

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#212

Post by bmacho »

viraptor wrote: post #172
JimDabell wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Mozilla doesn’t seem to care about Firefox; why should anybody else? The primary value in Firefox existing right now is that the web standards process becomes dysfunctional when there are only two major browser rendering engines, but that is fading away with Firefox’s market share. Hopefully Ladybird can gain enough momentum to matter there because it doesn’t seem like Gecko can maintain its relevance.

We're in the current situation because Google could spend enough money on promoting Chrome. That's it. A different, or even better browser won't change that. Google can put a chrome ad everywhere again for a few months.

I feel firefox market share is mostly because they actively enshittificate their browser, and not because of google ads, or chrome being better.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#213

Post by frognumber »

oskarkk wrote: post #32

One commenter who worked on Firefox made a nice blog post in response, about what it takes to make a web browser: https://robert.ocallahan.org/2024/06/browser-engine.html

If I were building this, I wouldn't do that.

I would build one piece, as a well-documented Pythonic (not in Python; just in coding / documentation style) library.

The reason this is impossible is the monolithic design of these things. There are good reasons for it -- the pieces interrelate -- but I think it's possible to break it up (with a lot of work).

For example:

- A clean, documented JavaScript engine would be a good start.

- Python-style, independent, isolated JavaScript libraries would help (usable serverside or clientside where possible)

- An independent rendering engine would be nice -- again, documented and independent of the above

- Network libraries

- HTML / XML / CSS parsing libraries

... etc.

If this were in place, code could be interchangeable between serverside and clientside much more than today (and usable in other places, such as using JS as a scripting language in other systems).

Test cases for rendering (or even just making a screenshot) wouldn't need the whole browser. You would import and call into the rendering engine to make a .png without selenium.

Making a new web browser would involve mostly glue code and OS-specific code.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#214

Post by sharlos201068 »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #194
erremerre wrote: post #133

Although I dont like quite a few Firefox decisions. Like the floating tabs which no easy way to revert. I still think Firefox as a browser is fairly decent. And I also think that ladybird is going to have all the problems that Opera Presto had (and now Firefox has) which is going to be ignored by any small developers, and targeted to generate errors by the big companies (google/microsoft...) I definitely would have p…

If enough people use different browsers then we'll get effective and slower standards once again. I think the only way to get people on other browsers is to legally require ballots on first use of an OS/device with random order. It worked in the EU, it can work in the US too.

How did it work in the EU? Almost the entire planet uses Chrome including the EU.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#215

Post by sharlos201068 »

wakeupcall wrote: post #113
miki123211 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is open source, it would be far easier for the community to make a stripped down Firefox port with no telemetry, no ads and no upsells for Mozilla services. With that said, almost all of Mozilla's revenue comes from Google, which might possibly influence what features they implement, their stance on various web standards etc.

As pointed out, these do exist. I've been using several over the decades. And chrome forks too. They all tend to lag behind over time, until the fork is eventually too old and it's either abandoned, useful changes I was relying on are dropped, or becomes just too old compared to upstream to be fully compatible (and thus just annoying to use). Just the burden to upkeep the upstream changes, in either firefox or chrome…

Keeping up with an already built browser is too hard so we’ll create an entirely new browser that takes even more work?

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#216

Post by SahAssar »

dralley wrote: post #175
safety1st wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well to put it bluntly, Firefox is Google's bitch. If we want the web to be a multi-vendor platform based on open, multi-vendor standards, as it has been for parts of its history, how much does Firefox really buy us? Do we really think that Firefox will take a hard stand against Google if their survival depends on not doing so? I use Firefox, but I think it's no longer true to its original mission in a lot of ways, S…

What are you talking about? Mozilla repeatedly stands up to Google on big ticket items. Flock being probably the biggest in recent history, but you can throw Manifest v2 on the pile as well and about half a dozen others.

> Flock

For the benefit of those not in the know: FLoC https://wicg.github.io/floc/

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#217

Post by paulryanrogers »

sharlos201068 wrote: post #214
paulryanrogers wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If enough people use different browsers then we'll get effective and slower standards once again. I think the only way to get people on other browsers is to legally require ballots on first use of an OS/device with random order. It worked in the EU, it can work in the US too.

How did it work in the EU? Almost the entire planet uses Chrome including the EU.

In the early 2010s a ballot appeared for new users on Windows [0], though the legal requirement expired only a few years later.

It helped other browsers gain market share. Sadly it's not enough alone. Major web players can promote their own browser and sabotage others, even if only by neglecting to test them. IMO a permanent ballot law is needed alongside restrictions from major web vendors pushing their own browser's and relying on their own browsers non-standard features.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#218

Post by erremerre »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #194
erremerre wrote: post #133

Although I dont like quite a few Firefox decisions. Like the floating tabs which no easy way to revert. I still think Firefox as a browser is fairly decent. And I also think that ladybird is going to have all the problems that Opera Presto had (and now Firefox has) which is going to be ignored by any small developers, and targeted to generate errors by the big companies (google/microsoft...) I definitely would have p…

If enough people use different browsers then we'll get effective and slower standards once again. I think the only way to get people on other browsers is to legally require ballots on first use of an OS/device with random order. It worked in the EU, it can work in the US too.

Unfortunately that is not how it works. The only way to get different browsers is to get absolutely every single OS project with some traction to force installation of them, to show advertisement everywhere, and to couple it with the installation of any piece of software, and to set it as default, plus import silently everything.

Anything that is not a dirty tactic will not work.

Also, the moment a user got an error they dont understand in certain browser, they blame the browser and change. How do you think firefox got out of business?

Have you tried using Firefox to request an appointment with the Spanish Drive and Vehicle License Administration? It wont work. The civil servant will tell you use chrome.

When a user get 2 or 3 use chrome to work, they will just use whatever it works. They won the browser war, adding ladybug to steal from firefox, is also not going to help either.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#219

Post by usef- »

segfaltnh wrote: post #135
voidwtf wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s curiosity because I’m involved in software security for the company I work for and I’m a software developer that primarily works with managed languages. I unfortunately lack the technical expertise to make an assessment on interpreters and virtual machines. I am, however, aware that many of the CVEs that I review involve reading/writing memory outside the intended bounds. Many of these while processing user gene…

What you're describing is not curiosity.

I think it is, but perhaps I read the grandparent comments that way because I was curious about it too...

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#220

Post by Y_Y »

PrayagS wrote: post #77
lukan wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every open source software has spyware and ads activated by default, while marketing itself as privacy friendly. Yes, can all be deactivated, I also use FF, but I do not trust Mozilla anymore.

Ikr. They're up to some questionable decisions since long. - Acquire companies like Pocket, Anonym in multi-million dollar deals and also the millions in bonuses that the CEO likes to enjoy. - At the same time, no significant expenditure towards developing its core software. Firefox is still ridden with bugs. They even went as far as firing the people that used to work on Servo, Rust, WASM, etc. I think it's clear to…

I see some nice parallels with Wikipedia. Makes me wonder if anyone's yet developed a theory of "foundation capture" where you find some marvellous free thing that is made for and by humanity at large and extract/redirect money from its market share/good will.
Post reply on HN