Ladybird browser spreads its wings • Hacker News Board

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#291

Post by ranger_danger » Fri, Jun 21, 2024, 6:40 PM UTC

8organicbits wrote: post #281

immibis wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then nobody will ever use your browser. Simple as that.

I think people forget the early 2000s. Many sites only worked on IE but Firefox was the better browser. Firefox users had an extension that would open certain links in IE or open the current page in IE via the context menu. If a lightweight browser could be significantly faster and more secure, people would tolerate using two browsers again. Although Ladybird hasn't reached that bar. YouTube certainly could use a sma…

> YT regularly breaks on Firefox

Source? I've never had a single problem ever, and I don't know anyone else that has either.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#292

Post by ranger_danger » Fri, Jun 21, 2024, 6:41 PM UTC

philistine wrote: post #264

hailruda wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chosing Discord was a deliberate choice. I remember when Serenity was using IRC as the only communication channel and immediately after setting up a new Discord server the community gravitated towards it. Infact, the number of community members sky rocketed. The fact is, Discord as a platform is more accessible compared to IRC.

Sounds like someone should work on Discord-ifying IRC to make it more palatable for the modern user.

That would be Matrix.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#293

Post by Lammy » Fri, Jun 21, 2024, 7:13 PM UTC

asddubs wrote: post #99

Lammy wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google co-opted an already common term into a Proper Noun™. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Chrome http://www.catb.org/%7Eesr/jargon/html/C/chrome.html Netscape called it that and thus so does Mozilla. Try loading up `chrome://branding/content/about-logo.png` for an example of the chrome URI scheme in Firefox!

Specifically google originally chose that name for chrome because one of their goals was reduction of chrome. They made a bit deal out of it when the browser was new, how it didn't have a bunch of menu bars or whatever

The Scott McCloud comic mentions this on page #24: https://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/big_24.html

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#294

Post by dishsoap » Fri, Jun 21, 2024, 7:29 PM UTC

dsalfdslfdsa wrote: post #21

I was recently browsing their docs, and kept finding references to choosing a "browser chrome" (options including Qt and AppKit). Is this some new usage of the word "chrome" that I'm not familiar with, or does it use chrome libraries?

>Is this some new usage of the word "chrome" that I'm not familiar with, or does it use chrome libraries?

Neither.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#295

Post by Wowfunhappy » Fri, Jun 21, 2024, 7:54 PM UTC

voytec wrote: post #265

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't the submission get user flagged anyway? Because when people clicked it, they'd see something NSFW and devoid of interesting content.

Flagged for what? In this case user - me - was unaware that submitted content gets replaced when requested with Referer header mentioning HN. There should be a 'you cannot post this' warning instead of hidden post creation. I only noticed shadowban by accident: switched to logged-in browser to submit and went back to logged-out for browsing.

> Flagged for what?

Flagged for being NSFW and devoid of interesting content. The average user, like you, is unaware that the content they are seeing is different from the content you submitted.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#296

Post by viraptor » Fri, Jun 21, 2024, 10:21 PM UTC

bmacho wrote: post #212

viraptor wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There's barely any enshitification in Firefox. People like to complain there, because any tiny addition looks bad in comparison. But it's not even close to Chrome's default. An average user is unlikely to notice either though.

But while Chrome was growing, the ad campaign was crazy. You could not miss it - Google results, Gmail header, every Adsense anywhere. Everyone was told to install Chrome when they used internet, every day - there was no escape.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#297

Post by krackers » Fri, Jun 21, 2024, 10:29 PM UTC

sprash wrote: post #42

As long as they don't get rid of the Qt dependency the project is a bit pointless. If you are using Qt anyways Qt Webview offers already a superior way to render HTML than Ladybird.

On mac there's a native appkit backend, no qt needed as far as i can see.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#298

Post by ranger_danger » Fri, Jun 21, 2024, 10:49 PM UTC

immibis wrote: post #267

starbugs wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You want to support YouTube, don't you? Of course no. You can use a bloated browser for that.

Then nobody will ever use your browser. Simple as that.

It doesn't need to be mainstream, that will probably ruin it anyways.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#299

Post by voidwtf » Sat, Jun 22, 2024, 12:22 AM UTC

alexvitkov wrote: post #268

voidwtf wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t mention rust, I don’t know Rust and if I were trying to start a similar project I might do so in .NET Core because of my familiarity with .NET. I’m asking because I don’t know if there is a reason it would not be viable, is the garbage collection too much of a hurdle to get decent performance while trying to interpret JavaScript? Is there too much overhead tracking claims on memory and doing the bounds check…

I apologize - when people mention "memory safe" nowadays 95% of the time they're talking about Rust, I made an assumption. Interpreting JavaScript at all it at all is a problem. Ladybird's LibJS compiles it to bytecode and interprets that (which is usually better than intereprting the AST). The bytecode interpreter is written in C++, and it's still pretty damn slow - websites take a long time to load, and LibJS is th…

This may be the biggest gap in my understanding. I didn’t realize that at some point the JavaScript is turned into instructions running directly on metal, I thought everything occurred within a synthetic/virtual environment.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#300

Post by ArtixFox » Sat, Jun 22, 2024, 1:38 AM UTC

m000 wrote: post #147

znpy wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I'm curious > Is it really curiosity though? I'm kind of annoyed at this whole train of comments ("I'm curious..."). In so many occasion I see something cool and the main comment track is "why hasn't this been writte in rust?" (or some other allegedly safe/better programming language). It's like seeing a beautiful painting being painted and arguing about the kind of paintbrush the painter has used. It's so sad.

> It's like seeing a beautiful painting being painted and arguing about the kind of paintbrush the painter has used. No it is not. You don't use your browser for its artistic value (which is in the eye of the beholder). You also don't make an announcement for a painting. This is more like using a non-inox screw in a high-humidity environment. Yes, it will hold on for a while. But it is objectively a bad choice. Non-i…

90% of all safety critical software is written in c/c++

There is no good safety language right now to write a browser in, except for c/c++. Rust might sound like an alternative but it's safety story is sad when compared to c/c++.

Ada might be a cool option, so is ATS.