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

A look at Firefox forks

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 390 posts

Re: A look at Firefox forks

#201

Post by paldepind2 »

TranquilMarmot wrote: post #163
tcfunk wrote: post #77

I've been using zen lately mostly for the combination of "essentials" + "workspace" tab management scheme. I love having a space for tabs while also having a spot to pin stuff like email and bluesky which doesn't necessarily fit into one category or other. Admittedly I haven't tried many other options, except sidebery which was good but not quite there for me.

Firefox has vertical tabs and tab groups now; those aren't specific to Zen

Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither vertical tabs nor tab groups are fully ready and shipped.

From a quick search, it seems that you need to make edits in `about:config` to enable tab groups and use nightly to access vertical tabs.

Re: A look at Firefox forks

#203

Post by alok-g »

In Firefox, you can choose a local html file as your home page, but not as a new tab page. This is allegedly because of some security concerns. Using extentions allows for a limited workaround where the page needs to be re-imported each time it is edited.

The surprising part to me is that the same applies to the forks too.

If opening a local file for the home page not a security concern, why should it be for the new tab page. I understand that giving local files access to extensions could lead to issues, however, it should not need an extension to use a local file as a new tab page.

Note: I maintain my bookmarks in a local html file, which I make into my home page, new tab page, across browsers, and then sync this file across devices using Syncthing.

Re: A look at Firefox forks

#205

Post by jbaber »

deeter72 wrote: post #194

Not released yet, but honorable mention to ladybird: https://ladybird.org/

I am a bit confused by their moving from C++ to Swift instead of Rust. It sounds a bit Apple-first. I get that it ports to Linux okay, but will it be hard to make it work with Windows some day?

Re: A look at Firefox forks

#206

Post by immibis »

klauserc wrote: post #186
anonym29 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try a spoofed user-agent, if disabling ETP and RFP doesn't help. Also, fuck companies that do this. I just start permanently deleting accounts whenever services do this.

As someone responsible for login/registration at a large online retailer, I see so much bot traffic and attacks. Attackers try to enumerate registered users, try to mass-login with credentials from password dumps, try to register accounts controlled by bots. Login forms are a war zone. Looking for patterns that indicate the other party is a bot and serve them (and only them) a captcha is a technique that is quite eff…

What is wrong with a bot creating an account? Is their money not as green?

Re: A look at Firefox forks

#207

Post by immibis »

anonym29 wrote: post #156
bad_user wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that people should look at what happened recently and realize that absolute nothing noteworthy happened. And Firefox is still the only browser engine with support for uBlock Origin, on Android too.

Whoa, slow down there. You can't just go around asking people to read first-party sources and think critically on their own about an issue without getting their opinion from their feed or influencer of choice. That's an unreasonable and insane expectation! /s

The first-party source is Mozilla themselves skirting around saying, but very heavily implying they are now selling unspecified data about me to unspecified actors, in a legally binding way, then walking it back with a pinky promise that is not legally binding, so doesn't actually mean anything.

Have you read the first-party sources?

Re: A look at Firefox forks

#208

Post by maccard »

jeffparsons wrote: post #167
slindsey wrote: post #50

For years I've thought of creating a "paid" Firefox fork that is _just_ Firefox rebranded, but otherwise the exact codebase. The money brought in would be used to pay an open source developer to work strictly on things intended to be sent upstream to the Mozilla Firefox. If nothing else, it would prove whether or not people are willing to pay for Firefox. The problem with Firefox currently is the organizational struc…

If you can get your organisation registered as a deductible gift recipient (DGR) in Australia, then I'll bet a few people here — myself included — would contribute. Being able to help out _and_ reduce ones tax bill at the same time seems to have a magical effect on some people — again, myself included.

Herein lies the problem. Multiply this by 10 countries, add in accountant fees and legal fees, HCOL adjustments, and you’ve spent $20k very very quickly before you’ve written a line of code. You might suggest “only do this if there are more than X donations from a country”, but now I need to bookkerp this which again takes away from the core goal of writing code for Firefox. Maybe I hire a fractional accountant to manage it? Now there’s an annual overhead to cover.

How much would you be willing to spot, $20 a year? To pay someone in Europe full time you’d need about 6k people to donate that annually. My experience here is that what people say they value and what they actually value when asked to open their wallets are two very different things

Re: A look at Firefox forks

#210

Post by maccard »

gausswho wrote: post #96
slindsey wrote: post #50

For years I've thought of creating a "paid" Firefox fork that is _just_ Firefox rebranded, but otherwise the exact codebase. The money brought in would be used to pay an open source developer to work strictly on things intended to be sent upstream to the Mozilla Firefox. If nothing else, it would prove whether or not people are willing to pay for Firefox. The problem with Firefox currently is the organizational struc…

Please someone make a Firefox that makes profile portability readable and with sensible defaults.

That’s not what OP is suggesting - that’s a Firefox fork.
Post reply on HN