261–270 of 851 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The whole web ecosystem was first run by VC money Huh? Nexus was funded by CERN. Newsgrounds was never investor funded. Yahoo! Directory was just two guys, and you paid to be listed. There were no investors involved. WebCrawler was a university project. Altavista was a research project.
I take your point, but I think the comment was referring to Web 2.0.
Remember when Kodak ignored digital cameras and became irrelevant? That was bad because it decreased shareholder value. That will not be allowed to happen again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This 3% number is deceptive. The whole desktop market is cratering. I was talking to a reddit mod a few months ago. He was looking at the subreddit stats. 95% of his users were on mobile. Think about that. We desktop users are dinosaurs. So FireFox having a 3% market share might actually mean more than half of desktop users are on FireFox.
I can't imagine browsing the web on my phone and tablet without Firefox mobile. That would honestly be the biggest loss once this CEO takes this nonsense to the logical end.
You can't install UBlock Origin on mobile.
Like I still use FireFox on mobile, just purely out of habit. I don't really see anything better about it (I am quite inexperienced when it comes to phones).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like many others, the ability to run uBO is the main reason I use Firefox. Otherwise I'd use Chrome or Safari.
and funnily enough uBO author didn't want any money even though he's making our lives a lot better
Literally only reason to use Firefox is that it still blocks ads properly. If Mozzilla brings AI or removes ad blocks then they are every way just worse Chrome and there is zero reason to use them over Chrome. I guess I should already start porting my Firefox extensions over to Chrome since this ship is sinking stupid fast.
Firefox may say they will not block anything and still end up adopting something like Manifest v3. Android blocking side loading is more or less in the same ballpark.
I don't know why bring up Android when it is already Google product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, and that's how he arrived at the $number. If a small number of people were using ad blockers, the cited sum would approach $0 since disabling ad blockers would affect very few page views, right?
Is that true? What if Google just pays them $150m to disable ad blockers? Not sure if that's legal or whatever but killing ad blockers is probably worth it for Google.
It's kinda frustrating that Mozilla's CEO thinks that axing ad-blockers would be financially beneficial for them. Quite the opposite is true (I believe) since a ton of users would leave Firefox for alternatives.
Which alternatives though? On Mac at least, I'm not aware of any viable non-Chromium alternatives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
well I use it because it can handle 2000 tabs on my m1 macbook air (16gb ram) ... damn do I have adhd?????
Get the OneTab extension. It'll save and close all those tabs. That way you won't have Firefox crashing during startup once you exceed the number of tabs it can handle (a few thousand).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their Google dependency is their existential problem. They're limited by what they can do with "making Firefox better" while effectively being a client state. An off the books Google department. Doomed to forever being a worse funded Chrome because they can't do too much to anger their patron. By selling browser UI real estate to AI companies[0] they reduce the power Google has over them. If they get to the point whe…
Is there any prove for Googles influence on their development you outline here?
In 2021 they got $500M "royalties" (this is their payment from Google) with only $75k revenue from all other sources, including $7.5k donations.
It's kinda frustrating that Mozilla's CEO thinks that axing ad-blockers would be financially beneficial for them. Quite the opposite is true (I believe) since a ton of users would leave Firefox for alternatives.