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

Mozilla Thunderbolt

thunderbolt.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 366 posts

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#71

Post by ErenayDev »

clumsysmurf wrote: post #62
spudlyo wrote: post #15

Chrome on Linux is ~1.47 times faster than Firefox on the Jetstream 3 benchmark as recently reported by Phoronix[0]. That's how we want you to spend the money Mozilla, keeping up with your well-funded rival Google, and making it so we don't end up with a browser monoculture. These sorts of distractions just piss me off, and are not part of your core mission. [0]: https://www.phoronix.com/review/firefox-chrome-2026

And regarding (memory) performance, chromium has the "memory saver" settings for unloading tabs. I don't understand why mozilla thinks its acceptable to require users unload tabs manually. Who even does that?

I use the about:memory tab whenever I need to clear some memory. However, it can't unload tabs.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#72

Post by mzajc »

dralley wrote: post #39
einr wrote: post #24

[flagged]

>120k LoC of probably largely vibecoded nonsense for a window with a text box and a button that lets you send and receive some data over a HTTP API. "I will make loads of assumptions without checking so that I can invent reasons to get mad" Note that about 30,000 of those lines are JSON files for localization and testing, as one example.

22,056 is not about 30,000. Per scc:

  Language      Files     Lines   Blanks  Comments     Code
  ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  TypeScript      760    109110    14500      7397    87213
  JSON             41     22056        6         0    22050
  Markdown         56      7150     2086         0     5064
  YAML             33      3965      406       208     3351
  ... and many more with fewer than 1k lines
Regarding "loads of assumptions," it's hard to tell how much of this is vibecoded slop (definitely non-zero looking at the commit log), but I don't think it's that outrageous to claim 87k sloc is too much for a textbox and an API wrapper.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#73

Post by CamouflagedKiwi »

What even is this? A chat frontend to arbitrary model providers on the backend - I guess that's sort of useful not to have to build yourself but it doesn't feel like the amazing thing they're trying to hype. Some of the features seem a bit weird to me too - like end-to-end encryption? There isn't a server intermediary, so you already have that with TLS to the model provider.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#74

Post by Zardoz84 »

p-e-w wrote: post #65
spudlyo wrote: post #15

Chrome on Linux is ~1.47 times faster than Firefox on the Jetstream 3 benchmark as recently reported by Phoronix[0]. That's how we want you to spend the money Mozilla, keeping up with your well-funded rival Google, and making it so we don't end up with a browser monoculture. These sorts of distractions just piss me off, and are not part of your core mission. [0]: https://www.phoronix.com/review/firefox-chrome-2026

Firefox has many weaknesses, but I never once thought “man, that thing is slow”. It isn’t, and chasing benchmark numbers is a waste of effort. A better security model or deeper customizability would be far more valuable.

The fact it's that for a normal usage, Firefox with uBlock Origin it's faster that Chrome without ad blocking. On Android this is especially noticeable.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#75

Post by whalesalad »

spudlyo wrote: post #15

Chrome on Linux is ~1.47 times faster than Firefox on the Jetstream 3 benchmark as recently reported by Phoronix[0]. That's how we want you to spend the money Mozilla, keeping up with your well-funded rival Google, and making it so we don't end up with a browser monoculture. These sorts of distractions just piss me off, and are not part of your core mission. [0]: https://www.phoronix.com/review/firefox-chrome-2026

[flagged]

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#76

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

Kye wrote: post #44
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Firefox started at 0% when IE was more dominant than Chrome is today. Nothing is certain.

Firefox hit a peak of 32% and has fallen ever since. Effectively Firefox crashed at the same time IE did, and I can’t see in what way Mozilla ever attempted to recover.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#77

Post by mzajc »

pndy wrote: post #49
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Watefox, Librewolf have both plucked out all unnecessary stuff Mozilla added over the years. Both are good but Librewolf comes with history and cache disabled by default which may be bit surprising. Floorp comes with additional custom interface features, workspaces (tabs grouping) and mouse gestures. And bit better profiles feature - Mozilla decided to redo it recently which lead to some problems. Mullvad has build i…

A tip for Librewolf: you can easily toggle permanent cookie storage for a site through the "Always store cookies/data for this site" option in the shield button menu on the URL bar. This is very convenient compared to vanilla Firefox where you have to add exceptions through the settings.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#78

Post by crazygringo »

Wow this is a confusing name.

At a glance it looks identical to Mozilla Thunderbird, but has nothing in common.

And then of course it's also the same as a well-known hardware interface.

I know it's hard to come up with names and pretty much everything is used by something else, but this seems particularly bad.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#79

Post by monooso »

anildash wrote: post #38

Addressing the usual few complaints folks always bring up: * This is from the separate independent team that works on Thunderbird, not Firefox, so there isn't any resource contention happening there * Thunderbird is revenue positive, and this potentially gives that team another revenue stream to be even more self-sustaining through charging companies * Businesses definitely want to control the AI they're using (espec…

Just for clarity, you do mean Thunderbird (the email client), not Thunderbolt (this new AI client)?

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#80

Post by afandian »

anildash wrote: post #38

Addressing the usual few complaints folks always bring up: * This is from the separate independent team that works on Thunderbird, not Firefox, so there isn't any resource contention happening there * Thunderbird is revenue positive, and this potentially gives that team another revenue stream to be even more self-sustaining through charging companies * Businesses definitely want to control the AI they're using (espec…

It goes to show that Mozilla(s) could, if they really wanted, restructure Mozilla Corporation / Foundation.

(edit - to allow users to fund Firefox, allowing us to better sleep at night, and to align our incentives)

Post reply on HN