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

111–120 of 366 posts

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#111

Post by pier25 »

dralley wrote: post #16
soapdog wrote: post #2

oh mozilla, why don't you just focus on Firefox. That is all we want.

People "want" a lot of contradictory things. People "want" them to be less financially reliant on Google, while also "focusing" on a browser in a market that is entirely commoditized and subsidized by 3 of the 10 largest companies in the world - and having a wholly implementation independent browser engine when it's so massively difficult and capital intensive that even Microsoft gave up on it.

Having the best browser should be Mozilla's first priority.

Investing on AI is not going to make them less financially reliant on Google.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#112

Post by braiamp »

Onavo wrote: post #109
ryukoposting wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> already painful and readily apparent, stagnation of your browser What's wrong with Firefox? There are several things Firefox does that it's annoying to live without in other browsers (video pop-outs, competent ad blocking, etc). Is there some core feature that's missing? I'm subjected to Edge at work and I couldn't tell you a single thing it does that I'd want FF to do. > and our standards bodies as entities distin…

It's slow. It almost always trails Safari and Chrome on most benchmarks. See e.g. https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1ljns9o/freshly_re...

How many milliseconds do you think this page took to render? I usually click and it's already done.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#113

Post by JCTheDenthog »

eipi10_hn wrote: post #82
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

Why is this related to Firefox?

Because Mozilla is wasting money on something other than their core product, once again.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#114

Post by someguyiguess »

ryukoposting wrote: post #103
drzaiusx11 wrote: post #81

For anyone reading this that has worked on the launch of this new product (or the many others of their ilk throughout the years) under the various Mozilla orgs, I mean no disrespect, however I feel it's important to not mince words these days.. I implore ANYONE at Mozilla org to please, please stop working on projects distracting from the complex and necessary work of browser and web standards stewardship. That alone…

> already painful and readily apparent, stagnation of your browser What's wrong with Firefox? There are several things Firefox does that it's annoying to live without in other browsers (video pop-outs, competent ad blocking, etc). Is there some core feature that's missing? I'm subjected to Edge at work and I couldn't tell you a single thing it does that I'd want FF to do. > and our standards bodies as entities distin…

It doesn’t support a lot of video formats that Chrome and Safari have supported for years (h265 is one I think. I’m no expert)

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#115

Post by Barbing »

Zardoz84 wrote: post #74
p-e-w wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wonder how much slower Firefox would have to be to invalidate the mental health gain not imagining every single keystroke going directly to Sundar.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#117

Post by Barbing »

wolvoleo wrote: post #5

Curious name choice, that's clearly encumbered by other trademarks. Also, my impression is: yay another AI front-end. What does this one differently that the other thirteen in a dozen don't?

Are they allowed to reuse Thunderbolt when it's already taken in the same industry?

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#118

Post by drzaiusx11 »

ryukoposting wrote: post #103
drzaiusx11 wrote: post #81

For anyone reading this that has worked on the launch of this new product (or the many others of their ilk throughout the years) under the various Mozilla orgs, I mean no disrespect, however I feel it's important to not mince words these days.. I implore ANYONE at Mozilla org to please, please stop working on projects distracting from the complex and necessary work of browser and web standards stewardship. That alone…

> already painful and readily apparent, stagnation of your browser What's wrong with Firefox? There are several things Firefox does that it's annoying to live without in other browsers (video pop-outs, competent ad blocking, etc). Is there some core feature that's missing? I'm subjected to Edge at work and I couldn't tell you a single thing it does that I'd want FF to do. > and our standards bodies as entities distin…

Some folks have already discussed this in sister comments to the one you're responding to, but it's a common enough hn discussion topic that searching will answer beyond that (better than I can regurgitate here.)

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#119

Post by x0x0 »

ryukoposting wrote: post #103
drzaiusx11 wrote: post #81

For anyone reading this that has worked on the launch of this new product (or the many others of their ilk throughout the years) under the various Mozilla orgs, I mean no disrespect, however I feel it's important to not mince words these days.. I implore ANYONE at Mozilla org to please, please stop working on projects distracting from the complex and necessary work of browser and web standards stewardship. That alone…

> already painful and readily apparent, stagnation of your browser What's wrong with Firefox? There are several things Firefox does that it's annoying to live without in other browsers (video pop-outs, competent ad blocking, etc). Is there some core feature that's missing? I'm subjected to Edge at work and I couldn't tell you a single thing it does that I'd want FF to do. > and our standards bodies as entities distin…

reddit tab, firefox: 428mb. same tab, chrome: 78mb.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#120

Post by holowoodman »

someguyiguess wrote: post #114
ryukoposting wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> already painful and readily apparent, stagnation of your browser What's wrong with Firefox? There are several things Firefox does that it's annoying to live without in other browsers (video pop-outs, competent ad blocking, etc). Is there some core feature that's missing? I'm subjected to Edge at work and I couldn't tell you a single thing it does that I'd want FF to do. > and our standards bodies as entities distin…

It doesn’t support a lot of video formats that Chrome and Safari have supported for years (h265 is one I think. I’m no expert)

h264 and h265 are patent-encumbered and therefore very expensive and/or dangerous. Patent trolls would rip Mozilla apart and eat all their money. The only reason H.264 works atm is that Cisco sponsors a plugin for that.
Post reply on HN