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

151–160 of 366 posts

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#151

Post by Hamuko »

benoau wrote: post #11
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?

> What does this one differently that the other thirteen in a dozen don't? Mozilla's a lot more trustworthy with privacy and data, and they're unlikely to sell the project to someone who only wants to stuff it full of malware/adware/crypto stuff - or do it themselves.

How much of that privacy matters when you're connecting it to third-party agents/models?

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#152

Post by Hamuko »

butz wrote: post #61

Good thing they didn't name this Unity or Proton. We are seriously running out of names for applications and services, ar we?

We're not, but companies are not courageous enough to explore new names.

I've already used up "cum" btw, so you're not allowed to name your product that.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#153

Post by drzaiusx11 »

kgraves wrote: post #130
drzaiusx11 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mozilla should not be a business, full stop. The fact that is being run like one, albeit poorly is exactly the problem. I don't think you realize the irony in calling my post childish here. "C'mon" I guess?

How would Mozilla replace the $500M a year from Google to not be a business?

Myself and I believe many others are willing to put money where our mouths are for an organization leading by example with regards to stewardship, much as this org has done in the past prior, instead of all these continued distractions, and ESPECIALLY if they stop swallowing this poisonous "donation" from Google. The fact that they do makes me wary of sending them a single penny. They'll just keep doing shit like they have been in recent years...

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#154

Post by latchkey »

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…

I'm building a fairly complicated browser extension [0].

Debugging the extension on Chrome, it works great. On Firefox, it is nearly impossible. There are a litany of compatibility issues that make it "different" than Chrome, despite the extension being very much standards based. It is really frustrating and makes me dread getting bug reports.

To be fair, Safari is even worse and I haven't even touched Edge yet.

As much as I'd love to have options in the marketplace, standards based compatibility between offerings should be a top line requirement.

[0] https://oj-hn.com

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#155

Post by latexr »

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…

> What's wrong with Firefox?

It seems like every thread talking about Firefox always has someone asking that question, so if you search back you should find plenty of reasons. Unfortunately, it’s been my observation that valid and polite criticisms always get downvoted. I don’t understand why. It’s not like downvotes are going to make the problems disappear.

Most of us would like Firefox to succeed, and it’s none of our faults that Mozilla is constantly neglecting it and going off on wild goose projects which get promptly abandoned.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#156

Post by captn3m0 »

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…

Firefox on iOS still doesn't support extensions or adblocking - something Safari (and other browsers as well) do.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#157

Post by Hamuko »

crazygringo wrote: post #78

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.

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

The cherry on top is that the domain is thunderbolt.IO. No other TLDs to pick from?

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#158

Post by drzaiusx11 »

time4tea wrote: post #140
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…

Firefox is pretty cool. Use it every day. Blocks ads Multi account containers Dev tools very good I never notice that it is in any way slow, except for those sites that need infinity cpu on any browser, like jira. What specifically is the issue? To my mind it quietly just gets on with things.

It is very cool! I'd go as far to say it's a great browser in fact. I simply want it to exist and be such in perpetuity and lead by example like it has in the past. I see it as a follower instead of a leader these days, largely to Google, but also Safari and to some degree Edge (by simply stealing the blink renderer)

The Mozilla org continues to produce a very capable browser, but it's now 3rd or fourth fiddle on a stage their misteps helped orchestrate in their demotion.

Edit: clarification

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#159

Post by VerifiedReports »

time4tea wrote: post #140
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…

Firefox is pretty cool. Use it every day. Blocks ads Multi account containers Dev tools very good I never notice that it is in any way slow, except for those sites that need infinity cpu on any browser, like jira. What specifically is the issue? To my mind it quietly just gets on with things.

Here are a couple:

1. The inability to set a specific page for new tabs to open on. That is ridiculous.

2. The mobile version sucks, specifically because bookmarks are buried under an absurd number of menu levels. And they're also broken up (without user approval or any way to stop it) into "mobile" and "desktop" bookmarks. WHY? The entire point of syncing is to have them all the same.

I want to like Firefox. I went back to Firefox for the first time in decades last year and gave it up after a couple months because #2 was that annoying. So brain-dead.

Oh yeah, and another one was that "never remember history" does, in fact, remember history. What Firefox really does is "stop adding to history." And the bug report on it resulted in several YEARS of debate over how to "fix" it. The latest I saw is that they're actually NOT going to fix it, but rather add more text (somewhere) to say basically, "This doesn't do what you think it's going to do."

If fixing a defect like that requires years of committee back-and-forth, the product is finished.

Re: Mozilla Thunderbolt

#160

Post by einr »

rothific wrote: post #102
einr wrote: post #24

[flagged]

Hi, I'm on team that worked on this. No it's not vibe coded. We do pretty intense code review of every PR. It looks like the number you're seeing is including lock files and artifacts that are not part of the core coverage.

Fair enough if it’s not vibe coded, I’ll take your word for it. Code review seems like it’s mostly bots (Claude, Cursor, Greptile) from the PRs I looked at?

Nevertheless, AI use is not what really stood out to me. It’s that it’s SO MUCH CODE. I have no idea how you guys maintain or reason about the quality or security of something like this. Good luck, I guess.

Post reply on HN