81–90 of 311 posts
http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=441&title=kb3064...
You have a choice of bios that lets you overclock but W10 will only work on one core, or bios that takes away overclocking and works with forced patch. At least with W7/8 you can block this particular update.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> True. However that default browser/file extension handlers preferences should be a priority to carry forward. Especially when you've previously been in antitrust lawsuits over abusing your position as the OS developer to take over the browser market. > It may be easy to set your new default browser, but it's one more thing I have to do to personalize my computer, instead of using my computer to do the tasks at hand…
> but it makes forcing Edge as default a huge dick move on MS's part. I suspect its a far less sinister reasoning for the change.
You'd have to ask someone inside MS if you want to know what they were thinking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They moved it into the settings app, so this is no longer just "Open Firefox, click 'set as default'" anymore. AFAIK, both ways should still work. The settings app is just a replacement for "Default Apps and Programs" (or something like that) which was in since Windows 7, maybe even Vista. Edit: At least in Chrome, clicking "Make Google Chrome the default browser" opens up the settings app to the correct view, so i…
Nope. The default browser can no longer be changed anywhere but the system preferences, applications can not set themselves as default. Been that way for a couple months in technical preview builds, with even first party software (OneNote desktop vs modern) continuing to ask if you want to set it as default, followed by a system popup telling you to use the Settings app.
I am writing to you about a very disturbing aspect of Firefox 38.0.5. Specifically, that the update experience appears to have been designed to throw away the choice your customers have made about the Internet experience they want, and replace it with the Internet experience Mozilla wants them to have. When we first saw the Firefox upgrade experience that strips users of their choice by effectively overriding existin…
It is extremely easy to switch web browser. It is not easy to switch OS. On a Windows machine, if you are savvy enough, you can install Linux, but otherwise, you need to buy a Mac in order to avoid Windows. And you need to learn a lot in order to drop Windows (easy for us here on HN, hard for 99% of people).
It's fine if you dislike some of Mozilla's decisions with Firefox. People have complained and in fact Mozilla has changed some decisions following that criticism. But the situation is just not comparable to Microsoft with Windows.
For that reason, I don't see a point to diverting the conversation. The topic here is Windows 10.
This is not rolling back the clock. Here are some important points to the debate: 1. Windows 10 users are upgrading from 7 and 8.1, these versions were heavily shipped with bloatware. If it took away default browsing from Firefox, it also took away volume control from OEM Volumizer 2010. 2. Your browsers like IE, Mozilla and Chrome might have Malware toolbars installed. Nobody can deny that it is far too common on Wi…
> They aren't defaulting on IE7. Edge is fantastic. I really don't know where to start. I tried out edge for a few days and although the browser itself is pretty and functional it completely falls flat compared to existing players, including IE. I don't care what features they've announced for the future that may never happen. As the browser currently stands it's a toy and isn't the "browser for doing." I had hoped t…
Mozilla hasn't made me very happy lately with their "choice" tactics. Resetting people's default search engine to Yahoo of all things on update was very opaque. Also the AMO signing fiasco, Pocket and Hello. Feels like an "It's only okay when we do it" kind of thing.
I agree. And I extend that sentiment to their approach to Web Standards a few years ago too, like WebSQL [0] and NaCl [1], Dart [2]. That felt like NIH [3] or some other non-collaborative or ultra-competitive motivation on their part. Not a place of "speak for the Web". IMO, the choice of IndexedDB over WebSQL set the Web back 20 years. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_SQL_Database [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w…
NaCl isn't portable (Mozilla is working on Web Assembly)
Dart excerpt taken from Dart FAQ; question: "Will the Dart VM get into Chrome?" response: "No. Dart is designed to compile to JavaScript to run across the modern web, and the dart2js compiler is a top priority for the team." [1]
[0] http://www.w3.org/TR/webdatabase/#web-sql
[1] https://www.dartlang.org/support/faq.html#q-will-the-dart-vm...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. And I extend that sentiment to their approach to Web Standards a few years ago too, like WebSQL [0] and NaCl [1], Dart [2]. That felt like NIH [3] or some other non-collaborative or ultra-competitive motivation on their part. Not a place of "speak for the Web". IMO, the choice of IndexedDB over WebSQL set the Web back 20 years. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_SQL_Database [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w…
> IMO, the choice of IndexedDB over WebSQL set the Web back 20 years. Yep. I recognise that this may not have been a winnable fight, but I absolutely judge the people who were on the other side. WebSQL was a much better tech than IndexedDB. Was the dependence on Sqlite problematic? Sure. But Mozilla had the resources to make a pretty good try at fixing it; instead they refused to even implement it and gave us the rel…
I agree the situation sucks, but I'm not sure how to fix it even today.
Mozilla hasn't made me very happy lately with their "choice" tactics. Resetting people's default search engine to Yahoo of all things on update was very opaque. Also the AMO signing fiasco, Pocket and Hello. Feels like an "It's only okay when we do it" kind of thing.
It's also disingenuous to call Mozilla a non-profit, given its wholly-owned for-profit subsidiary: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/organizations . Used to be that mozilla.com was the homepage for the for-profit wing, but I see now that it just redirects to mozilla.org. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla doesn't mention the for-profit subsidiary either. (I'm still a happy user of firefox. I just care…
Don't be misguided by the administrative setup. Mozilla is earning money from partnerships, but the company goals are driven by the not-for-profit mission statement. It takes resources to stay in the game...
I am writing to you about a very disturbing aspect of Firefox 38.0.5. Specifically, that the update experience appears to have been designed to throw away the choice your customers have made about the Internet experience they want, and replace it with the Internet experience Mozilla wants them to have. When we first saw the Firefox upgrade experience that strips users of their choice by effectively overriding existin…
Mozilla hasn't made me very happy lately with their "choice" tactics. Resetting people's default search engine to Yahoo of all things on update was very opaque. Also the AMO signing fiasco, Pocket and Hello. Feels like an "It's only okay when we do it" kind of thing.
Yeah, this is the most "pot calling the kettle black" article I've seen all month. Let's see: * no opt-out for Australis * removal of tabs on bottom * forced signed extensions * removing option to not retain download history (unless you give up browsing history too) * bundling of Hello * bundling of Pocket (requires a lot of effort to disable) * bundling of DRM web extensions * bundling ads out of the box (can be dis…
However, Australis for example was a large redesign of the UI. I'm not sure how you can support an opt-out, as that would mean supporting two codebases - two different and separate UIs, at once.
Regarding bundling of DRM, it isn't bundled, but it is downloaded on demand. This is a sad thing even so, but Google, Microsoft and Netflix just left other browsers no choice when they invented, standardized and shipped EME DRM. Mozilla fought DRM, but lost.