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

Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 311 posts

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#121

Post by [deleted] »

anotherangrydev wrote: post #99
brighteyes wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your sarcasm is entertaining, but the big difference is that while neither company/product is perfect, Microsoft still essentially owns the desktop with Windows. While Mozilla's Firefox is just one among several choices of web browser, currently #3 in the rankings. 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 otherwi…

>Microsoft still essentially owns the desktop with Windows So what? That doesn't mean they are obliged to comply with whatever you think is "the right thing"®. I'm gonna highlight another another big difference that you seemed to overlook. Microsoft is a company, their mission is to generate profits for their shareholders and they are the owners of Windows 10, because they developed it. Mozilla is a non-profit corpor…

[deleted]

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#122

Post by brighteyes »

kylec wrote: post #118
brighteyes wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you fix WebSQL? Writing a from-scratch implementation of SQLite seems like the only option, and I don't think Mozilla had the resources for that at the time. I agree the situation sucks, but I'm not sure how to fix it even today.

One thing I never understood is why there needed to be a second implementation of WebSQL. SQLite is public domain, any browser vendor can choose to embed it in what they ship.

It's a standards process requirement. A standard must have a well-written spec, well-written enough that multiple implementations are possible. Showing multiple implementations that are compatible is enough to prove that.

When there is just a single codebase, even if it is open source, it isn't a standard. Now, not everything needs to be a standard, but on the web standardization is a big part of why it is so successful.

One example of why a single codebase is bad: Imagine that SQLite version X is the implementation of WebSQL, which all browsers must use. SQLite development is of course continuing, fixing security issues and making it faster, etc. Will browsers just keep using SQLite past version X? What if the SQLite community takes SQLite in a direction that isn't optimal for web browsers? Perhaps web browsers will fork it. What if browsers end up not agreeing on the fork, and some use the original project, and others use the fork - or there are multiple forks?

All of that makes it very risky that compatibility issues will appear between browsers. Having a properly specced standard, with multiple compatible implementations, is so far the best way that we have found that can prevent such things.

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#123

Post by chinpokomon »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #102
anotherangrydev wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Microsoft still essentially owns the desktop with Windows So what? That doesn't mean they are obliged to comply with whatever you think is "the right thing"®. I'm gonna highlight another another big difference that you seemed to overlook. Microsoft is a company, their mission is to generate profits for their shareholders and they are the owners of Windows 10, because they developed it. Mozilla is a non-profit corpor…

How about this: It was wrong for Microsoft, and it was wrong for Mozilla. But it's worse when it's Microsoft, because it's easier to move to a different browser than to move to a different OS, and so it's harder to escape Microsoft's attempts to force you to do what they want you to. Also, Microsoft has much more of a history of deliberately doing this to people, and so the suspicion is higher with Microsoft. Mozilla…

Is it harder to move to a different browser in Windows 10? I feel like you keep emphasizing how easy it is to change your browser and yet are still registering a complaint. I'm not sure what you are complaining about.

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#124

Post by Dylan16807 »

ikeboy wrote: post #117
Dylan16807 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant the search engine thing. It's pretty normal for a program installer to set itself to handle files.

So then what's wrong when an OS does it?

The OS does set itself to do OS things.

OS shouldn't set your browser.

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#125

Post by AnimalMuppet »

chinpokomon wrote: post #123
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about this: It was wrong for Microsoft, and it was wrong for Mozilla. But it's worse when it's Microsoft, because it's easier to move to a different browser than to move to a different OS, and so it's harder to escape Microsoft's attempts to force you to do what they want you to. Also, Microsoft has much more of a history of deliberately doing this to people, and so the suspicion is higher with Microsoft. Mozilla…

Is it harder to move to a different browser in Windows 10? I feel like you keep emphasizing how easy it is to change your browser and yet are still registering a complaint. I'm not sure what you are complaining about.

First, you may be confusing me with another poster; I don't feel like your comment reflects my other posts on this article. I don't "keep emphasizing" how easy it is to change your browser.

I don't know if it's harder or easier to move to a different browser in Windows 10. I presume it's about the same, but it may be harder. I don't think that alters my point whatsoever.

My complaint is that Microsoft is making it difficult for users to do what the users want, if that's different from what Microsoft wants them to do. My position is that it's significantly worse when the OS does that to you than when an application - any application - does that, because it's much harder to switch OS than to switch an application. (If you're a large business, your ERP or, worse, database, may be the exception to this, but those aren't really the topic of this thread.)

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#127

Post by tn13 »

brighteyes wrote: post #84
Animats wrote: post #74

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…

Your sarcasm is entertaining, but the big difference is that while neither company/product is perfect, Microsoft still essentially owns the desktop with Windows. While Mozilla's Firefox is just one among several choices of web browser, currently #3 in the rankings. 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 otherwi…

Mozilla is becoming irrelevant in modern market and their response seems to be to blame others. I had guessed it when they fired their CEO over some ridiculous issue.

Windows is bigger does not mean they have any obligation to give space to others. Does Apple let you install YouPorn App on your iphone ? Does Google let you replace default search with Bing if you want ?

Both Android and iOS are immensely successful and both are on tight leash of Apple and Google. The reality is that, that tight leash has made user experience much much better. My father likes to surf net on his Android phone because his laptop is full of Ask and Conduit toolbars and he has no idea how they go there.

The world of Internet is now enough complex that it pays to let one company keep everything on tight leash and Microsoft's move in that direction makes a lot of sense.

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#128

Post by tn13 »

anotherangrydev wrote: post #99
brighteyes wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your sarcasm is entertaining, but the big difference is that while neither company/product is perfect, Microsoft still essentially owns the desktop with Windows. While Mozilla's Firefox is just one among several choices of web browser, currently #3 in the rankings. 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 otherwi…

>Microsoft still essentially owns the desktop with Windows So what? That doesn't mean they are obliged to comply with whatever you think is "the right thing"®. I'm gonna highlight another another big difference that you seemed to overlook. Microsoft is a company, their mission is to generate profits for their shareholders and they are the owners of Windows 10, because they developed it. Mozilla is a non-profit corpor…

Finally someone who talks sense.

Microsoft could as well ban Firefox on their OS if they want to. Reality is that with Google Chrome, Mozilla has become completely irrelevant and will eventually die out.

They can innovate but they chose to fire their CEO over some petty reasons and they are building some phone which has not seen light of the day for years.

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#129

Post by Tyr42 »

chinpokomon wrote: post #123
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about this: It was wrong for Microsoft, and it was wrong for Mozilla. But it's worse when it's Microsoft, because it's easier to move to a different browser than to move to a different OS, and so it's harder to escape Microsoft's attempts to force you to do what they want you to. Also, Microsoft has much more of a history of deliberately doing this to people, and so the suspicion is higher with Microsoft. Mozilla…

Is it harder to move to a different browser in Windows 10? I feel like you keep emphasizing how easy it is to change your browser and yet are still registering a complaint. I'm not sure what you are complaining about.

I think it is much more difficult to switch to a different default browser in Windows 10.

With Chrome at least, you used be be able to set it to your default browser when is asked on first launch, with only a click or two.

Now that API is deprecated and removed, and users have to click 11 times through the settings to set the default browser. Much worse. And this is after it sneakily sets Edge as the default browser when upgrading, with only a small blue on blue "customize" link to a unlabeled setting to opt out.

Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

#130

Post by Silhouette »

brighteyes wrote: post #90
byuu wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I think reasonable criticisms were made regarding some of those, like Pocket. 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 le…

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.

Isn't it frustrating when a major software vendor takes a product you rely on, updates the whole UI in a way that makes the product worse for you and many other people using the desktop version primarily in order to try to make it better for the tiny number of people using the mobile version, and then makes clear that if you don't go for their new version you'll also miss out on critical bug fixes and security updates for the old one within a few months?

Post reply on HN