101–110 of 350 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because pocket was a useless addition and dropping ftp:/ support breaks approximately 150 million valid links.
Browsers opening an ftp:// link can simply prompt to open it in a different program, much like they did PDFs in the past. (I also don't think a browser should have to be a great PDF renderer, but here we are.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Check out NCBI, terabytes of public data are being shared on FTP servers. There are other protocols/APIs, but FTP has been a much better experience in many use cases. Those files are also linked all over the place in NCBI pages and elsewhere.
Does FTP really have better experience in 2021? I'm pretty sure the last time I saw better performance from FTP was in the previous century and, unlike FTP, having built-in error detection and recovery is pretty nice.
I don't understand all the negativity around this. People complained when Firefox added Pocket, in part because they took a browser extension and made it a feature that was ostensibly unrelated to web browsing. Now they're taking an old feature that's definitely not related to web browsing and removing it, and people are still complaining? Firefox can't be everything. It should focus on being a great browser and not…
It's old, but "ftp://" is a valid uri scheme that has established use, and lots of valid links on existing, live web pages. Browsers removing support are breaking part of the web that was working fine.
This is frustrating. FTP is really handy for distributing some files and there are lots of servers in place that now Firefox users can’t access. One can argue that servers should upgrade, and that’s valid. But they don’t and they likely won’t do this just harms Firefox’s user base and is one more reason I no longer recommend Firefox. They just don’t seem user friendly as they once were. I would expect Mozilla to advo…
> there are lots of [FTP] servers in place... Define "lots". Chrome dropped FTP support in late 2020 and basically nobody noticed. The vast majority of the remaining public FTP servers are also accessible over HTTP. > I would expect Mozilla to advocate for more FTP as a cheap way of distributing files. In what sense is FTP "cheap"? What makes it any different from HTTP in that regard?
Maybe people outside of the tech world failed to notice, but it was discussed here at the time:
This is frustrating. FTP is really handy for distributing some files and there are lots of servers in place that now Firefox users can’t access. One can argue that servers should upgrade, and that’s valid. But they don’t and they likely won’t do this just harms Firefox’s user base and is one more reason I no longer recommend Firefox. They just don’t seem user friendly as they once were. I would expect Mozilla to advo…
People made exactly the same arguments, almost to the letter, about universalizing TLS. The arguments were made in good faith, often by very clueful people, but it's hard to dispute the positive results of the change. FTP needs to go.
I don't understand all the negativity around this. People complained when Firefox added Pocket, in part because they took a browser extension and made it a feature that was ostensibly unrelated to web browsing. Now they're taking an old feature that's definitely not related to web browsing and removing it, and people are still complaining? Firefox can't be everything. It should focus on being a great browser and not…
It's old, but "ftp://" is a valid uri scheme that has established use, and lots of valid links on existing, live web pages. Browsers removing support are breaking part of the web that was working fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because pocket was a useless addition and dropping ftp:/ support breaks approximately 150 million valid links.
Browsers opening an ftp:// link can simply prompt to open it in a different program, much like they did PDFs in the past. (I also don't think a browser should have to be a great PDF renderer, but here we are.)