111–120 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did the switch to Firefox too but can't help notice during frontend (Angular and React) development that Chrome reload my apps significantly faster.
Cache disabled when dev tools open in FF but not Chrome?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Footnote in pg's article makes me wonder what the stats are today. I'd guess Windows down, Mac way up, Linux/FreeBSD about flat [maybe slightly up], but I have no idea. [2] Y Combinator is (we hope) visited mostly by hackers. The proportions of OSes are: Windows 66.4%, Macintosh 18.8%, Linux 11.4%, and FreeBSD 1.5%. The Mac number is a big change from what it would have been five years ago.
Wow, that the majority is Windows is a bit unexpected to me. Really shows how powerful and omnipresent Windows actually still is - something that is often forgotten when living in certain tech bubbles. Linux with 11% is quite high, I like that. What seems lower then expected are the Mac numbers to me. Thanks for sharing.
Every year Stallman sounds less crazy. I used to think it didn't matter what tools I chose as a lone developer making consumer tech products and DSP audio applications. But over time, I saw that consumers rely on frontier-makers more than you think, even though they may lag behind by a few years. I reluctantly switched to Firefox because it still has add-ons and since Chrome's web tools are so good. With Mozilla's Ru…
Decades later, I think we are still at a point where following his ideas come at a very steep price in performance and day to day usage.
For instance any dev that touches an iOs app in any way or form (even if it’s just to run in on test devices) is better off with a mac.
There’s ton of prevalent android apps that won’t work without the Play Store, and even rooting the phone is already seen as an hostile act from many vendors.
The list goes on and on, keeping hardware or software free is still an insane move that needs sizeable sacrifices. And it’s scary there’s no indication of the situation to change for the better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At this point in time, there's hundres of real world exmples of every single "crazy" warning given by Stallman.
The difficulty is that many of those examples are also doing useful things that the more open/free alternatives aren't. We are developing an unfortunate dichotomy between commercially supported, closed ecosystems with lock-in and rapid update cycles that provide superior functionality and more community-driven, open ecosystems with standards and future-proofing but inferior functionality. If the open versions aren't…
Every year Stallman sounds less crazy. I used to think it didn't matter what tools I chose as a lone developer making consumer tech products and DSP audio applications. But over time, I saw that consumers rely on frontier-makers more than you think, even though they may lag behind by a few years. I reluctantly switched to Firefox because it still has add-ons and since Chrome's web tools are so good. With Mozilla's Ru…
What’s frightening is that most people agreed with his views, but weren’t willing to commit to them because of practicality. I of course am one of them. Decades later, I think we are still at a point where following his ideas come at a very steep price in performance and day to day usage. For instance any dev that touches an iOs app in any way or form (even if it’s just to run in on test devices) is better off with a…
Read faq.
Sounds like Google will still move towards what they were planning but will likely just take a bit more time and more versions to get there (as the outrage subsides). From my perspective, the biggest improvement in their proposal would have been the increased privacy and security users would receive with adblockers that use the proposed scheme. Under the current scheme, any Chrome adblocker can see all of the pages t…
Isn't there solution to have the blocker send a limited list of declarative block-rules of a particular style?
Why not just let the adblockers pass in an uncapped quantity of javascript that will run in some kind blocking context, but be sandboxed from any external outgoing communication? That would give the flexibility of the current adblockers, but still plug the privacy hole.
Edit: Apparently Google is actually not plugging any privacy holes, since it will still allow monitoring: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19184169
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> With Mozilla's Rust adoption, Firefox got fast. Those are unrelated.
Stylo was attempted in C++ twice. Both times it was too buggy and had to be thrown out. The third time, they used Rust. And it worked.
(And now I will get -20 when whole Rust evengalist crew will reign down on me... :D :D :D And people complain about Russians manipulating the elections :D Nothin compared to Rust :D)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's why this announcement should make people switch to alternatives with different engine like FF. Saying we need multiple browsers, then using chrome or its clone actually makes the situation worse. Also chrome is no longer snappy as it was initially.
Chrome may or may not be the best browser. But Google properties tying into Chrome as a platform (think sync, extensions, auth, captchas) and making it really difficult to switch away creates a situation where it's not all about choosing the best browser any more. This harkens back to the same anti-competitive monopolistic behavior that Microsoft got sued for in the late 90's.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, maybe. Google could add features to the api.
Then google will be the only one who can innovate in the area in adblocking abilities.
The way I would put it is that Google becomes the gatekeeper for some low-level adblocker features.
This is a win-win situation for Google. I doubt they haven't done the maths. If they lose a percentage of the userbase, but get increased revenue, it's only logical to do that. If their userbase decreases, their monopoly status also decreases, making regulation harder. The percentage of users who install firefox is low because of the inertia of the default. Having Google as the default search engine in firefox certai…
How do you expect Mozilla to undercut a major funder?