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

Firefox 93

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 235 posts

Re: Firefox 93

#181

Post by starik36 »

rahoulb wrote: post #131

Slightly off-topic but John Gruber has been writing about the new version of Safari[1] (and it's tabs and how they do or don't work) - and he linked back to some posts of his about Camino, which I'd forgotten about. Camino was the Gecko engine from Firefox in a "proper" Mac UI (unlike Firefox at the time, which was their cross-platform XUL UI). I used to use it as my primary browser and I really liked it. What killed…

> I still use Firefox, mainly because I would like there to be another option

I see people write that. But I use Firefox because I truly feel it's the best browser out there.

Re: Firefox 93

#182

Post by vimacs2 »

falcolas wrote: post #160
vimacs2 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering the fact that Firefox has had less than 5% coverage of the browser market for years now, this is not very reassuring. It's also quite frankly missing the point. It shows a clear case of mission statement in conflict with business model and shakes my confidence of Mozilla as the champions of privacy and freedom they paint themselves as. Keep in mind that they don't even need to make it built in, they could…

> But big daddy Google would get so cross I don't think Google would be as mad as every other publisher on the internet who relies on ads for their living. They would go on campaigns to block Firefox from their websites entirely. They already rail against adblockers with full-site popups and blocking content until you disable your adblocker, making adblocking a default would escalate the situation exceptionally quick…

Except there are already anti-anti-adblockers out there like REEK which work very well. Their campaigns might escalate but so would the efforts of the adblockers and in a fight between an established tech player like Mozilla and even a very large old media conglomerate, I don't fancy the latters chances at winning that tech arms race especially with all the bad press their efforts would generate.

This whole argument is largely invalided by the mere existence of Brave anyway. You could argue that their crypto based mode of monetisation is not the absence of rather the reimagining of ads but regardless of how you feel about crypto, it's definitely superior for the end user and offers effective monetisation that is optional.

Re: Firefox 93

#183

Post by BiteCode_dev »

intelMgmntEnema wrote: post #156
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want the exact equivalent, use Firefox profiles (-p at startup, or install the profile switcher addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/profile-switc... ). But Firefox has a much better feature: tab containers. You can attach a label to a tab, and only tabs sharing this label will share states, such as cookies, cache, localstorage and so on. This means you don't need to open a new window. You can…

>>>You can use it by activating a few settings in about:config Not. On. Android.

Can you have 2 different profiles on chrome opens at the same time on android?

Re: Firefox 93

#184

Post by rahoulb »

pram wrote: post #136
rahoulb wrote: post #131

Slightly off-topic but John Gruber has been writing about the new version of Safari[1] (and it's tabs and how they do or don't work) - and he linked back to some posts of his about Camino, which I'd forgotten about. Camino was the Gecko engine from Firefox in a "proper" Mac UI (unlike Firefox at the time, which was their cross-platform XUL UI). I used to use it as my primary browser and I really liked it. What killed…

I'm not sure how you arrive at Safari "killing" Camino. It was frankly always marginal. You had Mozilla, Firefox, and IE all available on OSX contemporaneously.

None of the others were Mac browsers - they all felt cross-platform.

Camino felt like a Mac app - and was the only real choice for that until Safari came along.

Re: Firefox 93

#185

Post by flurdy »

Liquid_Fire wrote: post #100
streblo wrote: post #91

Here's what I desperately want from Firefox, which I currently have from Chrome: isolated browser profiles tied to an account. I have two browser windows open at all times, one for my personal stuff and one for my work stuff. I want to keep those two windows totally isolated, where I log in with all my work accounts in one window, and all my personal accounts in the other window. Chrome does this by tying the window…

Firefox has supported this for decades, it just doesn't have a very nice UI for managing it. Simply start it with "firefox -P" and create two separate profiles (call them "work" and "personal"). Then just start two instances of Firefox, with "firefox -P work" and "firefox -P personal". They will be totally isolated - cookies, history, addons, everything.

There is also "about:profiles". Granted not pretty like Chrome profiles but it is there.

For me, one profile with "Temporary Containers" and "Multi-Account Containers" works well enough.

Re: Firefox 93

#186

Post by mulmen »

pessimizer wrote: post #170
cptskippy wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many charities will accept donations with restrictions (e.g. Only for program X, Only for Research, etc).

But they're not really enforceable because cash is fungible.

Just being able to state my intention prevents Mitchell Baker from putting words in my mouth.

Re: Firefox 93

#187

Post by pmurt7 »

2Gkashmiri wrote: post #174
pmurt7 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mitchell Baker (Mozilla CEO) makes 3 million a year. It's actually very profitable for a nonprofit organization, isn't it? "On the same period, Firefox marketshare was down 85%. When asked about her salary she stated "I learned that my pay was about an 80% discount to market. Meaning that competitive roles elsewhere were paying about 5 times as much. That's too big a discount to ask people and their families to commi…

i find the role of a "ceo" in mozilla as offensive as anything. for that matter any "management" role because it should be devs earning a buck while building cool software. nothing more, no paper pushing "managers" and ceos. why does mozilla need them anyways? who is forcing them to have one?

Mitchell Baker's blog:

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/author/mitchellmozillacom/

Virtue signaling and progressive propaganda. Not a single word about Firefox.

I bet Mitchell Baker can't even write a single line of code, yet she's leading a software company. Clown world at its finest.

Re: Firefox 93

#188

Post by loxias »

starik36 wrote: post #181
rahoulb wrote: post #131

Slightly off-topic but John Gruber has been writing about the new version of Safari[1] (and it's tabs and how they do or don't work) - and he linked back to some posts of his about Camino, which I'd forgotten about. Camino was the Gecko engine from Firefox in a "proper" Mac UI (unlike Firefox at the time, which was their cross-platform XUL UI). I used to use it as my primary browser and I really liked it. What killed…

> I still use Firefox, mainly because I would like there to be another option I see people write that. But I use Firefox because I truly feel it's the best browser out there.

I'm with you. I used to use Firefox for "everything but videos and gmail", which went in Chrome. But after v92 I think, I stopped going to Chrome for ... anything. My CPU has been happier!

Re: Firefox 93

#189

Post by oehpr »

gardaani wrote: post #114
theandrewbailey wrote: post #7

> Firefox now supports the new AVIF image format PARTY! I've been waiting for this for a long time. The last big hurdle for this was that color spaces weren't applied correctly. If you haven't taken a look at AVIF, do. You can get a similar looking image in AVIF at half the size as a JPEG. I find AVIF's image artifacts preferable to JPEG's.

Firefox 93 doesn't seem to support animated AVIF images. I have few AVIF examples animating correctly on Chrome 94 but only showing stills on Firefox 93. Edit: I found few examples here: https://colinbendell.github.io/webperf/animated-gif-decode/a...

Oh wow! I hope firefox eventually provides support for this.

Re: Firefox 93

#190

Post by morelisp »

pmurt7 wrote: post #187
2Gkashmiri wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i find the role of a "ceo" in mozilla as offensive as anything. for that matter any "management" role because it should be devs earning a buck while building cool software. nothing more, no paper pushing "managers" and ceos. why does mozilla need them anyways? who is forcing them to have one?

Mitchell Baker's blog: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/author/mitchellmozillacom/ Virtue signaling and progressive propaganda. Not a single word about Firefox. I bet Mitchell Baker can't even write a single line of code, yet she's leading a software company. Clown world at its finest.

She's been with them since the Netscape days and worked at tech companies before that. There's no reason a CEO should write code.

She's a really shitty CEO, but not for any of the reasons your right-tinged complaints insinuate.

Post reply on HN