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

Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

fakespot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 384 posts

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#211

Post by JohnFen »

lucideer wrote: post #79
Aeolun wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What state is that? I’ve been very satisfied with FF over the past 5 years.

Not sure how much of this is living in a bubble or selection bias of negative experiences in common but my own impression of the firefox userbase is that a significant portion of it are using firefox as a "least worst" browser, rather than one they are actually very happy with.

This was me for a few years after the revamp, even after the loss of important functionality after extensions were neutered. But eventually, I couldn't take it anymore and bailed on FF entirely.

I'm pleased to see others have good experience with FF performance, but for me, the performance simply became unacceptable.

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#213

Post by kelnos »

iudqnolq wrote: post #207
mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood what geolocation was supposed to be within the context of of a desktop browser. If a website asks for this information, and I approve, what information is transmitted that couldn't be determined serverside via geoip?

I think this is a gnome bug rather than an ff one, but it's pretty shit on my desktop. It reports absurd ( Edit: s/100ft/10ft after I remembered better

On the desktop, it might be limited in the sources it has. GeoIP is one source, of course, but that's often wrong or too coarse-grained (or distorted by things like VPNs). The BSSIDs of nearby WiFi access points can help make that better, but that depends on you being close enough to APs in its dataset. Most desktops don't have actual GPS hardware.

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#214

Post by progmetaldev »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #181
ncann wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Case in point: network ping spikes after using Geolocation that will persist until FF is closed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1711854

I never understood what geolocation was supposed to be within the context of of a desktop browser. If a website asks for this information, and I approve, what information is transmitted that couldn't be determined serverside via geoip?

Although I am unfamiliar with what is sent with geolocation, I do use a VPN, and allowing geolocation on a website does pull my correct location even when connected somewhere far away.

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#215

Post by micromacrofoot »

bleep_bloop wrote: post #152
micromacrofoot wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my perspective Mozilla is doing a better job with their browser than Google and Apple are, that's why I use it (despite the market share, I prefer their implementation of most things compared to alternatives). Everything else is gravy. I'm not sure that the money Mozilla spends on other things would be better spent on the browser... would it realistically close any existing gaps between their competition? Arguab…

Depends on what metrics you are using. Compatibility, APIs, Performance, Firefox is objectively worse than Chrome on all aspects. I like Mozilla as a company and I still use Firefox over Chrome knowing that it is objectively a worse browser and experience because I dislike Google and their business practices and i support businesses that I believe in. I am very much against the monopoly Google has over the web space…

Those are the kind of metrics that look nice on paper, but they've all passed a point where I cease to care about any further improvements.

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#216

Post by sebzim4500 »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #187
dkural wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuinely asking: Why do you think Firefox is outperforming Chrome / Safari in your opinion?

Not GP, but Firefox runs on every OS I use, Safari does not. Chrome maybe does, but I doubt it.

What OS doesn't run chrome? BSD?

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#217

Post by JohnFen »

waboremo wrote: post #43
wslh wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they can work on many things simultaneously but it is worrisome when the execution of their core product fails [1] it shows a big management failure. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=firefox+market+share&oq=fire...

I would argue the opposite: their core product is great, best in market. However, due to the browser landscape, your core product is virtually WORTHLESS. Every browser does just enough right to be interchangeable, so unless you are drastically taking a new approach to browsing in general (and your brand), you have zero chance in hell without being able to leverage your own hardware/added services.

> their core product is great, best in market

Man, I wish that were my experience. I'd love to keep using Firefox. My experience is the opposite of that, though.

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#218

Post by kelnos »

threeseed wrote: post #208
agumonkey wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how it felt to me too. Stretched too thin. Yet as a small company compared to MS or Google, I can imagine how hard it is to try to thrive or just survive and maintaining a stable path when you're fighting big pockets. I just wished they could rebalance their allocation and focus on simple daily usability things. Just a bit more. ps: for instance, the screenshot tool is brilliant

Size of the company is actually irrelevant. What's important is the number of developers they put on the project.

... which is often directly related to company size, or at least funding. It's not like Mozilla has all these great independent revenue sources. Google and Microsoft can afford to throw significantly more money at their browser without thinking about how to make any money off of it, or off of related things. Mozilla has no such luck.

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#219

Post by JohnFen »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #68
function_seven wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I let my nostalgia of 2004 get the best of me. And as much as I may gripe about their loss of focus, or their lagging behind in certain areas, I still appreciate them for the good things they do (e.g. fingerprint resisting, containers) and for the potential that they still have—even today—to implement user-focused improvements in their browser. They may not lean into it as much as I'd like, but they still do…

Microsoft has the potential to make Windows 11 UX great. They made it worse than 10 by removing functionality that's existed for years. Will Microsoft do it just because the potential exists? No. Mozilla CEO takes a $3m salary and their biggest earner by many magnitudes is a search partnership with Google. Nothing is going to change with how they treat Firefox at a consumer-level until they need to man the battle sta…

> Microsoft has the potential to make Windows 11 UX great.

Technically true, but I've become convinced that Microsoft is genuinely incapable of actually accomplishing that.

Re: Fakespot Is Acquired by Mozilla

#220

Post by progmetaldev »

I see a lot of people here complaining that Mozilla isn't spending enough of its money on the development of Firefox, but a lot of that money comes from their Google deal. If Firefox started to gain market share over Chrome, do you think that Google would continue to fund them, and if not then who would?
Post reply on HN