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

Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

neowin.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 480 posts

Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

#211

Post by lelanthran »

dvh wrote: post #123
dotcoma wrote: post #4

Why are people on HN still using Chrome? (or Edge, or Opera…)

There are 2 reasons why I'm using chromium (with ublock origin lite) over Firefox: 1. Chromium is significantly faster (maybe 5 to 10x faster on certain tasks mostly around canvas but anything that requires fast ui really). Every time I use Firefox it feels like it has some kind of serious problem. If chrome was this slow I would stop working and start investigating what part of my computer is broken. This experience…

> It just caches too aggressively which makes development really annoying to a point where anytime I encounter issue on Firefox my first thought is "Is this Firefox caching issue?".

This is a non-issue, if the devtools is opened, checkbox for "disable cache" is is checked by default.

> When I develop web I have very quick update loop and I really can't be questioning browser. I cannot work like this. Firefox is unusable for me.

How can you be developing front-ends and not have the devtools open while doing your quick edit-test cycle?

Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

#214

Post by lelanthran »

batperson wrote: post #193
dotcoma wrote: post #4

Why are people on HN still using Chrome? (or Edge, or Opera…)

Edge user here. For one, chromium is faster than firefox, any given page will load about 20% faster, another reason is edge workspaces feature, I've grown to like it, which seems to be some sort of chromium feature that everyone bakes in weird ways if at all, and I'm still running ublock origin on edge without any funky bypasses. Then there's a fact that a bunch of sites/webapps straight up refuse to work on firefox…

> Edge user here. For one, chromium is faster than firefox, any given page will load about 20% faster,

I'm skeptical; You're probably measuring Chromium + ads against FF + ads.

The only fair test is testing agains FF + uBlockOrigin. And there, FF wins hands down.

Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

#215

Post by account42 »

HerbManic wrote: post #28

Just remember that Google is essentially an advertising company and that they were always going to squeeze this opening closed as soon as they could get away with it. I do fear for a future were even Firefox ends up caving in. Ladybird browser might be our only hope until something legal comes along to block functionality.

The thing is that they shouldn't be able to get away with it.

Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

#216

Post by account42 »

close04 wrote: post #114
mrweasel wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Mozilla, at least from the outside appears to have been horribly mismanaged for the past 20-25 years and only survived because the ad money kept rolling in. I'm not knocking Mozilla for taking money from Google, it was a smart move. Most users would use Google anyway, so Mozilla pocketing billions by making users preferred search engine the default didn't really hurt anyone. Some of that money should however…

> the ad money kept rolling in Why "ad money"? That's a very uncharitable interpretation and for anyone not aware of the situation it's misleading. They're not paid for ads or by ads, they're paid by Google to continue being a viable alternative to Chrome. Is every Google employee getting "ad money" every month, or a salary? The payment is more accurately described as a protection tax.

> Is every Google employee getting "ad money" every month

Yes. You can think of it like "blood money".

Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

#217

Post by account42 »

yakcyll wrote: post #132
close04 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the ad money kept rolling in Why "ad money"? That's a very uncharitable interpretation and for anyone not aware of the situation it's misleading. They're not paid for ads or by ads, they're paid by Google to continue being a viable alternative to Chrome. Is every Google employee getting "ad money" every month, or a salary? The payment is more accurately described as a protection tax.

In this particular context there really isn't any difference. Technically Mozilla isn't in the business of delivering ads, but their revenue is mostly supported by ad money from Google, and Google, being an ad giant, can simply cut that stream off. The common sentiment seems to be that this would spell a life and death situation for the company and for the browser as a whole, which essentially makes Firefox a hostage…

> Technically Mozilla isn't in the business of delivering ads

They weren't back then but are now: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/advertising/mozilla-anonym-raisi...

Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

#218

Post by account42 »

pseudalopex wrote: post #116
anonymousiam wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the more reason to keep using Firefox. Donate if you can! https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/donate/

Donations to Mozilla Foundation do not support Firefox development. But payments for services to Mozilla Corporation do.[1] [1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/products/

Those also don't go to just Firefox development but also to cushy executive salaries.

Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

#219

Post by account42 »

close04 wrote: post #126
palmotea wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Firefox haven't caved in so far. Why do u think it might in future? Because pretty much all their revenue comes from Google.

Making Firefox even less desirable by "googlifying" it pushes Firefox users away and kills its image of a viable competitor. That's exactly what Google is paying for. Why would Google destroy the cover they have for keeping control over Chrome and 70% of internet users, just to squeeze a bit more ad revenue from what, 2% of users?

Copying Chrome at the expense of loosing even more of their user share has been Firefox's MO for the last decade. It doesn't have to make sense to be reality.

Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension

#220

Post by account42 »

qweqwe14 wrote: post #210
lelanthran wrote: post #184

Good! Give everyone the push they need to break the web homogeny of Chrome everywhere. I'm tired of all the (mostly technical) people whining that they need Chrome, and only Chrome can browse the internet. Then you ask them for a site that doesn't work and conveniently "it was some time back and I don't remember the details". I've been using FF since before it was called Firefox. In the last 10 years I've not come ac…

No. You do realize that people have stuff to do and want their browser to be both 1) fast and 2) compatible with all websites? Firefox is slower than Chromium, and always will have some compatibility issues, because all websites are made with Chromium in mind. You can pretend all you want that "well ackshually standards exist and all website makers should use things from the standard", but it's not realistic, everyon…

People are also too lazy to go vote and then cry when someone gets elected that they didn't want to. Sometimes participating in society means not always taking the easiest path.
Post reply on HN