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

Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 296 posts

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#231

Post by mthoms »

freediver wrote: post #156
mthoms wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. This is so misleading that it borders on outright lying. What's your agenda?

Truth? I can understand 'unpopular', but 'misleading' without probably even looking at it? 1) This can be easilly reproduced. https://twitter.com/jonathansampson/status/11658588961766604... 2) Over 95% of Mozilla revenue comes from Google for using Google as default search engine https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2017/mozilla-fdn-201... 3) https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/#health-report - see first…

Your link implies that Chrome is more respecting of privacy than Firefox. Can you show me a single reputable tech journalist or online privacy expert that agrees with this premise?

No, you can't.

Your bulleted points are widely known. Could Firefox be even more private? Of course. Would it be better if it didn't rely on Google for the vast majority of it's revenue? Obviously! Heck, even Mozilla itself freely admits that.

Is Firefox worse than Chrome at respecting your privacy as your link implies? That's plainly ridiculous. Even Google itself has never made such a claim.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#232

Post by buboard »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #181
hoptank wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you suggest Mozilla do instead? Mozilla don't just fund the development of their own products they also fund research [1] and other projects [2]. [1] https://research.mozilla.org/research-grants/ [2] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/grants/ In a perfect world Mozilla would be funded by donations. I donate to Mozilla but it's a pittance compared to what they get from Google.

> What do you suggest Mozilla do instead? Mozilla should sell two products: 1) Storage a la iCloud 2) Payment processing a la Paypal And for marketing purposes they should get into discovery of free/open web services, a la old school Yahoo. As a web site builder, I don't want to have to manage credit cards. As a user, I don't want to have to trust random web sites with my credit card info. I also don't want to be red…

I think storage is probably too costly to implement

But they can readily "become a PayPal" by bundling a digital ethereum wallet like metamask in the browser by default. Even if it's limited to max $50 / month, it could revolutionize the way we consume web content. And it also acts as an anonymous digital identity. Both ethereum and firefox enjoy trust by the community, that helps. But, we re more likely to see these from another browser like brave.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#233

Post by madenine »

Is there even a fight left?

Chrome was the newer, faster, better working option when the average user was acclimating to the web as a constant part of their lives. To a degree, Chrome became a status symbol - knowing to ditch IE and download chrome was a mark that you were minimally web and computer savvy.

For the average person to switch away from Chrome, FF would need to have an overwhelming advantage - and I'm not sure privacy is the place where the average user will register that advantage. With 100 other companies stealing and selling their data at any given time, why should they worry about their web browser?

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#234

Post by alwillis »

throwGuardian wrote: post #226
alwillis wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There are literally zero browser engines allowed on iOS, other than Safari/webkit, with a purposefully depleted feature set, to force developers and users to the app store. Apple is clearly moving towards a more secure set of operating systems and that starts by reducing the attack surface. On macOS, Apple is deprecating kernel extensions; the boot partition on macOS Catalina is read-only so that it can’t be modifie…

This response literally proves fanboys and employees will offer circuitous logic to substantiate Apple. iOS Safari W3C non-compliance is well known, a little googling will lay out the (intentionally) missing features. You go to lengths to defend Apple, but do not have the guts to let the consumer pick a Google/Mozilla alternative engine. What is Apple so scared of, if not a level playing field. This is the same compa…

>iOS Safari W3C non-compliance is well known, a little googling will lay out the (intentionally) missing features.

The illogic here is a little scary: Firefox and Safari on iOS basically have the same level of web standards compliance according to html5test.com, yet one is intentionally not implementing features?

No fanboyism; just the facts.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#235

Post by detaro »

alwillis wrote: post #234
throwGuardian wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This response literally proves fanboys and employees will offer circuitous logic to substantiate Apple. iOS Safari W3C non-compliance is well known, a little googling will lay out the (intentionally) missing features. You go to lengths to defend Apple, but do not have the guts to let the consumer pick a Google/Mozilla alternative engine. What is Apple so scared of, if not a level playing field. This is the same compa…

>iOS Safari W3C non-compliance is well known, a little googling will lay out the (intentionally) missing features. The illogic here is a little scary: Firefox and Safari on iOS basically have the same level of web standards compliance according to html5test.com, yet one is intentionally not implementing features? No fanboyism; just the facts.

It's not that surprisingly that the one making the decisions about the browser engine is blamed, not the one forced to use the browser engine instead of their own, is it?

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#236

Post by johnsea »

ImprovedSilence wrote: post #200
kilburn wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vertical space you can easily fix by opening the hamburguer menu > customize > density (bottom left) > compact. It then uses less space than chrome. You can also add/remove items from the top bar there, making your address bar larger if you want to. The default hotkeys for next/prev tab are cmd+option+left/right arrow. I don't know how to change those...

yeah, I'm muscle-memoried into cmd-' and cmd-; for tabbing right and left, I like using those keys, and this is across pretty much everything I use (I suppose chrome and terminals, mostly..). It's firefox, there's probably an extension for it, but that takes work to find and feels kludgy. good to know about the density, thanks.

In the mac settings about keyboard/shortcuts, you can define program specific shortcuts; e.g. take the exact name from the firefox menu for the 'next tab' action and give the shortcut you want.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#237

Post by greggman2 »

alwillis wrote: post #222
throwGuardian wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are literally zero browser engines allowed on iOS, other than Safari/webkit, with a purposefully depleted feature set, to force developers and users to the app store. It is astounding that overzealous Apple employees and fan boys will employ circuitous mental gymnastics to substantiate Apple policies, instead of simply allowing an open-market to thrive on iOS. It's as if open markets where consumers are allowed…

>There are literally zero browser engines allowed on iOS, other than Safari/webkit, with a purposefully depleted feature set, to force developers and users to the app store. Apple is clearly moving towards a more secure set of operating systems and that starts by reducing the attack surface. On macOS, Apple is deprecating kernel extensions; the boot partition on macOS Catalina is read-only so that it can’t be modifie…

browser extesions are a privacy feature. my browsing is much more private on Firefox with ublock origin then on no extension safari.

As for Safari using less power and ram on mobile there is no evidence that Firefox would uae more of either since Apple doesn't allow it to run. As far as we know if other browsers were allowed to run some might compete on power and ram.

As for security, chrome on desktop has a superior track record. The CVE list proves this, so by denying competition Apple denies users more secure browsers.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#239

Post by wtetzner »

catalogia wrote: post #216
ripa wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox for Mac has been more or less unusable up until the most recent release where they actually started using the Core Animation libraries in macOS. Now it won’t drain all the battery in no time, and it’s actually quite snappy. I’ve tried to run Firefox so many times in the past, but eventually always go back to Safari because it’s more native, fast and unobtrusive.

> Firefox for Mac has been more or less unusable up until the most recent release This is a gross exaggeration. I've been using firefox on MacOS for 3 years and it's worked fine the entire time.

I’ve been using Firefox on MacBook Pros for the last 9 years, and it’s worked fine.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#240

Post by the8472 »

neiman wrote: post #104

I see a problem, though I have no alternative to offer, with the current model of organizations. It seems you are either for-profit, and then you have no ethics and do everything you can to centralize the world around you with no concern for users or their benefits. Or you're a not-for-profit foundation or the Internet Archive, where you do good things but are destined to be "poor". Are there are any "shades" between…

There are many legal constructs that provide shades of gray. Mozilla itself is such an example, it's a for-profit corporation owned by a non-profit.

Additional examples: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-benefit_corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_purpose_corporation

Post reply on HN