231–240 of 274 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> End users do not care about the browser engine. But that's the problem, isn't it? Google controls Chromium, everybody uses Chromium, so Google controls the web.
Not really. If everyone would use a chromium version that radically blocks trackign and ads, google wouldn't control anything.
The web is more than tracking and ads. Chromium is not an ad engine.
I really love Firefox. I even organized events for them on my home country, so don't get me wrong, wouldn't it be best for the web/devs that they switched to chrome's engine? They can still implement whatever changes to privacy and their changes just like MS does, and devs will only have to target one engine. Or am I missing something? Please discuss it if you agree or disagree, do not downvote. Thanks.
Monoculture in software rarely goes well. Right now Safari and Firefox exist to push back on Google completely controlling the fate of the web. You do not want Google to have the same unquestioned power Microsoft did in the IE6 era.
[0]: https://blog.chromium.org/2024/05/manifest-v2-phase-out-begi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have 75,000 tabs open? I rarely have more than about 300 to be honest, how do you keep track?
> how do you keep track? I don't. I usually work with just the latest subset of a few dozen or so, the rest just sits there until I decide that it's time to close them all (like I did last week, so I'm at just 700 right now). I also use vertical tabs, see my other comment here for how it looks like. Keeping tabs open lets me quickly context-switch, which is super helpful when you get distracted and don't remember wha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> how do you keep track? I don't. I usually work with just the latest subset of a few dozen or so, the rest just sits there until I decide that it's time to close them all (like I did last week, so I'm at just 700 right now). I also use vertical tabs, see my other comment here for how it looks like. Keeping tabs open lets me quickly context-switch, which is super helpful when you get distracted and don't remember wha…
700 is fine, but that’s just 1% of 75k tabs
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...this would have changed the entire web because people would have flocked to Firefox. One cannot compete with those who hold the choke points. Google owned the Web when they launched Chrome. Microsoft and Apple own desktop and mobile defaults. With three major competitors setting defaults, nagging users, and aggressively developing their browsers, Firefox was doomed. Only unskippable browser ballots, with random…
15 years ago, lots of things were possible. Most people were using firefox, it had like 30 or 40% market share.
My argument is that short of ballots and anti-trust enforcement, nothing could have stood against three chokepoint-holding and well resourced competitors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was the switch from their own API and unsandboxed model to the standards-based one, right? I think all in all getting sandboxing as well as making it easier to provide cross-browser extensions was worth the breaking change.
Mandatory sandboxing increasingly seems like a misfeature. Now you can't install an extension that does a lot of things that are useful , ostensibly to protect you from malware. Optional sandboxing can be good because users can have more confidence that something can't hurt them. But it can also be bad because users will have more confidence that something can't hurt them, and then it does anyway. Meanwhile the abili…
> what have we gained, when the user just runs how_to_actually_uninstall_mcafee.avi.exe and gets the malware regardless?
Nothing would happen if I double-click that file, since it doesn't run on my OS. On the other hand, a compromised browser extension could deal an incredible amount of damage to me.
Are you saying that because we can't protect all users from all harm, we should just give up?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dumbing down of applications, including FF, is incredibly annoying and off-putting. I get it, though. FF probably wants to be friendly and approachable to the average non-techie person. I just wish that it (and other applications) would at least have an "expert mode" that isn't aimed just at the casual user.
I'm also for user choice but this consistent notion that uncluttered UIs are only for non-techie people is very annoying. I'm a software developer by trade but that doesn't mean I want every UI to look like the inside of an airplane cockpit or a 90s teletext. The trend in UIs to use space and reduce interface actions to the most important actions is both aesthetically more pleasing and more functional. I do not look…
Aesthetics is a matter of taste, of course, so there's no right or wrong there. Only if you like it or not.
But the trend towards minimalist UIs is something that actively gets in my way and makes the software more difficult for me to actually use. That's why I dislike it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> how do you keep track? I don't. I usually work with just the latest subset of a few dozen or so, the rest just sits there until I decide that it's time to close them all (like I did last week, so I'm at just 700 right now). I also use vertical tabs, see my other comment here for how it looks like. Keeping tabs open lets me quickly context-switch, which is super helpful when you get distracted and don't remember wha…
another case of someone refusing to use organized bookmarks. I've been there too