31–40 of 350 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmmm... would it be possible to write an ftp client in browser JS? I think probably not.
I don’t program web sites or web browsers, but with wasm or web sockets can’t you make a web page that opens a connection and sends arbitrary binary data to another server without any http?
I expect this to have very little impact on anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
but why? maintaining features is cost
Perhaps one day we can have a programming language that allows us to write software that doesn't rot or corrode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t program web sites or web browsers, but with wasm or web sockets can’t you make a web page that opens a connection and sends arbitrary binary data to another server without any http?
> but with wasm or web sockets can’t you make a web page that opens a connection and sends arbitrary binary data to another server without any http? I can't speak to WASM, but websockets are literally just a layer over HTTP in some regards -- a websocket connection is initiated by sending an HTTP request with the Upgrade header.
This is frustrating. FTP is really handy for distributing some files and there are lots of servers in place that now Firefox users can’t access. One can argue that servers should upgrade, and that’s valid. But they don’t and they likely won’t do this just harms Firefox’s user base and is one more reason I no longer recommend Firefox. They just don’t seem user friendly as they once were. I would expect Mozilla to advo…
Sure, there might be a user that doesn't know how to get a good FTP tool. But how many FTP servers are they accessing? Probably not enough of those to justify the maintenance effort.
Firefox can't be everything. It should focus on being a great browser and not a great browser and also great FTP client, or a great browser and also a great feed reader, or a great browser and also a great mail client. People using FTP can use a dedicated client, of which there are plenty on every platform, and people who don't use FTP (i.e. the vast, vast majority of web browser users) won't even notice.
A modern web browser is probably some of the most complex software humanity has invented yet, besides a full-scale OS. Taking a maintenance burden that's unrelated to the core browser product of a struggling NFP should be welcomed with a sigh of relief.
>If you are a Firefox user, you don’t have to do anything to benefit from this security advancement. The epitome of corporate speak: "we're taking away a feature of this software. You're welcome." I expect that kind of talk from Google; hearing it from Mozilla makes me a little sad.
Firefox removing support for non-encrypted data protocols makes me more confident in them, so consider me a fan of this messaging.
the sheer lack of awareness here sometimes, I swear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
but why? maintaining features is cost
Perhaps one day we can have a programming language that allows us to write software that doesn't rot or corrode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree with removing FTP support, I also agree that phrasing is pretty disgusting.
Describing ads ("sponsored tiles") as "user-enhancing" is arguably worse. https://twitter.com/dherman76/status/433320156496789504