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

Firefox Hello

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 239 posts

Re: Firefox Hello

#31

Post by jlebar »

cjensen wrote: post #10

A web browser should not include X functionality, but should allow a web page to implement X functionality. In my view, this is true for most values of X, including Skype, Mail, Word, Excel... To add insult to injury, there is no simple way of disabling the functionality[1]. Firefox Hello is ludicrous. [1] about:config is not a valid value of simple

> A web browser should not include X functionality, but should allow a web page to implement X functionality.

Exactly. Firefox doesn't include "Firefox Hello" anymore than it includes "Gmail". Instead, Firefox (and other web browsers) include XMLHttpRequest and WebRTC, which can be used to implement whatever you want.

I'm getting pretty tired of hearing this trope ("teh bloat!") anytime a browser announces new functionality. Browsers are among the most successful pieces of consumer software in existence, so let's maybe admit they've done something right? But moreover, you have the ability -- really, unprecedented for software so complex and in such wide use -- to fork not one but two excellent open-source browsers, plus an excellent rendering engine. If you think you know better than Mozilla and/or Google, go for it. It's not lost on anyone at Mozilla that this is how Firefox originated.

Re: Firefox Hello

#32

Post by nolok »

criley2 wrote: post #25
cjensen wrote: post #10

A web browser should not include X functionality, but should allow a web page to implement X functionality. In my view, this is true for most values of X, including Skype, Mail, Word, Excel... To add insult to injury, there is no simple way of disabling the functionality[1]. Firefox Hello is ludicrous. [1] about:config is not a valid value of simple

Just call it the "Chrome-ification" of Firefox. Chrome is automatically updated to be jam-packed full of browser-specific APIs and functionality. Like when Chrome automatically updated and registered itself as a background service without permission. Or when Chrome automatically installed a microphone listening service for always on "OK Google" hotword detection. Or the fact that Chrome Apps are less and less "webpag…

This is a thread about firefox, when you make an answer entirely about chrome. This is neither the place nor the time for your rant.

Re: Firefox Hello

#33

Post by nothrabannosir »

mccr8 wrote: post #21
cjensen wrote: post #10

A web browser should not include X functionality, but should allow a web page to implement X functionality. In my view, this is true for most values of X, including Skype, Mail, Word, Excel... To add insult to injury, there is no simple way of disabling the functionality[1]. Firefox Hello is ludicrous. [1] about:config is not a valid value of simple

The underlying technology used to implement this is WebRTC, which is available to web pages. Implementing peer-to-peer real time video communication entirely in Javascript would be difficult, so it has to be provided to some extent by the browser itself.

But, if this is peer-to-peer, what's Telefonica's role?

Re: Firefox Hello

#34

Post by nolok »

[deleted] wrote: post #15

[deleted]

> I somehow hoped Mozilla would never employ these kind of business models where is user is the product.

Then you must be naive, given that this has been Mozilla's main source of income for years.

Re: Firefox Hello

#35

Post by cmelbye »

BSousa wrote: post #6

I saw the tag line, liked what I saw until "powered by Telefonica". Seriously, I've lived in more than half of the European countries for a while, and never ever EVER saw such a shitty internet service as in Spain over their network. Lack of service for hours every day, substandard speeds... It made me anticipate a move to Portugal by one year because of their shitty service.

"Powered by Telefonica" really means "powered by OpenTok", which was developed by Tokbox, a Telefonica acquisition.

Re: Firefox Hello

#36

Post by pmontra »

[deleted] wrote: post #15

[deleted]

Me too. I immediately removed the Hello icon when I read Telefonica. Apparently it's because of Tokbox but I won't trust one more telco then I have to.

Re: Firefox Hello

#37

Post by coldtea »

cjensen wrote: post #10

A web browser should not include X functionality, but should allow a web page to implement X functionality. In my view, this is true for most values of X, including Skype, Mail, Word, Excel... To add insult to injury, there is no simple way of disabling the functionality[1]. Firefox Hello is ludicrous. [1] about:config is not a valid value of simple

>A web browser should not include X functionality, but should allow a web page to implement X functionality. In my view, this is true for most values of X, including Skype, Mail, Word, Excel...

And in other people's view, it is nonsense, and they liked their Mozilla with built-in mailer, Opera, etc.

And of course there's the huge ecosystem of browsers add-ons and plugins, that do exactly that: implement X functionalities outside of web pages.

>Firefox Hello is ludicrous.

Haven't seen any argument about it. Not being able to disable it and not wanting browsers to include X functionality doesn't translate to "ludicrous".

Re: Firefox Hello

#38

Post by [deleted] »

nolok wrote: post #32
criley2 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just call it the "Chrome-ification" of Firefox. Chrome is automatically updated to be jam-packed full of browser-specific APIs and functionality. Like when Chrome automatically updated and registered itself as a background service without permission. Or when Chrome automatically installed a microphone listening service for always on "OK Google" hotword detection. Or the fact that Chrome Apps are less and less "webpag…

This is a thread about firefox, when you make an answer entirely about chrome. This is neither the place nor the time for your rant.

[deleted]

Re: Firefox Hello

#39

Post by coldtea »

nolok wrote: post #32
criley2 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just call it the "Chrome-ification" of Firefox. Chrome is automatically updated to be jam-packed full of browser-specific APIs and functionality. Like when Chrome automatically updated and registered itself as a background service without permission. Or when Chrome automatically installed a microphone listening service for always on "OK Google" hotword detection. Or the fact that Chrome Apps are less and less "webpag…

This is a thread about firefox, when you make an answer entirely about chrome. This is neither the place nor the time for your rant.

There are no hard and fast rules about threads.

A thread about Firefox is also a thread to discuss web browsers in general, the web, html, etc.

Re: Firefox Hello

#40

Post by eyko »

BSousa wrote: post #6

I saw the tag line, liked what I saw until "powered by Telefonica". Seriously, I've lived in more than half of the European countries for a while, and never ever EVER saw such a shitty internet service as in Spain over their network. Lack of service for hours every day, substandard speeds... It made me anticipate a move to Portugal by one year because of their shitty service.

Nowadays they are very reliable, but still very expensive (compared to european competition).
Post reply on HN