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

Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 510 posts

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#461

Post by conartist6 »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #379
skybrian wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how AMP eventually died, it seems unlikely that web developers would go along with it. What’s in it for them? Also, I don’t see any sign that Google even wants to do it? This is not really evidence-based reasoning, it’s just “I can imagine something evil that Google might do.”

So in the enterprise world, it has been common for years for companies to "only support Chrome" even on iOS, where it's just skinned Safari . I have constantly had to call vendors mean names and point out how obviously iOS support means they are Webkit/standards-compliant. This is how I know, in fact, these websites will also work on Firefox. Apple's annoying iPhone monopoly is the last thing protecting the open web…

That's an interesting take that I hadn't heard before

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#462

Post by pelasaco »

pelasaco wrote: post #325

so crazy to think that 2025 will be finally the "Year of the Linux Desktop (TM)" and it's all DHH fault! love it <3

people downvoting is fine. Omarchy is great. Worked 12 years for a Linux Distro and they were never able to achieve what he did in months (on top of Arch for sure).

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#463

Post by mimasama »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #379
skybrian wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how AMP eventually died, it seems unlikely that web developers would go along with it. What’s in it for them? Also, I don’t see any sign that Google even wants to do it? This is not really evidence-based reasoning, it’s just “I can imagine something evil that Google might do.”

So in the enterprise world, it has been common for years for companies to "only support Chrome" even on iOS, where it's just skinned Safari . I have constantly had to call vendors mean names and point out how obviously iOS support means they are Webkit/standards-compliant. This is how I know, in fact, these websites will also work on Firefox. Apple's annoying iPhone monopoly is the last thing protecting the open web…

And it's not just the WebKit monopoly in iOS, but also being slow on adopting new features pushed by Google. Often even being slower than Mozilla funnily enough. I don't care about what Apple's intentions could be for being a slowpoke on adopting the new features, as long as it allows independent browsers like Pale Moon to catch up with the mainstream.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#464

Post by OJFord »

marginalia_nu wrote: post #454
OJFord wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thousands of people share their dotfiles though, there's just no need for it to be its own Arch-derivative distribution. Could've just been 'here are my dotfiles, works best on Arch'.

I came from doing that that before switching to Omarchy and it really is not the same. A lot of "other people's dotfiles" have issues, and often just a few too many anime waifus bundled. That's fine I guess, but it's not what I'm looking for in a WM. The fact that DHH's managed to rally a community to participate and maintain Omarchy is also a big part of it. If you have an issue, other people will have that issue, a…

I'm not at all discounting the value of rallying a community around one configuration - I just think dotfiles could have been the distribution mechanism, and it would be as valuable given the same community around it.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#465

Post by esperent »

nerpderp82 wrote: post #266
acdha wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don’t penalize browsers for not being Chrome – Safari users almost never see those, because their devices support a protocol for attesting real hardware with a real user, in what is hopefully a privacy-preserving manner: https://blog.cloudflare.com/eliminating-captchas-on-iphones-... That’s the underlying problem here: web sites are constantly getting suspicious traffic and if you do something like using Tor or…

So you are saying they don't penalize browser from not being Chrome and then link to a specific mechanism that they are allow listing Safari. That goes directly counter to what you are claiming. I have seen it myself, from my own system. Firefox, almost impossible to use the web due to non-stop bot checks by CF. For the same session, same site(s), I give up and use Chrome, with all the same browser extensions, and I…

Firefox on Ubuntu here. I switched over the past couple of months from using Chrome on Windows.

I see exactly the same amount of security checks, as far as I can tell.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#466

Post by aquariusDue »

skgough wrote: post #385
xenelor wrote: post #275

The hype around Omarchy is just insane.. It is not an installer script (anymore), so instead you have to download a 7GB ISO file (in the name of 'good UX') that ships with Zoom, Spotify, Hey, Basecamp, Steam, Minecraft (??), etc. but you still end up using the same package mirrors (arch's). If it was an install script, like LARBS or many others (before and after omarchy), I'd (almost) get it. If it was a derivative d…

It is strange to me that omarchy took off and not Regolith Desktop [1], which is a very similar project, and has been around a lot longer. I suppose the DHH effect is real. There is definitely a critical mass accumulating around the hyprland ecosystem. They seem to be forming their own culture separate from the wider FOSS community that I find concerning. [1] https://regolith-desktop.com/

Oh man, I forgot about Regolith! I ran it for a few weeks on an old ThinkPad a few years ago when it had a new release and it was pretty nice compared to configuring i3 and all that myself.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#468

Post by sebstefan »

akimbostrawman wrote: post #460
sebstefan wrote: post #457

>Will Ladybird work on Windows? >We don't have anyone actively working on Windows support, and there are considerable changes required to make it work well outside a Unix-like environment. >We would like to do Windows eventually, but it's not a priority at the moment. What's the user share again? 70% of desktop users?

What is the state of the project again? Alpha status?

Yeah, and it supports Mac, with the worst compilation experience on the market and 10% of the userbase. Starting support for another OS this late in the project is going to be a nightmare, it's insane to do it for Windows last.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#469

Post by MarsIronPI »

oefrha wrote: post #71
MarsIronPI wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By your argument, this could still be interpreted as Cloudflare approving Ladybird. I don't see how indie genuine browsers (i.e. not bots) are "against the ethos" of restricting the web to approved browsers only.

"Approved browser" in this context have technical restrictions on user freedom, e.g. https://developers.cloudflare.com/fundamentals/reference/cry... I'm not talking about someone at CF just adding a random browser to an approved list. More empirically speaking, a browser can't be considered approved if you can freely fork it and not revoke the approved status.

I read the article you referenced, though not very carefully due to lack of time, but I don't see anything like a list of supported browsers. They even mention Firefox as supported, which can be forked just like Ladybird.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#470

Post by glenstein »

charcircuit wrote: post #422
glenstein wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Google doesn't have control of Chromium though. There's a tightly controlled pool of developers who make up the decision-making body about which commits get approved. That pool is dominated by Google employees so they effectively control whether something gets committed. So it's not open in the sense that would be most people's first impression, which is that anyone can contribute code to the project and see it real…

>You'd have to fork it and maintain a Google sized code base. As opposed to maintaining an alternate google size code base of a non-chromium browser?

Webkit is ~10% as big as Chromium and Ladybird and Netsurf are less than 1%.
Post reply on HN