Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork • Hacker News Board

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#71

Post by neodymiumphish » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:24 PM UTC

GeckoEidechse wrote: post #34

trickypr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I am a dev on Pulse Browser. I want to clarify our current development direction (I haven't significant updated the website recently). We have been moving further away from privacy and towards developing/iterating on features faster than Firefox is willing to, along with providing sane defaults. For example, we have been experimenting with a opera/vivaldi-like method of accessing Firefox's sidebar. Whilst you cou…

Currently the 3rd most requested feature on Mozilla Connect is native vertical tabs: https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/native-vertical-tabs-li... Any chance we could see something like this in Pulse Browser or is that something that just requires touching too much of the underlying code base to be viable? ^^

This would be huge for me. I can't really move away from Edge for productivity/work use cases until I have vertical tabs to a comparable usability in another browser.

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#72

Post by solarkraft » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:27 PM UTC

Yes! We need a de-Mozilla-ed Firefox Fork. Remove the VPN ads, Pocket and whatever other crap they're trying to push.

But don't make the mistake of the other Forks of disabling almost every modern web technology. Don't rip out WebRTC. Keep JS on. Keep it usable by default.

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#73

Post by solarkraft » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:28 PM UTC

toastal wrote: post #59

Reasons LibreWolf ( https://librewolf.net/ ) is more interesting: • more mature • more installation options • hosted on an open-core forge, GitLab, instead of a proprietary, closed-source one, GitHub • open-source communications preferred, Matrix/Gitter, instead of proprietary, closed-source communications, Discord • website has a lot more information

Last time I checked it was incompatible with most half-advanced JavaScript apps by default. Not what I'm looking for.

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#74

Post by solarkraft » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:30 PM UTC

neodymiumphish wrote: post #71

GeckoEidechse wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Currently the 3rd most requested feature on Mozilla Connect is native vertical tabs: https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/native-vertical-tabs-li... Any chance we could see something like this in Pulse Browser or is that something that just requires touching too much of the underlying code base to be viable? ^^

This would be huge for me. I can't really move away from Edge for productivity/work use cases until I have vertical tabs to a comparable usability in another browser.

I don't know how you can deal with just vertical tabs. Sidebery (FF extension) offers tree tabs and it's really cool.

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#75

Post by solarkraft » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:32 PM UTC

GeckoEidechse wrote: post #34

trickypr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I am a dev on Pulse Browser. I want to clarify our current development direction (I haven't significant updated the website recently). We have been moving further away from privacy and towards developing/iterating on features faster than Firefox is willing to, along with providing sane defaults. For example, we have been experimenting with a opera/vivaldi-like method of accessing Firefox's sidebar. Whilst you cou…

Currently the 3rd most requested feature on Mozilla Connect is native vertical tabs: https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/native-vertical-tabs-li... Any chance we could see something like this in Pulse Browser or is that something that just requires touching too much of the underlying code base to be viable? ^^

Please not just vertical, I need my trees. Sidebery works pretty well though. Sometimes updates are a little delayed, but it's not very bad. Native support and optimizations for Sidebery should do the trick.

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#76

Post by solarkraft » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:33 PM UTC

trickypr wrote: post #26

csande17 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have been moving further away from privacy [...] I appreciate your honesty, but hearing this was enough for me to file your project into the "not touching with a ten-foot pole" bucket alongside the likes of Wave Browser.

I think you are miss interpreting me. I don't want to focus on privacy above all else. To do that well would compromise on the usability of the browser. For example, if I were to advertise it as "privacy focused", I would not feel comfortable unless I included strict anti-fingerprinting, which would break websites. It is a balancing act, and I won't be collecting or selling your data, but I won't be competing with Li…

Thank you! There are already other Firefox forks that rip out half of its browsing capability.

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#77

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:40 PM UTC

trickypr wrote: post #26

csande17 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have been moving further away from privacy [...] I appreciate your honesty, but hearing this was enough for me to file your project into the "not touching with a ten-foot pole" bucket alongside the likes of Wave Browser.

I think you are miss interpreting me. I don't want to focus on privacy above all else. To do that well would compromise on the usability of the browser. For example, if I were to advertise it as "privacy focused", I would not feel comfortable unless I included strict anti-fingerprinting, which would break websites. It is a balancing act, and I won't be collecting or selling your data, but I won't be competing with Li…

[deleted]

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#78

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:41 PM UTC

nonrandomstring wrote: post #18

dartharva wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hyper minimalistic UI"

I'm glad to see someone still has the courage to work on browsers - which is increasingly declared "infeasible". Well done. > We have been moving further away from privacy and towards But sorry, I literally stopped reading at that point. The only feature that people want and need from browsers, and the only reason to even glance twice at yet another Firefox fork is enhanced privacy and cast-iron control over what a b…

[deleted]

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#79

Post by pluc » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

toastal wrote: post #59

Reasons LibreWolf ( https://librewolf.net/ ) is more interesting: • more mature • more installation options • hosted on an open-core forge, GitLab, instead of a proprietary, closed-source one, GitHub • open-source communications preferred, Matrix/Gitter, instead of proprietary, closed-source communications, Discord • website has a lot more information

Plenty of obscure alternatives: LibreWolf, IceWeasel, IceCat, WaterFox, PaleMoon or just ArkenFox.

Re: Pulse Browser – An experimental Firefox fork

#80

Post by hnlmorg » Sun, Nov 13, 2022, 2:47 PM UTC

Existenceblinks wrote: post #65

hnlmorg wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A better firefox would be a better Chrome that copies optimization technique from firefox. Because "better" means improving the one that 65% of users are already using .. if it's fixable. I don’t want an internet dominated by only one web browser’s rendering engine. Not ever again thank you.

I don't want too. But I think in shoes of others. Clearly we want them to not want to too but the market share speaks itself.

Most people don’t use Chrome because it’s a better browser. They use it because it’s owned by Google, who is a familiar household name.

In fact I’d wager a fair number of Chrome users don’t even know it’s called Chrome. They probably just call it “Google” or “The Internet” (particularly on Android).

It would be the same case with Microsoft Edge. And possibly even with Safari for some Apple users too.