3 ms·

I never understood why Mozilla has allowed their main product and their only money maker to fall so far behind. They have a lot of income. I don't mind them g

I never understood why Mozilla has allowed their main product and their only money maker to fall so far behind. They have a lot of income. I don't mind them going of on various edgy projects. But FF has been inferior to Chrome for many years. They should really refocus their efforts to concentrate on delivering the best browser again, as it was before Chrome came along.

reitanqild 10y ago
> But FF has been inferior to Chrome for many years. Can we please stop fueling this myth? Maybe for some of you Firefox lacks something you actually need. For others, like me and a bunch of others it is completely the other way, -if I was forced to use any other browser it would annoy me to no end (not tree tabs, etc etc). So while I think it is totally fine to point out where other does better, telling everyone that Chrome is better isn't even true except for very specific cases. Edit: clarify need
- sosborn 10y ago
  It is almost as though different people has tastes that stray from yours.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    That is exactly what I point out. But unlike others I hope that I don't tell everyone that my taste is better.
- the_duke 10y ago
  It's not a myth. FF was my main browser, and would be to this date if it provided the best experience. Chrome is faster, snappier, more fluid. Faster time to render, fastes JS engine. There's a reason most of the geeks switched to Chrome on their own, before Google began it's aggressive approach of converting everyone to it with ads and bundling.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    This doesn't help. For any of the reasons you mention we can pull another reason why FF is better.
- Springtime 10y ago
  Once accustomed to browsers with more comprehensive customization it does feels rather limiting using anything else. It's the customization aspect that keeps me with Firefox coming from Opera Presto, in addition to a host of other functionality that thanks to its far more moddable nature is possible. One of the things I love about Chromium though is the responsive and device modes of the web inspector. Top quality.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    I don't responsive or mobile at the moment but I guess there is some kind of extension for that. Remember FF extensions can be quite a bit more powerful than other extensions.
cft 10y ago
Because capitalism and technological progress (unlike science or art) is about greed and money, and a non-profit is not a competitive vehicle for it.
- danieldk 10y ago
  And still, Linux outperformed most commercial competitors in the embedded and server spaces without being a single commercial entity. Apache was the most successful webserver for a long time, despite coming from a non-profit organisation, etc. I also believe that Firefox should look to exploit Google/Chrome's weaknesses more: Google relies fully on ad income. Firefox relies on sending users to someone's search engine/default page. Why not offer a version that shows the web as most of us see it: ad-free and with less tracking.
  - cft 10y ago
    Very good point. Linux and Apache however are not consumer products, and the for profit companies that are using them are heavily contributing to the projects. The end users of Firefox are not contributing to its code, all development is done by Mozilla foundation.
  - barpet 10y ago
    Linux did not outperform anyone. Companies did. Companies used and abused linux in such a way that the other simply followed the trend. Mainly because of the costs. And btw this is what Facebook and Google will be doing to most of other competitors as well. This is pure / chinese style capitalism. We give you something good enough for free but forget about normal wealth distribution only a single entity / group of people will get rich and the others will have to pay a hefty price of loosing their privacy. Linux and Apache and the others succeeded because they spawned a lot of other businesses that were just cheaper than the offerings from Microsoft or Oracle.
    - danieldk 10y ago
      Linux did not outperform anyone. Companies did. Companies used and abused linux in such a way that the other simply followed the trend. That's a unfair caricature of what really happened. There were competing systems with business-friendlier licenses. Obviously, Linux wouldn't be what it is without corporate contributions. But it also wouldn't be what it is without Linus' management and extreme pragmatism. That combined with the momentum introduced by the distribution ecosystem and advocacy that sprung up in the nineties. Don't forget that by the time that IBM started pouring money into Linux (Peace, Love, Linux was in 2001 IIRC), Linux already had a large following among the tech crowd, which was stealthily replacing commercial UNIX installations with Linux.

reitanqild 10y ago

> But FF has been inferior to Chrome for many years. Can we please stop fueling this myth? Maybe for some of you Firefox lacks something you actually need. For others, like me and a bunch of others it is completely the other way, -if I was forced to use any other browser it would annoy me to no end (not tree tabs, etc etc). So while I think it is totally fine to point out where other does better, telling everyone that Chrome is better isn't even true except for very specific cases. Edit: clarify need

sosborn 10y ago
It is almost as though different people has tastes that stray from yours.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  That is exactly what I point out. But unlike others I hope that I don't tell everyone that my taste is better.
the_duke 10y ago
It's not a myth. FF was my main browser, and would be to this date if it provided the best experience. Chrome is faster, snappier, more fluid. Faster time to render, fastes JS engine. There's a reason most of the geeks switched to Chrome on their own, before Google began it's aggressive approach of converting everyone to it with ads and bundling.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  This doesn't help. For any of the reasons you mention we can pull another reason why FF is better.
Springtime 10y ago
Once accustomed to browsers with more comprehensive customization it does feels rather limiting using anything else. It's the customization aspect that keeps me with Firefox coming from Opera Presto, in addition to a host of other functionality that thanks to its far more moddable nature is possible. One of the things I love about Chromium though is the responsive and device modes of the web inspector. Top quality.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  I don't responsive or mobile at the moment but I guess there is some kind of extension for that. Remember FF extensions can be quite a bit more powerful than other extensions.

cft 10y ago

Because capitalism and technological progress (unlike science or art) is about greed and money, and a non-profit is not a competitive vehicle for it.

danieldk 10y ago
And still, Linux outperformed most commercial competitors in the embedded and server spaces without being a single commercial entity. Apache was the most successful webserver for a long time, despite coming from a non-profit organisation, etc. I also believe that Firefox should look to exploit Google/Chrome's weaknesses more: Google relies fully on ad income. Firefox relies on sending users to someone's search engine/default page. Why not offer a version that shows the web as most of us see it: ad-free and with less tracking.
- cft 10y ago
  Very good point. Linux and Apache however are not consumer products, and the for profit companies that are using them are heavily contributing to the projects. The end users of Firefox are not contributing to its code, all development is done by Mozilla foundation.
- barpet 10y ago
  Linux did not outperform anyone. Companies did. Companies used and abused linux in such a way that the other simply followed the trend. Mainly because of the costs. And btw this is what Facebook and Google will be doing to most of other competitors as well. This is pure / chinese style capitalism. We give you something good enough for free but forget about normal wealth distribution only a single entity / group of people will get rich and the others will have to pay a hefty price of loosing their privacy. Linux and Apache and the others succeeded because they spawned a lot of other businesses that were just cheaper than the offerings from Microsoft or Oracle.
  - danieldk 10y ago
    Linux did not outperform anyone. Companies did. Companies used and abused linux in such a way that the other simply followed the trend. That's a unfair caricature of what really happened. There were competing systems with business-friendlier licenses. Obviously, Linux wouldn't be what it is without corporate contributions. But it also wouldn't be what it is without Linus' management and extreme pragmatism. That combined with the momentum introduced by the distribution ecosystem and advocacy that sprung up in the nineties. Don't forget that by the time that IBM started pouring money into Linux (Peace, Love, Linux was in 2001 IIRC), Linux already had a large following among the tech crowd, which was stealthily replacing commercial UNIX installations with Linux.