4 ms·

Sorry but the devtools can't even inspect my websocket API frames. The websocket inspector was a feature request filed 6 years ago. [1] Maybe Firefox devs did

by chmln 8y ago

Sorry but the devtools can't even inspect my websocket API frames. The websocket inspector was a feature request filed 6 years ago. [1] Maybe Firefox devs didn't have time for it. But somehow they got all the time in the world to add clickbait Pocket articles on my new tab page. [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=885508 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=885508

judge2020 8y ago
As well as the time to code in product placements https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15956325 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15956325
- ripdog 8y ago
  Financially, Mozilla is currently entirely dependent on a search contract with Google, their mortal enemy. They obviously see that this relationship is extremely risky, especially as Firefox becomes less popular and thus their userbase less valuable to Google. As such, they're trying to diversify their revenue stream. Do you have any better solutions? Browsers are absurdly expensive to develop, by the way.
  - jhasse 8y ago
    Become more popular by improving the product?
    - rb666 8y ago
      Funded by? you?
      - jhasse 8y ago
        All the money they shouldn't spend on Pocket for example.
        rb666 8y ago
        Pocket is not a cost center, it earns them money to develop the browser in the first place!
    - ripdog 8y ago
      Firefox is improving by leaps and bounds every day. But the market is not a meritocracy, as much as some people like to pretend it is. Success in the market is much more to do with things like marketing, momentum, inertia, and general opinions. All of these things are favoring Chrome right now, and Mozilla is not in a position to turn this around. And you may not have noticed, but being popular doesn't actually give you money when your product is free and features no ads or tracking. All you are saying is that "google should give mozilla more money". How do you suggest they diversify their revenue stream?
      - jhasse 8y ago
        I disagree. IMHO Chrome is a better browser than Firefox. A few examples from the top of my head why Firefox is worse than Chrome (on Linux): 1. Hardware acceleration is still disabled by default on Linux 2. Pocket 3. Unwanted notifications about wanting to update / being updated / having updated 3. Ugly spacing left and right of the adress bar 4. Takes longer to start 5. No integration with GNOME keychain. 6. Ctrl+Q quits the browser. 7. Laggy UI > How do you suggest they diversify their revenue stream? I would suggest that they don't need to diversify their revenue stream. As long as they are a major player, Google (or any other search engine) will continue to fund them.
        dblohm7 8y ago
        3. Ugly spacing left and right of the adress bar Those spacers are easily removed via customize mode.
        jhasse 8y ago
        Sure, you can also fix a lot of other annoyances. But those add up until the point where someone just installs Chrome in the first place where the defaults are sane.

by chmln 8y ago

judge2020 8y ago

As well as the time to code in product placements https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15956325 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15956325

ripdog 8y ago
Financially, Mozilla is currently entirely dependent on a search contract with Google, their mortal enemy. They obviously see that this relationship is extremely risky, especially as Firefox becomes less popular and thus their userbase less valuable to Google. As such, they're trying to diversify their revenue stream. Do you have any better solutions? Browsers are absurdly expensive to develop, by the way.
- jhasse 8y ago
  Become more popular by improving the product?
  - rb666 8y ago
    Funded by? you?
    - jhasse 8y ago
      All the money they shouldn't spend on Pocket for example.
      - rb666 8y ago
        Pocket is not a cost center, it earns them money to develop the browser in the first place!
  - ripdog 8y ago
    Firefox is improving by leaps and bounds every day. But the market is not a meritocracy, as much as some people like to pretend it is. Success in the market is much more to do with things like marketing, momentum, inertia, and general opinions. All of these things are favoring Chrome right now, and Mozilla is not in a position to turn this around. And you may not have noticed, but being popular doesn't actually give you money when your product is free and features no ads or tracking. All you are saying is that "google should give mozilla more money". How do you suggest they diversify their revenue stream?
    - jhasse 8y ago
      I disagree. IMHO Chrome is a better browser than Firefox. A few examples from the top of my head why Firefox is worse than Chrome (on Linux): 1. Hardware acceleration is still disabled by default on Linux 2. Pocket 3. Unwanted notifications about wanting to update / being updated / having updated 3. Ugly spacing left and right of the adress bar 4. Takes longer to start 5. No integration with GNOME keychain. 6. Ctrl+Q quits the browser. 7. Laggy UI > How do you suggest they diversify their revenue stream? I would suggest that they don't need to diversify their revenue stream. As long as they are a major player, Google (or any other search engine) will continue to fund them.
      - dblohm7 8y ago
        3. Ugly spacing left and right of the adress bar Those spacers are easily removed via customize mode.
        jhasse 8y ago
        Sure, you can also fix a lot of other annoyances. But those add up until the point where someone just installs Chrome in the first place where the defaults are sane.