4 ms·

And those architectural improvements broke things that worked for me previously, from my point of view they aren't improvements at all. I'm a user, we should I

by flukus 8y ago

And those architectural improvements broke things that worked for me previously, from my point of view they aren't improvements at all. I'm a user, we should I care that they are making architectural improvements while they rewrite things in a different language when there are so many obvious issues preventing me from using it? At this rate they will be rewriting it for no one.

pcwalton 8y ago
I'm sorry you had a bad experience. But architectural improvements are done to improve performance and stability. I can't think of a single Rust component that shipped without extensive performance measurement to demonstrate improvements in the important metrics that users care about.
- flukus 8y ago
  > demonstrate improvements in the important metrics that users care about And yet market share is plummeting, doesn't that indicated that your metrics for what users care about are completely wrong? It's hardly me alone having this experience, most firefox users had there extensions break for no visible benefit. Anyone with the non-default ubuntu theme has the same issue with text boxes, which indicates a complete lack of QA. I also have a 15 year long emotional attachment to firefox and a desire to see it succeed, if you can't convince me these changes are for the better then good luck with the rest of the world.
  - fabrice_d 8y ago
    Unfortunately market share is more about being about to efficiently distribute your product than just the quality of said product. Mozilla is suffering from not having its own platform - they could have done so by keeping FirefoxOS alive and use the growing success of KaiOS today. Looks like they are not ready to come back because... reasons.
    - jabl 8y ago
      FirefoxOS never had a snowball's chance in hell against Android and iOS. I wish it were otherwise, but it's not, and never was. But yes, I agree that FF market share problems are not due to problems with the product itself.
      - ittgsv 8y ago
        Firefox OS was a terrible idea. Gecko is horribly slow as it is, and they put it on low-end, under-powered mobile phones. As it was expected, using it for a few minutes made you want to hang yourself. I know they met with bosses from telecos, I wonder what faces they made when they showed them how the mobile behaved.
        littlestymaar 8y ago
        I used to have a Flame, the FirefoxOS development phone (which was the higher-end FFxOS device but was still bellow $200), and it was WAY snappier than my current Android phone (which is a $400 one!).
    - flukus 8y ago
      > Unfortunately market share is more about being about to efficiently distribute your product than just the quality of said product. Firefox has broken out of this before by being a better product. Not being default on any platform is nothing compared to back in the day when IE had >95% market share and sites were made to work with it only. These days even many linux distros are defaulting to chromium, that's the one place where it could be the "native" browser.

by flukus 8y ago

pcwalton 8y ago

I'm sorry you had a bad experience. But architectural improvements are done to improve performance and stability. I can't think of a single Rust component that shipped without extensive performance measurement to demonstrate improvements in the important metrics that users care about.

flukus 8y ago
> demonstrate improvements in the important metrics that users care about And yet market share is plummeting, doesn't that indicated that your metrics for what users care about are completely wrong? It's hardly me alone having this experience, most firefox users had there extensions break for no visible benefit. Anyone with the non-default ubuntu theme has the same issue with text boxes, which indicates a complete lack of QA. I also have a 15 year long emotional attachment to firefox and a desire to see it succeed, if you can't convince me these changes are for the better then good luck with the rest of the world.
- fabrice_d 8y ago
  Unfortunately market share is more about being about to efficiently distribute your product than just the quality of said product. Mozilla is suffering from not having its own platform - they could have done so by keeping FirefoxOS alive and use the growing success of KaiOS today. Looks like they are not ready to come back because... reasons.
  - jabl 8y ago
    FirefoxOS never had a snowball's chance in hell against Android and iOS. I wish it were otherwise, but it's not, and never was. But yes, I agree that FF market share problems are not due to problems with the product itself.
    - ittgsv 8y ago
      Firefox OS was a terrible idea. Gecko is horribly slow as it is, and they put it on low-end, under-powered mobile phones. As it was expected, using it for a few minutes made you want to hang yourself. I know they met with bosses from telecos, I wonder what faces they made when they showed them how the mobile behaved.
      - littlestymaar 8y ago
        I used to have a Flame, the FirefoxOS development phone (which was the higher-end FFxOS device but was still bellow $200), and it was WAY snappier than my current Android phone (which is a $400 one!).
  - flukus 8y ago
    > Unfortunately market share is more about being about to efficiently distribute your product than just the quality of said product. Firefox has broken out of this before by being a better product. Not being default on any platform is nothing compared to back in the day when IE had >95% market share and sites were made to work with it only. These days even many linux distros are defaulting to chromium, that's the one place where it could be the "native" browser.