5 ms·

Firefox push[ing] irrelevant notifications

36 points by duncan_bayne 6y ago

b_ocu 6y ago
I wonder if we needed a "chromium" version of firefox that's been stripped of all of the bloatware
- breakfastquark 6y ago
  What do you consider bloatware in that regard?
  - asddubs 6y ago
    i volunteer the stupid "pocket" thing
gZdJNc5C 6y ago
I found it relevant. Using Firefox is an act of activism for a better internet.
- gZdJNc5C 6y ago
  Please, help me to understand, why this message got so badly downvoted?
  - duncan_bayne 6y ago
    Submitter here (and author of one of the bug reports that got merged into this one). My guess is the downvotes are an expression of the idea that, just because you personally find something relevant, doesn't make it okay for Mozilla to spam ~250 million people with what is essentially political advertising.
Fej 6y ago
I love Firefox, and believe it's vitally important for an open web, but Mozilla has been shooting themselves in the foot. People don't pay attention to all the positive new features and news, they pay attention to negative coverage like this. And of course spam from any app is unacceptable without signing up prior, especially including a browser of all things, but that's pretty much a given.
- detaro 6y ago
  Mozilla has a surprising pattern of not missing an opportunity to look stupid, for minimal gains.
ncmncm 6y ago
I use Firefox for reasons, but sometime Mozilla makes it hard. They just pushed a new mobile version that wiped out all my tabs, and crashes on one of the stories in the front page here: https://lupyuen.github.io/pinetime-rust-mynewt/articles/wayland https://lupyuen.github.io/pinetime-rust-mynewt/articles/wayl... Curious if others are seeing it.
eska 6y ago
This is the last straw for me personally. At this point what Mozilla claims to do and what they actually do does not seem to match. They rally against Google etc, but then install and reinstall Pocket etc on updates, claim to support free speech, yet it's clear that they only want free speech for a particular group of political throught.. I'm switching.
- duncan_bayne 6y ago
  I gave some thought to switching back when Eich "resigned". In the end I decided that continuing to support Mozilla by using and advocating for Firefox was the lesser of two evils - the alternative being to surrender to a Web mono-culture. The deciding factor for me was: what would harm free speech more? 1) a browser duopoly involving an org willing to chuck their CEO under a bus for legitimate but oppressive political donations, or 2) a browser monopoly owned by an advertising company? In the end I decided (1) was the best bet. But I swear, Mozilla keeps me on my toes reconsidering it :)
woko 6y ago
It is troubling that there was nobody in the meeting room to raise concerns about pushing notifications to ~250 millions[1] of users. [1] Monthly Active users at https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity
Proven 6y ago
Well, most people knew it's garbage, just like Chrome. If you don't mind a monetized browser you might as well use one from a smaller shop, such as Vivaldi or other. A FF fork w/o Moz junk: https://librewolf-community.gitlab.io/ https://librewolf-community.gitlab.io/
smileypete 6y ago
I just wish there was a global switch for disabling new features (where possible) by default. These would then be re-enabled by individual switches, so accepting new updates would just apply security fixes to existing features, and not create usability and security issues from unwanted new features. Not everyone wants to be the beta tester for endless new features, especially if they prefer stability and are happy with the existing functionality.

36 points by duncan_bayne 6y ago

b_ocu 6y ago

I wonder if we needed a "chromium" version of firefox that's been stripped of all of the bloatware

breakfastquark 6y ago
What do you consider bloatware in that regard?
- asddubs 6y ago
  i volunteer the stupid "pocket" thing

gZdJNc5C 6y ago

I found it relevant. Using Firefox is an act of activism for a better internet.

gZdJNc5C 6y ago
Please, help me to understand, why this message got so badly downvoted?
- duncan_bayne 6y ago
  Submitter here (and author of one of the bug reports that got merged into this one). My guess is the downvotes are an expression of the idea that, just because you personally find something relevant, doesn't make it okay for Mozilla to spam ~250 million people with what is essentially political advertising.

Fej 6y ago

I love Firefox, and believe it's vitally important for an open web, but Mozilla has been shooting themselves in the foot. People don't pay attention to all the positive new features and news, they pay attention to negative coverage like this. And of course spam from any app is unacceptable without signing up prior, especially including a browser of all things, but that's pretty much a given.

detaro 6y ago
Mozilla has a surprising pattern of not missing an opportunity to look stupid, for minimal gains.

ncmncm 6y ago

I use Firefox for reasons, but sometime Mozilla makes it hard. They just pushed a new mobile version that wiped out all my tabs, and crashes on one of the stories in the front page here: https://lupyuen.github.io/pinetime-rust-mynewt/articles/wayland https://lupyuen.github.io/pinetime-rust-mynewt/articles/wayl... Curious if others are seeing it.

eska 6y ago

This is the last straw for me personally. At this point what Mozilla claims to do and what they actually do does not seem to match. They rally against Google etc, but then install and reinstall Pocket etc on updates, claim to support free speech, yet it's clear that they only want free speech for a particular group of political throught.. I'm switching.

duncan_bayne 6y ago
I gave some thought to switching back when Eich "resigned". In the end I decided that continuing to support Mozilla by using and advocating for Firefox was the lesser of two evils - the alternative being to surrender to a Web mono-culture. The deciding factor for me was: what would harm free speech more? 1) a browser duopoly involving an org willing to chuck their CEO under a bus for legitimate but oppressive political donations, or 2) a browser monopoly owned by an advertising company? In the end I decided (1) was the best bet. But I swear, Mozilla keeps me on my toes reconsidering it :)

woko 6y ago

It is troubling that there was nobody in the meeting room to raise concerns about pushing notifications to ~250 millions[1] of users. [1] Monthly Active users at https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity

Proven 6y ago

Well, most people knew it's garbage, just like Chrome. If you don't mind a monetized browser you might as well use one from a smaller shop, such as Vivaldi or other. A FF fork w/o Moz junk: https://librewolf-community.gitlab.io/ https://librewolf-community.gitlab.io/

smileypete 6y ago

I just wish there was a global switch for disabling new features (where possible) by default. These would then be re-enabled by individual switches, so accepting new updates would just apply security fixes to existing features, and not create usability and security issues from unwanted new features. Not everyone wants to be the beta tester for endless new features, especially if they prefer stability and are happy with the existing functionality.