3 ms·
A technically competent user's feedback should be weighted at least one, if not tens or hundreds of orders of magnitude greater than anonymously gathered teleme
by robbedpeter 5y ago
A technically competent user's feedback should be weighted at least one, if not tens or hundreds of orders of magnitude greater than anonymously gathered telemetry. Remove actual, intentional human communication from the loop and you're lost at sea - anyone can make the anonymous data mean anything, and then it's whomever can make the cleverest chart or analysis of the data that ends up directing decisions.
Ignoring the people who actually take the time to communicate problems in favor of interpreted telemetry is exactly why Firefox is losing. Taking direction from technical users, or so-called power users, can give the application improvements in nuanced and technical uses. Taking direction from anonymous "averages" makes development a race to the bottom.
Firefox developments over the last couple years feels like what would happen if you put grandma in charge of trying to make things better. To put it bluntly, fuck grandma, she doesn't know what the hell she's doing anyway. Firefox used to be a Lamborghini, it doesn't need training wheels and balloon bumpers. Lean into technical excellence and drop the obsessive ui/ux nonsense.
- bityard 5y agoI agree with this so much. Once it was clear that Chrome was destined to cater to the masses, Firefox should have done a hard pivot with an emphasis on privacy and putting the user in control of their browsing experience. The best time to do this was a few years back when all of this was becoming obvious, but now with massive popular distrust of large tech companies like Facebook and Google making daily news, the second best time is now. There's a reason I run Linux and BSD on every computing device I own, instead of Windows or Mac. It's not because it's easier to use (they are not), it is not because it has more bells and whistles (they do not). It's because at the end of the day, _I_ am the one in control of my computers, not some product manager who needs bullet points on his or her annual review. There is no universe in which Firefox is going to successfully compete against Google at their own game, especially when Google is _still_ the majority source of their funding. I have no evidence for or against this, but my greatest fear is that the people at Mozilla who were passionate about the same things that I am passionate about have left out of frustration and the only ones left are there for the lifestyle and hipsterness of "working in tech" at a non-profit in a trendy city.
- md8z 5y agoI cannot agree with it or your comment. I have seen these type of comments pop up in every Firefox thread on HN. It is so common for people to try to play armchair CEO. But when I actually dig into it, I have really never seen anyone with a competent vision of what a "competing browser" is supposed to look like. It all seems to boil down to "put the user in control of X feature and add a bunch of settings for it" or "don't remove Y feature that I used" or "bring back XUL" or something like that which I hope you can understand are not reasonable high-level directions. The various forks of firefox are well intentioned but these are all minor modifications, they don't try to do something different. To illustrate what I mean here, if you want a fork with an emphasis on privacy you can just use LibreWolf. It is the entire thread we are responding to, the thing you want exists right now. But I don't see people exactly flocking to use that, your comment seems to not even acknowledge that it exists!
- nuerow 5y ago> Once it was clear that Chrome was destined to cater to the masses, Firefox should have done a hard pivot with an emphasis on privacy and putting the user in control of their browsing experience. Why do you believe that catering to the masses implies not focusing on privacy and putting the user in control of their browsing experience?