9 ms·

Instead of building another Chromium-based browser, I’d love to see if it were possible for Mozilla and DuckDuckGo to form a partnership that potently helps bot

by cebert 5y ago

Instead of building another Chromium-based browser, I’d love to see if it were possible for Mozilla and DuckDuckGo to form a partnership that potently helps both firms. I’m concerned we will end up with a monolithic browser stack controlled by Google unless Firefox gains more adoption and support. I believe multiple parties and players help us build a more open and standards based web. I use Firefox as my daily driver primarily for privacy concerns and control, and secondarily to avoid monolithic browser stacks controlled by Google. Firefox isn’t perfect, but I enjoy the experience and have no issue browsing the web with it.

dkdbejwi383 5y ago
It’s not (necessarily) Chromium: > "Instead of forking Chromium or anything else, we're building our desktop app around the OS-provided rendering engines (like on mobile), allowing us to strip away a lot of the unnecessary cruft and clutter that's accumulated over the years in major browsers," explains Weinberg.
- Comevius 5y ago
  The OS-provided rendering engine is Chromium's engine on Android and Windows, and Safari's on iOS and macOS.
  - isodev 5y ago
    "Safari" refers to the browser app built on top of the WebKit engine. Browsers on iOS use the WebKit engine (and not the Safari browser itself). The same engine (WebKit) is available on all Apple platforms. One can also build a desktop browser on top of WebKit like DuckDuckGo suggests it may do on macOS. This approach has a tremendous advantage for solid platform integration and allows them to focus on building a good user experience (and, in this case, secure* good user experience).
    - smoldesu 5y ago
      WebKit is also fully usable on other platforms too, but I seldom ever reach for it unless I'm forced to by the OS.
    - cma 5y ago
      > This approach has a tremendous advantage for solid platform integration and allows them to focus on building a good user experience It basically only lets them do a bit more than skinning it. No deep plugin architectures like you see with Android Firefox, allowing real ad blockers.
      - isodev 5y ago
        WebKit is just the part that renders web content. Browser makers are free to include plugin functionality in their implementation if they want to, including content blockers like ad-block, fancy tab and theme functionality, etc. It is also possible to extend the content blocking feature, so it also works in Safari itself through a regular web plugin or a content blocker extension. DuckDuckGo offers the "DuckDuckGo Privacy Essentials" plugin for iOS and macOS, blocking all kinds of trackers.
        cma 5y ago
        That's the limited blocker stuff you can do on iOS safari, you can't block as deeply as ublock origin and others.
- cebert 5y ago
  Yes, I’ll admit that part of the article is was a bit unclear to me. On iOS for example, you have to use Safari as your rendering engine. Chrome, Firefox, and any other browser ultimately us that on iOS. Android the os-provided rendering engine is Chromium. For desktop OSes I didn’t get the impression that they’re building their own rendering engine and at this point it would be a hefty engineering effort to do so. My assumption is that Chromium would be the underlying technology most commonly employed here.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - dkdbejwi383 5y ago
    One can use WKWebView on MacOS as well as iOS. How they will support Linux is a mystery.
    - BurningPenguin 5y ago
      Probably depends on the GUI framework they're using. QT uses Chromium for its QtWebEngine. I think that would be one of the most sensible choices to achieve cross platform support.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - neoberg 5y ago
      lynx
- 3np 5y ago
  Sounds like no Linux release then..?
  - kaba0 5y ago
    It could just use qt’s or gtk’s native renderer.
- kaba0 5y ago
  That takes a small fraction of the dev time than a complete browser though, so it doesn’t really help the very chrome-centric landscape.
- CursedUrn 5y ago
  So could Google just put spyware (sorry "telemetry") in the rendering engine?
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    Well it's open source so they can just rip it back out as well, that's what brave does.
numlock86 5y ago
> "Don't use X! Use Y instead!" > I believe multiple parties and players help us build a more open and standards based web. How is choosing Firefox over Chromium going to help in that regard? And why do you think Chromium is a monolithic browser stack by Google? How is it monolithic? I see plenty of "Chromium parts" forked and used in different environments on their own all the time. Blink, V8 or mixed combinations like CEF ... Also what makes you think it's "controlled by Google"? You say you want more open standards, but funnily enough Mozilla is one of those ignoring most new widely adopted and open standards because of ... well, some developer simply doesn't want Firefox to support it. See the "Web Serial API" for example.
- Sebb767 5y ago
  > How is choosing Firefox over Chromium going to help in that regard? Chromium is absolutely dominant in that space, since basically all major browsers except Safari and FF are based on it. Creating your own stack is hardly an option and Safari isn't forkable, so if you don't want to support the near-monopoly of the Chrome browser stack Firefox is the only option. Now, I do agree that FF made some very questionable decisions recently, but so did Chrome (see Manifest v3) and the way it's going right now, we'll have yet another Internet Exporer-like scenario on our hands soon.
  - ekianjo 5y ago
    Internet explorer was proprietary. Bad analogy.
    - Sebb767 5y ago
      It's still mostly controlled by a single company. The fact that it's open source makes the situation a tad better, but it's still a lot of power and network effect centered on a single entity.
  - mattkevan 5y ago
    Didn’t Google fork WebKit to make Chrome? If I remember correctly, the first few versions of Chrome were actually fully WebKit.
najqh 5y ago
Precisely the last thing we need is more ads and unwanted features in Firefox.
- sh4un 5y ago
  The best is the furniture maker splash screen. My wife says what does it have to do with the internet. I told her Mozilla has conflicting priorities.
- pizza234 5y ago
  DDG has been very lightweight with regard to user experience. And they actually have to, otherwise, they couldn't distinguish themselves from the competition (ie. Google). So there's no realistic risk of invasiveness. WRT the features: Firefox needs market share above all. I'm actually terrified by a future where companies can't be bothered to put even a minimal effort to make a website/service run acceptably on Firefox. Try to use Slack on it, and you'll see what I mean.
  - najqh 5y ago
    "Firefox has been very lightweight with regard to user experience. And they actually have to, otherwise, they couldn't distinguish themselves from the competition (ie. Google). So there's no realistic risk of invasiveness."
  - deadbunny 5y ago
    > I'm actually terrified by a future where companies can't be bothered to put even a minimal effort to make a website/service run acceptably on Firefox This isn't the future unfortunately. This is the present.
  - neoberg 5y ago
    Future? As a webdev I don't remember having to check if something works on Firefox since probably 7-8 years at least. Userbase is too small to justify allocating resources.
    - 5y ago
cainxinth 5y ago
I use Chrome for everything. I have 27 plug-ins running right now. But if Manifest 3 turns out to be as bad as predicted, I’ll abandon ship for Firefox without a second thought.
- xNeil 5y ago
  If you use Chrome, aren't you sending all your data to google directly? Can any number of plugins ensure your privacy?
  - deepstack 5y ago
    use brave or ungoogled chromium (search for it on github) shall stop that.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    Lol no you aren't "sending all your data to google". Come on man, certainly they spy on you but all your data is a bit of a bogey man story.
- mccorrinall 5y ago
  Im curious what plugins you use. 27 seems to be a lot.
  - cainxinth 5y ago
    Here's a partial list: - Dark Night Mode - FireShot - Force Background Tab - Google Docs Offline - Google Mail Checker - Hacker News Enhancement Suite - Image Downloader - Instapaper - LastPass - Linkclump - Popout for Youtube - Privacy Badger - Read Aloud - Reader Mode - Reddit Check - Reddit Enhancement Suite - ReviewMeta - Send from Gmail - Tampermonkey - The Camelizer - uBlock Origin
    - deleted 5y ago
agumonkey 5y ago
Revive servo, and call it drust. Another one byte the drust quick song ala winamp on first launch.
crate_barre 5y ago
Mozilla is not altruistic enough like that to turn off Google funding into their org. This is a company that’s trying to sell VPN subs for god’s sakes, like every other mom-pop vpn shop. These cats need that Google money and could give two fucks about seriously competing with them.
- kaba0 5y ago
  How do mozilla receiving money for a setting which is literally on the first page of the settings page and is directly available from the url bar and you can set it with like 2 clicks causes you any problem? Are you donating money to mozilla in exchange for something? Or are you helping out with the code?
Devasta 5y ago
Monolithic browser controlled by Google is already the case, the corpse of firefox is being dangled about "Weekend at Bernies" style so they can pretend they don't control the web. Chromes dominance is not going to be changed outside of government action.
- mfer 5y ago
  > Chromes dominance is not going to be changed outside of government action. This is because business tactics rather than technical or product ones are the reason for their domination. While I love technologies, it's so important to focus on the things outside of the tech itself at times.
  - Devasta 5y ago
    Tbh a lot of the tech is business tactics. Pumping so much stuff into the browser makes it an impossible task just trying to maintain feature parity nevermind compete on quality. Building out a high quality subset is not viable, the second your browser stops working with Amazon or Ebay or whatever else your browser is finished.
    - mfer 5y ago
      > Pumping so much stuff into the browser makes it an impossible task just trying to maintain feature parity nevermind compete on quality. To compete or gain a market doesn't mean you need to have all the features. Doing things differently can and does work. The more I read books like Competing Against Luck and The Design Of Everyday Things the more I'm able to see it and even work on projects that do that. > the second your browser stops working with Amazon or Ebay or whatever else your browser is finished This is why standards are so important. Why it's important to have Firefox and Safari in the marketplace. Apple using Safari on iOS and iOS large market helps keep the standards ecosystem in check with Chromes dominance. The lack of modern tech communications standards is causing problems for consumers. While I don't always like the HTML, CSS, and JS specs... the fact that we have specs and multiple implementations is a benefit to people who want to try and compete.
steviedotboston 5y ago
If Chromium works well and is open source, why does it matter?
- luxcem 5y ago
  The standard adoption might be pushed by Google only or at best by a limited group of developers working on chromium. Monopoly, even with open source is dangerous.
- phkahler 5y ago
  >> If Chromium works well and is open source, why does it matter? Where's the source for the MS version of it?
luxcem 5y ago
Agreed, we already had discussion here about Gecko beeing used more in project I think there were a project for a Gecko based electron alternative. That said I'm not sure what is the current state of Gecko and how it could be used easily in new project. I'm not even sure that's a goal Mozilla is pushing.
tarboreus 5y ago
As much as I think Firefox is great as a project, if only because it's not Chrome. I think we could use more people entering the space with fresh ideas. A monoculture with just Firefox and Safari outside it is is still basically a monoculture. Plus Mozilla is pretty solidly captured by Google, sorry to say, that's where all of their revenue comes from, more or less. If Firefox actually started getting big market share tomorrow, Google could just pull the plug on them.
rPlayer6554 5y ago
Mozilla needs Google's money to continue existing so I don't think that's going to happen.
- sanxiyn 5y ago
  Mozilla partnered with Yahoo just fine, so I don't see why it can't with DuckDuckGo.
no_wizard 5y ago
The prevalence of chromium forks makes me wonder if there is something about the Firefox code base that makes it far less attractive to work with then chromium’s. Is it just raw features of the core engine? Or is there a bigger issue? I believe the chromium team does put some effort in helping even competing forks with technical issues. I wonder Mozilla is unable to demonstrably provide support in this area?
quincunx 5y ago
I also use Firefox as my daily, but more and more software seems incompatible with it. For instance, AWS EC2 Global View insists I switch away from Firefox, that's just one example, but there are more. Anyone know why? I've always viewed Firefox as the de-facto standard, why the recent breakage? Why is it deemed acceptable, by AWS of all orgs?
- arilotter 5y ago
  Since it's got such a low market share, it's much easier to declare your website "not compatible with Firefox" than it is to test on Firefox, even though 99% of sites that claim they're not compatible with Firefox work perfectly as soon as you spoof your user-agent to WebKit.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- antihero 5y ago
  I'm looking at AWS EC2 Global View now (on Firefox) and am seeing nothing about switching away from Firefox.
  - quincunx 5y ago
    ok, interesting. I just checked, as of right now I still very much get the message "Unsupported Browser - In order to provide the best experience we require you use a different browser." So I'm not sure where our configurations differ. Firefox 95.0.2 64-bit fwiw.
- sydbarrett74 5y ago
  Perhaps Mozilla should create more paid coding positions rather than padding Mitchell Baker's purse. She's sucked a lot of the air out of that organisation.
teh_klev 5y ago
> I use Firefox as my daily driver primarily for privacy concerns and control I'd switch to Firefox in an instant if they would just make the multi-profile functionality a first class citizen instead of hiding it behind about:profiles. It's a feature in Chrome that is hugely essential to my daily workflow and the current equivalent in Firefox has too many friction points to sway me at the moment.
znpy 5y ago
I honestly think that some body like duckduckgo should fork firefox, hire as many firefox developers as possible and get seriously on track with developing a seriously better browser. Firefox has been consistently getting worse in dumb ways, and the mozilla foundation seems to be interested in anything and everything but delivering a superior web browser.

by cebert 5y ago

dkdbejwi383 5y ago

It’s not (necessarily) Chromium: > "Instead of forking Chromium or anything else, we're building our desktop app around the OS-provided rendering engines (like on mobile), allowing us to strip away a lot of the unnecessary cruft and clutter that's accumulated over the years in major browsers," explains Weinberg.

Comevius 5y ago
The OS-provided rendering engine is Chromium's engine on Android and Windows, and Safari's on iOS and macOS.
- isodev 5y ago
  "Safari" refers to the browser app built on top of the WebKit engine. Browsers on iOS use the WebKit engine (and not the Safari browser itself). The same engine (WebKit) is available on all Apple platforms. One can also build a desktop browser on top of WebKit like DuckDuckGo suggests it may do on macOS. This approach has a tremendous advantage for solid platform integration and allows them to focus on building a good user experience (and, in this case, secure* good user experience).
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    WebKit is also fully usable on other platforms too, but I seldom ever reach for it unless I'm forced to by the OS.
  - cma 5y ago
    > This approach has a tremendous advantage for solid platform integration and allows them to focus on building a good user experience It basically only lets them do a bit more than skinning it. No deep plugin architectures like you see with Android Firefox, allowing real ad blockers.
    - isodev 5y ago
      WebKit is just the part that renders web content. Browser makers are free to include plugin functionality in their implementation if they want to, including content blockers like ad-block, fancy tab and theme functionality, etc. It is also possible to extend the content blocking feature, so it also works in Safari itself through a regular web plugin or a content blocker extension. DuckDuckGo offers the "DuckDuckGo Privacy Essentials" plugin for iOS and macOS, blocking all kinds of trackers.
      - cma 5y ago
        That's the limited blocker stuff you can do on iOS safari, you can't block as deeply as ublock origin and others.
cebert 5y ago
Yes, I’ll admit that part of the article is was a bit unclear to me. On iOS for example, you have to use Safari as your rendering engine. Chrome, Firefox, and any other browser ultimately us that on iOS. Android the os-provided rendering engine is Chromium. For desktop OSes I didn’t get the impression that they’re building their own rendering engine and at this point it would be a hefty engineering effort to do so. My assumption is that Chromium would be the underlying technology most commonly employed here.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dkdbejwi383 5y ago
  One can use WKWebView on MacOS as well as iOS. How they will support Linux is a mystery.
  - BurningPenguin 5y ago
    Probably depends on the GUI framework they're using. QT uses Chromium for its QtWebEngine. I think that would be one of the most sensible choices to achieve cross platform support.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - neoberg 5y ago
    lynx
3np 5y ago
Sounds like no Linux release then..?
- kaba0 5y ago
  It could just use qt’s or gtk’s native renderer.
kaba0 5y ago
That takes a small fraction of the dev time than a complete browser though, so it doesn’t really help the very chrome-centric landscape.
CursedUrn 5y ago
So could Google just put spyware (sorry "telemetry") in the rendering engine?
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  Well it's open source so they can just rip it back out as well, that's what brave does.

numlock86 5y ago

> "Don't use X! Use Y instead!" > I believe multiple parties and players help us build a more open and standards based web. How is choosing Firefox over Chromium going to help in that regard? And why do you think Chromium is a monolithic browser stack by Google? How is it monolithic? I see plenty of "Chromium parts" forked and used in different environments on their own all the time. Blink, V8 or mixed combinations like CEF ... Also what makes you think it's "controlled by Google"? You say you want more open standards, but funnily enough Mozilla is one of those ignoring most new widely adopted and open standards because of ... well, some developer simply doesn't want Firefox to support it. See the "Web Serial API" for example.

Sebb767 5y ago
> How is choosing Firefox over Chromium going to help in that regard? Chromium is absolutely dominant in that space, since basically all major browsers except Safari and FF are based on it. Creating your own stack is hardly an option and Safari isn't forkable, so if you don't want to support the near-monopoly of the Chrome browser stack Firefox is the only option. Now, I do agree that FF made some very questionable decisions recently, but so did Chrome (see Manifest v3) and the way it's going right now, we'll have yet another Internet Exporer-like scenario on our hands soon.
- ekianjo 5y ago
  Internet explorer was proprietary. Bad analogy.
  - Sebb767 5y ago
    It's still mostly controlled by a single company. The fact that it's open source makes the situation a tad better, but it's still a lot of power and network effect centered on a single entity.
- mattkevan 5y ago
  Didn’t Google fork WebKit to make Chrome? If I remember correctly, the first few versions of Chrome were actually fully WebKit.

najqh 5y ago

Precisely the last thing we need is more ads and unwanted features in Firefox.

sh4un 5y ago
The best is the furniture maker splash screen. My wife says what does it have to do with the internet. I told her Mozilla has conflicting priorities.
pizza234 5y ago
DDG has been very lightweight with regard to user experience. And they actually have to, otherwise, they couldn't distinguish themselves from the competition (ie. Google). So there's no realistic risk of invasiveness. WRT the features: Firefox needs market share above all. I'm actually terrified by a future where companies can't be bothered to put even a minimal effort to make a website/service run acceptably on Firefox. Try to use Slack on it, and you'll see what I mean.
- najqh 5y ago
  "Firefox has been very lightweight with regard to user experience. And they actually have to, otherwise, they couldn't distinguish themselves from the competition (ie. Google). So there's no realistic risk of invasiveness."
- deadbunny 5y ago
  > I'm actually terrified by a future where companies can't be bothered to put even a minimal effort to make a website/service run acceptably on Firefox This isn't the future unfortunately. This is the present.
- neoberg 5y ago
  Future? As a webdev I don't remember having to check if something works on Firefox since probably 7-8 years at least. Userbase is too small to justify allocating resources.
  - 5y ago

cainxinth 5y ago

I use Chrome for everything. I have 27 plug-ins running right now. But if Manifest 3 turns out to be as bad as predicted, I’ll abandon ship for Firefox without a second thought.

xNeil 5y ago
If you use Chrome, aren't you sending all your data to google directly? Can any number of plugins ensure your privacy?
- deepstack 5y ago
  use brave or ungoogled chromium (search for it on github) shall stop that.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  Lol no you aren't "sending all your data to google". Come on man, certainly they spy on you but all your data is a bit of a bogey man story.
mccorrinall 5y ago
Im curious what plugins you use. 27 seems to be a lot.
- cainxinth 5y ago
  Here's a partial list: - Dark Night Mode - FireShot - Force Background Tab - Google Docs Offline - Google Mail Checker - Hacker News Enhancement Suite - Image Downloader - Instapaper - LastPass - Linkclump - Popout for Youtube - Privacy Badger - Read Aloud - Reader Mode - Reddit Check - Reddit Enhancement Suite - ReviewMeta - Send from Gmail - Tampermonkey - The Camelizer - uBlock Origin
  - deleted 5y ago

agumonkey 5y ago

Revive servo, and call it drust. Another one byte the drust quick song ala winamp on first launch.

crate_barre 5y ago

Mozilla is not altruistic enough like that to turn off Google funding into their org. This is a company that’s trying to sell VPN subs for god’s sakes, like every other mom-pop vpn shop. These cats need that Google money and could give two fucks about seriously competing with them.

kaba0 5y ago
How do mozilla receiving money for a setting which is literally on the first page of the settings page and is directly available from the url bar and you can set it with like 2 clicks causes you any problem? Are you donating money to mozilla in exchange for something? Or are you helping out with the code?

Devasta 5y ago

Monolithic browser controlled by Google is already the case, the corpse of firefox is being dangled about "Weekend at Bernies" style so they can pretend they don't control the web. Chromes dominance is not going to be changed outside of government action.

mfer 5y ago
> Chromes dominance is not going to be changed outside of government action. This is because business tactics rather than technical or product ones are the reason for their domination. While I love technologies, it's so important to focus on the things outside of the tech itself at times.
- Devasta 5y ago
  Tbh a lot of the tech is business tactics. Pumping so much stuff into the browser makes it an impossible task just trying to maintain feature parity nevermind compete on quality. Building out a high quality subset is not viable, the second your browser stops working with Amazon or Ebay or whatever else your browser is finished.
  - mfer 5y ago
    > Pumping so much stuff into the browser makes it an impossible task just trying to maintain feature parity nevermind compete on quality. To compete or gain a market doesn't mean you need to have all the features. Doing things differently can and does work. The more I read books like Competing Against Luck and The Design Of Everyday Things the more I'm able to see it and even work on projects that do that. > the second your browser stops working with Amazon or Ebay or whatever else your browser is finished This is why standards are so important. Why it's important to have Firefox and Safari in the marketplace. Apple using Safari on iOS and iOS large market helps keep the standards ecosystem in check with Chromes dominance. The lack of modern tech communications standards is causing problems for consumers. While I don't always like the HTML, CSS, and JS specs... the fact that we have specs and multiple implementations is a benefit to people who want to try and compete.

steviedotboston 5y ago

If Chromium works well and is open source, why does it matter?

luxcem 5y ago
The standard adoption might be pushed by Google only or at best by a limited group of developers working on chromium. Monopoly, even with open source is dangerous.
phkahler 5y ago
>> If Chromium works well and is open source, why does it matter? Where's the source for the MS version of it?

luxcem 5y ago

Agreed, we already had discussion here about Gecko beeing used more in project I think there were a project for a Gecko based electron alternative. That said I'm not sure what is the current state of Gecko and how it could be used easily in new project. I'm not even sure that's a goal Mozilla is pushing.

tarboreus 5y ago

As much as I think Firefox is great as a project, if only because it's not Chrome. I think we could use more people entering the space with fresh ideas. A monoculture with just Firefox and Safari outside it is is still basically a monoculture. Plus Mozilla is pretty solidly captured by Google, sorry to say, that's where all of their revenue comes from, more or less. If Firefox actually started getting big market share tomorrow, Google could just pull the plug on them.

rPlayer6554 5y ago

Mozilla needs Google's money to continue existing so I don't think that's going to happen.

sanxiyn 5y ago
Mozilla partnered with Yahoo just fine, so I don't see why it can't with DuckDuckGo.

no_wizard 5y ago

The prevalence of chromium forks makes me wonder if there is something about the Firefox code base that makes it far less attractive to work with then chromium’s. Is it just raw features of the core engine? Or is there a bigger issue? I believe the chromium team does put some effort in helping even competing forks with technical issues. I wonder Mozilla is unable to demonstrably provide support in this area?

quincunx 5y ago

I also use Firefox as my daily, but more and more software seems incompatible with it. For instance, AWS EC2 Global View insists I switch away from Firefox, that's just one example, but there are more. Anyone know why? I've always viewed Firefox as the de-facto standard, why the recent breakage? Why is it deemed acceptable, by AWS of all orgs?

arilotter 5y ago
Since it's got such a low market share, it's much easier to declare your website "not compatible with Firefox" than it is to test on Firefox, even though 99% of sites that claim they're not compatible with Firefox work perfectly as soon as you spoof your user-agent to WebKit.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
antihero 5y ago
I'm looking at AWS EC2 Global View now (on Firefox) and am seeing nothing about switching away from Firefox.
- quincunx 5y ago
  ok, interesting. I just checked, as of right now I still very much get the message "Unsupported Browser - In order to provide the best experience we require you use a different browser." So I'm not sure where our configurations differ. Firefox 95.0.2 64-bit fwiw.
sydbarrett74 5y ago
Perhaps Mozilla should create more paid coding positions rather than padding Mitchell Baker's purse. She's sucked a lot of the air out of that organisation.

teh_klev 5y ago

> I use Firefox as my daily driver primarily for privacy concerns and control I'd switch to Firefox in an instant if they would just make the multi-profile functionality a first class citizen instead of hiding it behind about:profiles. It's a feature in Chrome that is hugely essential to my daily workflow and the current equivalent in Firefox has too many friction points to sway me at the moment.

znpy 5y ago

I honestly think that some body like duckduckgo should fork firefox, hire as many firefox developers as possible and get seriously on track with developing a seriously better browser. Firefox has been consistently getting worse in dumb ways, and the mozilla foundation seems to be interested in anything and everything but delivering a superior web browser.