3 ms·

Ok Moz if browsers are essential why are you complicit in making them even more complex all the time, and push for entire new runtimes such as WASM even? If bro

Ok Moz if browsers are essential why are you complicit in making them even more complex all the time, and push for entire new runtimes such as WASM even? If browsers were commodity items, we'd see more innovation and participation than we do now. The same "gatekeeper" argument brought against OSs in the report also works against browsers which, with the exception of Safari, are produced by an unhealthy browser cartel. (comment copied from when this was posted the first time a couple days ago)

smoldesu 4y ago
> why are you complicit in making them even more complex all the time, and push for entire new runtimes such as WASM even? Because we're out of options. Apple pushed us all here by crying "there's no other way" when people question their monopoly over app distribution. If you want browsers to be less complex, then you should advocate for the free distribution of software so the web isn't the only viable place to deliver you content.
- pwinnski 4y ago
  In 2022, I'm looking at the plethora of browsers available for MacOS, and sticking with Safari. Chrome would be my second choice, and in fact I have it installed, but only use it once a month or so on average. Nothing from Mozilla or Brave or anyone else is even installed. You can say the complexity is required to compete, but I stick with Safari because it is simple, and fast, and doesn't gorge itself on system memory.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    Go for it. Safari (rather WebKit) is an option on all sorts of platforms, but nobody uses it where it isn't preinstalled. Safari is free to be as simple as it wants, but that doesn't excuse them for blocking browser innovation on iOS.
    - ezfe 4y ago
      Well, it isn't even available anywhere it isn't preinstalled. lol.
    - pwinnski 4y ago
      It's been some number of months, so I thought, hey, I'll take this opportunity to see what I'm missing out on with Firefox. And I'll even start with whatever Firefox says for the comparison. Fortunately, there's a handy page for that[0]. Under "Security and Privacy," it looks like both do fine. Firefox pledges to "Block cryptomining scripts," which... I have Ghostery installed, so I think I'm probably safe there. Other than that there are some sister-products I could install, and Firefox is cross-platform, but I have MacOS and iOS, so I guess no win there. Under "Utility," I'm missing "Autoplay blocking," except... no, that's in Safari as well. I can "Allow All Auto-Play," "Stop Media with Sound," or "Never Auto-Play," and set that per website, too. Maybe that's just out-of-date. (Ah yes, comparison is based on Safari 14, I am running 15.5) For the rest, Firefox seems to begrudgingly give a nod to Safari here, suggesting extensions to try to make up for functionality Firefox lacks natively. But it does suggest Firefox's screenshots feature, which... MacOS has handy keyboard shortcuts for screenshots already, and lots of options about where and how to save the results, so I'm not sure why I'd want to use something different for Firefox than I use for everything else. Next up is "Portability," but since I'm already in the Apple ecosystem for both work and home, this does nothing for me. So nope, still nothing that suggests I should try again. It's funny, the thing I remember most from when I last used Firefox a couple of years ago was "Multi-Account Containers," but I see now that was an add-on, not native to the browser proper. In any case, I'm glad Firefox exists, because more choice is always good! I mean, would I now have tab groups in Safari if some other company hadn't done something similar first? So carry on, Firefox, Brave, etc. Meanwhile, I'll stick with Safari to help ensure that at least one browser survives against Chrome. 0. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browsers/compare/safari/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browsers/compare/safar...
protoster 4y ago
Firefox is no position to make these kinds of moves (7% of desktop users, ~0% of mobile). Taking activist stances on how they want to see the web will serve to do nothing but drive more users away from Firefox.
- elforce002 4y ago
  I stopped using Firefox and went with Brave. No regrets here.
adolph 4y ago
> If browsers were commodity items, we'd see more innovation and participation than we do now commodity != competitive If anything the low margin of a commodity market freezes innovation and participation. If anything the period leading up to monopoly is the best for innovation and participation. The monopoly company takes its winnings for a time and then loses its shine as it matures and a new paradigm takes over. Like you said, Mozilla has an unhealthy revenue model from the cartel. If anything they act as sock puppet competition for Google, a subsidiary save in name out of monopsony. Still, in 2020, Mozilla Corporation’s revenue was $466 million from its search partnerships (largely driven by its search deal with Google), subscriptions and advertising revenue. https://techcrunch.com/2021/12/13/mozilla-expects-to-generate-more-than-500m-in-revenue-this-year/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/12/13/mozilla-expects-to-generat...
- tannhaeuser 4y ago
  Hmm I think you're right wrt commodity markets and lack of incentives for innovation. What I meant was that if the specs for the "web stack" would set any kind of reasonable target for implementation, then we could've seen new browser projects, especially F/OSS user and privacy-focussed ones; but they don't, making them mere instruments for pulling up the ladder. Despite of this, folks cheer at eg bits of inessential yet complex CSS additions and bloating JavaScript the language with inessential features.
  - adolph 4y ago
    What is the scope of what you call the "web stack?" Is DNS, TLS, http, html, css, DOM, ECMA, not enough of a standard/target already? I think the challenge for F/OSS user and privacy-focussed browsers is an environment where a living can't be made with it through licensing/subscriptions. Pureblood Gnu is fine for folks with academic sinecures, but without cash, the bazaar is bare. Brave is making an effort as is the Neeva search engine, probably others too. https://neeva.com/index https://neeva.com/index
    - tannhaeuser 4y ago
      > Is DNS, TLS, http, html, css, DOM, ECMA, not enough of a standard/target already? It is, but as long as we allow a single party to grossly bloat HTML, http and DNS (ie DoH, http/3) plus driving CSS ad absurdum over the course of 25 years, not to speak of JS APIs, there's not even a theoretical chance of new browsers emerging, since by the time those efforts can be completed, they're obsolete. And Mozilla is complicit in this, yet want to lecture us about the open web and stuff.

smoldesu 4y ago

> why are you complicit in making them even more complex all the time, and push for entire new runtimes such as WASM even? Because we're out of options. Apple pushed us all here by crying "there's no other way" when people question their monopoly over app distribution. If you want browsers to be less complex, then you should advocate for the free distribution of software so the web isn't the only viable place to deliver you content.

pwinnski 4y ago
In 2022, I'm looking at the plethora of browsers available for MacOS, and sticking with Safari. Chrome would be my second choice, and in fact I have it installed, but only use it once a month or so on average. Nothing from Mozilla or Brave or anyone else is even installed. You can say the complexity is required to compete, but I stick with Safari because it is simple, and fast, and doesn't gorge itself on system memory.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Go for it. Safari (rather WebKit) is an option on all sorts of platforms, but nobody uses it where it isn't preinstalled. Safari is free to be as simple as it wants, but that doesn't excuse them for blocking browser innovation on iOS.
  - ezfe 4y ago
    Well, it isn't even available anywhere it isn't preinstalled. lol.
  - pwinnski 4y ago
    It's been some number of months, so I thought, hey, I'll take this opportunity to see what I'm missing out on with Firefox. And I'll even start with whatever Firefox says for the comparison. Fortunately, there's a handy page for that[0]. Under "Security and Privacy," it looks like both do fine. Firefox pledges to "Block cryptomining scripts," which... I have Ghostery installed, so I think I'm probably safe there. Other than that there are some sister-products I could install, and Firefox is cross-platform, but I have MacOS and iOS, so I guess no win there. Under "Utility," I'm missing "Autoplay blocking," except... no, that's in Safari as well. I can "Allow All Auto-Play," "Stop Media with Sound," or "Never Auto-Play," and set that per website, too. Maybe that's just out-of-date. (Ah yes, comparison is based on Safari 14, I am running 15.5) For the rest, Firefox seems to begrudgingly give a nod to Safari here, suggesting extensions to try to make up for functionality Firefox lacks natively. But it does suggest Firefox's screenshots feature, which... MacOS has handy keyboard shortcuts for screenshots already, and lots of options about where and how to save the results, so I'm not sure why I'd want to use something different for Firefox than I use for everything else. Next up is "Portability," but since I'm already in the Apple ecosystem for both work and home, this does nothing for me. So nope, still nothing that suggests I should try again. It's funny, the thing I remember most from when I last used Firefox a couple of years ago was "Multi-Account Containers," but I see now that was an add-on, not native to the browser proper. In any case, I'm glad Firefox exists, because more choice is always good! I mean, would I now have tab groups in Safari if some other company hadn't done something similar first? So carry on, Firefox, Brave, etc. Meanwhile, I'll stick with Safari to help ensure that at least one browser survives against Chrome. 0. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browsers/compare/safari/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browsers/compare/safar...

protoster 4y ago

Firefox is no position to make these kinds of moves (7% of desktop users, ~0% of mobile). Taking activist stances on how they want to see the web will serve to do nothing but drive more users away from Firefox.

elforce002 4y ago
I stopped using Firefox and went with Brave. No regrets here.

adolph 4y ago

> If browsers were commodity items, we'd see more innovation and participation than we do now commodity != competitive If anything the low margin of a commodity market freezes innovation and participation. If anything the period leading up to monopoly is the best for innovation and participation. The monopoly company takes its winnings for a time and then loses its shine as it matures and a new paradigm takes over. Like you said, Mozilla has an unhealthy revenue model from the cartel. If anything they act as sock puppet competition for Google, a subsidiary save in name out of monopsony. Still, in 2020, Mozilla Corporation’s revenue was $466 million from its search partnerships (largely driven by its search deal with Google), subscriptions and advertising revenue. https://techcrunch.com/2021/12/13/mozilla-expects-to-generate-more-than-500m-in-revenue-this-year/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/12/13/mozilla-expects-to-generat...

tannhaeuser 4y ago
Hmm I think you're right wrt commodity markets and lack of incentives for innovation. What I meant was that if the specs for the "web stack" would set any kind of reasonable target for implementation, then we could've seen new browser projects, especially F/OSS user and privacy-focussed ones; but they don't, making them mere instruments for pulling up the ladder. Despite of this, folks cheer at eg bits of inessential yet complex CSS additions and bloating JavaScript the language with inessential features.
- adolph 4y ago
  What is the scope of what you call the "web stack?" Is DNS, TLS, http, html, css, DOM, ECMA, not enough of a standard/target already? I think the challenge for F/OSS user and privacy-focussed browsers is an environment where a living can't be made with it through licensing/subscriptions. Pureblood Gnu is fine for folks with academic sinecures, but without cash, the bazaar is bare. Brave is making an effort as is the Neeva search engine, probably others too. https://neeva.com/index https://neeva.com/index
  - tannhaeuser 4y ago
    > Is DNS, TLS, http, html, css, DOM, ECMA, not enough of a standard/target already? It is, but as long as we allow a single party to grossly bloat HTML, http and DNS (ie DoH, http/3) plus driving CSS ad absurdum over the course of 25 years, not to speak of JS APIs, there's not even a theoretical chance of new browsers emerging, since by the time those efforts can be completed, they're obsolete. And Mozilla is complicit in this, yet want to lecture us about the open web and stuff.