Discussed 4 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32985713 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32985713 The TL;DR on this blog post is that Mozilla

Discussed 4 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32985713 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32985713 The TL;DR on this blog post is that Mozilla is unhappy that Operating Systems push you to choose their preferred browser. But really, what is the distinction between a browser and an OS? Why should they not be integrated? Why does a "web browser" need to exist as a standalone thing? Hand-wavy things like "user choice" don't apply here, because otherwise, why not demand that every part of the OS be modular? Why can't I swap out the USB stack on MacOS with a custom one? (Linux users mostly demand that anyway, but that's beside the point.) It seems like this piece is a calculated move to keep people believing that "web browsers" are separate apps, and cannot or should not (either logically or emotionally) be incorporated into an OS. Ironically, it also tries to say that browsers are essential to modern technology, in which case, doesn't that show that they should be even more integrated with the "operating" "system" of the computer? Personally, between Firefox and Chrome, I chose the lesser of two annoyances (Chrome) because it doesn't try to push a paid VPN or a paid Mozilla Pocket every time the browser updates (changelog: fixed bugs. also look at our pocket service!)