4 ms·

If they want to dig an early grave for chrome, sure, there's always firefox

est31 3y ago
Chrome on Android does not support extensions at all. It's still the biggest mobile browser. Sure, it will make a lot of technical people mad, but a lot more won't care.
- TheLoafOfBread 3y ago
  Brave and Firefox on Android blocks ads just fine.
  - LinuxBender 3y ago
    Sadly I suspect that may change. Manifest v3 was added to FF in 109 which is why I am on ESR and will probably stay on it as long as I can. Mozilla get funding from Google and that could potentially come with the price of blocking ad-blockers using manifest v3 at some point.
    - ylyn 3y ago
      AFAIK FF manifest v3 will maintain the webRequest interface.
    - johnny22 3y ago
      they've explicitly said it won't. If somehow that ever changes you'll see huge news about it.
      - fwn 3y ago
        We've always said the same thing about the Firefox for Android extension ecosystem. Despite Mozilla's explicit denial of the intention to kill extensions on Android, there is an allow list that effectively bans almost all extensions on Android. There is no justification for this; extensions work just fine on Firefox for Android, which can be tested using the nightly and jumping through a few artificial hoops. tl;dr: There's little evidence that there will be any big news once adblockers get finally axed on Firefox.
  - est31 3y ago
    Great but they barely have market share. People apparently don't care enough about blocking ads.
- adriancr 3y ago
  internet explorer used to be the biggest browser at some point
itsmartapuntocm 3y ago
Firefox’s main source of revenue is Google paying them to be the default search provider. They essentially exist at Google’s whim.
- adriancr 3y ago
  They can probably do just fine with another provider and less money if google gives up, so power dynamic isn't all what you say.
  - dredmorbius 3y ago
    Regardless of who the patron is, that's still a patronage operation, rather than a freestanding commercial enterprise. (I'm not defending market-based approaches, nor do I think they're well-suited to all domains, and most especially not information services. But I am pointing out the relationship of Mozilla to its Daddy Moneybags. I sincerely hope better alternatives will be found.)

Chrome on Android does not support extensions at all. It's still the biggest mobile browser. Sure, it will make a lot of technical people mad, but a lot more won't care.

TheLoafOfBread 3y ago
Brave and Firefox on Android blocks ads just fine.
- LinuxBender 3y ago
  Sadly I suspect that may change. Manifest v3 was added to FF in 109 which is why I am on ESR and will probably stay on it as long as I can. Mozilla get funding from Google and that could potentially come with the price of blocking ad-blockers using manifest v3 at some point.
  - ylyn 3y ago
    AFAIK FF manifest v3 will maintain the webRequest interface.
  - johnny22 3y ago
    they've explicitly said it won't. If somehow that ever changes you'll see huge news about it.
    - fwn 3y ago
      We've always said the same thing about the Firefox for Android extension ecosystem. Despite Mozilla's explicit denial of the intention to kill extensions on Android, there is an allow list that effectively bans almost all extensions on Android. There is no justification for this; extensions work just fine on Firefox for Android, which can be tested using the nightly and jumping through a few artificial hoops. tl;dr: There's little evidence that there will be any big news once adblockers get finally axed on Firefox.
- est31 3y ago
  Great but they barely have market share. People apparently don't care enough about blocking ads.
adriancr 3y ago
internet explorer used to be the biggest browser at some point

itsmartapuntocm 3y ago

Firefox’s main source of revenue is Google paying them to be the default search provider. They essentially exist at Google’s whim.

adriancr 3y ago
They can probably do just fine with another provider and less money if google gives up, so power dynamic isn't all what you say.
- dredmorbius 3y ago
  Regardless of who the patron is, that's still a patronage operation, rather than a freestanding commercial enterprise. (I'm not defending market-based approaches, nor do I think they're well-suited to all domains, and most especially not information services. But I am pointing out the relationship of Mozilla to its Daddy Moneybags. I sincerely hope better alternatives will be found.)