6 ms·

We could at least get everyone here to use Firefox. There's really no excuse for a technically minded person to still be using Chrome for their day to day brows

We could at least get everyone here to use Firefox. There's really no excuse for a technically minded person to still be using Chrome for their day to day browsing. If you do eventually run into a poorly crafted webpage that doesn't work on Firefox you have the wherewithal to decide if you are simply not going to use that site or hop over to chrome just this once. But the important thing is checking in automatically as a Firefox user in the logs of every other site online. Push Firefox marketshare up and at least some places will be hesitant to write off Firefox as irrelevant.

sneak 3y ago
> There's really no excuse for a technically minded person to still be using Chrome for their day to day browsing. Sadly, Chrome is substantially more secure than Firefox.
- ocdtrekkie 3y ago
  It is extremely disingenuous to claim the only browser to still refuse to block third party cookies by default, because it helps their ad partners, is "more secure". The only way in which Chrome is more secure at anything appears to be securely forcing you to view ads via this API. And a shocking amount of malware fails to work when you use a running environment that 95% of society are not using. You are far safer on Firefox than Chrome.
  - somsak2 3y ago
    Why do most FAANG-type businesses require use of Chrome then?
    - ocdtrekkie 3y ago
      So as someone who deals with enterprise software: Network effects. Where I work, we treat Chrome as the malware it is: It's banned both by technical measures and security policy. We deploy Firefox, and begrudgingly deal with Edge when people insist on a Chromium-based browser. (At least Microsoft added some modicum of privacy settings here.) Here's what I've learned over the past several years: Web developers are lazy. We're commonly told such and such app or service "only works on Chrome" or they'll "only support on Chrome". When we call for support, half the time we'll get told it's because we're not on Chrome, and I have to actually prove to them on an isolated machine that the issue occurs on Chrome so they'll shut the heck up and do their job. "Oh, I found an issue on our server" after I spent two hours trying to convince them their app works fine on Firefox. In most cases, things "not working on Firefox" entails exempting a site from the popup blocker. In 2023, troubleshooting alternative browsers is usually... roughly that easy. But blaming your web browser is easy and lets them shift blame, so that's what they do. But enterprise software companies have completely turned Chrome into the modern Internet Explorer: The only browser they'll even deal with. And since a lot of people buy Google's marketing that they know security and aren't completely clueless how security works (they are), people have by and large given in and installed Chrome.
  - BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
    How are third-party cookies a security (not privacy) risk?
    - ocdtrekkie 3y ago
      Privacy and security are the same thing. You cannot have one without the other.
p-e-w 3y ago
> We could at least get everyone here to use Firefox. That would accomplish nothing. > But the important thing is checking in automatically as a Firefox user in the logs of every other site online. No, that's not important. HN users are a tiny minority compared to the billions of people that use the web daily. I'm sorry, there's no easy way to say this: Firefox is never coming back. The web of old is never coming back. It's over. Even if this particular proposal gets defeated somehow, a future similar proposal will make it through. There is nothing you or I can do about it. Google is more powerful than most governments, and they are vastly more powerful than any random group of like-minded people who get together on the Internet in the belief that they can accomplish something.
- iddan 3y ago
  Google is not stronger than the EU.
  - PontifexMinimus 3y ago
    This presumes that the EU (1) Understands what this is about (2) cares about its citizens' freedom (3) has enough coherence to actually do something about it It's not obvious to me that any of these apply. The EU is pushing -- in fits and starts -- towards self-reliance in its computing infrastructure, but at a slow pace.
    - netbeethoven 3y ago
      Of these, number 1 is probably the most doubtful. The EU, however boring that line of thinking is, is still quite bureaucratic, and it's doubtful that measures to control this, might not be a priority of bureaucrats. After all, the regs I mention later are in the name of "less e-waste" (which is good, but besides the point). So something like "control web DRM" might not be as blatant and easily solved (your point No.3). For number 2, the EU's new regulations above more easily replacable batteries, mandatory USB-C ports and such, in my eyes prove -- though not doubtlessly -- that they do care about walled gardens in tech. Number 3 though, again, as I've alluded to before, doubtful. But possible in my eyes. Urgency is another thing you've mentioned, and -- let's say it again -- bureaucrats are not particularly known for solving a problem in the right time. NB: don't misenterpret my use of 'bureaucrat[ic]' as a negative comment, it is just a fact, however boring.
Shawnj2 3y ago
I use Vivaldi (not chrome itself but another Chromium browser) because I want PWA support on my Linux machine so I can have an app for outlook with notifications and Chromium browsers make that far more convenient than Firefox.
- themoonisachees 3y ago
  If your sole holdout for using a chromium browser is an outlook app, I suggest you go looking around the keyword "email" in your package manager.
  - Shawnj2 3y ago
    I’m not stupid, of course I tried that first Essentially this doesn’t work because every email client I tried can’t handle the specific way my work email account does authorization and the login always fails. They also blocked POP/IMAP so that’s not an option either. No one else in a team of software engineers figured out a better way to access email so for now this is the best option

sneak 3y ago

> There's really no excuse for a technically minded person to still be using Chrome for their day to day browsing. Sadly, Chrome is substantially more secure than Firefox.

ocdtrekkie 3y ago
It is extremely disingenuous to claim the only browser to still refuse to block third party cookies by default, because it helps their ad partners, is "more secure". The only way in which Chrome is more secure at anything appears to be securely forcing you to view ads via this API. And a shocking amount of malware fails to work when you use a running environment that 95% of society are not using. You are far safer on Firefox than Chrome.
- somsak2 3y ago
  Why do most FAANG-type businesses require use of Chrome then?
  - ocdtrekkie 3y ago
    So as someone who deals with enterprise software: Network effects. Where I work, we treat Chrome as the malware it is: It's banned both by technical measures and security policy. We deploy Firefox, and begrudgingly deal with Edge when people insist on a Chromium-based browser. (At least Microsoft added some modicum of privacy settings here.) Here's what I've learned over the past several years: Web developers are lazy. We're commonly told such and such app or service "only works on Chrome" or they'll "only support on Chrome". When we call for support, half the time we'll get told it's because we're not on Chrome, and I have to actually prove to them on an isolated machine that the issue occurs on Chrome so they'll shut the heck up and do their job. "Oh, I found an issue on our server" after I spent two hours trying to convince them their app works fine on Firefox. In most cases, things "not working on Firefox" entails exempting a site from the popup blocker. In 2023, troubleshooting alternative browsers is usually... roughly that easy. But blaming your web browser is easy and lets them shift blame, so that's what they do. But enterprise software companies have completely turned Chrome into the modern Internet Explorer: The only browser they'll even deal with. And since a lot of people buy Google's marketing that they know security and aren't completely clueless how security works (they are), people have by and large given in and installed Chrome.
- BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
  How are third-party cookies a security (not privacy) risk?
  - ocdtrekkie 3y ago
    Privacy and security are the same thing. You cannot have one without the other.

p-e-w 3y ago

> We could at least get everyone here to use Firefox. That would accomplish nothing. > But the important thing is checking in automatically as a Firefox user in the logs of every other site online. No, that's not important. HN users are a tiny minority compared to the billions of people that use the web daily. I'm sorry, there's no easy way to say this: Firefox is never coming back. The web of old is never coming back. It's over. Even if this particular proposal gets defeated somehow, a future similar proposal will make it through. There is nothing you or I can do about it. Google is more powerful than most governments, and they are vastly more powerful than any random group of like-minded people who get together on the Internet in the belief that they can accomplish something.

iddan 3y ago
Google is not stronger than the EU.
- PontifexMinimus 3y ago
  This presumes that the EU (1) Understands what this is about (2) cares about its citizens' freedom (3) has enough coherence to actually do something about it It's not obvious to me that any of these apply. The EU is pushing -- in fits and starts -- towards self-reliance in its computing infrastructure, but at a slow pace.
  - netbeethoven 3y ago
    Of these, number 1 is probably the most doubtful. The EU, however boring that line of thinking is, is still quite bureaucratic, and it's doubtful that measures to control this, might not be a priority of bureaucrats. After all, the regs I mention later are in the name of "less e-waste" (which is good, but besides the point). So something like "control web DRM" might not be as blatant and easily solved (your point No.3). For number 2, the EU's new regulations above more easily replacable batteries, mandatory USB-C ports and such, in my eyes prove -- though not doubtlessly -- that they do care about walled gardens in tech. Number 3 though, again, as I've alluded to before, doubtful. But possible in my eyes. Urgency is another thing you've mentioned, and -- let's say it again -- bureaucrats are not particularly known for solving a problem in the right time. NB: don't misenterpret my use of 'bureaucrat[ic]' as a negative comment, it is just a fact, however boring.

Shawnj2 3y ago

I use Vivaldi (not chrome itself but another Chromium browser) because I want PWA support on my Linux machine so I can have an app for outlook with notifications and Chromium browsers make that far more convenient than Firefox.

themoonisachees 3y ago
If your sole holdout for using a chromium browser is an outlook app, I suggest you go looking around the keyword "email" in your package manager.
- Shawnj2 3y ago
  I’m not stupid, of course I tried that first Essentially this doesn’t work because every email client I tried can’t handle the specific way my work email account does authorization and the login always fails. They also blocked POP/IMAP so that’s not an option either. No one else in a team of software engineers figured out a better way to access email so for now this is the best option