4 ms·

You're probably right because we've left. I was a Firefox advocate for the longest time. I used Firefox since v3.0, and before that Mozilla and Netscape. I only

by cpburns2009 3y ago

You're probably right because we've left. I was a Firefox advocate for the longest time. I used Firefox since v3.0, and before that Mozilla and Netscape. I only recently switched over to Brave in the past year or two. I'm doing my part to switch friends and family over too. The only thing Mozilla has accomplished in the past 10 years was releasing Rust, and that was before firing the whole team.

actualwitch 3y ago
What did brave accomplish that is worthy of advocacy? Shitcoin and ublock inspired adblock?
- cpburns2009 3y ago
  Two things. First, an Android browser that's as fast as Chrome (a reskin) with a built-in ad-blocker. Sure you can install uBlock Origin on Firefox for Android but it's noticeably slower than Chrome. Second, a continuation of the old Firefox spirit as a privacy focused browser. Firefox has since lost that spirit and has been chasing after Chrome since at least 57. The shitcoins are a passing fad. Just turn them off.
  - actualwitch 3y ago
    So you discount mozilla actually implementing and maintaining a separate multiplatform browser engine and a whole ass language for that and instead find more value in forking other people's work and adding rudimentary features on top of it? I would have imagined someone who used to be firefox advocate since 3.0 to be used to getting subpar performance.
    - cpburns2009 3y ago
      Rust is independent now, and Mozilla fired most of that team a while ago. Mozilla has little to show for raking in $500 million a year from Google. Firefox never was slow on the desktop in my experience. Chrome was faster for the first few years. SpiderMonkey always lagged behind V8 in benchmarks, but general performance of the browsers has been equal since the early or mid 2010s.
  - dartharva 3y ago
    > First, an Android browser that's as fast as Chrome (a reskin) with a built-in ad-blocker Bromite existed before Brave and was (still is, in the Cromite fork) better in every way.
jraph 3y ago
I don't have any particular opinion on Mitchel Baker, but... > You're probably right because we've left "We"? I certainly didn't and I'm not alone. > I only recently switched over to Brave in the past year or two. I'm doing my part to switch friends and family over too You don't say why. Why leave Firefox for Brave, and more importantly, why encourage people to do so? Despite all Mozilla's flaws, Firefox is still great and contrary to Brave, it doesn't contribute to Google's browser monopoly. Integrated adblocking, which is often mentioned, is not a good reason: it's faster and easier to install uBlock Origin on an existing Firefox install than to install a brand new browser and make your relatives change their habits. What do you say to your relatives to justify this switch? I'm trying to understand what I can take from your comment here.
- cpburns2009 3y ago
  > "We"? I certainly didn't and I'm not alone. I was replying to the statement in the parent post: >> If you are suggesting that people who still use firefox hate Mitchell Baker, you are mistaken. I stopped using Firefox. From this and other threads about Mozilla/Firefox, plenty of other HN people have too. It's not just Mitchel Baker. Mozilla has been under schizophrenic leadership for years, running in a hundred directions while neglecting their core product: Firefox. Firefox at its best broke IE's dominance, and at it's peak had 30% market share, and now it's what? 4%? If the trend continues, it's going to drop below Steam's Linux market share of 1%. > You don't say why. Why leave Firefox for Brave, and more importantly, why encourage people to do so? > > Despite all Mozilla's flaws, Firefox is still great and contrary to Brave, it doesn't contribute to Google's browser monopoly. I don't see Firefox having a long term future. Brave, Vivaldi, or one of these other Chrome reskins will assume Firefox's place as it slowly fades into a niche browser. Even Microsoft gave up and made Edge a Chrome reskin. Mozilla had the opportunity to have the best and most popular browser and they blew it. They abandoned Firefox OS and Servo. Somehow Rust survived. > Integrated adblocking, which is often mentioned, is not a good reason: it's faster and easier to install uBlock Origin on an existing Firefox install than to install a brand new browser and make your relatives change their habits. > > What do you say to your relatives to justify this switch? When they ask, and they do for some reason because I wound up being IT, I tell them I prefer to use Brave now. That it's a privacy focused variation of Chrome. Or if they complain about ads on Android's Youtube app, I tell them to use Youtube from Brave. When I setup a new computer for any of them I now install Brave along side whatever previous browser they used: Chrome, Edge, or Firefox. I used to always install Chrome and Firefox (with uBlock Origin of course).

actualwitch 3y ago

What did brave accomplish that is worthy of advocacy? Shitcoin and ublock inspired adblock?

cpburns2009 3y ago
Two things. First, an Android browser that's as fast as Chrome (a reskin) with a built-in ad-blocker. Sure you can install uBlock Origin on Firefox for Android but it's noticeably slower than Chrome. Second, a continuation of the old Firefox spirit as a privacy focused browser. Firefox has since lost that spirit and has been chasing after Chrome since at least 57. The shitcoins are a passing fad. Just turn them off.
- actualwitch 3y ago
  So you discount mozilla actually implementing and maintaining a separate multiplatform browser engine and a whole ass language for that and instead find more value in forking other people's work and adding rudimentary features on top of it? I would have imagined someone who used to be firefox advocate since 3.0 to be used to getting subpar performance.
  - cpburns2009 3y ago
    Rust is independent now, and Mozilla fired most of that team a while ago. Mozilla has little to show for raking in $500 million a year from Google. Firefox never was slow on the desktop in my experience. Chrome was faster for the first few years. SpiderMonkey always lagged behind V8 in benchmarks, but general performance of the browsers has been equal since the early or mid 2010s.
- dartharva 3y ago
  > First, an Android browser that's as fast as Chrome (a reskin) with a built-in ad-blocker Bromite existed before Brave and was (still is, in the Cromite fork) better in every way.

jraph 3y ago

I don't have any particular opinion on Mitchel Baker, but... > You're probably right because we've left "We"? I certainly didn't and I'm not alone. > I only recently switched over to Brave in the past year or two. I'm doing my part to switch friends and family over too You don't say why. Why leave Firefox for Brave, and more importantly, why encourage people to do so? Despite all Mozilla's flaws, Firefox is still great and contrary to Brave, it doesn't contribute to Google's browser monopoly. Integrated adblocking, which is often mentioned, is not a good reason: it's faster and easier to install uBlock Origin on an existing Firefox install than to install a brand new browser and make your relatives change their habits. What do you say to your relatives to justify this switch? I'm trying to understand what I can take from your comment here.

cpburns2009 3y ago
> "We"? I certainly didn't and I'm not alone. I was replying to the statement in the parent post: >> If you are suggesting that people who still use firefox hate Mitchell Baker, you are mistaken. I stopped using Firefox. From this and other threads about Mozilla/Firefox, plenty of other HN people have too. It's not just Mitchel Baker. Mozilla has been under schizophrenic leadership for years, running in a hundred directions while neglecting their core product: Firefox. Firefox at its best broke IE's dominance, and at it's peak had 30% market share, and now it's what? 4%? If the trend continues, it's going to drop below Steam's Linux market share of 1%. > You don't say why. Why leave Firefox for Brave, and more importantly, why encourage people to do so? > > Despite all Mozilla's flaws, Firefox is still great and contrary to Brave, it doesn't contribute to Google's browser monopoly. I don't see Firefox having a long term future. Brave, Vivaldi, or one of these other Chrome reskins will assume Firefox's place as it slowly fades into a niche browser. Even Microsoft gave up and made Edge a Chrome reskin. Mozilla had the opportunity to have the best and most popular browser and they blew it. They abandoned Firefox OS and Servo. Somehow Rust survived. > Integrated adblocking, which is often mentioned, is not a good reason: it's faster and easier to install uBlock Origin on an existing Firefox install than to install a brand new browser and make your relatives change their habits. > > What do you say to your relatives to justify this switch? When they ask, and they do for some reason because I wound up being IT, I tell them I prefer to use Brave now. That it's a privacy focused variation of Chrome. Or if they complain about ads on Android's Youtube app, I tell them to use Youtube from Brave. When I setup a new computer for any of them I now install Brave along side whatever previous browser they used: Chrome, Edge, or Firefox. I used to always install Chrome and Firefox (with uBlock Origin of course).