4 ms·

Most of the functionality you're describing is better relegated to third party websites/software/extensions. I want my web browser to just be a web browser, no

Most of the functionality you're describing is better relegated to third party websites/software/extensions. I want my web browser to just be a web browser, no unnecessary add-ons. There's already lots of great solutions for RSS. Ditto for torrents. You can't build a wysiwyg editor that will work across the entire web, there's countless formats which are specific to each website. They just need to focus on building a top-notch web browser, no unnecessary bells or whistles.

berkes 2y ago
Why do you presume it must be built into a browser? Mozilla alteady has mumore products and services than just ff. These ideas could be standalone too.
ndriscoll 2y ago
You don't need the wysiwyg editor to be embedded into the browser (though it could share the rendering engine). It's just an enabling technology. And it is doable; they existed in the 90s/2000s! But it's very much within the scope of an organization that's ostensibly trying to build technologies for an open web. If your goal is to let people self publish something like Twitter/Facebook/Substack posts with embedded video, you don't need much more than a basic rich text editor with some CSS themes (and ability to edit/share custom CSS for advanced users). No JavaScript needed (it's not like those sites let you use it). Torrenting should have built in support. Torrent support is needed to be able to use magnet links as a src for media. RSS is less necessary, but built in support would be one component of a decent home page like iGoogle tried to build back in the day.
ajkdhcb2 2y ago
>I want my web browser to just be a web browser, no unnecessary add-ons. When i try to consider what that really means, it leads me to think it actually encompasses a large and ever-increasing scope of features that have just become the norm. Browsers are becoming almost a general purpose OS. Also, some of those features clearly require network effect to function which entails having it officially supported and suggested to the users (or even making it default).

berkes 2y ago

Why do you presume it must be built into a browser? Mozilla alteady has mumore products and services than just ff. These ideas could be standalone too.

ndriscoll 2y ago

You don't need the wysiwyg editor to be embedded into the browser (though it could share the rendering engine). It's just an enabling technology. And it is doable; they existed in the 90s/2000s! But it's very much within the scope of an organization that's ostensibly trying to build technologies for an open web. If your goal is to let people self publish something like Twitter/Facebook/Substack posts with embedded video, you don't need much more than a basic rich text editor with some CSS themes (and ability to edit/share custom CSS for advanced users). No JavaScript needed (it's not like those sites let you use it). Torrenting should have built in support. Torrent support is needed to be able to use magnet links as a src for media. RSS is less necessary, but built in support would be one component of a decent home page like iGoogle tried to build back in the day.

ajkdhcb2 2y ago

>I want my web browser to just be a web browser, no unnecessary add-ons. When i try to consider what that really means, it leads me to think it actually encompasses a large and ever-increasing scope of features that have just become the norm. Browsers are becoming almost a general purpose OS. Also, some of those features clearly require network effect to function which entails having it officially supported and suggested to the users (or even making it default).