zlacker

[parent] [thread] 12 comments
1. CJeffe+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-05-26 01:17:43
I keep hearing people say this, but what exactly do you mean?

In what significant ways could Firefox be improved, such that it would help most users, over Chrome?

replies(8): >>Kuinox+y1 >>murder+S1 >>II2II+r2 >>kps+G2 >>surgic+G3 >>yjftsj+ym >>Faark+Fn >>zo1+tx
2. Kuinox+y1[view] [source] 2023-05-26 01:34:26
>>CJeffe+(OP)
For devs: Time travel debugging. Ah wait, they fired the engineers on that.

A complete new fast browser in rust - ah wait they also fired these engineers.

Not being multiples years late on some browsers features: you can't import es modules in a webworker yet.

replies(1): >>acemar+Yc
3. murder+S1[view] [source] 2023-05-26 01:37:59
>>CJeffe+(OP)
Not pushing pocket everywhere, not showing literal popup ads to users
4. II2II+r2[view] [source] 2023-05-26 01:42:52
>>CJeffe+(OP)
One improvement would be to have their actions reflect their messaging. They claim their browser is about privacy, yet I am tweaking more and more settings as time goes on. Sometimes it is to enjoy the features where they are available. In other cases, it is to circumvent their actions which are contrary to my definition of privacy.
5. kps+G2[view] [source] 2023-05-26 01:44:46
>>CJeffe+(OP)
Perhaps some of these? It says ‘10000 bugs found’.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?product=Firefox&que...

6. surgic+G3[view] [source] 2023-05-26 01:52:51
>>CJeffe+(OP)
Why, make a browser that is lighter, faster, and more privacy focused. And with excellent support for plugin developers. Let the bells and whistles be plugins developed by third parties.

Chrome is the product of a company whose mandate is extracting as much data as possible from its users to feed their ad business. Firefox can and should be better, as they could be 100% user focused.

A Chrome monopoly in the browser space has the potential to be more damaging to the web than the Microsoft monopoly in days gone by. They want to make the world a better place? Well, they could have made the web a better place, if they could meaningfully take some share away from Chrome.

replies(1): >>CJeffe+66
◧◩
7. CJeffe+66[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-05-26 02:18:03
>>surgic+G3
It's going to be hard, almost impossible, to be faster than chrome, with the huge amount of money and man-power Google can throw at things. They can probably get "lighter" (as in support fewer things), but I don't think that's going to make things any faster.

Also, experience tells us that being fast and light is incompatible with excellent plugin support, as the more hooks you provide for plugins, the less you can change without breaking those plugins -- that was Firefox's previous problem.

replies(1): >>surgic+0N
◧◩
8. acemar+Yc[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-05-26 03:20:03
>>Kuinox+y1
FWIW, the Firefox devs who were doing the WebReplay time travel debugging POC weren't, as far as I know, fired. Instead, they left and started Replay ( https://replay.io ), a true time-traveling debugger for JavaScript.

I joined Replay as a senior front-end dev a year ago. It's real, it works, we're building it, and it's genuinely life-changing as a developer :)

Not sure how well this would have fit into Firefox as a specific feature, given both the browser C++ runtime customizations and cloud wizardry needed to make this work. But kinda like Rust, it's a thing that spun out of Mozilla and has taken on a life of its own.

Obligatory sales pitch while I'm writing this:

The basic idea of Replay: Use our special browser to make a recording of your app, load the recording in our debugger, and you can pause at any point in the recording. In fact, you can add print statements to any line of code, and it will show you what it would have printed _every time that line of code ran_!

From there, you can jump to any of those print statement hits, and do typical step debugging and inspection of variables. So, it's the best of both worlds - you can use print statements and step debugging, together, at any point in time in the recording.

See https://replay.io/record-bugs for the getting started steps to use Replay, or drop by our Discord at https://replay.io/discord and ask questions.

replies(1): >>Kuinox+iO
9. yjftsj+ym[view] [source] 2023-05-26 04:36:45
>>CJeffe+(OP)
> In what significant ways could Firefox be improved, such that it would help most users, over Chrome?

Finish making gecko reusable so people can use it instead of blink whenever someone wants to make a custom skin, or instead of electron for "desktop" apps. I grant that it's not immediately user-facing, but it would help give them the actual market share so that web devs have a reason to care about gecko.

10. Faark+Fn[view] [source] 2023-05-26 04:46:42
>>CJeffe+(OP)
For Android, Firefox still only allows a small list of "recommend" add-ons. The developer workaround requires listing them in some online account.

I want a way to instal things on my system without a third party graciously allowing me to, that's what I'd consider freedom and why I try to avoid the playstore like the plague. Seeing Mozilla to not be better either is just sad :(

11. zo1+tx[view] [source] 2023-05-26 06:15:45
>>CJeffe+(OP)
In one sentence: Make it the browser that fixes the web. E.g. Remove ads, privacy popups , paywalls, ad tracking, and other annoyances. Make the plugin ecosystem so good that people flock to help you with that and then people will only want go browse the web that way.

It should be a noble goal that acts as a beacon for others to follow. It'll lose money at first, but they'll keep their core privacy and power user base, until people come around.

Oh and stop following google and privacy advocates supposed efforts to make the web "safer". Those are all mostly propaganda and feel good initiatives whilst the tracking still happens. But that's a long side rant from a pet peeve of mine.

◧◩◪
12. surgic+0N[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-05-26 08:44:05
>>CJeffe+66
I am not convinced.

Google's main focus is in extracting rent from their dominance, not in making the browser faster, lighter or whatever.

As for plugin support, that's the challenge no? Make it so the contract for third party plugins can be maintained without breaking them every 6 months as the browser improves.

Firefox has excellent developers. The fact that it still has some relevance despite many years of mismanagement is testament to that. I bet if the company behind the browser was laser focused in making it as good as possible, with no compromise, they could challenge Chrome dominant position.

◧◩◪
13. Kuinox+iO[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-05-26 08:55:40
>>acemar+Yc
> Not sure how well this would have fit into Firefox as a specific feature, given both the browser C++ runtime customizations and cloud wizardry needed to make this work.

Well it worked on firefox before, but only on macOS:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDq1AN1kSn4

https://web.archive.org/web/20210331133857/https://developer...

> But kinda like Rust, it's a thing that spun out of Mozilla and has taken on a life of its own.

It could has been a feature that make firefox the browsers for developers, instead it's a new paid subscription dev product.

[go to top]