this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2024
282 points (94.9% liked)

Firefox

17828 readers
16 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/20260243

Google Chrome warns uBlock Origin may soon be disabled

Google Chrome is now encouraging uBlock Origin users who have updated to the latest version to switch to other ad blockers before Manifest v2 extensions are disabled.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 146 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I think people come down a lot harder on Firefox than they should. It's a great browser, and they do a lot for the freedom of the community and as an open source ambassador.

I feel like people generally feel that, given their prominence, they could do a lot more. This is certainly true. Their weird corporate structure, their half-baked experiments like Pocket or VPN, their Google ad money, these are all valid issues.

But do you know what else is supported by Google ad money? Chromium and every browser built on it. Do you know what has a far more corporate culture? Chrome, Edge, Safari, etc. Do you know who else had weird little money making experiments? Every other browser (Brave's Basic Attention Tokens, DDG's Privacy Pro, etc.).

Firefox makes a bigger target because of their relative popularity and long history.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 56 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It has always felt so goofy to see people say "x" based Chromium browser is better than Firefox because Firefox takes Google's money but "x" based Chromium browser doesn't. Like... It just completely ignores the investment Google puts in Chromium lol. Google's money into Firefox equals bad, but Google's money into Chromium, oh, that's actually not bad because we just cover our eyes and ears and go "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" or something???

All that to say, I'm glad to see someone else explicitly share this opinion.

[–] astro_ray@lemdro.id 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Isn't the only reason firefox gets google ad money is because google is afraid they would slapped with an anti-trust lawsuit? Firefox getting money from google doesn't seem like a valid criticism.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 20 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I believe it is because Google is the default search engine in Firefox.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 15 points 3 months ago (7 children)

When Chrome came out it was heavily promoted by everyone I knew (apart from my best friend) I tried it, didn't like the UI (still don't) and didn't see the point of it.

People talked abour how fast it was, and I felt that Firefox was fast enough, and Firefox just worked as I wanted it to, why change?

I kept stedfast with Firefox, apart from when the horrible Australis UI was launched, then I switched to a fork called Pale Moon, which I used for several years untill the current UI was launched.

[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

it actually WAS really good when it first came out and for a few years, it was also back during the days where google still kind of follows the "don't be evil" principle.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I have very strong doubts about the security of Palemoon

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 13 points 3 months ago (14 children)

I've best heard it described as: people love Firefox to death.

People, use whatever you like, but if you actively discourage everyone to stop using it, we might lose it - and with it, Librewolf, Palemoon, Tor Browser, and everything that's not Chrome or Safari.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Honestly it's more that Lemmy as a whole is just a big group of curmudgeons. Most discussions on here veer strongly negative, not limited to Firefox.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I want there to be a competitive market so that Firefox gets better. Without good competition it will continue to rot.

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (6 children)

I don't understand the premise of this statement. Do you think Firefox doesn't have competition in the browser space?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Midnitte@beehaw.org 43 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That's exactly what happens if we lose Firefox - Chrome (and those based on it) now have all the power to disable all ad blocking - enabling Google's horrific privacy-less future

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 months ago (4 children)

There’s still WebKit, which doesn’t suck anymore! (At least from my end-user standpoint)

At least for mobile—I cannot attest to the desktop version.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] kbal@fedia.io 35 points 3 months ago (7 children)

It's a good opportunity for any Chrome users in the crowd to switch to Librewolf. It may be a small project but it's been around for a while and they haven't made any mistakes that I've heard about. Google has its various off-brand browsers using the engine, why shouldn't Mozilla get some? It comes with uBlock Origin preinstalled, and has none of the telemetry and ads of Firefox.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

One thing to note about using forks is that they have no chance of being on corporate software whitelists, while firefox does. For that reason, adding to firefox numbers is potentially important. I've already seen companies wanting to only allow chrome/edge/safari (even while they officially support firefox ..)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

For mobile, there is Fennec, which is just Firefox with those elements removed.

Edit: there is also Mull, which is more privacy focused.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

I don't care about telemetry that reports what features I use and sends crashes, only actual marketing telemetry. Is Fennec a good choice for me? Stuff like Pocket is annoying but you can sort of disable it in about:config. Basically, I hate stuff like Pocket but don't mind stuff like syncing or non-ad based telemetry.

[–] verdigris@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah IMO there is nothing in vanilla Firefox to complain about that you can't disable easily from the settings. You only need librewolf or the arkenfox user.js if you're a privacy nut.

[–] themurphy@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"Privacy nut" might be a little harsh, as it's a valid concern.

[–] verdigris@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't mean it as a derogative, but there's a certain point at which you have to either go whole hog on minimizing your digital footprint, or accept that some companies are gonna know more about you than you would maybe prefer. I think the Firefox defaults are much less onerous than, say, signing up for a loyalty program with any major retailer, and you can disable the few things that do any tracking.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] LWD@lemm.ee 33 points 3 months ago (12 children)

Firefox stands as the lesser of two evils.

The problem is that for the past 8 months, Mozilla has been accelerating making Firefox more evil, and if it continues at this trajectory, it might catch up to Google.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 31 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I don't see any issues with Firefox?

[–] Bulletdust@lemmy.ml 14 points 3 months ago

I've been using FF for more years than I care to remember, and with the exception of a couple of sites that weren't really that important, I've never had an issue. I certainly never had an issue running uBlock Origin and YouTube.

I flat out refuse to use anything even loosely based on Chromium on principal alone.

[–] Goodie@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

People like to bemoan the funding model, as well as the Mozilla Foundations broad overview and general "business vibe"

[–] bitwolf@lemmy.one 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There's a few irritating ones on Android at least.

On desktop it's been solid since Quantum

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 months ago

Quantum was an insane update.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago (9 children)

Firefox has a lot of issues

I dunno... I mean, what are your expectations?

Ultimately I have actual problems in my life, my browser choice is an absolutely marginal decision I make when the actual goal is to visit a website that in itself is usually just a tiny component of something else - say ordering something, checking on a piece of information, etc etc.

It's kinda weird to even think so much about browsers - excluding when you are actively developing for/with them - that you recognize issues beyond a single big one like "Has no support for an adblocker". I can get behind that being big enough to matter in regards to which browser is usable or not.

But again, if you develop for Firefox or an addon for it, I can see why details matter and you'd probably have a long laundry list of issues, sure.

[–] CafecitoHippo@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I dunno… I mean, what are your expectations?

Honestly, some sites just don't want to work properly. Firefox is my main browser. For some reason, Dicks Sporting Goods has like a 50% success rate on whether the page wants to load correctly. I fire up Brave when I'm looking at their website.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Use an extension to spoof your useragent, and it will probably load just fine

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] cyberwolfie@lemmy.ml 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I see many people say to just use forks of Firefox. I use Librewolf myself. However, are such forks not very dependent on upstream Firefox not being completely enshittified? Will it be possible to keep the forks free of all new bullshit, or does that at any point become a too difficult/comprehensive task for the maintainers?

[–] laughterlaughter@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

At that point the forks will become its own thing and depart from Firefox.

Which is ironically and exactly how Firefox came to be.

Netscape fucked up Navigator, some folks forked Navigator and created Phoenix - which then was renamed to Firebird, then Firefox. And somewhere in that timeline the Mozilla foundation ditched Navigator in favor of the fork.

[–] cyberwolfie@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

But is it viable? I know very little of browser development, but my impression is that it is a lot of work to develop and keep the browsers secure. If Librewolf separated completely from upstream Firefox, would they be able to keep the browser secure without significantly expanding their team?

I ask in earnest, as I said I know very little about this.

[–] unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

For Firefox forks, it's viable since the forks aren't doing all that much in the grand scheme of things. That isn't to say what they're doing is in any way bad, it's just that there's no need to reinvent the wheel.

Firefox is a secure browser and already has 99% of the work done. Most changes which forks make can be done just by changing the config. Some unfortunately have to be made seperately, and that does require extensive testing. Some can even be lifted from other open-source projects.

Separating from source just isn't viable. Something nuclear would need to happen for any fork to decide to seperate from Firefox. If we just look at the Chromium side of things, Microsoft found it easier to switch to Chromium than to keep making IE/Edge from scratch, and Microsoft surely has a lot of resources to burn.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tpihkal@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I switched back to Firefox two or three years ago. It was tough at first but now that I have it setup for me, I like it so much better than Chrome. Very little noise, ad-free most of the time.

Now I only use Chrome when I'm shopping because that's the only thing it's good for.

[–] astro_ray@lemdro.id 20 points 3 months ago

I couldn't help, so let me ask What about firefox stops you from using it for online shopping?

[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 14 points 3 months ago (8 children)

For shopping? That can also be done via Firefox.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] anticurrent@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 months ago

Firefox's desktop market share is the lowest it has ever been, and its mobile share is zero-point-smithereens. not to be a party pooper but google and chromium's monopolistic hold is only growing stronger.

[–] funkyfarmington@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Librewolf works just fine, out of the box.

[–] laughterlaughter@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

You're being downvoted by clueless people.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 8 points 3 months ago

Exactly, so you have Firefox, Floorp, LibreWolf and even Waterfox. Just pick one.

[–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 8 points 3 months ago

Even tho I somtimes don't care about floss I enjoy firefox it's customizable

[–] Phegan@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

Waterfox gang.

[–] ambitiousslab@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I really wish there was a GPL-licensed rendering engine and browser, accepting community funding, with some momentum behind it.

I feel Ladybird have correctly identified the problem - that all major browsers and engines (including Firefox) get their primary source of funding from Google, and thus ads. And the donations and attention they've received show that there is real demand for an alternative.

But I think the permissive license they have chosen means history will repeat itself. KHTML being licensed under the LGPL made it easy for Google to co-opt, since it was so much easier to incorporate into a proprietary (or more permissively licensed) codebase.

There is Netsurf, but the rendering engine understandably and unfortunately lags behind the major ones. I just wish it was possible to gather support and momentum behind it to the same extent that Ladybird has achieved.

[–] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm probably wrong, but isn't the Mozilla License non-permissive? It's likely more complicated than that. Non-permissive*

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›