this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2025
509 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

63082 readers
3517 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hector@sh.itjust.works 5 points 26 minutes ago

The problem with Web Standards is that they're so complete, broad and complex that it's very hard as an independent team to get started writing a browser.

You'd have so little daily active users compared to the titans products (Chromium, Gecko, WebKit) that even if you made something super good, it would still be hard to guarantee website compatibility without faking the user-agents.

There's also a lot of complexity involved in writing a sandbox for every instance of a website (tabs or iframe) and sharing information between multiple process. I don't know how they do it in Chrome, but in Firefox they have a whole specification language for that which compiles to C++.

You also have to recreate the DevTools and other tooling for developers to adopt your browser and for you to debug any issues with your DOM renderer...

I love how much the web has to offer nowadays with technologies like WebRTC, WebSocket, Blobs, GamePad API, modern CSS3 but it has also the effect of locking us down into a tiny ecosystem.

I really their should be legislation on what companies can do with their browser because they've become such an important piece of the internet so they should serve public good.

I don't know how to make it happen and I don't even know if it's a good idea when you consider the governance issues it would bring for open-source project.

I'm really passionate about this technology !

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, there are only 3 companies developing browsers right now: Google, Apple and Mozilla.

Apple's browsers are only available on Apple platforms. In fact, if you're on iOS you have no choice, you have to use Safari. Even browsers labelled as "Chrome" or "Firefox" are actually Safari under the hood on iOS. But, on any non Apple platform, you can't use Safari.

Google is an ad company, so they don't want to allow ad blockers on their browser. So, it's a matter of time before every kind of ad blocking is disabled for Chrome users.

Firefox is almost entirely funded by Google, so there's a limit as to what they can do without the funding getting cut off. They seem to be trying to find a way forward without Google, but the result, if anything is as bad as Google if not worse:

"investing in privacy-respecting advertising to grow new revenue in the near term; developing trustworthy, open source AI to ensure technical and product relevance in the mid term;"

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-leadership-growth-planning-updates/

All these other browser people like are basically reskinned versions of Chrome or Firefox. They have a handful of people working on them. To actually develop a modern browser you need a big team. A modern browser basically has to be an OS capable of running everything from a 3d game engine, to a word processor, to a full featured debugger.

It looks like it's only a matter of time before there will be 0 browsers capable of blocking ads, because the only two companies that make multi-platform browsers depend on ads for their revenue, and both of them will have enormous expenses because they're obsessed with stupid projects like AI.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 1 points 52 minutes ago (1 children)

It looks like it’s only a matter of time before there will be 0 browsers capable of blocking ads[.]

I don't know if I'd take it that far. Firefox and the Chrome engine are open source projects. Anyone can modify the browser to enable ad-blocking in some form if a user is sufficiently determined. Now, will it be possible to write and distribute a popular an effective adblocker under these conditions? It appears to be getting harder.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 29 minutes ago

Firefox and the Chrome engine are open source projects. Anyone can modify the browser to enable ad-blocking in some form if a user is sufficiently determined.

Technically, sure. But, these are extremely complex software products, and it would be one hobbyist vs. an entire software division of a trillion dollar company who are determined to make sure you see ads.

[–] Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

Vivaldi on Linux and Windows is still good in my experience, and so far uBlock Origin for manifest v2 still works. I hope they keep v2 support forever, forking completely if they must.

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.world 28 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I switched to Firefox the morning they disabled uBlock Origin.

[–] AngryRobot@lemmy.world 10 points 1 hour ago

I never left Firefox. It's a fantastic browser.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 59 points 15 hours ago

Meanwhile ublock origin works fine in Fennec/Firefox Android.

[–] Blindsite@lemmy.today -2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Use an alternative chromium based browser?

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 hour ago

Don’t use chromium?

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 50 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Chrome? A browser that's easily replaceable with any other browser? Huh... Didn't see that one coming.

/S

[–] Dicska@lemmy.world 20 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm saying this as a 2 year convert Firefox user: mostly easily replaceable. Sure, I can browse pretty much every page that I can on chrome. However, a few sites don't work the same way - sometimes because of the site's conscious decision, sometimes because of Firefox.

Take Facebook, for example. On desktop, I can't make voice calls anymore from the desktop site. For a while it was possible with non encrypted chats, but now pretty much all of them are encrypted, and FF is not compatible with that. I also can't watch h265 videos in my chats anymore. I'm still sticking with FF, but I just can't easily say that FF is just as good for everything (I'm still not going back to chrome).

[–] ButtDrugs@lemm.ee 14 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah I'm a 20-some year FF user and when it started you had to have IE as a backup because not everything was compatible. In the late 2000s through late 2010s everything worked everywhere, then with chromes dominance places have stopped testing or supporting certain things in FF and it feels like history is repeating itself. Unfortunately you need a chromium-based backup realistically for certain sites, but 99.5% of things work totally fine in FF.

[–] Brumefey@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

A lot of websites are broken on Firefox which is a shame. I can’t even scroll down on some news sites. What a shame…

[–] therichkid@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

This might be the fault of your ublock filters rather than Firefox. Do you have a cookie banner filter list? Some websites are blocking scrolling until you make a cookie decision. A short disable of ublock, rejecting the cookies should then work. The "downside" of a powerful ad blocker

[–] hkspowers@lemmy.today 2 points 5 hours ago

Agreed, I've never come across a site that was broken because of Firefox. Usually the culprit is adblock being too good at blocking, so just toggle it off and refresh and page loads just fine.

[–] sma3in@lemmy.world 52 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

LibreWolf if you want security, privacy and freedom

https://librewolf.net/

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 13 points 16 hours ago

Fennec on Android

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 286 points 23 hours ago (7 children)

If you're still using Chrome, do yourself a favour and install Firefox.

[–] nahostdeutschland@feddit.org 209 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

Let's be honest: Everything that might be "worse" or "annoying" in Firefox for someone is not relevant in comparison to "no working adblocker available". A browser without adblock is unusable

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

I haven't actually found anything that doesn't work on Firefox on my personal computer. At work we also use Firefox, and some things don't work on it, but some things don't work on chrome or edge either, it's a hodge poge.

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 54 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

True, but if an adblocker no longer works on a specific browser, change your browser! I started using Netscape back in '94, and lost count on how many browsers I've tested and used in the past... Holy shit, 30+ years!!

[–] imvii@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 hour ago

Mosaic was awesome. Netscape 1 was pretty cool, but Netscape 2 and animated gifs... zowie! That was a day to remember.

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 28 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

30+ years!

.....fuck off, '94 wasn't 30.... counts on fingers several times

.....Shit.....

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I know... Jurassic Park is 33 years this year. It would be like watching a movie from the 60' when it was released.

We're old, friend.

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago

I've never hated my life more than right now...

[–] Teal@lemm.ee 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

It doesn’t sound right but it is. I think in ‘94 I was using Juno for email and internet. Shortly after that it was time to actually use one of the many AOL trial discs for service instead of a mini frisbee/ninja star.

Modem sounds, chat rooms, you’ve got mail. What a time to live!

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 hours ago

Fuck. I got free internet for almost 5 years. So many AOL discs. 01, 02? Friend's dad had a T1 connection put into their house for his work. The difference between T1 and the 56k I had at home? At home walk out the room, have a smoke, maybe ⅔ a boob loaded. At buddy's house, that's when I realised that the internet had the potential to change everything. Whole boob before you could even stand up.

Kids these days. No appreciation for how much struggle it used to be. Everything just. Just there. No bork the only computer in the house because boob.exe.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

I use Palemoon for the nostalgia but also because of the best theme around, Moonscape

Netscape will forever be my number one.

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 28 points 23 hours ago (7 children)

In the past 10 years it's pretty much just been Firefox, Safari, Explorer/Edge, and Chrome. 99% of browsers are just skinned Chrome. Even Edge now. Opera's engine died in 2013.

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 29 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

99% if browsers are just skinned Chrome.

Yup. Hence, the reason I originally suggested to use Firefox, only because it's not built on Chromium.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] CarbonBasedNPU@lemm.ee 30 points 22 hours ago (24 children)

What issues do people even have with firefox? Its a browser, it seems fast enough. Isn't that all most people need from a browser

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 13 points 20 hours ago (11 children)

I very much dislike Mozilla's direction over the last decade. They're introducing user-hostile features that subtly break normal browsing experience, even when disabled[0]. Not like Google is better, but I'm also trying to get away from Mozilla.

[0] On Firefox Mobile, there's a "feature" which makes the address bar auto-complete domains of companies paying Mozilla. I noticed this with Netflix - I never visit, but when I start writing a URL with n, roughly every 10th time Netflix was suggested. You can disable this feature, but this doesn't actually disable it. The address bar no longer auto-completes with Netflix, instead it just doesn't autocomplete! So 9/10 times I can write n and press Enter, but 1/10 times I press n and search for the letter n.

Mozilla doesn't care whether they break features, as long as they can make more money. I strongly dislike this approach by the supposedly "good" browser manufacturer.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 120 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Ethanol@pawb.social 3 points 4 hours ago

upvoted for the spinny gif ... weeeeeeeee C:

[–] PumpkinEscobar@lemmy.world 47 points 22 hours ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RustyShackleford@literature.cafe 35 points 23 hours ago

It's a good thing I stayed loyal to Firefox. Mainly due to my dislike of change lol, but I was forced to use Chrome and it felt ominous with its owner being Google.

load more comments
view more: next ›