this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
5 points (85.7% liked)

Technology

59569 readers
4136 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 another!
  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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can we please stop with the browser bloat? This is something that should be a plug-in, not a kitchen sink feature.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I actually don't agree, and the reason is - non tech people. You and me can install plugins but ordinary people don't do that. So the default experience must be good, offering improvements to the experience over Google Chrome.

Otherwise all privacy features could also be plugins. Imagine if that was true. Firefox would have no identity and you would have to install plugins and make it your own.

So some features should be built in. Maybe the ability to get pop-ups about false reviews will actually make users go "wow that is so useful".

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Compromise: Develop it as a Plugin and then install it by default. That way people who don't want the feature can easily remove it completely. That approach would likely also reduce the number of Firefox forks whose sole purpose is to remove the new features some consider bloat.

[–] redcalcium@lemmy.institute 1 points 1 year ago

That's actually what Firefox usually did for these kind of features. They're usually delayed as system add-ons.

[–] Engywuck@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Now, let's talk about adblockers... Oh, wait, Google would get upset if FF had an inbuilt adblocker and could stop giving us those $weet money...

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If Google stopped sponsoring, Mozilla would go down and Google would get slammed with anti-monopoly lawsuits from the EU.

So Mozilla can do whatever they want and Google won't stop sending them money. Since that is a lot more profitable in the long run.

[–] Engywuck@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mozilla can do whatever they want and Google won’t stop sending them money.

So... What are they waiting for? Are they going to rely on gorhill for ever?

[–] jtk@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You want Mozilla choosing what gets blocked?

[–] jdaxe@infosec.pub 0 points 9 months ago

Sure, as long as we still have options to disable their blocker and use a 3rd party one if we choose. It's astounding how many users don't bother to install an adblocker and it would be a massive improvement for those users who don't know better.

There's been more than one occasion that I've used a family member's PC and they have Firefox installed without a single extension, they didn't even know that extensions existed.