Firefox did an add-on genocide years ago and it obviously didn’t hurt them in the long run.
The moment that Firefox goes too far, it’ll immediately be forked and 75% of the user base would leave within a few months. Their user base is almost entirely privacy-conscious, technologically savvy people.
morriscox@lemmy.world 2 months ago
EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 2 months ago
Depends on how it “goes too far”. What I am, for example, afraid of is the possibility of removing Manifest V2 support. Maintaining the browser with such a significant change would get more and more difficult as time goes on.
sandbox@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I think that would be an example of a wildly unpopular change, yeah.
verdigris@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
This is currently one of the biggest selling points for the browser, since Chrom(ium) is dropping support for v2… So I don’t see that happening.
EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 2 months ago
Sure hope so! But sadly, I think this is a possibility - iirc they were working on a different implementation of Manifest V3, so I fear that it might still happen eventually, “for the sake of security”.
unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 2 months ago
I agree, but something will have to change because chrome will swallow ALL that. Just today some back-end problem was messing up all my stuff, and co-workers were asking, " did you try a different browser? " botch no I did not try Netscape
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 months ago
“I agree [with the opposite of what you said]. Also, here, have an irrelevant anecdote that includes a funny misspelling and a supposed diss of FF from 1999”
sandbox@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Not sure what you mean - I don’t think most of the people still using Firefox are going to switch to a Chromium based browser any time soon, I can’t speak for everyone of course but it feels like Firefox users tend to have an ideological objection to Google having a monopoly on web browsers.
It’s always worth trying a different browser when you have issues on websites - there are a lot of things that can be different beyond the layout and javascript engines - cookies, configuration, addons, etc. Yesterday I noticed a big difference between Chromium and Firefox in that even if you hard-refresh on a HTTP/2 connection, Chromium reuses a kept-alive connection, and firefox doesn’t — I would totally argue that Firefox’s implementation is more correct, but Chrome’s implementation will lead to a better experience for users hard-refreshing.
Esp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
Personally, I remember chrome always flash banging me when on a website with a dark background and I clicked to the next page because apparently clearing the page to the same RGB value as what is set as the HTML background is too hard so they just always clear with pure white. But they did have a faster JS engine. Not sure anymore, haven’t given enough of a shit to try anything but firefox in years now.
unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 2 months ago
I meant, talking to coworkers, – yes, I already tried Chrome, Edge, etc, not sure what etc would include - not worth it to explain what little I know of Chromium, and it doesn’t matter. I’m aware it’s Chromium or Firefox in getting a page to work. Random coworkers, they don’t know or care.