Now, let’s talk about adblockers… Oh, wait, Google would get upset if FF had an inbuild adblocker…
Comment on Firefox will have a built-in ‘fake reviews detector’ — Amazon is in trouble
1984@lemmy.today 11 months agoI 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”.
Engywuck@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Honytawk@lemmy.zip 11 months ago
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 11 months ago
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 11 months ago
You want Mozilla choosing what gets blocked?
netchami@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
Use LibreWolf. It’s Firefox with pre-installed uBlock Origin and pre-configured privacy settings. It also doesn’t have any of the Firefox bloat like Pocket
Engywuck@lemm.ee 11 months ago
No way I’m giving market share to gecko and, thus, to Mozilla. I just point how how hypocrite they are.
jtk@lemmy.sdf.org 11 months ago
Blockers need to be an extension, keeps everyone honest.
mitrosus@discuss.tchncs.de 11 months ago
…you would have to install plugins and make it your own.
Reminds me of gnome.
neshura@bookwormstory.social 11 months ago
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 11 months ago
That’s actually what Firefox usually did for these kind of features. They’re usually delayed as system add-ons.
Lepsea@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
Or make it so that people have a choice to add some of the features when installing the browser. Debloating is not fun
Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Sometimes it feels like debloating is a hobby to people with little to show for it
Aceticon@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Well, the purpose of debloating is to end up with less stuff than you started with ;)
ByGourou@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
Most people don’t want a 45th prompt when they just want to install firefox to check facebook and their mail
neshura@bookwormstory.social 11 months ago
True, also wouldn’t be too much work. Just some additional dialogues on first start up asking you which plugins you’d like installed
tweeks@feddit.nl 11 months ago
Good solution, perhaps two simple options at browser install: Default / Custom. That way you don’t have to uninstall all the stuff at the end.
BaardFigur@lemmy.world 11 months ago
But how should they handle a version update where a given addon is added. A popup?
Gestrid@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
Probably handle it similarly to how Chrome handles an extension asking for new permissions. It disables the add-on and gives the user a small non-intrusive notification on the options menu. Opening the notification notified the user about the change in permissions and asks them if they want to re-enable the add-on or remove it from Chrome.