It’s a bunch of things. Not having extensions however removed a potentially differentiating feature, which certainly didn’t help.
Comment on Mozilla tells extension developers to get ready to go mobile • The Register
elbarto777@lemmy.world 10 months agoAs if extensions is the reason of Firefox faltering on mobile. Do Chrome and Safari allow extensions on mobile?
nevemsenki@lemmy.world 10 months ago
elbarto777@lemmy.world 10 months ago
But mobile Firefox does have extensions. It’s just not a big number.
nevemsenki@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I just counted, it’s 22… and there a lot of redundancy in there. So I’d say that FF on mobile had extensions technically. Want something as extreme as RES or some video downloader? You have with fiddle with nightly… which barely any average user would.
lud@lemm.ee 10 months ago
True, and that’s why they are opening it up.
bingbong@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 months ago
Safari actually has a pretty good extension system (for mobile)
ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Safari does. I think they’re the same as desktop Safari but it seems like a different and smaller ecosystem from the Chrome/FF one and the good ones tend to cost a dollar or two (or six). Still, I have an ad-blocker, a dark mode one, a Userscripts one, one to get rid of AMP links, and a few others.
elbarto777@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Oh nice! I didn’t know.