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”.
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.
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.
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.
Agreed. This is well outside the scope of native browser functions. Firefox already has a rich extensions ecosystem. They can just include the extension with the browser by default for all I care, but as a native feature, this makes no sense.
I agree and I worry about what options they’ll remove from about:config next to make room for or force the acceptance of new features like they have a habit of doing.
Amazon only operates in 58 countries, so it’s basically useless for everyone else. But the company they acquired (fakespot) seems to do more than amazon, but that still does not make it worth packaging it with the browser
Can we please stop with the browser bloat? This is something that should be a plug-in, not a kitchen sink feature.
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”.
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.
That’s actually what Firefox usually did for these kind of features. They’re usually delayed as system add-ons.
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.
deleted by creator
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.
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…
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.
So… What are they waiting for? Are they going to rely on gorhill for ever?
You want Mozilla choosing what gets blocked?
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.
Blockers need to be an extension, keeps everyone honest.
Reminds me of gnome.
deleted by creator
Agreed. This is well outside the scope of native browser functions. Firefox already has a rich extensions ecosystem. They can just include the extension with the browser by default for all I care, but as a native feature, this makes no sense.
They do that. Screenshot upload and so on are handled as extensions.
Firefox extension platform frontend is a mess and has been for years.
I’d say these should be “recommended plug-ins” but imho FF/Moz embarassed themselves on that front with the whole “Pocket” thing.
I agree and I worry about what options they’ll remove from about:config next to make room for or force the acceptance of new features like they have a habit of doing.
Amazon only operates in 58 countries, so it’s basically useless for everyone else. But the company they acquired (fakespot) seems to do more than amazon, but that still does not make it worth packaging it with the browser