Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TechRepublic: Mozilla 'Is Desperately Needed to Save the Web' (techrepublic.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the fighting-for-the-future dept.

"I can't remember the last time I cared about Mozilla," writes Matt Asay at TechRepublic. "I also can't remember a time when we needed it more." An anonymous reader quotes TechRepublic: Mozilla's Firefox is almost a rounding error in desktop market share, and nonexistent in mobile browser market share. It offers a few other services, like Pocket, but largely gets ignored... This is a mistake. Our world is increasingly mediated by the internet, and that internet has just a few gatekeepers, collecting tolls as we browse. As Python guru Matt Harrison put it, "Vendors control the default browser which 99.9% of people use." Those vendors are happy to sell us access to information. Nothing about it is free. You are most definitely the product.

On mobile, where the majority of the world's content is now consumed, Google and Facebook own eight of the top 10 apps, with apps devouring 87% of our time spent on smartphones and tablets, according to new comScore data. For that remaining 13% of time spent on the mobile web, Google and Apple offer the two dominant browsers... the majority of our time online is now mediated by just a few megacorporations, and for the most part their top incentive is to borrow our privacy just long enough to target an ad at us. Then there's Mozilla, an organization whose mantra is "Internet for people, not profit." That feels like a necessary voice to add to today's internet oligopoly, but it's not one we're hearing... We clearly need an organization standing up for web freedom, as expecting Google to do that is like asking the fox to guard the henhouse. Google does many great things, but its clear incentive is to sell ads. We are Google's product, as the saying goes.
The article applauds the Mozilla-sponsored Rust programming language as promising, "but not to save the web from the all-consuming embrace of Facebook and Google, especially as they wall off the experience in apps... "If I sound like I don't know what to propose Mozilla should do, it's because I don't. I simply feel strongly that the role Mozilla played in the early browser wars needs to be resurrected to save the web today."

13 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. Everyone knows what Mozilla needs to do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... except Mozilla.

    Every release they make the browser worse. Their mantra is "just like Chrome, except slower and with more bugs." No wonder people switch to Chrome.

    Firefox is supposed to be the browser that people use because they care - they want to customize, they want features, they want control. But with every release this slips a little farther away. Things constantly stop working, and it gets harder and harder for the extension makers to keep up.

    Oddly, Android is the one place where Firefox is still actually better than Chrome - because it's got a real ad blocker. Sure, it's slow and crashes all the time, but it's a worthwhile tradeoff.

    But at least there's Pocket! Oh yay.

    1. Re:Everyone knows what Mozilla needs to do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Most extension makers have already given up. People who have been coding and maintaining extensions for decades are now retiring because Firefox kicked their extensions out. Running Firefox without extensions is just not an option. When all relevant Firefox extensions get disabled on November 14, I'll just try to stick with the last working version and hope there aren't too many exploits against it. But my enthusiasm for Mozilla is completely gone. I don't think they can "save the web" if they can't even keep their browser working.

  2. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mozilla is too busy trying to be an inferior version of Google as evidenced in their attempts to convert Firefox into an inferior version of Chrome.
    Mozilla lost its philosophy and soul during that period when it was subsidized by Google, and that's when everything started turning to shit for the company.
    As far as wasting money on diversity programs and social justice instead of improving its products, well the latest financial report that emphasizes ruin talks for itself.
    Forget about Mozilla, it's time to give some of the Firefox forks some support and attention. Mozilla has been corrupted by Google and its philosophy.

  3. Their plan to save the web: Redesign FF UI again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The entire browser is going to be hidden under one giant hamburger button. No menus, no URL bar, no scroll bars, hell no rendering window. Just one giant hamburger button that crashes the browser when you click it.

    You heard it here first, folks.

  4. Mozilla has spent almost 10 years... by Dracos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...specifically since January 8, 2008, working to be as irrelevant, feckless, and misguided as they are now. The only positive and notable thing they've done for the web in that time is Let's Encrypt.

    Two versions of Firefox from now, they will jettison what made their browser great: the extensions. Mozilla needs a radical change in direction to save itself.

    1. Re:Mozilla has spent almost 10 years... by theweatherelectric · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Two versions of Firefox from now, they will jettison what made their browser great: the extensions.

      Prove it. The extensions API is changing, that's all. I'm using the WebExtensions version of uBlock Origin (version 1.14.4) in Firefox 56 beta and it works fine. Tree Style Tab is another add-on people like and the WebExtensions version is in development.

      Add-ons will either migrate to the new API or they won't. If WebExtensions APIs to support your pet add-on are missing, then get involved and add them. Mozilla wants you to.

    2. Re:Mozilla has spent almost 10 years... by Deb-fanboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      they will jettison what made their browser great: the extensions.

      And that is why I am having to use the browser 'Pale Moon' in order to use the extensions I love such as Pentadactyl.

      Since firefox have disregarded what was great about their browser, i.e. the extensions, they are effectively killing it.

    3. Re:Mozilla has spent almost 10 years... by theweatherelectric · · Score: 4, Informative

      scrapped an extensions architecture that worked fine

      It didn't work fine. Firefox 57 is faster without it. Have you tried Firefox nightly? Alternatively, wait for 57 to move to the beta channel and try it then.

    4. Re:Mozilla has spent almost 10 years... by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I thought users were complaining that their 2015 era 8-core laptop was slower for web browsing than their 2-core 2009 workstation because using a fifth of the electricity meant lower single-threaded performance.

      So they rewrote their extensions API because the old API couldn't easily be multi-threaded nor easily ported to Servo.

      Progress...

    5. Re:Mozilla has spent almost 10 years... by theweatherelectric · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On top of that, the new APIs will have only been out for a few months when the pull support for all "legacy" extensions.

      WebExtensions have been available for over a year. Everyone's had plenty of time to port extensions and request changes.

      remembered as the final blow to Firefox

      Doubt it. It's a new beginning.

    6. Re:Mozilla has spent almost 10 years... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If WebExtensions APIs to support your pet add-on are missing, then get involved and add them. Mozilla wants you to.

      That's exactly the problem. Mozilla continues to head in the direction of a consumer shopping service and then they invite the tiny, tech-literate population to use extensions. Why doesn't Firefox have easily usable NoScript-type options? Why not block known 3rd-party trackers by default? Is it so radical to think people have a right not to be spied on? Instead they've hidden the script settings. They've hidden cookie settings, allowing 3rd-party cookies by default. They've hidden the status bar and encourage people to do all their browsing through a search engine.

      The list goes on. A case could be made that those changes are for convenience, but when options are actually removed (like javascript settings) that's coercion, not convenience. As someone else said, they became corrupted by the Google money. Matt Asay wants to know how it can be fixed? Simple: Always design with the idea that you're serving the customer. In this case, make it as easy as possible to protect privacy and security. Don't assume everyone wants to shop or go to Facebook. Don't treat people like idiots. Everyone knows how to get to Google or Yahoo. There's no need to let those companies take over the address bar. Just be honest. The beauty of a non-profit is that you don't have to be popular. Remember?

  5. if they verified DNSsec... by johnjones · · Score: 4, Interesting

    why not aim for a secure browser audience...

    Ditch SSL Certificate authorities unless users trusted them and verify the DNS responses (DNSsec) present that information to the user

  6. Re:They dug their own grave by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mozilla reminds me of people who profess a desire for world peace, but then get into petty feuds with their neighbors. They can't seem put what they advocate into practice on a small scale, which tends to undermine confidence in their capacity to advocate and execute their larger mission.

    Mozilla has one project that really matters, and they employ a lot of people. Why Firefox isn't hands-down the world's best browser is beyond me.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.