Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sypran

Chrome may soon break Ad-Blockers

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JoostinOnline said:

I remember that. It was annoying as hell. They kept making it more like Chrome. I stayed on Firefox 3.6 as long as I could. XD

Have they settled down since then?


Main rig: Asus Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700k stock, Noctua D14, G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200 2x8GB, Gigabyte Windforce 980Ti, Corsair HX750i, In Win 303 NVIDIA, Samsung SM951 512GB, WD Blue 1TB, HP LP2475W 1200p wide gamut

Gaming system: Asrock Z370 Pro4, i7-8086k stock, Noctua D15, G.Skill TridentZ 3000C14 2x8GB, Asus 1080 Ti Strix OC, Fractal Edison 550W PSU, Corsair 600C, Optane 900p 280GB, Crucial MX200 1TB, Sandisk 960GB, Acer Predator XB241YU 1440p 144Hz G-sync

Ryzen rig: Asrock B450 ITX, R5 2600, Noctua D9L, Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000 2x4GB, Vega 56, Corsair CX450M, NZXT Manta, Crucial MX300 525GB, Acer RT280K

VR rig: Asus Z170I Pro Gaming, i7-6600k stock, Silverstone TD03-E, Kingston Hyper-X 2666 2x8GB, Zotac 1070 FE, Corsair CX450M, Silverstone SG13, Samsung PM951 256GB, HTC Vive

Gaming laptop: Asus FX503VD, i5-7300HQ, 2x8GB DDR4, GTX 1050, Sandisk 256GB SSD

Total CPU heating: i7-7800X, 2x i7-6700k, i7-6700HQ, i5-6600k, i5-5675C, i5-4570S, i3-8350k, i3-6100, i3-4360, 2x i3-4150T, E5-2683v3, 2x E5-2650, R7 1700, 1600

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

That's probably what Google is thinking too. However, a lot of average Joes just follow the advice of their more technology literate friends and family members. If those people start switching over to Firefox, for whatever reason, then a portion of the ones who don't understand the difference might switch too, and that in turn can cause a snowball effect.

Would you suggest a web browser where, say, 30-40% of website don't play nice with it? Including YouTubbe, and say Google?

When Firefox came in defeating IE, you didn't have YouTube, social media with near null existent compared to today.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully this increases Firefox market share.


Workstation Rig:
CPU:  Intel Core i9 9900K @4.7ghz  |~| Cooling: Noctua NH-U12P |~|  MOBO: Asus Z390M ROG Maximus XI GENE |~| RAM: 32gb 3200mhz CL16 G.Skill Trident Z RGB |~| GPU: nVidia TITAN V  |~| PSU: Corsair RM850X 80Plus Gold |~| Boot: WD Black M.2 2280 500GB NVMe |~| Storage: 2X4TB HDD 7200rpm Seagate Iron Wolf + 2X2TB SSD SanDisk Ultra |~| Case: Cooler Master Case Pro 3 |~| Display: ASUS ROG Swift PG348Q 3440x1440p100hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.
Personal Use Rig:
CPU: Intel Core i7 8700 @4.45ghz |~| Cooling: Cooler Master Hyper 212X |~| MOBO: Gigabyte Z370M D3H mATX|~| RAM: 16gb DDR4 3333mhzCL16 G.Skill Trident Z |~| GPU: nVidia Founders Edition GTX 1080 Ti |~| PSU: Corsair TX650M 80Plus Gold |~| Boot:  SSD WD Green M.2 2280 240GB |~| Storage: 1x3TB HDD 7200rpm Seagate Barracuda + SanDisk SSD Plus G26 480gb |~| Case: Cooler Master Case Pro 3 |~| Display Setup: Acer X34 3440x1440p100hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Would you suggest a web browser where, say, 30-40% of website don't play nice with it? Including YouTubbe, and say Google?

When Firefox came in defeating IE, you didn't have YouTube, social media with near null existent compared to today.

Sites like Youtube and Google doesn't play nicely with Firefox? First time I've heard of this. I certainly haven't had any issues, and Firefox has been my primary browser for years.

The only time I've had issues was with the web version of Google Earth, but that's because Firefox doesn't support Native Client. Google is however working on a WebAssembly version which will work on all browsers. Google will remove support for Native Client in favor of WebAssembly in Chrome too (currently scheduled for the second half of 2019) so soon Google Earth will have to switch to WebAssembly if it wants to function in any browser.

 

(In before that horribly inaccurate tweet about how "Youtube is deliberately ruining Firefox performance" which the author later said he was wrong about his conclusions, but nobody posts that part).

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

Hopefully this increases Firefox market share.

Unless a bunch of publications targetting average users run this story, it probably won't change by a meaningful margin.

 

Sadly.


Yup the yup.

 

Socialism is for figs.

Not supporting the political facade known as "Gay Pride."

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Sites like Youtube and Google doesn't play nicely with Firefox? First time I've heard of this. I certainly haven't had any issues, and Firefox has been my primary browser for years.

Seconded, I use Firefox for over 10 years already and I can not remember it messing up with YouTube or Google at all, and I use a shit load of extensions and what not all keeps working perfectly fine.

 

Honestly feels more of a salty Chrome user statement just trying to downplay the alternative browser.


Workstation Rig:
CPU:  Intel Core i9 9900K @4.7ghz  |~| Cooling: Noctua NH-U12P |~|  MOBO: Asus Z390M ROG Maximus XI GENE |~| RAM: 32gb 3200mhz CL16 G.Skill Trident Z RGB |~| GPU: nVidia TITAN V  |~| PSU: Corsair RM850X 80Plus Gold |~| Boot: WD Black M.2 2280 500GB NVMe |~| Storage: 2X4TB HDD 7200rpm Seagate Iron Wolf + 2X2TB SSD SanDisk Ultra |~| Case: Cooler Master Case Pro 3 |~| Display: ASUS ROG Swift PG348Q 3440x1440p100hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.
Personal Use Rig:
CPU: Intel Core i7 8700 @4.45ghz |~| Cooling: Cooler Master Hyper 212X |~| MOBO: Gigabyte Z370M D3H mATX|~| RAM: 16gb DDR4 3333mhzCL16 G.Skill Trident Z |~| GPU: nVidia Founders Edition GTX 1080 Ti |~| PSU: Corsair TX650M 80Plus Gold |~| Boot:  SSD WD Green M.2 2280 240GB |~| Storage: 1x3TB HDD 7200rpm Seagate Barracuda + SanDisk SSD Plus G26 480gb |~| Case: Cooler Master Case Pro 3 |~| Display Setup: Acer X34 3440x1440p100hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Sites like Youtube and Google doesn't play nicely with Firefox? First time I've heard of this. I certainly haven't had any issues, and Firefox has been my primary browser for years.

The only time I've had issues was with the web version of Google Earth, but that's because Firefox doesn't support Native Client. Google is however working on a WebAssembly version which will work on all browsers. Google will remove support for Native Client in favor of WebAssembly in Chrome too (currently scheduled for the second half of 2019) so soon Google Earth will have to switch to WebAssembly if it wants to function in any browser.

 

(In before that horribly inaccurate tweet about how "Youtube is deliberately ruining Firefox performance" which the author later said he was wrong about his conclusions, but nobody posts that part).

No no, I am talking about hypothetical future, where Firefox would continue to drop in market share and increase Chrome engine market. Almost or reach IE6 level, like when IE had 90% market share.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoodBytes said:

Would you suggest a web browser where, say, 30-40% of website don't play nice with it? Including YouTubbe, and say Google?

When Firefox came in defeating IE, you didn't have YouTube, social media with near null existent compared to today.

 

I have yet to see webpage that literally doesn't work in Firefox. Most of the time I break them with Ghostery or uBlock, not by default. Mind you, Youtube existed before Chrome did. Which means it ran in Firefox. And still does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

No no, I am talking about hypothetical future, where Firefox would continue to drop in market share and increase Chrome engine market. Almost or reach IE6 level, like when IE had 90% market share.

I see. Didn't know you were talking about a hypothetical future.

Well that is the future we may be heading towards, and Microsoft has only sped up the process by switching to Chromium.

Again, I would have preferred seeing them switch to Firefox as the backend instead of Chromium, and devoted resources to improving that.

 

That, combined with these news could potentially have made the browser landscape far more competitive and even (at least in terms of Chrome vs Firefox) than it is today, and most certainly more competitive than it will be in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I see. Didn't know you were talking about a hypothetical future.

Well that is the future we may be heading towards, and Microsoft has only sped up the process by switching to Chromium.

Again, I would have preferred seeing them switch to Firefox as the backend instead of Chromium, and devoted resources to improving that.

 

That, combined with these news could potentially have made the browser landscape far more competitive and even (at least in terms of Chrome vs Firefox) than it is today, and most certainly more competitive than it will be in the future.

Who knows, Microsoft may have talked to Mozilla about using Quantum. I'd be surprised if they hadn't talked behind closed doors. However, their ideals don't align quite as well as they do with Google. I know a couple of developers at Microsoft that had talked to me, said that they hoped it might go that direction as some point. Though it appears that didn't come to fruition.

 

Honestly, I'm just thinking aloud (sort of, I'm not exactly speaking to my monitor). It would be instresting to find out if it was considered at all though in the upper chain of command.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
1 hour ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Who knows, Microsoft may have talked to Mozilla about using Quantum. I'd be surprised if they hadn't talked behind closed doors. However, their ideals don't align quite as well as they do with Google. I know a couple of developers at Microsoft that had talked to me, said that they hoped it might go that direction as some point. Though it appears that didn't come to fruition.

 

Honestly, I'm just thinking aloud (sort of, I'm not exactly speaking to my monitor). It would be instresting to find out if it was considered at all though in the upper chain of command.

Heh. That is one thing to consider...
Firefox has really been championing privacy a lot lately, something that Microsoft with Windows10 has not...  I wouldn't doubt there would be some heated debates about telemetry between Mozilla and Microsoft, since it could damage Mozilla's reputation if there were articles like " 'Edge: powered by Mozilla' is spying on you. "

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sypran said:

Heh. That is one thing to consider...
Firefox has really been championing privacy a lot lately, something that Microsoft with Windows10 has not...  I wouldn't doubt there would be some heated debates about telemetry between Mozilla and Microsoft, since it could damage Mozilla's reputation if there were articles like " 'Edge: powered by Mozilla' is spying on you. "

FF is open source so it wouldnt be their fault if MS puts nefarious code into their version....

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

FF is open source so it wouldnt be their fault if MS puts nefarious code into their version....

Right, but I think what he means is that you'll have click-bait article / fear focused titles to get views. We see this more and more these days.

We saw this with Windows 10. Personally, I am annoyed with such none sense:

Title: "Nvidia pulling out of making Graphics Cards!"

Article: "Nvidia is discontinuing support of its GeForce 4 MX, a graphic card of 2002."

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GoodBytes said:

We saw this with Windows 10

Well you cannot say it was baseless... (And ms just kept on digging their grave deeper by spouting lies instead of backing down and removing to problematic parts from the OS, even now they still refusing to do it.) But in most cases you are right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

FF is open source so it wouldnt be their fault if MS puts nefarious code into their version....

Something to remember though, most people don't understand open source and how it works. It's very similar to public knowledge of non-profit and not for profit, most people don't understand the difference, that is if they realize they are different at all.

 

@GoodBytes bingo, public perception can make or break a company/project. When you are the the little guy in the process of trying to grow and gain market share, the last thing you want is bad public perception.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sypran said:

Heh. That is one thing to consider...
Firefox has really been championing privacy a lot lately, something that Microsoft with Windows10 has not...  I wouldn't doubt there would be some heated debates about telemetry between Mozilla and Microsoft, since it could damage Mozilla's reputation if there were articles like " 'Edge: powered by Mozilla' is spying on you. "

Microsoft is required to rely on telemetry, because they basically fired almost entire human Q&A division. Now they pretty much entirely rely on fast ringers and telemetry. It's skippable for corporate use because that's almost a requirement, but for home, it's not. In general, nothing's wrong with telemetry as such and they do anonymize it. Sometimes something might slip through (like name in a file path), but who will really look for your name in millions of reports. Probably no one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I'll just move to Firefox if that happens.


Spoiler

PCPartPicker Part List: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/kmxLMZ

CPU: Intel - Core i5-8600K 3.6 GHz 6-Core OEM/Tray Processor  (Purchased For $200.00) 
CPU Cooler: Noctua - NH-L9i 33.84 CFM CPU Cooler  (Purchased For $44.49) 
Motherboard: Gigabyte - Z390 I AORUS PRO WIFI Mini ITX LGA1151 Motherboard  (Purchased For $154.99) 
Memory: G.Skill - Trident Z RGB 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  (Purchased For $130.00) 
Storage: Crucial - MX300 1.05 TB 2.5" Solid State Drive  (Purchased For $200.00) 
Storage: Western Digital - Red 8 TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive  (Purchased For $130.00) 
Video Card: Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 670 2 GB Video Card  (Purchased For $30.00) 
Case: Cooler Master - Elite 120 Advanced (Black) Mini ITX Tower Case  (Purchased For $25.00) 
Power Supply: Corsair - HX Platinum 1000 W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply  (Purchased For $130.00) 
Optical Drive: Asus - BW-12B1ST/BLK/G/AS Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer  (Purchased For $75.00) 
Operating System: Microsoft - Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit  (Purchased For $0.00) 
Monitor: Dell - U2417H 24.0" 1920x1080 60 Hz Monitor  (Purchased For $0.00) 
Monitor: LG - 34UM69G-B 34.0" 2560x1080 75 Hz Monitor  (Purchased For $0.00) 
External Storage: Western Digital - My Passport Slim 1 TB External Hard Drive  (Purchased For $20.00) 
External Storage: Seagate - Backup Plus 1 TB External Hard Drive  (Purchased For $20.00) 
Total: $1159.48

Main PC: See spoiler tag

Laptop: Early 2014 Macbook Air. Intel i5-4260U, 4GB RAM, 128GB Apple PCI-E SSD, Intel HD Graphics 5000

Phone: iPhone XS Max 64GB: A12 Bionic. 4GB RAM, 6.5-inch 2,688 x 1,242 OLED, 3,174 mAh 

Wearables: Sony 1000XM2

Random devices in various stages of working: Dell Inspiron 1000 (Works perfect other than battery), Late 2008 Macbook Aluminum Unibody (For Sale), Gateway Solo W2000 Laptop (For writing floppies, needs a battery), iBook G4 (For Sale.), Surface 3 (Touch screen is borked, perfect otherwise.), Lenovo G580 (For Sale)

 

Spoiler

"Love is a bitch with a blindfold" You clicked the wrong spoiler! Hah! Bet you feel really bamboozled now!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, porina said:

Have they settled down since then?

Yes, and while I still liked the old UI better, it's at least staying the same now. Also the new type of extensions they use means that there are no longer a risk of breaking compatibility with updates.


Make sure to quote or tag me (@JoostinOnline) or I won't see your response!

PSU Tier List  |  How to build a gaming PC for $400US or less   |  The Real Reason Delidding Improves Temperatures

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, LAwLz said:

It was objectively a waste of resources because they are now scraping all their work.

If I spent millions of dollars developing something, and then just went "you know what, no need to reinvent the wheel so let's just use a competitors product" then it would have been a waste of resources too.

 

The fact that Microsoft are scrapping it is the reason why I call it a waste of time. If you build spend resources building something, just to then throw it all away, then your time and efforts were wasted.

 

You're mixing several of my arguments and reasoning into one mess.

I made a comment about how bad Edge was, but that comment was not linked to my reasoning for why I think it was bad for Microsoft to scrap Edge and go with Chromium.

 

No it is not an opinion, and you're not reading my posts carefully enough.

What I said was that it would have been better for Microsoft to go with Firefox over Chromium as the base for their new browser. That is not an opinion, that is a fact as far as preventing a Google monopoly on browsers is concerned. This is math, not an opinion.

 

If Microsoft goes with Chromium as their base:

Google controls ~71% of the market.

Firefox controls ~10% of the market.

 

If Microsoft goes with Firefox as their base:

Google controls ~66% of the market.

Firefox controls ~15% of the market.

 

Which one seems the most balanced and least like a monopoly to you?

If we assume that the current Internet Explorer users will continue to use the standard browser, rather than install a third party one then the results will look like this in ~10 years.

 

If Microsoft goes with Chromium as their base:

Google controls ~82% of the market.

Firefox controls ~10% of the market.

 

If Microsoft goes with Firefox as their base:

Google controls ~66% of the market.

Firefox controls ~27% of the market.

 

Again, which one seems the most balanced and least like a monopoly to you?

I am not arguing opinions here. I am arguing facts and math.

 

 

Nope, that is not my argument at all. Stop with the strawmanning.

 

More choice is not always better. I would argue that having a balance where 50% of users used Chrome (or Chromium derivatives), and 50% of users used Firefox (or Firefox derivatives) would be optimal.

What you have to remember (like I mentioned earlier) is that the more browser engines there are in use, the harder the jobs of web developers becomes. The slower adoption of new standards becomes. The more it costs to develop websites.

 

More choice is not always better, but neither is a lack of choice.

Microsoft could have made the playing fields a bit more even between Firefox and Chrome, but chose a path which widens the gap even further, and gives Google an even better position for monopoly.

I get you don't like it, but that's still your opinion about how bad it was,  However as I keep saying it's still completely one less option for consumers and now you are trying to use projected market figures if MS adopted FF to support it being better. Don't accuse me of strawman arguments when you are doing exactly that.

 


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr moose said:

I get you don't like it, but that's still your opinion about how bad it was,  However as I keep saying it's still completely one less option for consumers and now you are trying to use projected market figures if MS adopted FF to support it being better. Don't accuse me of strawman arguments when you are doing exactly that.

How many times do I have to tell you that I am NOT arguing for the quality of Edge? I am not.

I repeat, I am NOT talking about the quality of Edge or other browsers. This is not about me liking Edge or not, so please stop with the strawman arguments.

I am NOT talking about opinions. I even showed you the math for this.

 

Again, NO! I am not saying FF is better than Edge or whatever you are trying to strawman there. I do not believe market share is any indication of quality, because it isn't.

 

Can you please stop arguing against me as if I was discussing the quality of these browsers, please? And stop accusing me of strawman arguments when I am not making any.

A strawman argument is to misrepresent another person's argument, like you're doing right now, saying I am talking about the quality of the browsers, rather than the market share and monopolistic outlook on the browser market.

 

If I wanted to talk about how bad Edge was then I wouldn't be going on and on about market share, because market share is irreverent to how good something is. I would say things like how the UI was terrible (missing a lot of functions, even basic ones like detailed certificate viewing, the ability to sort organize bookmarks in any way other than alphabetically, etc). I would not be going "durr, Edge is bad because it has a small market share" because that is an idiotic and shitty argument.

 

What I said was that Edge was a waste of time. I did not mean that as "Edge was bad". I meant that as "Microsoft spent a lot of time and resources on Edge, just to scrap it all. All those resources could and should have been allocated to improving Firefox instead from the beginning. The world of browsers would have been in a better place now if that had been done". That is not an opinion. That is a fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Princess Cadence said:

Hopefully this increases Firefox market share.

Firefox Quantum, or just known now as Firefox is very underrated. It's on par with Chrome if not better in some aspects. I just like certain aspects like video full screen transitions. Firefox uses a nice fade in to full screen whereas Chrome still uses this dumb, block, jagged full screen transition, little things like this is why I prefer Firefox. I use EverSync to sync bookmarks between browsers in case I feel like a change.

9 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Sites like Youtube and Google doesn't play nicely with Firefox? First time I've heard of this. I certainly haven't had any issues, and Firefox has been my primary browser for years.

The only time I've had issues was with the web version of Google Earth, but that's because Firefox doesn't support Native Client. Google is however working on a WebAssembly version which will work on all browsers. Google will remove support for Native Client in favor of WebAssembly in Chrome too (currently scheduled for the second half of 2019) so soon Google Earth will have to switch to WebAssembly if it wants to function in any browser.

 

(In before that horribly inaccurate tweet about how "Youtube is deliberately ruining Firefox performance" which the author later said he was wrong about his conclusions, but nobody posts that part).

9 hours ago, Princess Cadence said:

Seconded, I use Firefox for over 10 years already and I can not remember it messing up with YouTube or Google at all, and I use a shit load of extensions and what not all keeps working perfectly fine.

 

Honestly feels more of a salty Chrome user statement just trying to downplay the alternative browser.

I can agree with these comments. If Google purposefully injected bloated code into YouTube, Gmail, Calendar etc. for Firefox specifically, slowing it down, it could force to me to change. Aside from that I see no reason to go back to Chrome at this stage. Again, it's just as responsive if not more responsive than Chrome.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

How many times do I have to tell you that I am NOT arguing for the quality of Edge? I am not.

right here you did:

On 1/24/2019 at 8:18 AM, LAwLz said:

The problem was that Edge was not good. They were constantly playing catch up, and for what purpose? 

We already have a good alternative, which is firefox. 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I repeat, I am NOT talking about the quality of Edge or other browsers. This is not about me liking Edge or not, so please stop with the strawman arguments.

I am NOT talking about opinions. I even showed you the math for this.

 

Again, NO! I am not saying FF is better than Edge or whatever you are trying to strawman there. I do not believe market share is any indication of quality, because it isn't.

 

Can you please stop arguing against me as if I was discussing the quality of these browsers, please? And stop accusing me of strawman arguments when I am not making any.

See above quote, you not only try to argue edge was bad but that FF is a good alternative, This not only stands in contradiction to what you are trying to claim now but it does not address what I said. I have not made any claims as to the quality of edge or FF or chrome, they are your arguments.  All I said was we no longer have edge as an option, and you are accusing me of srawman arguments while rebutting things I have not said or argued. You are absolutely making strawman arguments. And then you have the hypocrisy to accuse me of it. 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

A strawman argument is to misrepresent another person's argument, like you're doing right now, saying I am talking about the quality of the browsers, rather than the market share and monopolistic outlook on the browser market.

 

If I wanted to talk about how bad Edge was then I wouldn't be going on and on about market share, because market share is irreverent to how good something is. I would say things like how the UI was terrible (missing a lot of functions, even basic ones like detailed certificate viewing, the ability to sort organize bookmarks in any way other than alphabetically, etc). I would not be going "durr, Edge is bad because it has a small market share" because that is an idiotic and shitty argument.

 

What I said was that Edge was a waste of time. I did not mean that as "Edge was bad". I meant that as "Microsoft spent a lot of time and resources on Edge, just to scrap it all. All those resources could and should have been allocated to improving Firefox instead from the beginning. The world of browsers would have been in a better place now if that had been done". That is not an opinion. That is a fact.

What you are trying to do is argue away my comments by talking about unrelated stuff.  I know what a strawman is, Again it is all the stuff you are arguing, I have not made any comments about quality, or market share or claims about resources and so on. I have not even an raised an iota regarding it's value.  The only thing I said and will continue to say is that it is one less option for consumers. It's your opinion it is bad, a waste of resources, but that does not change what I have been saying.

 

 

 

And you keep trying to perplex the argument by claiming it is pointless, always playing catch-up, does not work properly and a waste of time and money yet claim you claim you are not commenting on how bad it is.    Saying something is pointless, always behind and a waste of resources is absolutely calling it bad.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mr moose said:

right here you did:

I ave made several arguments throughout this thread, and you are only focusing one one thing I said once. I even pointed that out here:

20 hours ago, LAwLz said:

You're mixing several of my arguments and reasoning into one mess. 

I made a comment about how bad Edge was, but that comment was not linked to my reasoning for why I think it was bad for Microsoft to scrap Edge and go with Chromium.

I have made 6 (now 7) replies to you, and only one of them did I mention that Edge was bad in it. In all other posts I have made several different arguments for other things, such as why having more options isn't necessarily better (regardless of how good the competing browsers are).

 

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

you not only try to argue edge was bad but that FF is a good alternative

That was one comment I made, and you are still ignoring all other arguments I have made. I have also explained why spending resources developing Firefox would have been better served than spending them on Edge.

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

I have not made any claims as to the quality of edge or FF or chrome, they are your arguments.

That is not really my argument either. That's like, one out of maybe 5 points/arguments I've made.

 

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

All I said was we no longer have edge as an option, and you are accusing me of srawman arguments while rebutting things I have not said or argued.

I explained why not having Edge is a good thing.

 

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

What you are trying to do is argue away my comments by talking about unrelated stuff.  I know what a strawman is, Again it is all the stuff you are arguing, I have not made any comments about quality, or market share or claims about resources and so on. I have not even an raised an iota regarding it's value.  The only thing I said and will continue to say is that it is one less option for consumers. It's your opinion it is bad, a waste of resources, but that does not change what I have been saying. 

You said that having one less option is bad, and the reason why that is untrue is because of things like market share distribution, and then you said that was only an opinion of mine.

You never brought up market share but I did because it is an argument for why you are wrong about having one less option is bad. It's not bad. Having one fewer browser on the market can be good in many aspects, which is what I have been arguing.

 

The conversation essentially went like this:

You: Not having Edge is bad because we have one fewer option.

Me: Not having Edge can actually be good. The resources can be allocated elsewhere, less time needed for web developers to test. The userbase could have been used to boost the strongest competitor to Chrome (which is Firefox) although Microsoft chose not to do that. Edge wasn't even good to begin with so nothing of value was lost really.

You: I never made a comment about market share! Stop strawmanning me! You just don't like Edge because you think it was bad!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all,

 

Honestly, was thing really a shock to anyone? Google's life blood is selling ads so this is a good business move for them. However, this may also cause people to switch to Firefox or even other web browsers. In the end, who cares? Google is just a spyware company so just switch browsers, save your RAM and copy over your bookmarks. Or wait and see how this plays out.

 

Thank you.

 

Sincerely.

 

JATG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Buy VPN

×