Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

[Diggale]

I use Firefox because of Linux and open standards. It works great for me, regardless of what some dude posted on his blog. Tin-foil hat much?

[LAwLz]

Lol at that ambiguous "freedom" part.

It's not really ambiguous.

Chrome (not to be confused with Chromium) is closed source, tracks you and is in general pretty restrictive. On top of that Google is doing some very anti-competitive things to favor Chrome over other browsers.

[Builder]

I'm sure the majority of members on this forum don't work for AMD, Intel or Nvidia, but that doesn't stop them from being fanboys in terms of promoting a product without compensation. Fanboy bias exists for browsers as well. The fact there is decent support for Chrome in spite of its glaring flaws is obvious. I use Chrome and am not afraid to speak out on what's wrong with it.

I don't care whether or not he's biased, what he's saying is verifiably true. You can read more about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8185461

 

Lol at that ambiguous "freedom" part. Lol even more about the ecosystem part when you're an Apple fan. And I don't care if there are Chrome/Google fanboys in this tread too, because that has no effect on my point whatsoever.

 

"Better" is subjective. The fact that you're pushing other people so hard to come over to your opinion when it doesn't affect you either way makes you even more suspect. If you didn't have something driving with this, you would have stopped by now.

Apple does not want total control of the internet the way Google does. They want you to use their products, but they aren't going to penalize people who don't by not allowing them to use their services. Case in point, you can install iTunes on Windows or Linux and use it to purchase music, without buying any products whatsoever. Apple products play nice with others, even though they may place nicer with each other.

 

We are however coming to a real problem with Google because they have almost control over discoverability online. On top of that, they're trying to gain almost total control over access. If Google wants to squash you, they can blacklist you on their search engine and you'll be gone fast. Google is refusing to use web standards in their quest for total domination of media consumption on the internet, and they are trying as hard as they can to dominate. They control who gets ad space and who doesn't, who is discoverable and who isn't, among a whole host of other atrocities.

 

They already have almost a monopoly on search, which means the potential for censorship is vast. They've already started with vivint and RapGenius, and trust me, those are not the last names we'll be seeing in headlines that read "Google blocks _________."

[IdeaStormer]

Google has already lost the Google+ battle, we can again use random usernames as opposed to real names, they tried to keep it their way but when they loss people they learned its our way or we'll go away from them. They may be talking about this but deep down you know if we bail on them they'll lose again.

 

I still feel Google is in bed with the NSA, they with major delay listed their anger at what NSA did to get behind their servers to see all the data and how they encrypt it now, do you have proof? Nope, I think its business as usual with Google writing BS blurbs as to how they're protecting you but you know well enough they can't do jack to keep the NSA out anyway, or they'll get a nice note from DOJ stating they will let them in or shut their doors down.

[Techhog]

It's not really ambiguous.

Chrome (not to be confused with Chromium) is closed source, tracks you and is in general pretty restrictive. On top of that Google is doing some very anti-competitive things to favor Chrome over other browsers.

I meant that the word "freedom" is ambiguous. It could mean so many things in this context that it really doesn't say anything.

 

I don't care whether or not he's biased, what he's saying is verifiably true. You can read more about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8185461

 

Apple does not want total control of the internet the way Google does. They want you to use their products, but they aren't going to penalize people who don't by not allowing them to use their services. Case in point, you can install iTunes on Windows or Linux and use it to purchase music, without buying any products whatsoever. Apple products play nice with others, even though they may place nicer with each other.

 

We are however coming to a real problem with Google because they have almost control over discoverability online. On top of that, they're trying to gain almost total control over access. If Google wants to squash you, they can blacklist you on their search engine and you'll be gone fast. Google is refusing to use web standards in their quest for total domination of media consumption on the internet, and they are trying as hard as they can to dominate. They control who gets ad space and who doesn't, who is discoverable and who isn't, among a whole host of other atrocities.

 

They already have almost a monopoly on search, which means the potential for censorship is vast. They've already started with vivint and RapGenius, and trust me, those are not the last names we'll be seeing in headlines that read "Google blocks _________."

None of this is enough to convince that I should go through the hassle of doing things like switching to Firefox (which doesn't handle integration on multiple computers as well as Chrome does, which I need), getting rid of my Gmail account (which would requires weeks of work), switching to another search engine that doesn't work as well, buying a different phone with an OS I don't like as much (and, btw, I actually don't use Chrome on Android, and iOS is fucking dumb if you don't start using iTunes and convincing everyone you know to switch with you), etc. I'm sorry, but when all of my choices are evil corporations, I don't see where to go. (Yes, I know that Firefox is opensource, but just switching one thing is pointless.) Trust me, I hate a lot of things about Google too. The thing is that I also hate a lot of things about Microsoft and Apple. They've all been guilty of anti-competitive BS. Apple does it in the most subtle ways, which is why you're blind to it. The only way to fight it is through the government. I'm not going to inconvenience myself because a blog that nobody's ever heard of was posted by some random guy on some internet forum. Even if everyone on this forum switched, it wouldn't make a dent. If you want to avoid all of this stuff surefire, go Amish. It's your only choice.

 

P.S., what's default search engine in Firefox again?

[mr moose]

. Apple does it in the most subtle ways, which is why you're blind to it.

 

I would hardly call what is mostly unfounded lawsuits subtle, but I do get your point.  People will ignore facts if it means they have to question the integrity of the company who's products they enjoy.

[HerEscutcheon]

I read that article as:

 

"The future is scary. Google is scary. Chrome is from Google so it's also scary. Trust me on this, I know things. I can't tell you what things I know, but trust me, they're scary."

[SubTract]

Your quote is broken and what you said doesn't make sense. Please explain. What was I incorrect about?

 

Dude I said that iPhone gave us the candybar form factor. (The basic design of every "smartphone" now)

I also said that apple is doing it without the fragmentation (even if it has nothing to do with features)

the whole eco system with one account has nothing to do with the fact that you have an account even so gmail has been around for yonks.

It has more to do with the fact that google had all the services that they could integrate under one account. Apple didn't have the services.

When android launched it had Account syncable contacts, Account syncable calander, Account tied location services (Maps), Account syncable search (Google), even google talk (as horrid as it was), then on top you have gmail, and youtube.

It's a unified ecosystem with one account. Apple simply didn't have the services at this stage to offer this. They relied on people tying their device to other accounts depending on what you had.

 

I also want to know if you ever used the original iphone, or the app store when it came out. (Holy balls.... sooooo bad. It's like trying to use windows XP today (shivers))

symbian had websites that managed apps for their terribly fragmented OS's that worked so much better than the original app store.

Today iOS is a pleasant experience (Even if I would like to do more with my device than it would allow, It just means that its not for me)

There is a reason say iOS is designed for idiots. It's not because everybody who has an iPhone is an idiot (Even though I like to imagine it like this)

It's because an idiot shouldn't be able to screw it up and should be able to use it.

 

I said "as we know it" meaning something came out but overall it functions one way today that was different when it launched. I class the basic idea of how it works today as first.

This is down to some level off interpretation, but obviously you're going to disagree with almost everybody here, and if you're willing to ignore all the good points people have made it is your problem and not everybody else's.

 

It's been rather amusing but I'm going to be late to work so I have to go. I look forward to when I get home ;-)

[Builder]

I would hardly call what is mostly unfounded lawsuits subtle, but I do get your point.  People will ignore facts if it means they have to question the integrity of the company who's products they enjoy.

Clearly they were "mostly unfounded" when they actually won...

 

I do question Apple's integrity. Frequently. They still haven't fixed the App Store ratings issue and I'm almost sure they're in bed with the NSA too, or if they aren't they've probably been hacked by now. Notice Tim Cook said he was backing off of the litigious usage of patents, and they even dropped their case in every country except the US. They're basically acknowledging that they've either made a mistake or can't win at this point and I think you have to give them credit for that.

 

Personally, I think the dealings of large corporations are unimportant to us lowly individuals. Not enough people have internet, but Google is willing to change that. How? They're going to provide it with balloons. Great. And to all those people who have Google Fibre or want Google Fibre, fantastic. Another middleman in between you and the information you deserve. Another opportunity for censorship from a company that's shown they aren't above it. The "next billion people" to get smartphones are going to basically be owned by Google. That's what I don't like. Google is forcing them to give up their freedom of choice by offering their services to them for free. Well, guess what. If you aren't paying for anything you're the product when it comes to for-profit companies.

 

In the case of Mozilla, their product is open source and they are a non-profit. While they may be funded by Google, they are wholly committed to making a rock solid baseline web browser that's 100% compliant with standards. That's what's great about Firefox. Design and functionality decisions are all made with the idea of creating a standards-driven web browser in mind. And it's 100% open source too, with a brilliant license that marries the copylefting concepts of the GNU license with the total freedom provided by the BSD license.

 

I read that article as:

 

"The future is scary. Google is scary. Chrome is from Google so it's also scary. Trust me on this, I know things. I can't tell you what things I know, but trust me, they're scary."

Then you evidently can't read very well. 

 

Read the top comment here:

 

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8185461

[Builder]

-snip-

There are advantages to Android. It comes down to whether you want to spend more time tinkering or more time doing in my opinion.

 

I like a lot of Android phones. HTC could be crushing Samsung, they make clearly superior devices but Samsung's marketing budget dwarfs everyone else's. The G3 is nice too, certainly a departure from the norm. 

 

I had an original iPhone, and every -S variant since then. I loved the App Store, (still do) and I have been using it since it first launched. It was always part of their plan, if you watch the original keynote you can here about it. What defines a modern smartphone for me is a predominantly touchscreen interface that allows access to an internet browser, mail client, and the installation of 3rd party apps. Android was originally going to look like a BlackBerry, as I said, they changed the design when the iPhone rolled out. Honestly nothing about how smartphones function has changed in a fundamental way since 2007, which is why I say the iPhone defined the category as it stands.

 

Honestly the account syncing is minor to me. iPhone has had backups since day one and I always just restored from my last backup. iCloud is nice, and it's becoming the lynchpin of Apple 4.0 right now, but before it things were fine too. On top of that, most of the things you describe were available at the time of iPhone launch through me.com. 

 

It's not so much "designed for idiots" as it is "designed for everyone." There's nothing fundamentally different about how Android and iOS function at this point, but Apple's design philosophy has always been designing things for the widest group of users, if you were new, you could figure things out naturally just by using it, and if you were experienced, you had access to powerful tools that unlocked whole new dimensions of functionality within the operating system. (see: AppleScript and Terminal)

 

I can tell you feel superior to me, and if it makes you happy, then good for you. I guess I can just wallow down here in my pits of tasteful design and usability. It's an awful place to be, really.

[seabass9990]

I unlike alot of haters here have and always will use mozilla Firefox

[mr moose]

Clearly they were "mostly unfounded" when they actually won...

 

I do question Apple's integrity. Frequently. They still haven't fixed the App Store ratings issue and I'm almost sure they're in bed with the NSA too, or if they aren't they've probably been hacked by now. Notice Tim Cook said he was backing off of the litigious usage of patents, and they even dropped their case in every country except the US. They're basically acknowledging that they've either made a mistake or can't win at this point and I think you have to give them credit for that.

 

Personally, I think the dealings of large corporations are unimportant to us lowly individuals. Not enough people have internet, but Google is willing to change that. How? They're going to provide it with balloons. Great. And to all those people who have Google Fibre or want Google Fibre, fantastic. Another middleman in between you and the information you deserve. Another opportunity for censorship from a company that's shown they aren't above it. The "next billion people" to get smartphones are going to basically be owned by Google. That's what I don't like. Google is forcing them to give up their freedom of choice by offering their services to them for free. Well, guess what. If you aren't paying for anything you're the product when it comes to for-profit companies.

 

In the case of Mozilla, their product is open source and they are a non-profit. While they may be funded by Google, they are wholly committed to making a rock solid baseline web browser that's 100% compliant with standards. That's what's great about Firefox. Design and functionality decisions are all made with the idea of creating a standards-driven web browser in mind. And it's 100% open source too, with a brilliant license that marries the copylefting concepts of the GNU license with the total freedom provided by the BSD license.

 

Then you evidently can't read very well. 

 

Read the top comment here:

 

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8185461

 

Apple have lost nearly all cases outside the US and won nearly all inside. I believe that is why they are dropping cases outside the us and why I said most are unfounded.    I definitely agree that all the litigation is starting to take its toll on their brand image.

[Builder]

Apple have lost nearly all cases outside the US and won nearly all inside. I believe that is why they are dropping cases outside the us and why I said most are unfounded. I definitely agree that all the litigation is starting to take its toll on their brand image.

They're dropping them because they aren't winning. Samsung won in Korea, Apple won in the US. It's what you'd expect, isn't it?

 

I wasn't necessarily referring to brand image but I think overall it was a bad idea from the start. There's no way they could have won the cases they made, but at least they tried. I still don't necessarily think it's right but we both know you won't convince me and I won't convince you so I think it's prudent to stop the litigation talk here.

[eLucid]

Firefox runs perfectly fine for me. I tried chrome and honestly, I didn't enjoy the experience.

 

I guess I'm a hipster for not being "mainstream"

[Builder]

Firefox runs perfectly fine for me. I tried chrome and honestly, I didn't enjoy the experience.

 

I guess I'm a hipster for not being "mainstream"

No, you're smart for not using Chrome. Unfortunately it has a 20% market share and you'd only be a hipster if you used Firefox before it was cool.

[eLucid]

No, you're smart for not using Chrome. Unfortunately it has a 20% market share and you'd only be a hipster if you used Firefox before it was cool.

So true

[Builder]

So true

If you truly want to be a hipster, use Lynx.

[cubercaleb]

I don't care whether or not he's biased, what he's saying is verifiably true. You can read more about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8185461

 

Apple does not want total control of the internet the way Google does. They want you to use their products, but they aren't going to penalize people who don't by not allowing them to use their services. Case in point, you can install iTunes on Windows or Linux and use it to purchase music, without buying any products whatsoever. Apple products play nice with others, even though they may place nicer with each other.

 

We are however coming to a real problem with Google because they have almost control over discoverability online. On top of that, they're trying to gain almost total control over access. If Google wants to squash you, they can blacklist you on their search engine and you'll be gone fast. Google is refusing to use web standards in their quest for total domination of media consumption on the internet, and they are trying as hard as they can to dominate. They control who gets ad space and who doesn't, who is discoverable and who isn't, among a whole host of other atrocities.

 

They already have almost a monopoly on search, which means the potential for censorship is vast. They've already started with vivint and RapGenius, and trust me, those are not the last names we'll be seeing in headlines that read "Google blocks _________."

 

Actually Apple does penalize you from not wanting to use their services. Unless you install iTunes I can not sync data on your computer to a iOS device. Google is the opposite of a closed ecosystem. All their products while work great together are not dependent on one another and can be used freely and openly.

[Builder]

Actually Apple does penalize you from not wanting to use their services. Unless you install iTunes I can not sync data on your computer to a iOS device. Google is the opposite of a closed ecosystem. All their products while work great together are not dependent on one another and can be used freely and openly.

Obviously, if you want your iTunes music, you have to sync it with iTunes. If you want your Google Music music, you have to sync it with Google Music. That was a piss poor analogy, you must be really grasping at straws. You don't even need a computer to sync iTunes. It's called iTunes Match or iCloud if you don't have any ripped CDs.

 

How are they the opposite of a closed system? They are in the process of locking down Android, lord knows Chrome is a disaster (that's why we're here) and they're starting to make it so you need Chrome to use certain features of their otherwise platform independent web apps.

[Psykomantis00]

This is one of the dumbest thread titles I've come across in my short time of being here. 

[Guest MrE]

I didn't want to scan through all the pages of comments, but just in case.. you do know Robert O'Callahan who wrote the blog post works for Mozilla yea?

Figures

[ZeroBreaker]

Trying Chrome after using Firefox for a while, I did notice some slight improvements to overall performance. And Chrome also offers enough customization for my needs

 

Mate, i did, up until a coupla months ago i was using chrome, then I switched back to FF and realised holy shit, chrome uses the same ram, is the same speed and doesnt have as many extensions. Thats my personal experience, things differ machine by machine, but in all honesty this article is simply asking you to reevaluate and try it, because it could probably work better for you and for everyone in the future.

 

 

Ill be honest, the only reason i ever tried chrome in the first place was the hatsune miku ad. Chrome wouldn't be where it is today without google's domination of ads on the internet and also it's cash thrown towards tv ads.

[ZeroBreaker]

-

[toughtrasher]

Chrome's integration with many things Google is what's keeping me to stay. Plus I can sync stuff to my phone.

[LAwLz]

They're dropping them because they aren't winning. Samsung won in Korea, Apple won in the US. It's what you'd expect, isn't it?

I am pretty sure you are getting Korea and Japan mixed up. Samsung won against Apple in Japan which is actually not what you'd expect since they hate Korea. Samsung also won in Germany (in the end) and in the UK. The case in UK even went as far as to make Apple publicly apologize on their website (which they did such a poor job of they had to remake it). If a US based company only win their lawsuits in the US but loses everywhere else then I do find it a little suspicious.

I am ashamed that you used this thread to bash Google while defending Apple. You're picking the greater of two evils. Even though I agree that Google has started to put restrictions on Android, making more apps closed source and so on, it's still far more open than iOS has ever been.