Hacker News Reader

Comment by farisjarrah | Hacker News Reader

I disagree that Google is building a better browser then anyone else can build. Extension support on Firefox is better then Chrome for my use case and Firefox containers are orders of magnitude better then Chrome profiles, in my humble opinion. With Chrome if i want to open up 4 different AWS profiles/accounts I need 4 separate Chrome profiles with 4 different browser windows. With Firefox I can have 4 containers/aws profiles all in the same browser window. Furthermore, Firefox for android supports ublock origin which makes browsing the web orders of magnitude better. I may have an edge case for how I use a browser and I realize that, however, that just goes to show that we shouldnt have a browser monoculture. Different people use technology in different ways.

View on HN

I still use and mostly like FF too, but just look at their marketshare (and their own developer confidence, with Servo and Brave). Chrome destroyed them and I think it was mostly on technical merit, from a general user's perspective.

Honestly Google did everything they could to help FF (to the tune of $400M/year) and Mozilla squandered it. Really sad.

Edit: Before this comment gets downvoted I want to try to explain it. When Brendan Eich wanted to make a new browser, he could've based it on Firefox/Gecko, which he had decades of experience with, but he didn't. What a vote of no confidence. Then Rust was invented because they thought creating a new language was the best way to catch up to Chrome's security. Even if you like Rust, you have to admit that was a bad decision for Mozilla's management.

Mozilla was the good guys, but being the good guys doesn't automatically mean you'll win. Too much wishful thinking can easily cloud one's judgment.

I'm only writing this because I care.

They paid everyone under the sun to bundle chrome with their installers, they are pushing chrome through every one of their properties, and last but not least they deliberately introduce incompatibilities.

I would like to see some proof for the last statement.

> Chrome destroyed them and I think it was mostly on technical merit

That most certainly had nothing to do with the large advertisement on the Google-owned most visited web page in the world and the way Google artificially limited their products on competing browser.

Please, look away regulators. Nothing to see here.

Edit: I have even forgotten to mention his they forced manufacturers to preinstall Chrome on every Android phones, an action for which they were fined 4.4 billions by the EU. Clearly the idea that Chrome won on technical merits need to die. Chrome market share was made through aggressive marketing and leveraging position in adjacent markets where Google is dominant.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com