criticalfault

webassembly is not an alternative to Js. if someone else said it, fine, but I didn't.

the reason why I didnt is because I despise JavaScript and was hoping that webassembly would give an alternative. which never became an alternative.

with embedded you are arguing for my point. you say sometimes there are alternatives (maybe depending on the platform). sometimes not. you can change platforms as well. that's fine. sometimes is very much different from none. and we have none for the web.

if you say apple allows only one language, it may be true. you don't have alternatives. but you can change platforms.

there is no alternative to the web and within the web there are no alternative languages.

for embedded, you have options, no? and I don't mean glue: rust. quick Google says Ada and assembly.

> I would rather the web was based on a statically typed language that had better error handling practices like Go.

So, dart?

Back in the day Google had plans to make a dart VM in Chrome, but powers that be didn't like this idea.

So here we are. it's 2026 and the web is still limited to one language. Dare I say the only area where we don't have alternatives.

well written

would really be happy to have had these explanations before I had to figure it out for myself.

then you have these guys who reached the next level

https://www.dns.toys/

opera had a different business model. I don't think they had millions upon miliona that Mozilla gets from Google for antitrust reasons.

opera had to earn their money.

this aside, Mozilla just now implemented tab grouping. does that mean they are going to, because of the added features, follow opera's path?

my point was that someone said how they increased development speed. and I'm saying they are breaking record in how slow it is. it's not 1y, it's since the feature appeared anywhere and it's 20y ago. what the f was Mozilla doing since then? obviously they didn't work on the features. but also they didn't work on the other list of things I mentioned since only one is fully delivered (look and feel on all platforms) and those are non-features like fore mentioned tab groupings, but core capabilities for a browser.

in everything else they are so much behind it's really a wonder they still have market share as much as they do.

all this should have been developed in 2000s

different point of view: tab grouping took 20+y to develop (since opera had it in 2000s).

in 2026 firefox should have: - fast ui - fast js - fast rendering - hw acceleration for video - same look and feel on all platforms - faster adblocker

just the basics, no? didn't add more advanced features here.

and let's see what is actually here: - UI rendered via HTML/xul. an abomination. a slow abomination at that. right clicking something can show you stagers of rendering of a menu. - check any Js benchmarks, you will see how FF stands - rendering,... there was a talk in one of the conferences explaining timing requests and time-to-picture. this may be blamed on the standards, but chrome does it better - video hw acceleration on Linux? is this actually working? and I don't mean 3/100 relevant codecs - same look and feel - done - AdBlock is the only advantage you have over other platforms. it would make sense to implement this in the browser and not rely on Js and extensions

it's sad and funny that people with only a couple million are going to soon catch up to Mozilla and make it obsolete, by building a Bowser engine, not only a shell around blink/WebKit.

> Standards bureaucracies like the Linux Foundation (which consumed the Free Standards Group in its' ever-growing accretion disk years ago) happily document and add to this sort of complexity without ever trying to understand why it was there in the first place.

this is the reason in my opinion and experience

as a lead dev in a rather complicated environment I tended to solve the problem many times where some identifier was used. short deadlines and no specification made us solve the problem quickly, so some shortcuts and quick actions were done. this identifier gets asked about later and super overcomplicated explanations given as a reason by people that don't know the history.

...and the history is often like 'they mounted stuff to /usr because they got a third drive'. and now, people even in this thread keep giving explanations like it's something more.

just tried to reverse the string you provided using Gemini. it worked fine on the first try

if you ever come into a position that you could try or would like to try gnome, I would encourage you to do it. maybe you could eliminate that bad opinion of Wayland (or confirm it)...

yes gnome has a vision of how the desktop should look like and strong behavior of "my way or the highway", but maybe you get surprised how well it works. especially on fedora.

I assumed wrongly other people (you mostly) use gnome by default, which obviously is not the case. in that case I could see it as a problem since not everyone has red hat resources for desktop development.

isn't HN more like professional news/discussion place?

is it considered social media?

fair enough.

if this is so, I can admit I'm wrong. so not everything works for everyone.

For myself and members of my family, I can say that absolutely everything works on gnome. And I have several machines, spread over several cpu and gpu generations, and different form factors that confirm this. not only those 3 laptops I mentioned.

Could it be that since you are not using gnome that you are hitting those problems? My experience is exclusively gnome, so maybe this is it?

a11y aside of course... given that this was not really finished. or seriously worked on.

what laptop? what hardware?

here is my state of laptops:

* Dell latitude with old Intel 8gen CPU, it works fine (Linux kernel causes problems with PSR, but this has nothing to do with Wayland and disabling it fixes the problem, same thing with cstates)

* Dell latitude with 10gen CPU, works fine.

* Huawei d15 with Ryzen 3000 Apu, works fine.

ok. for accessibility it's fair enough as a critique. I don't use it so can't say. As far as I can tell this hasn't been in focus at all. but most of this is on the toolkit side, not Wayland (even though here one thing is mentioned as Wayland specific, just briefly went through the post)

https://blogs.gnome.org/a11y/2024/06/18/update-on-newton-the...

Most users have no idea what is behind. They don't want X or anything X related, they want things to work. Most of the things worked before 2020, including legacy things through xwayland. Now all things work, except maybe remote apps through ssh ootb, but for this you can either use RDP or Waypipe.

The only thing maybe worth discussing is video acceleration. this aside, I have been using gnome on Wayland for years and no problems what-so-ever. I really don't know what the fuss is about.

I would prefer that people start moving this legacy nonsense behind and finally start accepting new and better things and focusing on things that have future. Same thing happened with systemd, it improves massively everything Linux, yet some people just want their services started with scripts.

What problems do you have when things don't work for you on Wayland?

wondering who those people are given that Wayland was done by xorg devs

As far as I know, you need root permissions to add an interface. Even though the module is enabled, it's not used.

The official wireguard app also mentions wireguard-go

Or, just delete both and use dart.

What features? Voice control?

If it is about chat, do we actually need Firefox adapted when you can go to gemini.google.com or some other one and write what you want there? Optionality is ensured since you actively have to go there.

Microsoft ♥ Linux?

> Google pays Mozilla up to $420 million per year...

What the hell is Mozilla doing with that money? How useless are all those people?

Isn't this what made Linux successful?

Being able to sell it closed and not releasing the source would make closing the android ecosystem 'good old times', no?

We would only get a bunch of closed outdated company controlled binaries, but now for everything, not only drivers?

I wonder why all of these do not use gpl2?

If it was ordered by Microsoft and paid by Microsoft to be developed, fine.

But, wouldn't it make more sense for amd to go into risc-v at this point of time?

Would this help you?

https://reactos.org/

This is an open source reimplementation of winxp. I think they can even run drivers made for windows now.

I disagree completely. If libre office would be fine, it would be popular. And, as said, most of the people I know avoid it like a plague.

Also, im not trying to ridicule FOSS as a whole. if anything I'm a financial supporter for several projects and organizations. It's not a lot of money, but it's every month. So, no, it's not this.

The proposal would be to fund something like collabora, build on top of libre office or do something greenfield, but all this money that was supposed to go to Microsoft should be redirected.

Decision that governments did are not based on the fact that libre office is good. It's based on 1) political reasons called digital sovereignty and 2) price. Maybe 3) being pissed at trump. They didn't do it because LO was good.

Some american products have no good alternatives, yet. Some do, like windows can be replaced with gnome, but mobile phones cannot. Probably you are not typing or reading this from a European os on your phone, yet alternatives exist. Just not good ones.

Microsoft Office clone is not what I want, but what I would accept. Let's say UI should be very similar to Microsoft Office or even better Google office. That's it. Make it in a desktop suite and we are all good.

But do not ignore the UI part of the app.

Yes Microsoft Office was already dominant. Why didn't libre office affect this dominance being 'so good'? It's also free, so it should be interesting to companies, right? Wrong. I recently set up an SME who when saw it ran away and immediately bought a Microsoft license, which means they would rather pay and be spied on than use libre office.

Believe it or not, people like nice things. Microsoft Office looks nice. Libre office looks like a car accident. It's shallow, I know, but this is the response I get every time.

Everyone I know hates it. It is a small sample, true, but it says something. So I think, the fact Microsoft is so strong is to be blamed on the alternatives, or in this case only one alternative.

We need to look at this as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

Turn it around. If it would be good, people would jump on it. Especially small companies.

Google workspace is a web app, no? So it being better than desktop is comparing different things. I use it and I like it, especially since I don't need advanced Features Microsoft offers

We have no good alternative. We have an alternative.

All this money saved should be "unsaved" until a decent alternative is made. Everything that the government should spent here, should be invested into pan-european organization to develop a new office suite.

Libre office in my opinion is one of the reasons Microsoft is so dominant. Unfortunately, libre office, even though useful, is one of the worst desktop applications to use.

Everyone I proposed this to tried it and said that its horrible and they don't want to use it. And I agree with them: because libre office is so sh*t, u use Google docs.

Now that we can do a nice toolbar and components, somebody please make a document canvas control so we can make a decent office suite.

Cosmic is built on iced, so you could look what they achieved.

Why not?

Personal feelings aside, snap is working fine. It's maybe a bit slow on startup, but that's it.

Flatpak and snap please