• spacecadet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      170
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I use Firefox because I want you use a web browser whose main focus is browsing the web.

      • cley_faye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        Great, because it comes bundled with an extension to show you news article you may be interested in, occasional ads for their other paid services and will regularly nudge you into donating money so that it can be used for many purpose beside improving the browser.

        • spacecadet@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is interesting, maybe I changed a settingn years ago but when I start fire fix it just takes me to an empty window until I type something in. Doesn’t try to sell me anything

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is my biggest gripe about Firefox. It keeps trying to recommend “Search with Amazon” instead of google search and a bunch of small little ads baked into the home landing page.

      • JulyTheMonth@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        128
        ·
        1 year ago

        I really really want to believe in firefox but the corporations behind it are way too fishy.

        The whole setup of mozilla foundation and mozilla coporation stinks. Mozilla asking for donations when the donation amount is barely 1 percent of their income.

        • my_hat_stinks@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          75
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s an odd complaint. If they didn’t ask for donations, donations would be a lower % of their income. How many donations do you need before you can ask for donations?

          • cley_faye@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not a matter of how many donation do you need, it’s a matter of why are you asking for donations in the first place. When half the donations barely cover the salary of the head honcho through shifting restricted cash between organizations, you have to have some confidence to prominently display “We exist to advance the interests of people who use the internet — not profit for shareholders.” on your summary.

            • BURN@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              So dont donate?

              Mozilla used to be much smaller and did rely on some form of donations to continue development. That may not be the case today, but the option is still there for those who’d like to

          • JulyTheMonth@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            42
            ·
            1 year ago

            If a corporations earns halve a billion. Does it really need donations?

            The whole concept of a parent company owning the foundation is fishy. Its just as strange that firefox seems to be like by privacy people when the owners are as instranparent as mozilla.

            • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              33
              ·
              1 year ago

              Firefox is open source. Check it out for yourself or find a fork that works better for you.

            • kirklennon@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              The whole concept of a parent company owning the foundation is fishy.

              The non-profit foundation is the parent company. It has some taxable subsidiaries that, among other things, handle certain revenue-generating business deals.

              • JulyTheMonth@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                You say that like it is any better.

                A non-profit that owns a for-profit company is very well not realy non-profit. Just because all their profit is made by one of their subsidaries? And yet mozilla stand itself on some kind of moral highground.

                • kirklennon@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  A non-profit that owns a for-profit company is very well not realy non-profit.

                  All of the profit of the subsidiary goes to the nonprofit parent, in furtherance of its nonprofit mission. The subsidiary doesn’t exist to make anybody rich but just to earn (taxable) income for the parent.

        • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          55
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I really really want to believe in firefox but the corporations behind it are way too fishy.

          You’re right. Let’s continue using browsers made by Google or Microsoft instead. No fishiness there at all!

    • tiita@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I came to say just this…

      Why is the person downloading chrome in the first place. Firefox with ghostery and ublock origin is the way forward

    • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Sadly Firefox on iPhone doesn’t translate [human languages]. I don’t want to use Chrome on iPhone and Firefox on PC because synchronising bookmarks and history is too important to give up.

        • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Blame Apple for that bullshit.

          This one isn’t on Apple. There’s nothing stopping Firefox from having translate on iPhone. It’s on Chrome and Edge.

            • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s available as an add-on for Firefox on PC. Language translation is built into the application for Chrome and Edge on iPhone.

              • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, that’s what I’m trying to say. The browsers have different methods for providing same functionality. But due to restrictions on one platform, Firefox can’t provide the functionality that the users want.

                Also no-addons policy means no adblock either. Which is quite an L.

                • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  But due to restrictions on one platform, Firefox can’t provide the functionality that the users want.

                  With all due respect, I don’t think you understand. There is no restriction on language translation on iPhone. Firefox merely doesn’t support built-in language translation. It might have been easier for them if Apple permitted add-ons on iPhone, but it definitely does not prevent language translation. Chrome and Edge have built language translation into their apps for iPhone to facilitate this. Firefox could do the same, but have chosen not to.

                  • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Firefox doesn’t do that because modularity has been their thing for a long time while Google and MS would prefer if you’d start using their browsers as they are.

                    Apple’s restrictions aren’t targeted towards Firefox but inadvertently do exactly that.

      • Steeve@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t own an iPhone, but this seems like a totally fair criticism and I don’t see any replies refuting it, so what’s with all the downvotes? I swear to god this place is ridiculous sometimes, these people won’t be happy until you jump through every hoop imaginable to use the Lemmy approved software. Only positive feedback allowed!

        • sir_reginald@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          because this is inherently Apple’s fault and not Mozilla’s.

          Apple’s the one forcing every browser on iOS to be a reskinned version of Safari. And it’s perfectly understandable that Mozilla doesn’t want to waste time and resources developing features for a Firefox-branded Safari when they could be working on their own browser.

          • Steeve@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            What’s your point? The dude gave a perfectly valid reason to not using Firefox, regardless of who’s fault it is.

            But also, how on earth would building a functional browser for a phone that owns 55% of the US market share be a waste of time and resources?

            • sir_reginald@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              it’s a perfectly valid reason for not using Firefox, my point is that they’re on the wrong platform. It’s the user’s own fault, because they chose a closed platform like iOS. Developing free software for iOS is a waste of time, since everything is under Apple’s tyrannical rule and they get to decide which web engine you use, they can disallow extensions and make it very hard (and against their ToS) to sideload apps.

              I don’t like Mozilla at all, and that’s why I use Firefox derivatives and not Firefox itself, but I’m glad they don’t waste time developing for a re-skinned Safari. Those resources are best used in their own web engine.

              • Steeve@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                these people won’t be happy until you jump through every hoop imaginable to use the Lemmy approved software

                and hardware apparently lol