News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by jeswin on Thursday June 01, 2017 @08:40AM (#14459730)
Even if thousands of developers from HN switch, that would hardly move the needle. Ordinary users just won't care about any of this.

Servo, which I think is the most important software project in the world, is where it will start to change. That's when those of us who may not be directly contributing code into Servo need to come out and do our thing. I still fondly remember the NYT ad and the crop circle. We should do it all over again.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by ablankst on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:25AM (#14460020)
> Even if thousands of developers from HN switch, that would hardly move the needle. Ordinary users just won't care about any of this.

Thousands of developers from HN make websites. If they switch to Firefox, at the very least, the websites they make will support Firefox. This won't necessarily make Mozilla commercially viable, but if people are really that concerned about it, they can donate to the Mozilla Foundation.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wcummings on Thursday June 01, 2017 @01:41PM (#14462543)
I am horrified by the number of developers who only test in Chrome. At my last gig I found glaring UI bugs (whole menus not responding to mouse clicks, for ex) in FF. Sad.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by irrational on Thursday June 01, 2017 @03:35PM (#14463709)
At my job I work in Firefox, a coworker works in Chrome, and a third person works in Safari (to be honest we don't bother checking the site in any Microsoft browser). That way we are able to do cross browser testing fairly easily.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by braveo on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:09AM (#14460310)
that's purely a business decision.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wpietri on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:30AM (#14460537)
Not really. Assertions like yours are a moral assertion that we should ignore the moral points at issue and instead favor some unspecified pseudo-business-y ones.

But even taken on business terms, you're sweeping a lot under the rug. As developers and entrepreneurs, we've benefited hugely from the web being an open, competitively specified platform. The more one large company can control the platform, the more it will get tilted toward that company and away from the rest of us.

That may not be bad for any given business next week; these things take time. But for anybody building a serious business, you're going to have to worry about the long-term, large-scale stuff. Google's been going 20+ years; Microsoft and Apple, 40+; IBM, 100+. They didn't get there by only thinking about the next quarter, and you won't either.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by 2bitencryption on Thursday June 01, 2017 @01:26PM (#14462415)
if using Chrome meant you needed to step on three kittens a day, I think I would agree with you.

but it's just browser preference, so the whole "moral" thing factors in less than whatever logo is printed on the pen I take from the junk drawer. I just want a pen that works.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wpietri on Thursday June 01, 2017 @04:40PM (#14464440)
One of those words that is often a tell is "just". That's where people sweep a lot of things under the rug. Including here, where you've hidden the fact that you made an unsupported assertion that assumes an answer to the question we're discussing.

I'll note that it's a different bad argument, one about consumer choice, than the one I was addressing, which was about business choices. But consumer choices too always have implications. That's why, e.g., boycotts are a thing: small decisions add up.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by braveo on Friday June 02, 2017 @09:10AM (#14469569)
I'm going to have to agree with 2bitencryption here.

Everything is a "moral choice" when the person demanding the choice feels strongly about it, but that typically means you just lack perspective.

At the end of the day we're talking about browsers and websites, and while people may not LIKE it, when a business writes software it's a business decision as to whether or not they'll target all browsers or a subset.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wpietri on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:02PM (#14472499)
By all means, keep on asserting things without demonstrating them and ignoring arguments and examples to the contrary. It doesn't actually convince, but I'm sure it makes you feel better.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by braveo on Friday June 02, 2017 @04:18PM (#14472983)
I can tell you're young.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wpietri on Friday June 02, 2017 @08:52PM (#14474305)
Oh, tell me more, anonymous coward! Your perception knows no bounds.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by 2bitencryption on Friday June 02, 2017 @10:24PM (#14474655)
i've finally done it, i've found a live r/iamverysmart!
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by hinkley on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:54PM (#14462021)
Firefox got big in large part because they had good developer tools long before anyone else did. I worked several places where management would say things like, "don't waste time, we only need this to work in IE". The developers would nod and go right back to creating in Mozilla and then fixing it in IE after, because it was faster.

In that way there was a quiet revolution toward cross browser support.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by realusername on Thursday June 01, 2017 @03:09PM (#14463442)
I can confirm this, everyone I knew at the time was coding on Firefox even if no-one required any compatibility with it just for that reason, it was just much easier to code with.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by hinkley on Thursday June 01, 2017 @03:31PM (#14463674)
When I shared my observations with coworkers, they would nod and say they had experienced the same thing. Same with peers I knew outside of work. Either we were in a very large bubble, or that was happening everywhere. And I think the rise of Mozilla aligns with those observations. It 'just worked' because everyone quietly made sure it did, even when people told them not to.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by braveo on Friday June 02, 2017 @09:11AM (#14469575)
And yet, the decision to target a specific browser is STILL a business decision.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by Vinnl on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:12AM (#14460341)
Our business decision is that Firefox needs to be supported as well. The fact that most of the developers use Chrome as their daily driver, however, results in a lot of bugs being seen and caught early (or at all) there.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by ionised on Thursday June 01, 2017 @11:53AM (#14461354)
Maybe your business decision should be a socially responsible one.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by blazespin on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:36AM (#14460585)
It is a business decision, and the right decision is not to allow for monoculture to develop.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wutbrodo on Thursday June 01, 2017 @02:01PM (#14462757)
This is just flat inaccurate. Given the GP comments' premise of optimizing only for the business's direct interests, the expected value of your contribution against monoculture is so negligible that it won't balance out changing damn near any habit that you had already chosen. It's a pretty basic collective action problem; if you're optimizing for yourself and your business alone, ignoring the wider picture is still the optimal decision.

The actual argument against (which others are making and which I'm sympathetic to) is that one shouldn't optimize only for direct bottom-line business interests, that businesses and people have a social responsibility, etc etc. But that's entirely different from what you're talking about.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by braveo on Friday June 02, 2017 @09:16AM (#14469602)
That's not at all what I said.

It's a business decision.

That's it. I didn't say we should optimize for direct bottom-line business interests. I said IT IS A BUSINESS DECISION.

It is not the decision of the developers unless the BUSINESS GIVES THEM THE ABILITY TO CHOOSE.

And even in THAT, it's a business decision.

That's all I said. The business that pays for the labor and chooses the direction they go in.

This idea that a business targetting a specific browser is some horrible social problem is silly. If I'm making a product that's meant to sit in a kiosk running Chrome OS, I'm sure as shit not going to pay for FF and Edge support. If I get it on accident, fine, but if something breaks in FF I'm not putting any effort in fixing it.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by SimonPStevens on Thursday June 01, 2017 @11:09AM (#14460880)
Thousands of developers who probably also support 10's of thousands of family member's PCs and can just quietly switch the defaults.

The price for me doing tech support for free on your laptop is the default browser gets switched to Firefox and Chrome gets uninstalled :-)

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by TremendousJudge on Thursday June 01, 2017 @11:44AM (#14461256)
And a week later Chrome is back to being the default, since Google pushes it like it was malware. They learned a lot from toolbar installers
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wutbrodo on Thursday June 01, 2017 @02:08PM (#14462831)
Eh, I'd rather not force my views onto people, against their interests, without their knowledge or consent. That strikes me as pretty dishonest.

I use both Firefox and Chrome pretty regularly, but I'm under no illusions that the quality of Firefox isn't quite a bit lower in multiple very concrete ways for my day-to-day usage (presumably because Mozilla has less resources than Google).

In the past, I have switched family members to a _better_ browser, but I'm talking about IE6 to Firefox, the usability gap between which was 1) in favor of the switched-to browser and 2) waaaayyy bigger than Firefox v Chrome in 2017. Even then, if I had to make that same decision again today, I would probably first convince the person whose computer I was modifying. Especially for non-technical users, having things suddenly change out from under you can be really jarring in an environment that's already pretty confusing.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by jhoechtl on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:49AM (#14460178)
Given the original posters perspective, Servo is certainly te least concern to change the tides. For an end user it makes absolutely no difference if Mozilla reloaded will be written in C++, OCaml, Rust, wathever. Features, performance, security and speed of evolvement do count.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by pygy_ on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:35AM (#14460578)
Servo's WebRender sub-project has amazing performance (GPU accelerated compositing and rendering), and is scheduled to be merged in Firefox as fast as possible.

Stylo (Servo's style subsystem) has already landed in Firefox behind a preference flag (not everything is wired at this point), and it also improves perf.

So, yes Servo is of paramount importance for Mozilla's future, because it does make a difference to end users.

Another advantage of Rust is that it allows devs to avoid a whole range of bugs making it easier for them to iterate and ship updates without introducing new tricky bugs (race conditions can be hard to debug).

While dynamic languages may be nice when you want to explore a problem space, the stronger/most static type system is a benefit for upgrading large, mature code bases...

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by cpeterso on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:36PM (#14461815)
> Stylo (Servo's style subsystem) has already landed in Firefox behind a preference flag

Stylo is still a compile-time option, but will soon be built by default and controlled by an about:config flag. You can watch the progress to build by default in this Firefox bug:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1356991

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by markdog12 on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:05PM (#14461481)
> Servo's WebRender sub-project has amazing performance

Have you gotten amazing results on your machine? I ask because I think Servo, Rust, WebRender are awesome and I'm rooting for them, but the performance has not been great when I try Servo or WebRender in Firefox on multiple machines. Maybe it's just the machines I've tried on though.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by NiLSPACE on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:09PM (#14461538)
Currently WebRender on Firefox renders the page twice as explained here: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/618p54/webrenderer_la...
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by markdog12 on Thursday June 01, 2017 @01:24PM (#14462381)
Thanks for the info, that is...unexpected, but a good approach.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by ShannonAlther on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:54AM (#14460204)
Mozilla claims that Servo's parallelization will improve performance, and that Rust's features will improve security.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by a_imho on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:28PM (#14461717)
And impact wise fast default on content blocking is the feature that gives the biggest bang for your buck. It makes for a nice, fast and more secure browsing experience, plus it is a differentiation Chrome might be reluctant to enable (without crippling it too much).

Browser benchmarks should include how long does it take to watch a 30 sec youtube video from application start to finish or how much 3rd party feature/bloat/mal/adware it downloads connecting to $major_site.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by kuschku on Thursday June 01, 2017 @08:44AM (#14459745)
I doubt that would help.

As the lead dev of VLC in a recent interview said, they’ve been offered huge amounts of money to include Google Chrome in their installer, and saying no was the hardest decision he’s ever made.

As long as Google has fraudulent ads for Chrome "your browser is outdated, update now to Google Chrome" on their websites, as long as Google intentionally makes the experience worse for Firefox (see the youtube redesign), as long as Google pays developers to ship Chrome as malware with every single installer, as long as Google forces OEMs to install Chrome with Android, Chrome will rule the market.

The only solution now is the EU.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by tambourine_man on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:15AM (#14459948)
Agreed with everything but your first sentence.

MS was a much bigger impenetrable monopoly and the Web was won back. It can be done again. Having a great product and grassroots evangelism certainly help.

(Not that I think Chrome is THE ENEMY. It's constantly evolving, multiplatform and open source. IE was none of that. But I agree Google's practices you described are despicable. Huge kudos to VLC for doing the right thing)

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by cknight on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:51AM (#14460723)
It's an interesting comparison.

With IE, Microsoft was influencing what the web was viewed with via its control of the client - Windows.

Google is influencing what the web is viewed with by simply being such a key part of the web itself, and using its weight from that direction instead.

(One could argue that they have Android for the client, but as a percentage of web users it's still far from what Windows had in the IE6 days.)

Firefox won back the web by having a great product, grassroots evangelism, and a Microsoft who badly neglected their competing product for many years. They left an opening.

Chrome might be losing its lustre but it's certainly not being treated the same way. I think Firefox's new battle for market share might be harder than it was vs IE, simply because Google is still so active on this front. In response, the only real new thing in our arsenal is hindsight, which I guess is what the VLC example above is a result of.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by euyyn on Thursday June 01, 2017 @11:28AM (#14461077)
> With IE, Microsoft was influencing what the web was viewed with

Microsoft was trying (and succeeding) for the web not to be a preferable API to Win32, so as to keep that way a high barrier to entry into the OS business. Which is why IE was squarely against standards.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wpietri on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:43AM (#14460653)
> MS was a much bigger impenetrable monopoly and the Web was won back. It can be done again.

The Web won because a) its introduction was a one-time technological change whose social impact was on the order of the printing press, and b) Microsoft had gotten fat and lazy on their monopoly revenues from Windows and Office.

We can't get cocky here. It is perfectly plausible that HTML will still render 500 years from now. And I'm dead certain that it will still dominate 20 years from now.

Growing up in a major technical revolution, it's easy for us to assume that the future will have a lot of technical revolutions that will keep knocking monopolists, rentiers, and authoritarians off their perches. And if that happens, great. But we should really be planning for the opposite case.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by tambourine_man on Thursday June 01, 2017 @11:15AM (#14460938)
Not cocky, just watchfully optimist
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by knocte on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:21AM (#14459995)
Chrome is not open source. Chromium is.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by tambourine_man on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:24AM (#14460469)
Its rendering and JS engine are, which is what matters to compatibility and portability
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by valarauca1 on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:21AM (#14459992)
Whoa.

Internet Exploder was constantly evolving and multi-platform.

Did you forget IE ran on PPC Macs, X86 Macs, Windows, and CP/M?

IE updated... just slower than Netscape.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by tapoxi on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:46AM (#14460680)
Internet Explorer wasn't really multi-platform. The Mac version used a different rendering engine (Tasman as opposed to Trident) and it of course didn't have support for ActiveX extensions.

For a long time being a 90s Mac user sucked as different websites required you to use IE on a Windows PC.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by tambourine_man on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:19AM (#14460419)
IE6 was not updated for 6 years. On Windows.

On the Mac it went as far as version 5 only. And never made it to x86 (unless you count Rosetta)

So, through the dark ages, IE was very much frozen and Windows only, for all intends and purposes.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by jchw on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:40AM (#14460112)
IE ran on... CP/M? What CP/M are you talking about?
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by echeese on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:13AM (#14460357)
They probably meant Windows CE or Pocket PC (P/PC)
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by bobthedino on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:43AM (#14460132)
There was even briefly a version of IE for HP-UX and Solaris.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by bzbarsky on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:45PM (#14461921)
IE ran on Sparc/Solaris too, at least as of IE5. I don't think they ever ported IE6 there.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by jeswin on Thursday June 01, 2017 @08:55AM (#14459819)
Mobile is where the war is being fought. A better browser can ship with hundreds of millions of mobile devices. Firefox-next with ad blocking and better support for parallelism is just what phones need. Users will use what came with the phone.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by chinhodado on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:00AM (#14459851)
Firefox's performance on Android is horrible though. I tried switching to it a few times but always have to switch back because of performance issue.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by sirfz on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:21AM (#14460440)
It's the default browser I'm using right now on Android. Performance is still not on par with Chrome but it did improve since the last time I tried it a few months ago. The ability to install extensions surpasses anything else for me so I'm sticking with FF.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by bryanlarsen on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:56AM (#14460751)
I find Firefox on Android to be much faster than Chrome. The browser itself may or may not be faster, but the uBlock Origin plugin makes it scream...
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by angry_octet on Thursday June 01, 2017 @11:07AM (#14460860)
And saves battery and data. The absence of plugins on ios/safari and android/chrome is a severe deficiency. It is also interesting that adblocking firewalls get denied by the app stores...
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by pmontra on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:32AM (#14460067)
It doesn't has text reflow after zooming, which Opera has. For all the other features I don't see anything horrible. It used to be slow at drawing pages but it's not anymore. I've been using it since Opera changed hands and it's nice to have uBlock on the phone too.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by acjohnson55 on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:07AM (#14459895)
Agreed. It's the browser I'm using right now, but it's got some big problems. It's draining my battery and it interferes with chromecast.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by phillc73 on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:40AM (#14460632)
I've been using Brave[1] on my Android phone for the past two months. It's been brilliant. A much better experience than Firefox, which was a bit slow and some pages loaded as a white screen.

I'd love to use Brave on my desktop too, but their lack of plugin/extension/add on support cripples it a little. There's a couple I just can't live without. Using Iridium[2] on the desktop instead.

[1] https://www.brave.com/

[2] https://iridiumbrowser.de/

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by kuschku on Thursday June 01, 2017 @01:01PM (#14462101)
How do you get Firefox on devices? If OEMs want to use the Google Play store on any single of their devices, they have to make Chrome the default browser on all of them.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by magicalist on Thursday June 01, 2017 @02:11PM (#14462855)
> In practice this means that the position of packages in node_modules is computed internally in Yarn, which causes Yarn to be non-deterministic between people using different versions.

I believe Chrome has to be installed, but it clearly doesn't have to be the default. Just see all the Samsung phones with the default Samsung Internet Browser as evidence.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by dmitrygr on Thursday June 01, 2017 @03:13PM (#14463486)
Open play store and install it unlike iOS, android supports setting any browser as default. You can then even completely disable chrome
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by kuschku on Thursday June 01, 2017 @07:54PM (#14466165)
Again, 90% of users out there will never change the browser, not even if the default is IE6 (as the browserchoice case showed).

As long as Chrome is preinstalled, it will win.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wutbrodo on Thursday June 01, 2017 @02:13PM (#14462888)
> As long as Google has fraudulent ads for Chrome "your browser is outdated, update now to Google Chrome" on their websites

Where do you see this? I have Firefox open and don't see this on Search, Drive, Google Music, etc.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by jaflo on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:38PM (#14461848)
Do you have a link to the interview? And how is the YouTube experience worse on Firefox? I didn't know of Google's practices except for the banner in other browsers.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by kuschku on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:54PM (#14462019)
You can find an excerpt in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWx1P93nS0c&t=51s

Transcribing the subtitles:

> "To be honest we’ve been offered some insane amounts of money to do bad stuff around VLC, like shipping tool bars at the same time of the installer of VLC or or installing other software like Google Chrome and so on. And when you see the numbers they propose to you, you’re just like: How the fuck am I going to say no to that?"

> "The thing is, it’s not only my project so I’m not allowed to do that. [It’s the] legacy of other people. That wouldn’t be moral."

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by fiala__ on Thursday June 01, 2017 @08:51AM (#14459789)
can you elaborate on that last point? What does the EU have to do with this?
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by sciurus on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:02AM (#14459869)
The European Commission has successfully acted against Microsoft in the past and has repeatedly tried to act against Google on various antitrust concerns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp_v_Commission

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/technology/google-europea...

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by fiala__ on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:13AM (#14459932)
Thanks!
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by hacksonx on Thursday June 01, 2017 @08:59AM (#14459849)
I think, I could be wrong but I think he/she is referring to what the European Union did with Microsoft and asked them to include a way that asks new Windows users to select a default browser and offer them choices besides Internet explorer.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by NiLSPACE on Thursday June 01, 2017 @08:58AM (#14459839)
Perhaps he means a similar thing to what they did to Microsoft by forcing them to make it possible to choose a different browser when installing Windows.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by daddykotex on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:40AM (#14460114)
What is Servo bringing to the table that will, in your opinion, make Firefox the browser of choice again?

I'm asking genuinely here. Is Servo expected to be have a much better performance?

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by NiLSPACE on Thursday June 01, 2017 @09:47AM (#14460158)
It heavily makes heavy use of parallelism and the GPU which increases the responsiveness. It's also uses Rust as a programming language instead of C++ which will prevent a whole category of bugs like buffer overflows and use after free.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by braveo on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:10AM (#14460323)
Are these category of bugs a constant problem in FF?
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by steveklabnik on Thursday June 01, 2017 @11:16AM (#14460949)
They're a constant problem in all browsers. Take last year's Pwn2Own for example: http://blog.trendmicro.com/pwn2own-day-2-event-wrap/

Demonstrated a successful code execution attack against Safari to gain root privileges using an use-after-free vulnerability in Safari and an out-of-bounds vulnerability in Mac OS X.

Demonstrated a successful code execution attack against Microsoft Edge in the SYSTEM context using an uninitialized stack variable vulnerability in Microsoft Edge

Demonstrated a successful code execution vulnerability against Microsoft Edge in the SYSTEM context using an out-of-bounds vulnerability in Microsoft Edge and a buffer overflow vulnerability in the Kernel.

etc. Highlights mine. All of these are prevented in safe Rust.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by paulmlewis on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:30AM (#14460541)
They're a big enough problem that they created Rust to deal with them.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by NiLSPACE on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:14AM (#14460360)
Some of these bugs could've been prevented with Rust: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2017-0...
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by wpietri on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:31AM (#14460547)
Do you have any evidence that's why users are switching away?

My general belief is that general-audience users don't care at all about bugs like those. Which is why we have so very many of them, and have for decades.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by pygy_ on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:44AM (#14460663)
Rust's fearless concurrency[0] allows devs to write and refactor performant parallel code without the risk of introducing bugs, enabling them to ship upgrades faster.

It's the same benefit you get from strong, static types in a large project vs one with dynamic/weak types, but for another category of bugs. In large projects, it makes a difference.

---

0. Hopefully you'll forget the meme ;-)

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by MisterBastahrd on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:50AM (#14460709)
I switched away from Firefox because at the time it was bloated, buggy, and slow. I haven't switched back because I am more familiar with Google's developer tools.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by NiLSPACE on Thursday June 01, 2017 @10:37AM (#14460605)
I don't, but a marketing campaign saying "using modern safe techniques" might get a little traction.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by braveo on Friday June 02, 2017 @09:06AM (#14469533)
That isn't what I asked, I asked if this class of problem is truly causing a lot of harm.

Software stabilizes over time, you find problems and then you fix them. How often are these class of bugs causing catastrophic issues?

That's really the important question.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by daddykotex on Thursday June 01, 2017 @11:03AM (#14460812)
Ok thanks.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by throwaway-1209 on Thursday June 01, 2017 @12:29PM (#14461726)
I can tell you exactly why I'm not using FF: due to extremely poor support for switching between multiple profiles. Oh, it's possible, but compared to Google's seamless support for the same, its very awkward, even if you install an extension (which is only available from a third party).
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by KORraN on Thursday June 01, 2017 @02:09PM (#14462840)
Then try containers from Test Pilot and probably you will not need profiles anymore :)
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by throwaway-1209 on Thursday June 01, 2017 @02:36PM (#14463113)
Thanks for the suggestion, just from the screenshots it looks pretty good. Will give it a try.
Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by bobajeff on Thursday June 01, 2017 @01:58PM (#14462722)
I think it's important to scale back expectations for Servo. Given that Servo itself won't be ready to be used as a main engine for quite some time do to insufficient site compatibility.

Project Quantum will use only pieces of Servo coupled along with Gecko. Maybe Mozilla will fully replace all of the old single threaded code at some point in the future but I imagine that's a ways off.

Given the gradual progress of these changes it's likely that any successes in performance it brings will be copied in the other engines before they are too far ahead.

Re:WebAssembly: Mozilla Won by SimeVidas on Thursday June 01, 2017 @01:37PM (#14462496)
It can. My father and sister use Firefox, because I told them it’s the best option for privacy.