Re:Firefox 64 Released
by reubenmorais on Tuesday December 11, 2018 @08:43PM
(#18660678)
Emacs and vi are used by programmers. Browsers are used by nearly every single person on the Internet. The threat model is completely different.
Re:Firefox 64 Released
by piyush_soni on Wednesday December 12, 2018 @01:53AM
(#18661879)
Time for a developers only Browser! Anyone wants to grab that? :)
Re:Firefox 64 Released
by bovine3dom on Wednesday December 12, 2018 @06:39AM
(#18663040)
Qutebrowser and next browser are both quite programmer-focused. They are WebKit based, however.
Re:Firefox 64 Released
by The-Compiler on Wednesday December 12, 2018 @07:07AM
(#18663194)
qutebrowser uses QtWebEngine, which is based on Chromium/Blink - I wouldn't call that WebKit anymore ;-)
Re:Firefox 64 Released
by bovine3dom on Wednesday December 12, 2018 @07:14AM
(#18663232)
I was probably wrong about next too, then. Still, they both hail from the Steve Jobs school of blurry fonts, which is all any sane person tries to avoid in a web browser ; )
Re:Firefox 64 Released
by Ar-Curunir on Tuesday December 11, 2018 @09:10PM
(#18660804)
Emacs or vi don't handle potentially malicious third-party code...
Sure they do. That's what extensions are.
That’s like saying everyone is at risk of bear attacks because a few people in rural areas do get attacked. Yes, extensions exist but when was the last time someone clicked on a link in an email and installed an emacs extension? That happens daily to thousands of web users because the population is so many orders of magnitude greater.
I don't buy that. It's my browser running on my computer, it's my choice whose code I choose to run on it.
If, say, emacs or vi had this kind of handholding, neither one would be much more than a text editor.