• I’m switching today. Right now. Because of this post.

        ^^maybe
        EDIT: okay. I think I’ve done it. I’m currently editing this comment from Firefox. I already had Firefox installed. But now I have pinned it to my taskbar. I went to import my bookmarks from chrome, and found that I also had the option of importing other stuff from chrome, too (bookmarks, passwords, history and autofill data). That’s sweet. My bookmark bar has the same bookmarks in the same position. I also installed ublock origin, like someone recommended. And I am going to give it a go. If it all goes smoothly, I will unpin Chrome from the taskbar.

        Thanks everyone for the encouragement!

          •  A1kmm   ( @A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3811 months ago

            And in fact will save you CPU cycles. For a bit, Chrome had a slight performance edge over Firefox. But once Google got the market share, Firefox caught up and got ahead, and Chrome didn’t invest in keeping up, so Firefox is generally faster. The only exception is a few sites (especially Google ones) seem to be heavily optimised for Chrome, but not necessarily as much for Firefox. If you stay away from those sites, Firefox is generally faster.

            Plus Chromium is increasingly becoming more hostile to efficient ad blocking add-on implementations - so if you want to block ads (generally recommended due to ad networks doubling as paid malware distribution networks), Firefox or other Gecko-based browsers are generally the best bet.

            •  zucky   ( @zucky@lemm.ee ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              311 months ago

              Wait can you elaborate on that a little bit? Back in the days, Chrome was a resource hog which made me switch to Firefox for a few years. Then I tried a bunch of different browsers and found that my Firefox couldn’t keep up with the performance of Chromium-based browsers, which made me switch to Edge. But now, Firefox has better performance again?

              • It ebbs and flows over time. All browsers will be attempting to improve performance, but at the same time adding features. More features often impact performance negatively.

                Most normal pages are apparently faster in Firefox right now, but Google might make an optimisation effort in chromium that might make Firefox comparatively slower.

                The main pages that are still slower in Firefox are Google sites. Google has repeatedly made things on their pages that unfairly favor Chrome. For example at one point they added an invisible frame that had no functionality over the video player on YouTube. They obviously made optimisations in chrome at the same time so they wouldn’t be affected, but Firefox’ hardware acceleration of videos broke, because the video now had additional items over top that it needed to custom handle. This gave chrome a massive performance edge on YouTube, until Firefox started ignoring completely invisible overlays of videos, just like Chrome did

        • I highly recommend putting your passwords in a paid manager. Bitwarden is awesome. I’m also testing out Protonpass which just came out. If you’re looking to move more services from google to an alternative, give Proton a look. Been running their email, calendar, and VPN and I’ve been pleased. Its still missing a few things but its improving everyday.

    •  dan   ( @dan@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      5811 months ago

      Firefox is awesome now. It was great, then it lost out a bit to chrome, but it’s back to being awesome. If anyone’s reading this and isn’t using Firefox, please switch!

      And importantly, their import mechanisms are great. A typical user can switch with basically no effort. Next time they ask you for help, switch your parents too, and your siblings, and that neighbour who keeps referring to the internet as “the google”. Set them up with Firefox and ublock origin and they’ll be set.

    • I’d solely use Firefox if jetbrains had better JS debugging support for it.

      So for now I use edge for that at work.

      Also I really like the tab sleep and vertical tabs features on Edge.

      But everything is Firefox on my personal machines

  • People’s willingness to seize every opportunity and monetize everything that was once free and open is truly shocking. Every day when I read about another dogshit attempt to make the internet as a whole a worse place, I’m not even supprised anymore

  •  moonmeow   ( @moonmeow@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5311 months ago

    good stuff, glad to see this opposition.

    Also slightly related, but I’d absolutely hate if I were an employee having to work on this project and having my name attached to this. Quite embarrassing for all those involved.

    •  73ms   ( @73ms@sopuli.xyz ) 
      link
      fedilink
      1911 months ago

      Same as with IE in the past. A little better with most of the source being open but not much. I wonder how we could solve this issue since people obviously don’t care.

    • Being fair to Chrome (which I hate doing but there is a point), they got in when more tech-people online saw them as pushing so many things forward. Was functionally faster than IE for sure, but also Firefox got stuck on their 4.0 limbo and being heavy in memory usage. Though I think the issue with memory usage also came from having almost a decade of so many extensions. Chrome was also slightly simpler than Firefox (imo even though my primary browser is and has been since before 1.5). Pair that with Google also then becoming the only (in market share) real competition to Apple’s ecosystem on Smartphones.

      The best way to start taking down Chrome’s massive control over web standards is to do the same things as when IE was the default name people knew. Start using Firefox and get others to try it again or for the first time. Since so many people would trick their parents into using Chrome by changing the name and icon to IE. Most older folks kind of don’t even notice, and just think and “update” changed the look a bit. But as long as it works, they will just use it. In fact this can apply to a lot of the general public in actually scary ways. Back in the day with IE and those stacks and stacks of toolbars that I saw on almost every PC I worked on for people. I would just start removing them while they told me about why they were in (which was often caused by but not seen as to them as the issue). They would see me just OCD getting rid of them and would be shocked, and I do truly mean shocked, that those things weren’t just “part of the browser and never questioned them being there.”

      Now that Chrome and Chromium are the main browser and browser base. I see soooo many BS Chromium browsers just get installed via the same kinds of tactics as the old toolbars. Even set themselves to both launch at every reboot, set themselves to always be able to run in the background, AND set themselves as the system default browser. Sometimes there may be multiple all doing the same things, but also have been made into desktop toolbars/docks of sorts. And that same shit is done by the super annoying ones skinned by the AV companies (AVG, Avast, CCleaner, and now even mainline Norton). And the person just thinks they are just part of Windows, but they only even came in because they “started having issues with wifi” or even a broken Windows update that wasn’t related.

      That shit should really really get more attention in general. With so many fake things just being ignored, it means that the mass public will just never know or care about Google turning the internet into whatever it wants. Just not even know that they had actual options before they are removed. If it wouldn’t piss off the massive amount of companies that do ad business with Google. I wouldn’t be shocked if they turned ad blocking into a “premium feature” to subscribe to monthly.

      I personally install Firefox as the non-Edge option when setting up someone’s new PC (so long as they didn’t specify Chrome) so they might at least try it. I never set it as the default, and will remove it if they want it gone when picking up the PC. Also do try to let some of them that ask about Chrome know that Edge is 100% compatible for their sites that mention Chrome. Which they at least then tend to be like “oh, well then I guess don’t worry about installing Chrome then.” No real pressure is put on them, just information, though Microsoft is making it hard with all the wild “HEY TRY THIS FEATURE!” pop-ups and that damn pointless desktop search bar.

    • Example Firefox: As it is Google is funding Mozilla to make it seem that there is competition. I don’t know if I want firefox to get bigger just enough so Google cuts their funding and it disappears. If so many people want to use spyware let them, so we can have the goodies.

  •  coolin   ( @coolin@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3711 months ago

    As a Linux user this has got me very worried. Chromium has so much market share that this change will certainly go through, and I feel like Safari won’t care as it benefits them and their ecosystem to have device checks. I feel like Firefox and non standard OSes will almost certainly be blocked on a large range of websites with little impact on total users, not to mention completely blocking ad block and anti-tracking clients.

    I think eventually regulators in the US will file an antitrust lawsuit and break chromium off of Google if this actually happens, but until then Fediverse/FOSS and personal websites are going to be the only places untouched by this.

        •  wallmenis   ( @wallmenis@lemmy.one ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          511 months ago

          I think they meant it as a “necessary evil” because companies could start implementing their own drm and make everything more difficult to crack. Also without it, companies would not trust it without drm due to the greed.

        •  grue   ( @grue@lemmy.ml ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          “Don’t work at all” in Firefox, when Chrome implements the DRM the service insists upon and Firefox doesn’t

          and

          “Don’t work at all” because the services can’t exist without DRM

          are very different assertions.

          I think you’re (rightfully!) doubting the latter, but the person you replied to meant the former.

    •  A1kmm   ( @A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1711 months ago

      I think we need to try to get Firefox’s user base up fast (and the user base for other browsers that are ultimately controlled by non-profits) - if non-commercial browsers dominate or even have 30+% market share, if they say no to something bad for users and the open web, it doesn’t happen. While non-commercial browsers are a small minority, if they say no, services that work everywhere else follow Google / Apple and consider breaking Firefox acceptable collateral damage, and then Firefox etc… becomes an ever smaller minority, so they get forced into things like this.

      The trouble is FAANG get advantage by posing an insidious threat - they treat users well when they are trying to gain market share, and invest heavily and maybe briefly offer a superior user respecting product. But when they get the market share to give them the leverage, the switch part of bait-and-switch comes out, and we see them try to take down the open web to cement their position against the non-profits, and make their browsers inferior for users to bump up revenue (enshitification, to borrow a term from Cory Doctorow).

    • I am a pirate myself but they have to implement video DRM since the content is technically their’s and you are just allowed to view it as long as you are subscribed to them, and they don’t want their content to be stolen (which they can’t stop btw).

      •  grue   ( @grue@lemmy.ml ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        911 months ago
        1. The content’s copyright is technically owned by the copyright holders, not Google.

        2. Copying isn’t theft. Nothing is removed from the servers; YouTube still has its copy. Calling it “stealing” is biased loaded language.

        • Strictly speaking copyright also means that the copyright holder is the only one that is allowed to either copy the content or grant permissions to copy it, thus any of us making copies of things to be sure we don’t lose access to it are truly breaking that. But I would be a lot more conflicted about it if the system wasn’t like it currently is and it wasn’t almost only big corporations that seem to benefit.

        •  redfellow   ( @red@sopuli.xyz ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          If I create art, then copyright states that you cannot copy (and redistribute) the art I created.

          I’d be bummed out and it would feel like you just stole from me. Now the people I might have sold my art aren’t interested, as they already got it for free. It feels like the work I did was wasted, and I also lost some profits, the amount of which is naturally hard to guess, but still.

          Story time’s over. So your 2nd point is shit, and I wish people stopped making that. It’s not biased or loaded because there are actual monetary losses to whomever it is you are illegally copying stuff from, instead of paying.

          Anyway, I just pirate because I really just will not pay for 10 different subs to get the content I want. Never. Spotify is great, but as long as movie/tv streaming is fragmented, Piracy will never dwindle.

          Just stop fucking justifying yourselves with shit arguments.

          •  grue   ( @grue@lemmy.ml ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            111 months ago

            I’d be bummed out and it would feel like you just stole from me.

            Words have meanings. You are factually incorrect, and frankly, I don’t give a shit how you “feel” about it.

  • Google already rolled out AMP which is overtly hostile to an open internet and faced zero repercussions from it. The same will be true for this. The average person has no idea what this means, doesn’t care, and won’t be bothered by it. Politicians always side with big business.

  •  grue   ( @grue@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2211 months ago

    I don’t think OP had any nefarious purpose in it, but this title is ridiculous doublspeak. Google might have a vested interest in trying to bullshit us about this being about “web integrity,” but that doesn’t mean we have to accept its dishonest framing!

  •  wolf   ( @wolf@lemmy.zip ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1811 months ago

    IMHO we have several really big problems with the web as it is today, which are intertwined:

    1. The web (standards) is by far too complicated. If even Microsoft doesn’t have (or isn’t willing) to provide the resources to implement a browser, there are not many players left with the resources and the motivation

    2. Google Chrome and Safari are the only game in town. (My main browser is Firefox, but seriously, we have such a small market share that nobody gives a damn)

    3. Most people/governments/companies don’t care or don’t understand the problem of the mono culture for browsers

    4. The value of the web is everything which is already on the web and that one can access anything with the browser - for this reason, we can only grow in the direction of more complicated while keeping backwards compatibility

    5. Besides lip-service to the contrary, our politicians want to control communication and supervise their citizens, so for politicians it is better to have a browser controlled by a company like Google, than a really free web

    Given how fundamental important the web is for modern human basic infrastructure, we (as a society) should find a better way to protect our infrastructure, freedom of speech and basic freedoms.