And since you won’t be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.
The community feedback is… interesting to say the least.
And since you won’t be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.
The community feedback is… interesting to say the least.
It doesn’t matter and it’s irrelevant here. I just despise Mozilla and their false morality. Use whatever you want.
It’s not irrelevant since you stated Firefox is less good than what you are using now. Of course people are interested in a feasible alternative. So, since you introduced it, what are you using instead?
I said that I feel it’s less good. I’m not going to tell people what they should use and I surely won’t tell them to use the same browser I use. People should simply use whatever they prefer/suits them best.
So you’ll rather give in to blatant corporate greed?
What kind of Alt-Right logic is this?
I didn’t know I was so evil that I’m doing the world a worse place just because I prefer a different browser. And I’m ideologically far form alt-right, btw.
OTOH, talking about corporate greed:
that is a funny graph. Even assuming the data is true, it deliberately missrepresents market share as usage. Which pretty much neglects the fact hat maybe a person or two and a device with a browser or two have entered the market since then.
Also it does not have any information on source of the data, methodology, definition of the terms etc. So it is pretty much worthless as an argument.
Fine, so on the same basis we can also reject the “chromium dominance” argument, which is the main selling point of Mozilla.