Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | s3p's commentslogin

And its userbase is essentially just HN users unfortunately

And it’s trying to get them to run away as fast as possible.

Firefox is not going to save us again. It’s arguably part of the problem in a different way.


It's amazing how you can literally start a nonprofit to code a billion-dollar browser, give it away for free, and let people modify it however they want and then HN users will still find a way to act like this is being evil and exploitative. It's as if they care more about whining than they do about their supposed open-source principles.


HN users are almost entirely Google users

Until websites block you from logging in, completing transactions, ordering items until you open it with Chrome

Or just get buggy. I have absolutely run into sites that work on mobile Safari but not on desktop Safari. Because they don’t test it and don’t care.

You HAVE to use Chrome or possibly Firefox. We’ve always seen what Firefox is doing, they’re not going to be our saviors again.


There’s a meaningful amount of blame here that sits squarely at the feet of Apple.

1. They produce the world’s buggiest browser by far. Look at this chart that shows the number of bugs that ONLY OCCUR IN A SINGLE BROWSER. https://wpt.fyi/results/?label=master&label=experimental&ali...

2. They don’t support any modern testing protocols like WebdriverBiDi

3. They don’t make their software available to anyone who isn’t using Apple’s hardware.

The core root of the problem is very clearly Apple who’ve done nothing other than make the world’s buggiest and least accessible browser and then tried to hold everyone hostage who was previously forced to use it until courts had to stop them and they had no choice.


> They don’t make their software available to anyone who isn’t using Apple’s hardware.

Why should they? When did this become a rule? If Atari survived would they be required to make Windows software? Be? Commodore?

Where/why does/should the law require everyone to make Windows apps?

Really?


Why should people buy special, extra expensive hardware to test with a bad web browser?

It's logical to skip that step.


If you read it, it shows the impact Google has on browser quality for end users.

Exactly, so you can't generate a cent of revenue. OpenAI got millions of people to buy a $20/mo subscription. You couldn't.


I'm not sure they did. What do you think is the answer to "Why would you trust chrome if you care about privacy?"


GP said:

> I don't understand why anyone would choose Chrome over Firefox. I get that it's performant, but it's developed by a dominant advertising company. Why would you trust Chrome if you care about your privacy?

I believe the vast majorty of people do not care about their privacy, answering GP's question.


Very tinfoil hat of them.


Who? I don't understand your logic either. I don't think anyone said this "is fine as long as it's used against the majority". Virtually every large city uses Flock. This is the norm.


Don't phones do this now? I remember Lytro cameras, they were really exciting.


Phone cameras fake it.

They don't capture a light field like Lytro did, they capture a regular image with a very deep depth of field, extract a depth map (usually with machine learning, but some phones augment it with stereoscopy or even LIDAR on high end iPhones) and then selectively blur based on depth.


What? Just give them an option. Ads or ad free with card.


Some sites do give you that option. But they're still going to track you everywhere else, so opting out of one doesn't really solve the privacy problem.

There's also an economic problem with the pay-or-ad model. The users who won't pay are the ones with the least money, so your remaining advertisers won't pay as much. They may not even break even with the ads, but persist just to annoy you into subscribing.


Garmin is also charging a premium, up to $2,000 it seems.


Yeah, that's Garmin's thing. They are selling top of the line, marine/aviation grade, safety critical equipment. $2,000 is almost low for what they normally sell, like radar systems and chart plotters for boats, or glass cockpits for aircraft. They are mostly competing with Raytheon and BAE systems for niche applications. Stuff you would find in F-16 fighter jets except better somehow.

Essentially, Garmin is the product you buy when money is no object. Either because you are obscenely wealthy, or because you are trusting their product with your life and the lives of your passengers. They have some consumer grade stuff too that is usually trickling down from their obscenely expensive other businesses.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: