What if they just instead spent that effort on actually improving the browser? They could bring back per-site useragents, add more media codecs, finally implement WebSerial API which Chrome has and is used more and more as everything moves into web browser environment, etc..
I desire the browser to work as well as it did a decade ago. It worked perfectly all the time. Now I'm task closing it once every days because an entire window just goes blank white and never context updates. The CPU usage randomly spikes super high. It eats RAM uncontrollably and seemingly never releases what it should and holds on to what it doesn't need forever.
I don't need AI. I need a good browser. And many of these issues are Chromium and why I switched from Chrome long ago (which I had switched to after FF broke all the extensions 20 years ago in the first place). This really shouldn't be that hard.
I desire the browser to work as well as it did a decade ago. It worked perfectly all the time.
You have on rose colored glasses. As a web developer, no browser ever worked, works, or will ever work perfectly all the time and it's not even close nor has it ever been. We have been inching toward that for 20 years but we'll never get there unfortunately as it would require web standards to freeze and infinite effort to achieve.
Now I'm task closing it once every days because an entire window just goes blank white and never context updates.
Weird. I leave FF open for days and weeks on end. Rarely ever have an issue. I don't see this one in particular. Which OS are you running?
It eats RAM uncontrollably and seemingly never releases what it should and holds on to what it doesn't need forever.
I agree FF is not efficient enough with RAM, but on the other hand I normally see it under 5 GB despite leaving dozens of tabs open all the time. I think they opt to keep things in RAM so switching tabs won't feel sluggish. It's a trade off. I don't think much of the RAM usage is unintentional.
No, there really isn't. There isn't going to be any form of technology where you can be free if it. And in that case, I don't see how it will be possible for Mozilla to avoid it, even if they want to. At the very least, Firefox will have to interact with it elsewhere. It's really best that they start figuring out what that's going to look like, if a bit late.
Not investing in AI is a good way to neuter your already non existent user base. Part of why edge took off even more is because generative ai was added. Regardless of our feelings about it, choosing to ignore what’s hot in tech would be foolish.
The fakespot service is pretty useful when searching products on websites. It doesn’t have to be search results or code , but there are useful ways to invest in AI and maybe attract more users to your platform.
For software to be trustable the public needs be able to see what it does (not necessarily as an individual but collectively). Normally that means we need the source code but "AI" can mean a system like an artificial neural network - source code isn't enough to understand what it is actually doing (even with the training data).
A TechCrunch report has a company memo that followed these layoffs, detailing one product shutdown and a "scaling back" of a few others.
reads the very top of the page; it then goes on to detail a lot of projects that aren't in line with Mozilla's core work of making a browser.
These non-browser projects could be seen as a search for a less vulnerable revenue stream, but none have put a huge dent in the bottom line.
TechCrunch managed to get an internal company memo that details a few "strategic corrections" for the myriad Mozilla products.
Mozilla seized an opportunity to bring trustworthy AI into Firefox, largely driven by the Fakespot acquisition and the product integration work that followed.
Mozilla paid an undisclosed sum in 2023 to buy a company called Fakespot, which uses AI to identify fake product reviews.
The original article contains 731 words, the summary contains 140 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!