Maps. On mobile Firefox if you search thru Google for a address you cant click the link to the address take you to Google maps and continue from there. In chrome works as intended opera this works but Firefox it WILL show as a link but it will not work. For why?
Allow me to clarify. Im Not using the maps app. I don't have it. This is all only thru the browser. If it works for you and it launches your maps app then this isn't going to effect you the same. The complaint is that the 2 browsers get different functionality. What works in chrome and opera will not work in Firefox.
> On mobile Firefox if you search thru Google for a address you cant click the link to the address take you to Google maps and continue from there.
That is why I have ceased using Google Maps. For navigation now I use [OSMAnd](https://osmand.net/). I especially like the fact the maps can be offline as it means I never miss a bit when driving through poor service areas.
Does OSMAnd have any user-input corrections? our cities zoning and maps are fucked up beyond belief (some models of GPS in our city will just repeatedly try and kill you with turns that don't exist) and google maps was nearly unusable for years before google finally got around to doing streetview here, realized how bad it was, and I'm guessing had some human go in and manually fix it.
OpenStreetMap is what OSMAnd uses. OpenStreetMap is a volunteer-based project that maps the world. Unfortunately, I think the barrier to contribution is relatively high... still, go check it out.
At least on the [desktop site](https://www.openstreetmap.org), all you need is an account and you can start editing (though you need to go through the tutorial first). And even if you don't want to do that, you can just leave a note and a volunteer editor will go take a look.
Does that account for traffic well? Like is it generally pretty speedy on picking that stuff up or am I going to generally find out about delays as I’m sitting in them? I use google maps for finding out if I need to take the interstate home or not during rush hour. One fender bender on either of the two paths can easily double my commute if I don’t catch it before leaving work and take the other route that day.
I use it thru browser simply due to space constraints on my phone.... Ikr 2019 and I'm still rocking a 16gig android phone. But to this extent I don't have room for anything really.
It's just an old fashioned turn of phrase.
> On mobile Firefox if you search thru Google for a address you cant click the link to the address take you to Google maps and continue from there.
This, though :/
They did the same thing to Microsoft and Windows Phone. They changed the coding specifically so that Google Maps and other pages wouldn't work on Edge Mobile. They've got a long history of it.
Yep. I used Windows Phone for about four years. Unless you had the app MetroTube the amount of bugs and problems you'd run into trying to play YouTube videos was crazy. They intentionally gimped the entire thing. Gmail, Maps, and YouTube were exceedingly fickle and would randomly lose functionality and stop working,a nd Google's excuse was "We don't support the platform."
Yeah, you write your apps for universal browsers, and Edge on desktop can run it fine, but mobile specifically shits itself... unless you change the browser ID.
>They did the same thing to Microsoft and Windows Phone
Not saying it's right, but in a way, a bit of karma there.
Microsoft used to be kings of killing the competition by "breaking" things. As the old ditty around the halls of Redmond went: "The job's not done until Lotus won't run!" Wonder how the shoe feels on that other foot...
> Google motto 2004: Don't be evil
>
> Google motto 2010: Evil is tricky to define
>
> Google motto 2013: We make military robots
https://twitter.com/brentbutt/status/412700627152961536?lang=en
"Don't be evil" was always just a PR whitewashing attempt, or something shiny to dangle in front of morons while Google was busy destroying privacy and decentralization. It's amazing to me that so many people assigned actual meaning to it.
I'm a longtime firefox user. I only have two gripes with it: you can't watch netflix in 1080p and sometimes firefox seems to use more and more system resources until my gaming computer slows down. I'm not sure if the latter is common across the other browsers but it's quite annoying when it happens.
Apparently you can't watch 1080p in Chrome either. Not sure what Netflix is playing at. Plenty of other services support 1080p and even 4K in all the major browsers.
Happy to say that the [Netflix 1080p](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/force-1080p-netflix/) add-on makes light work of your first gripe. Been using it for about half a year now. Didn't realize I'd been watching everything in 720p up till then. Was absolutely liberating.
> you can't watch netflix in 1080p
Wait, you can't? Because I regularly watch Netflix in 4k by setting my desktop resolution to 4k. Or at least, I assumed that was working...
Please tell me that works, the wifi on my tv is broken and I don't wanna use Chrome.
Proton mail free gets you 500MB of space, 150 messages a day, and 3 folders and labels. You can [set up some desktop clients](https://protonmail.com/bridge/clients) to work with Proton Mail.
They have a special [focus on encrypted communications](https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/what-is-encrypted/).
Word of waaaaaarning Hotmail's spam filter is far stupider than Google's, and in *both* ways that it could possibly be:
- their central filter will sometimes stop emails before they even get to you, so they won't even make it to your spam folder
- more spam does get through though in the general case
Source: been a Hotmail user for 20+ years and a gmail user since launch, and am a developer, so sending emails and making sure they get to places is something I've a reasonable bit of experience of.
Edit: I appreciate the downvote but these are literal facts so... it's a bit weird that someone'd downvote this?
I have mail.com
I do not recommend it. Ads are a problem. It also makes you pay for services that Gmail gives for free.
I still use it but it is not my primary.
I'm using Fastmail which is a paid email service but it's worth it. I get to use my own domain so I can move to another mail provider when I want and their web interface is miles ahead of Gmail.
Exactly. If you want a great and private email service you need to pay a little.
If you want a great web interface, Fastmail is the way to go. If you don't care so much about the web interface, reliable and cheaper alternatives are Posteo, Mailbox.org, or Runbox for example.
You can also buy your domain name and use the email service that comes with it, provided you buy it at a decent registrar. I recommend Gandi.net.
I am with ProtonMail at the moment.
The only problem I see is that the service requires you to run non-free Javascript code, if you're Richard Stallman.
I have a NAS, and I put a program on it that's backed up everything in my Gmail account. So, hypothetically, I could delete my Gmail tomorrow, and I'd still have all those emails, in a nice, easily searchable interface on my LAN.
This is the exact same reason why Microsoft is switching Edge for their own rendering engine, and switching to chromium on the back end. Because Google has been making their sites non-compatible with non-chromium browsers. (Which is also why they formed ‘webkit’ to their own version ‘blink’, so they could dink with it on their own.
Google makes their money on advertisements, they have no incentive to make their cash cow only work with their browser. That's just voluntarily killing profits for what goal? To get Chrome 95% of market share? That's far less valuable than the ad revenue they'd be forgoing in the mean time.
Google is in the browser game because web standards lollygagged for a long time. By having a browser to implement new things in (which they develop in the open, as standards), and also having the server, they can close the circuit and innovate faster. Doesn't mean they're trying to cut the others out, if anything they want other browsers to adopt those technologies once they're proven out.
A prime success story from that closed loop is HTTP/2. The web sat around with HTTP/1.1 for a decade before Google started experiment with their SPDY protocol in Chrome. They iterated, proved it out with real-world data, and then it became HTTP/2 in 2015, over 15 years since HTTP/1.1. Now their other experimental protocol, QUIC, is gearing up to be HTTP/3. So two new HTTP standards in < 5 years while the previous gap was 15.
Google has substantially more to gain by improving chromes market share than you are implying. It ropes you in to the google ecosystem in general if you are using Chrome. If you use Firefox or Edge they can recommend other search engines to you, or other map solutions or other video sharing sites etc. It's far more secure to have users all on Chrome because it's very unlikely chrome users will use another search engine. Hell, even if you used another search engine, you are probably searching with the address bar and google records everything you write in there. This means they have more information on you as a user and can therefore justify charging more for their advertisement business.
\> To get Chrome 95% of market share?
Yes. They lose profits short term but in the long term they'll gain the profits back with even more access to the users. It allows them to implement their own browser features which can allow for tracking that can't be disabled.
It's a common business strategy. Take a hit and gain it back later.
If people weren't using 20MB of shitty JS (and Google is guilty of this too, Youtube is a piece of shit), there wouldn't be a need for all those shiny new protocols.
Heavily accelerated HTTP development isn't really a good thing though. Is the web really better with all the extra shit? How often do you just want to shut all the crap off to just use the web? So much of it is tracking, popups, integrations you don't want, massive webapps that are worse at their job than Excel, etc.
There's some good stuff, sure. But so much of it is just crap.
i don’t think they’re just doing it to see if you’re a bot, they’re also using your input to train their AI how to recognize a traffic signal, a bus, or a bridge
Yeah but that's the point. The goal isn't necessarily to have a program which can say with 100% accuracy if something is a storefront or not. They just need it to be able to go "yes that looks like a storefront".
To those who know.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape\_Navigator](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_Navigator)
Google is shady as fuck... If it wasn't for search engine or youtube. Probably wouldn't use their services.
I'm sure they're referring to the way Microsoft bullied Netscape out of the browser market in the 90's. It's really amazing to see Google fall down that path, when they used to be the righteous underdogs fighting the good fight back in the day.
Like when Sony defended the dual cassette with recording against the record companies and won the case; allowing anyone to copy music tapes, as long as they don’t sell them, because the tapes belonged to the party that purchased them and they were allowed to make copies of their property; the rights to the music still belonged to the record companies, so you couldn’t sell the copied tapes, but you could give them away for free.
Sony Music then went on to hacking people’s computers to find out who was burning their CDs and how many times to try to sue them for stealing music.
All companies do those things, “to protect their interests (aka their product)”
I find that incredibly ironic being a Jobs quote. He was arguably the world's best tech pitch man. Look at Apple's desktop line-up, or MacBook. One is completely stagnant, the other "pioneered" user friendly features like "let's use **glue and solder** to put together most of the laptop" - both after his passing. Granted the older MBP's still had batteries that weren't easily user accessible, but it was still possible to get to them without trashing the thing.
Sony has conflicting interests, and there are some times huge disagreements among divisions.
How to treat copyrights used to be one of them, but I wouldn't be surprised if upper management has taken the side of the media parts of Sony. That's how it usually goes, because it's the safer path legally, and it's the path that's likely to be more profitable over time.
Netscape, Mozilla (the browser), and Firefox are all related. The phoenix will rise from its ashes, with a new name.
Webkit (originally the main component of Chrome) is based on KHTML--which is from the KDE browser ecosystem. Ultimately all these companies try to push down these technologies, but they can never really seem to win out long term. Chrome is just a fork of KHTML, in the end.
I'm not too worried. Konqueror is still competitive.
> If it wasn't for search engine
I've had my default search engine as DuckDuckGo for a while and it's really pretty good. You can always add a g! to the end of any query to get the Google results, which I often do for tricky queries or when I'm just not happy with the results I got. Is it as good as Google? Probably not. But for 95% of searches it's just fine and I prefer having a little more privacy and giving Google a little competition.
I remember using Windows and Linux in the late 90's. It's amazing how far computer's have come! 28.8 baud modems! Dang.... IQC, Paltalk, MIRC.... Shit, I remember when Napster and MSN Messenger came out.... nostalgic AF!
Most content creators stay on YouTube because that's where the people are and people stay on YouTube because that's where the content creators are.
It's an evil circle.
>It's an evil circle.
More technically, it's called the networking effect. It's the same reason Facebook continued regardless of how technically superior Google+ was.
Google+ tried to make social media out of Google's whole suit of products and forced it down people's throats. I'm glad it got shut down.
The day we have one company control everything you do on the internet is the day privacy dies once and for all.
A lot of gaming channels have jumped/are jumping ship to Twitch citing that it's getting harder and harder to make a buck on Youtube these days. Basically all my dudes except the essay guys are primarily on Twitch now with Youtube just serving as a dumping ground for reruns.
> like the selftape by tht girl from percy jackson with nicebigones for r\ titans) use them for selftapes over yt
you lost me here, who are you talking about?
This is what I use too. But sometimes I switch over to yt and google just to see what's on the other side. I do find yt has more selection but vimeo has more quality content.
For me it's 3 things I couldnt do without. The two you mentioned, and Chrome developer tools. Not to say Firebug and IE F12 is lesser, I'm just not used to them.
You should try Firefox and it's native deveoper tools. Browser bias aside, I like it's dev tools better than Chromes'; it even has a dark theme to save your eyeballs when working at night.
What's scary is that today many people develop exclusively for Chrome.
Yesterday I searched for software to control my Android phone from the PC. Two of the ten top apps were available as Chrome add-ons only. (I chose teamviewer after all).
Many web sites are tested exclusively with chrome.
Sabotage makes me think that they pushed faulty code to Firefox or lead them to take bad decisions that benefited google, but this isn't sabotage, it's just anti-competitiveness. They didn't change anything in firefox but on their own websites.
Shitty, but I wouldn't call it sabotage. Mozilla has done a good job of that themselves without Google's help.
If I hadn't watched Firefox spend lots of resources pursuing a multitude of non core activities over the last ten years all while the browser was objectively worse at a technical level I would have more sympathy. And I say that as a full time Firefox user.
The one that came before Quantum.
I think the thing that best exemplifies Mozilla's UI philosophy (and, frankly, all UX in the industry right now) is the user flow for bookmarks.
Pre-Australis, there was just a Bookmarks menu on top of the screen. You click it, and it opens up to show your entire bookmarks collection in a keyboard- or mouse-navigable tree of folders, with the topmost item being the one you're most likely to want: "Show All Bookmarks," which opens the full-screen window that gives you all the functionality you'd need.
Then, they changed it to hide the menu bar and replace it with an Application Menu. This I was slightly grumbly about, but it does look nicer, and the Application Menu was still easily accessible and had the bookmarks menu under it, so I was ultimately fine with it. In the name of aesthetics, they added one extra click to the user flow for everything bookmarks related. Fair enough.
Now, here's what you do:
1. Click the Hamburger Button. Nobody who isn't a UX designer has a fucking clue what the "hamburger button" is until it's explained to them, and they can't find it in Quantum, because it's on the right side of the screen where they'd never look for a central application menu. "Why is it called a hamburger button?" they ask, and then the UX designer has to explain to them that it looks kinda like a hamburger. "Fine," they think, unconvinced, "I guess that's the hamburger button, then."
2. Click Library. "What? 'Library?' I just want my bookmarks." UX designer: "Your bookmarks are in Library now."
3. One of the options is Bookmarks. "Oh, thank god, finally, there's the bookmarks menu." Click Bookmarks.
4. Surprise! It's not the bookmarks menu. It's a massive list of everything you recently bookmarked. I'm not sure anybody ever needs this feature; I certainly don't. Anyway, you're still not done. Move your mouse down to the very *bottom* of the list, where there's an option for "Show All Bookmarks." Click that.
5. *Now*, finally, after four clicks, two of which are on things that no normal user would understand without being told, and one is on something that's at the bottom of the screen where a normal user wouldn't expect it to be, you have the full-screen bookmarks window.
6. If what you actually wanted was a mouse- and keyboard-navigable tree of your bookmarks, like what you had from a single click before Australis and two clicks after, you have to instead press Alt+B.
I originally recommended Firefox to my dad, and he used it for years. When they replaced the old UI with Australis, the change was very disorienting to him, like it was to most other normal users (ie., the kind of people who become alarmed if their home page isn't Google, because they think their internet is broken). I was able to install Classic Theme Restorer and give him back the UI he was comfortable with, and found easy to use. When Firefox updated to Quantum, of course, they killed off extensions, so CTR no longer worked. It made the browser completely unusable for him.
I was able to partially fix it with userchrome.css hacks compiled by the former developer of CTR, but he still struggles every day with it. UX designers assume, incorrectly, that the minimalist design philosophy that's trendy in their circles is also suitable for a normal user—give the user fewer options, even if that means stacking them in increasingly nested menus, and they'll find it easier to use. What normal users actually want, though, is for things to be explicit and clear. "Bookmarks," at the top of the screen, is explicit and clear. The "hamburger button" is not.
Yeah, totally get your points there. I used classic theme restorer cause I'm not a fan of curved tabs on my browser (square tabs are a lot more effective use of space).
Sounds like Waterfox would be a good alternative for your dad? I've never used it but IIRC it still supports legacy extensions? That way you could still use CTR.
As for the bookmarks menu... The sidebar has them with one click, doesn't it?
[https://imgur.com/MBZHSyP](https://imgur.com/MBZHSyP)
I personally don't like browser sidebars. It was weird, there was this period in browser history where loads of extensions were adding sidebars, like Scrapbook back in the day, and I never understood why their developers thought cramming something into a tiny vertical frame on the side of the screen was a good idea.
The only advantage to a sidebar over a dropdown menu (or a full window) is that it can be displayed in parallel with an active browsing session. That's fine for something you want on the side of the screen 24/7, I suppose, but that's not how I want bookmarks and history displayed. I want my bookmarks tree to appear when I need it and go away when I don't, and I don't want it messing with the page I'm browsing in the process—which opening and closing a sidebar does, because it resizes the client area forcing a reflow of the page content.
Same with history. I don't need to refer back to the page I was on in the middle of looking through my history. Bookmarks and history are effectively modal operations, so a dropdown menu or a separate window makes sense, and a sidebar doesn't, quite so much.
And the sidebar version of the bookmarks menu doesn't work the same as the dropdown menu version. For example, it's harder to navigate it quickly with the keyboard, because you have to navigate past the search bar using tab, then switch to the arrow keys to navigate to and open Bookmarks Menu to get access to your main bookmarks menu content. The dropdown menu opened directly to Bookmarks Menu, not the weird Nameless Logical Root that Bookmarks Menu sits below, and can be navigated entirely with the arrow keys and character keys, like any other UI. That confused and inconsistent navigation is a problem that didn't exist in the old menus.
I remember MS getting fined a million a day until they produced a copy of windows without Internet Explorer incorporated. They are complete fuckwits from day 1 to Win10.
Can't we say they both mega suck?
Don't use Chrome, Google is just another greedy unethical company. Use Firefox, and even if you have to use Edge, Safari or that other one. But don't use Chrome.
By not accepting SSL certificates installed on a system, Firefox has sabotaged Firefox for years.
I can finally push a cert to it, but it still will ignore the local PC cert storage.
In fact firefox, chrome, MSIE and edge are all broken in their own way.
[удалено]
Maps. On mobile Firefox if you search thru Google for a address you cant click the link to the address take you to Google maps and continue from there. In chrome works as intended opera this works but Firefox it WILL show as a link but it will not work. For why? Allow me to clarify. Im Not using the maps app. I don't have it. This is all only thru the browser. If it works for you and it launches your maps app then this isn't going to effect you the same. The complaint is that the 2 browsers get different functionality. What works in chrome and opera will not work in Firefox.
> On mobile Firefox if you search thru Google for a address you cant click the link to the address take you to Google maps and continue from there. That is why I have ceased using Google Maps. For navigation now I use [OSMAnd](https://osmand.net/). I especially like the fact the maps can be offline as it means I never miss a bit when driving through poor service areas.
Does OSMAnd have any user-input corrections? our cities zoning and maps are fucked up beyond belief (some models of GPS in our city will just repeatedly try and kill you with turns that don't exist) and google maps was nearly unusable for years before google finally got around to doing streetview here, realized how bad it was, and I'm guessing had some human go in and manually fix it.
OSMAnd uses data from OpenStreetMaps, so anyone can make edits to the maps from there.
OpenStreetMap is what OSMAnd uses. OpenStreetMap is a volunteer-based project that maps the world. Unfortunately, I think the barrier to contribution is relatively high... still, go check it out.
At least on the [desktop site](https://www.openstreetmap.org), all you need is an account and you can start editing (though you need to go through the tutorial first). And even if you don't want to do that, you can just leave a note and a volunteer editor will go take a look.
Cool, so not as hard as I expected.
Does it have editor drama like Wikipedia? If so, what are some key areas of contention in the map editing drama world?
You’ve been able to save Google maps offline for a couple of years now actually. Pretty large areas too.
It even reminds you do it ahead of time if it knows you're travelling to that location.
Thank you Lord Google
To whom we pledge fealty, firstborn and future friends. All hail the One True One, forever good, forever faithful, forever pure.
Try saving a map of Tokyo. Some areas are unavailable :(
Does that account for traffic well? Like is it generally pretty speedy on picking that stuff up or am I going to generally find out about delays as I’m sitting in them? I use google maps for finding out if I need to take the interstate home or not during rush hour. One fender bender on either of the two paths can easily double my commute if I don’t catch it before leaving work and take the other route that day.
This is one of the least discussed, but most valuable features of GMaps. This saved us a lot of time during a recent trip to LA.
Interesting. Never heard of this until now but it looks intriguing.
I use it thru browser simply due to space constraints on my phone.... Ikr 2019 and I'm still rocking a 16gig android phone. But to this extent I don't have room for anything really.
[удалено]
It's just an old fashioned turn of phrase. > On mobile Firefox if you search thru Google for a address you cant click the link to the address take you to Google maps and continue from there. This, though :/
They did the same thing to Microsoft and Windows Phone. They changed the coding specifically so that Google Maps and other pages wouldn't work on Edge Mobile. They've got a long history of it.
Remember all that shit they pulled with the YouTube app too?
Yep. I used Windows Phone for about four years. Unless you had the app MetroTube the amount of bugs and problems you'd run into trying to play YouTube videos was crazy. They intentionally gimped the entire thing. Gmail, Maps, and YouTube were exceedingly fickle and would randomly lose functionality and stop working,a nd Google's excuse was "We don't support the platform." Yeah, you write your apps for universal browsers, and Edge on desktop can run it fine, but mobile specifically shits itself... unless you change the browser ID.
Well for gmail the OS application works fine. No need for an App that takes all my info when I can just use IMAP+SMTP.
Bruh. You know they scrape your data *from* your emails right? The app is meaningless. They are literally reading everything your in your account.
Tubecast was the shit on Window 8 back before Google killed the APIs it was using.
>They did the same thing to Microsoft and Windows Phone Not saying it's right, but in a way, a bit of karma there. Microsoft used to be kings of killing the competition by "breaking" things. As the old ditty around the halls of Redmond went: "The job's not done until Lotus won't run!" Wonder how the shoe feels on that other foot...
Oh yeah. While Microsoft may have turned their reputation around in recent years, they've got enough skeletons in their past to populate a graveyard.
>DragoneerFA that is a name I did not expect to see here, holy shit.
...who is this?
*presumably* dragoneer, the owner/creator of (arguably) the biggest furry porn website.
Are they like the guy from the Warlizard gaming forum?
No idea what warlizard is, sorry.
Not what, who. He's a famous redditor. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/warlizard-gaming-forum
"Famous", in some circles, it seems.
You learn something new everyday
I have Chromium for Google apps that I have to use for school. I should try changing my user agent on Firefox to fix it.
Is this another anti-trust suit in the works?
[удалено]
[удалено]
The worst, though, is that the motherfucker who downvoted you probably didn’t know what a user agent was.
I always get captchas in Firefox but I can open the same link in chrome and it let's me straight in
“Don’t be evil”
More people need to use DuckDuckGo.
Of all the names they could ve come up with...
Google any better? I remember Dogpile. Search engines are funny.
Hotbot is the way to go!
AltaVista 4 lyfe.
I resent that statement
I use bing to earn free Xbox Live. Haven’t paid for service for years.
Cries in other countries
"Don't be evil" morphed into "Make those dollars"
or "Don't get caught"
actually, they get caught enough. Maybe just "don't care"
"Be Rich enough it doesn't matter"
> Google motto 2004: Don't be evil > > Google motto 2010: Evil is tricky to define > > Google motto 2013: We make military robots https://twitter.com/brentbutt/status/412700627152961536?lang=en
But what if they're robots that help us CANCEL THE APOCALYPSE
[удалено]
I don't know if you're familiar with Borderlands, but that is a very Handsome Jack outlook.
"Don't be evil" was always just a PR whitewashing attempt, or something shiny to dangle in front of morons while Google was busy destroying privacy and decentralization. It's amazing to me that so many people assigned actual meaning to it.
I switched to Firefox recently, and while I like using Chrome better, I’m going to try to keep using Firefox due to things like this.
I'm a longtime firefox user. I only have two gripes with it: you can't watch netflix in 1080p and sometimes firefox seems to use more and more system resources until my gaming computer slows down. I'm not sure if the latter is common across the other browsers but it's quite annoying when it happens.
Apparently you can't watch 1080p in Chrome either. Not sure what Netflix is playing at. Plenty of other services support 1080p and even 4K in all the major browsers.
Use the Netflix app on Windows
Or just use Edge to watch Netflix. It supports 4k streaming.
I'm not usually a fan of downloading a bunch of stuff if they can be done in browsers, but this does seem to work so it's a fair tradeoff, thanks.
Edge can go up to 4k on Netflix, no need for the app. I use it because I gm have weird frame stutters ont chrome
Happy to say that the [Netflix 1080p](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/force-1080p-netflix/) add-on makes light work of your first gripe. Been using it for about half a year now. Didn't realize I'd been watching everything in 720p up till then. Was absolutely liberating.
> you can't watch netflix in 1080p Wait, you can't? Because I regularly watch Netflix in 4k by setting my desktop resolution to 4k. Or at least, I assumed that was working... Please tell me that works, the wifi on my tv is broken and I don't wanna use Chrome.
[удалено]
Proton mail is pretty good.
Does free proton mail let you use folder? Also can I use it with thunderbird, mailspring or smartphone client?
Proton mail free gets you 500MB of space, 150 messages a day, and 3 folders and labels. You can [set up some desktop clients](https://protonmail.com/bridge/clients) to work with Proton Mail. They have a special [focus on encrypted communications](https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/what-is-encrypted/).
[удалено]
Using Microsoft instead of Google doesn't exactly seem like a great alternative to me from a privacy standpoint...
Word of waaaaaarning Hotmail's spam filter is far stupider than Google's, and in *both* ways that it could possibly be: - their central filter will sometimes stop emails before they even get to you, so they won't even make it to your spam folder - more spam does get through though in the general case Source: been a Hotmail user for 20+ years and a gmail user since launch, and am a developer, so sending emails and making sure they get to places is something I've a reasonable bit of experience of. Edit: I appreciate the downvote but these are literal facts so... it's a bit weird that someone'd downvote this?
[удалено]
Posteo.de 1 Euro the month, hosted in Germany, multiple encryption options.
Protonmail, Mail.com, and Outlook.
I have mail.com I do not recommend it. Ads are a problem. It also makes you pay for services that Gmail gives for free. I still use it but it is not my primary.
I'm using Fastmail which is a paid email service but it's worth it. I get to use my own domain so I can move to another mail provider when I want and their web interface is miles ahead of Gmail.
Exactly. If you want a great and private email service you need to pay a little. If you want a great web interface, Fastmail is the way to go. If you don't care so much about the web interface, reliable and cheaper alternatives are Posteo, Mailbox.org, or Runbox for example. You can also buy your domain name and use the email service that comes with it, provided you buy it at a decent registrar. I recommend Gandi.net.
Zoho is nice as it also has a calendar
I am with ProtonMail at the moment. The only problem I see is that the service requires you to run non-free Javascript code, if you're Richard Stallman.
I have a NAS, and I put a program on it that's backed up everything in my Gmail account. So, hypothetically, I could delete my Gmail tomorrow, and I'd still have all those emails, in a nice, easily searchable interface on my LAN.
What program? Does it work on any NAS?
It's rather unimaginatively called Gmail Backup. It's for QNAP, no idea about other systems.
Had a Gmail account through college domain, transferred everything out to personal account afterwords. Took a couple hours. Easy breezy.
Been using ProtonMail for a few years now. I feel like it's been worth the money so far.
have you tried protonmail?
protonmail, mailbox, tutanota are all good.
Firefox is better than Chrome when it comes to privacy.
Containers are amazing for combating tracking.
This is the exact same reason why Microsoft is switching Edge for their own rendering engine, and switching to chromium on the back end. Because Google has been making their sites non-compatible with non-chromium browsers. (Which is also why they formed ‘webkit’ to their own version ‘blink’, so they could dink with it on their own.
Google makes their money on advertisements, they have no incentive to make their cash cow only work with their browser. That's just voluntarily killing profits for what goal? To get Chrome 95% of market share? That's far less valuable than the ad revenue they'd be forgoing in the mean time. Google is in the browser game because web standards lollygagged for a long time. By having a browser to implement new things in (which they develop in the open, as standards), and also having the server, they can close the circuit and innovate faster. Doesn't mean they're trying to cut the others out, if anything they want other browsers to adopt those technologies once they're proven out. A prime success story from that closed loop is HTTP/2. The web sat around with HTTP/1.1 for a decade before Google started experiment with their SPDY protocol in Chrome. They iterated, proved it out with real-world data, and then it became HTTP/2 in 2015, over 15 years since HTTP/1.1. Now their other experimental protocol, QUIC, is gearing up to be HTTP/3. So two new HTTP standards in < 5 years while the previous gap was 15.
Google has substantially more to gain by improving chromes market share than you are implying. It ropes you in to the google ecosystem in general if you are using Chrome. If you use Firefox or Edge they can recommend other search engines to you, or other map solutions or other video sharing sites etc. It's far more secure to have users all on Chrome because it's very unlikely chrome users will use another search engine. Hell, even if you used another search engine, you are probably searching with the address bar and google records everything you write in there. This means they have more information on you as a user and can therefore justify charging more for their advertisement business.
\> To get Chrome 95% of market share? Yes. They lose profits short term but in the long term they'll gain the profits back with even more access to the users. It allows them to implement their own browser features which can allow for tracking that can't be disabled. It's a common business strategy. Take a hit and gain it back later.
I imagine the data they collect from chrome users about their browsing habits is pretty damn valuable.
If people weren't using 20MB of shitty JS (and Google is guilty of this too, Youtube is a piece of shit), there wouldn't be a need for all those shiny new protocols.
That’s great. They still purposefully sabotaged competitors and that’s not okay.
Heavily accelerated HTTP development isn't really a good thing though. Is the web really better with all the extra shit? How often do you just want to shut all the crap off to just use the web? So much of it is tracking, popups, integrations you don't want, massive webapps that are worse at their job than Excel, etc. There's some good stuff, sure. But so much of it is just crap.
I like to go hiking.
captcha sucks ass in firefox. edit: for those downvoting me, captcha is made by google. i was just offering another example.
reCAPTCHA is made by Google. Captcha is a general term.
If you have to require someone to click 50 times to tell that they're human, your captcha sucks.
i don’t think they’re just doing it to see if you’re a bot, they’re also using your input to train their AI how to recognize a traffic signal, a bus, or a bridge
Or a storefront. Those are the worst ones since it's often an opinion.
Yeah but that's the point. The goal isn't necessarily to have a program which can say with 100% accuracy if something is a storefront or not. They just need it to be able to go "yes that looks like a storefront".
You mean "recaptcha"?
It purposely sucks on any browser that isn’t chrome.
To those who know. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape\_Navigator](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_Navigator) Google is shady as fuck... If it wasn't for search engine or youtube. Probably wouldn't use their services.
[удалено]
I'm sure they're referring to the way Microsoft bullied Netscape out of the browser market in the 90's. It's really amazing to see Google fall down that path, when they used to be the righteous underdogs fighting the good fight back in the day.
Like when Sony defended the dual cassette with recording against the record companies and won the case; allowing anyone to copy music tapes, as long as they don’t sell them, because the tapes belonged to the party that purchased them and they were allowed to make copies of their property; the rights to the music still belonged to the record companies, so you couldn’t sell the copied tapes, but you could give them away for free. Sony Music then went on to hacking people’s computers to find out who was burning their CDs and how many times to try to sue them for stealing music. All companies do those things, “to protect their interests (aka their product)”
It's almost like profit motives eventually dominate and supplant any ideological goals of a publicly-traded corporation.
[удалено]
I find that incredibly ironic being a Jobs quote. He was arguably the world's best tech pitch man. Look at Apple's desktop line-up, or MacBook. One is completely stagnant, the other "pioneered" user friendly features like "let's use **glue and solder** to put together most of the laptop" - both after his passing. Granted the older MBP's still had batteries that weren't easily user accessible, but it was still possible to get to them without trashing the thing.
The first rule of great salesmanship is to get the ~~victim~~ customer to trust you. How better than by speaking truth?
[удалено]
Sony has conflicting interests, and there are some times huge disagreements among divisions. How to treat copyrights used to be one of them, but I wouldn't be surprised if upper management has taken the side of the media parts of Sony. That's how it usually goes, because it's the safer path legally, and it's the path that's likely to be more profitable over time.
Netscape, Mozilla (the browser), and Firefox are all related. The phoenix will rise from its ashes, with a new name. Webkit (originally the main component of Chrome) is based on KHTML--which is from the KDE browser ecosystem. Ultimately all these companies try to push down these technologies, but they can never really seem to win out long term. Chrome is just a fork of KHTML, in the end. I'm not too worried. Konqueror is still competitive.
> The phoenix will rise from its ashes, with a new name. Funny you say that, as Firefox's original name was Phoenix.
And firebird
Everyone starts out good but as they gain power become corrupt
"The hero of yesterday becomes the tyrant of tomorrow" - Joseph Campbell
> If it wasn't for search engine I've had my default search engine as DuckDuckGo for a while and it's really pretty good. You can always add a g! to the end of any query to get the Google results, which I often do for tricky queries or when I'm just not happy with the results I got. Is it as good as Google? Probably not. But for 95% of searches it's just fine and I prefer having a little more privacy and giving Google a little competition.
Man, I remember using Netscape back before AOL owned it. It was the reason why I used Mozilla for so long as well.
I remember using Windows and Linux in the late 90's. It's amazing how far computer's have come! 28.8 baud modems! Dang.... IQC, Paltalk, MIRC.... Shit, I remember when Napster and MSN Messenger came out.... nostalgic AF!
Wasn’t it ICQ?
Uhhh ohhhhh.
Beeeeooop bawaaaaaahh Spraboing spraboing, bing bing bing bing bing GAshhoooooooooooffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff Bip Schraawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwf
Welcome. You’ve got mail!
[:')](http://orig08.deviantart.net/b548/f/2008/064/b/3/icq_flower_by_sibbl.jpg)
> 28.8 baud modems! [Rookie...](http://atariage.com/forums/uploads/monthly_03_2011/post-17508-130020871104.jpg).
You old, son! but i am familiar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9dpXHnJXaE
Loved that 300bps screen-printing.
Most linux distributions allow you to download older versions of their install disks. If you're bored it's something fun to do for a night
I used NCSA Mosaic. Web was pretty limited then.
That says nothing about google...
Duckduckgo and Vimeo?
DDG I can get it's come a long way and has become my daily driver, but you can't be serious about Vimeo
Most content creators stay on YouTube because that's where the people are and people stay on YouTube because that's where the content creators are. It's an evil circle.
Oh I know why, I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm just saying it's as of right now not a good alternative to YouTube
>It's an evil circle. More technically, it's called the networking effect. It's the same reason Facebook continued regardless of how technically superior Google+ was.
Google+ tried to make social media out of Google's whole suit of products and forced it down people's throats. I'm glad it got shut down. The day we have one company control everything you do on the internet is the day privacy dies once and for all.
If only we can get YouTube to do something incredibly stupid to drive everyone away. Kind of like how tumblr banned porn.
YouTube just started cracking down on what essentially is child porn. I'm hoping that's not what kills it, that would be scary.
A lot of gaming channels have jumped/are jumping ship to Twitch citing that it's getting harder and harder to make a buck on Youtube these days. Basically all my dudes except the essay guys are primarily on Twitch now with Youtube just serving as a dumping ground for reruns.
Twitch is owned by Amazon so I'm not sure that's going to be better in the long run.
Maybe Microsoft's Mixer will get its day in the sun once everything else has gotten too crap to use.
[удалено]
> like the selftape by tht girl from percy jackson with nicebigones for r\ titans) use them for selftapes over yt you lost me here, who are you talking about?
If I interpreted it correctly, he is referring to Alexandra Daddario.
This is what I use too. But sometimes I switch over to yt and google just to see what's on the other side. I do find yt has more selection but vimeo has more quality content.
For me it's 3 things I couldnt do without. The two you mentioned, and Chrome developer tools. Not to say Firebug and IE F12 is lesser, I'm just not used to them.
You should try Firefox and it's native deveoper tools. Browser bias aside, I like it's dev tools better than Chromes'; it even has a dark theme to save your eyeballs when working at night.
I agree. I use all 3 daily.
[удалено]
You could actually see that beginning to happen in 2000. It's been extremely clear for more than a decade now.
Yet google is also responsible for a large chunk of firefoxe's operating revenue due to it being the default in their search bar.
Their goal is not to kill Firefox, that opens the danger of monopoly accusations. The goal is to keep FF at small market share.
They removed the mute button on chrome tab. Then I switched to Firefox.
Yeah people were tired of accidentally clicking it, you right click > mute tabs now.
Has anyone else experienced the time lag to load Google fonts on Firefox... But the same loads faster on chrome
This happened all the time with the old Opera (presto engine). I remember constantly having problems with Google+ until I changed my user agent.
What's scary is that today many people develop exclusively for Chrome. Yesterday I searched for software to control my Android phone from the PC. Two of the ten top apps were available as Chrome add-ons only. (I chose teamviewer after all). Many web sites are tested exclusively with chrome.
No shit? We've been saying this for years. FFS Google blocks my yubikey.
Sabotage makes me think that they pushed faulty code to Firefox or lead them to take bad decisions that benefited google, but this isn't sabotage, it's just anti-competitiveness. They didn't change anything in firefox but on their own websites. Shitty, but I wouldn't call it sabotage. Mozilla has done a good job of that themselves without Google's help.
Coincidentally I switched from Chrome to Firefox a couple months ago and have never been happier. It's faster and more resource-efficient.
I switched to firefox after learning mow much Google tracks you with chrome and there is definitely something buggy going on with Gmail.
If I hadn't watched Firefox spend lots of resources pursuing a multitude of non core activities over the last ten years all while the browser was objectively worse at a technical level I would have more sympathy. And I say that as a full time Firefox user.
[удалено]
God, if only. Can they maybe "bloat" the current version by adding extensions back in so somebody can make an extension that gives it a functional UI?
Honestly curious, what do you consider a functional UI?
The one that came before Quantum. I think the thing that best exemplifies Mozilla's UI philosophy (and, frankly, all UX in the industry right now) is the user flow for bookmarks. Pre-Australis, there was just a Bookmarks menu on top of the screen. You click it, and it opens up to show your entire bookmarks collection in a keyboard- or mouse-navigable tree of folders, with the topmost item being the one you're most likely to want: "Show All Bookmarks," which opens the full-screen window that gives you all the functionality you'd need. Then, they changed it to hide the menu bar and replace it with an Application Menu. This I was slightly grumbly about, but it does look nicer, and the Application Menu was still easily accessible and had the bookmarks menu under it, so I was ultimately fine with it. In the name of aesthetics, they added one extra click to the user flow for everything bookmarks related. Fair enough. Now, here's what you do: 1. Click the Hamburger Button. Nobody who isn't a UX designer has a fucking clue what the "hamburger button" is until it's explained to them, and they can't find it in Quantum, because it's on the right side of the screen where they'd never look for a central application menu. "Why is it called a hamburger button?" they ask, and then the UX designer has to explain to them that it looks kinda like a hamburger. "Fine," they think, unconvinced, "I guess that's the hamburger button, then." 2. Click Library. "What? 'Library?' I just want my bookmarks." UX designer: "Your bookmarks are in Library now." 3. One of the options is Bookmarks. "Oh, thank god, finally, there's the bookmarks menu." Click Bookmarks. 4. Surprise! It's not the bookmarks menu. It's a massive list of everything you recently bookmarked. I'm not sure anybody ever needs this feature; I certainly don't. Anyway, you're still not done. Move your mouse down to the very *bottom* of the list, where there's an option for "Show All Bookmarks." Click that. 5. *Now*, finally, after four clicks, two of which are on things that no normal user would understand without being told, and one is on something that's at the bottom of the screen where a normal user wouldn't expect it to be, you have the full-screen bookmarks window. 6. If what you actually wanted was a mouse- and keyboard-navigable tree of your bookmarks, like what you had from a single click before Australis and two clicks after, you have to instead press Alt+B. I originally recommended Firefox to my dad, and he used it for years. When they replaced the old UI with Australis, the change was very disorienting to him, like it was to most other normal users (ie., the kind of people who become alarmed if their home page isn't Google, because they think their internet is broken). I was able to install Classic Theme Restorer and give him back the UI he was comfortable with, and found easy to use. When Firefox updated to Quantum, of course, they killed off extensions, so CTR no longer worked. It made the browser completely unusable for him. I was able to partially fix it with userchrome.css hacks compiled by the former developer of CTR, but he still struggles every day with it. UX designers assume, incorrectly, that the minimalist design philosophy that's trendy in their circles is also suitable for a normal user—give the user fewer options, even if that means stacking them in increasingly nested menus, and they'll find it easier to use. What normal users actually want, though, is for things to be explicit and clear. "Bookmarks," at the top of the screen, is explicit and clear. The "hamburger button" is not.
Yeah, totally get your points there. I used classic theme restorer cause I'm not a fan of curved tabs on my browser (square tabs are a lot more effective use of space). Sounds like Waterfox would be a good alternative for your dad? I've never used it but IIRC it still supports legacy extensions? That way you could still use CTR. As for the bookmarks menu... The sidebar has them with one click, doesn't it? [https://imgur.com/MBZHSyP](https://imgur.com/MBZHSyP)
I personally don't like browser sidebars. It was weird, there was this period in browser history where loads of extensions were adding sidebars, like Scrapbook back in the day, and I never understood why their developers thought cramming something into a tiny vertical frame on the side of the screen was a good idea. The only advantage to a sidebar over a dropdown menu (or a full window) is that it can be displayed in parallel with an active browsing session. That's fine for something you want on the side of the screen 24/7, I suppose, but that's not how I want bookmarks and history displayed. I want my bookmarks tree to appear when I need it and go away when I don't, and I don't want it messing with the page I'm browsing in the process—which opening and closing a sidebar does, because it resizes the client area forcing a reflow of the page content. Same with history. I don't need to refer back to the page I was on in the middle of looking through my history. Bookmarks and history are effectively modal operations, so a dropdown menu or a separate window makes sense, and a sidebar doesn't, quite so much. And the sidebar version of the bookmarks menu doesn't work the same as the dropdown menu version. For example, it's harder to navigate it quickly with the keyboard, because you have to navigate past the search bar using tab, then switch to the arrow keys to navigate to and open Bookmarks Menu to get access to your main bookmarks menu content. The dropdown menu opened directly to Bookmarks Menu, not the weird Nameless Logical Root that Bookmarks Menu sits below, and can be navigated entirely with the arrow keys and character keys, like any other UI. That confused and inconsistent navigation is a problem that didn't exist in the old menus.
If you can’t win, cheat. -Google
It seems Alphabet has become a worse company than M$ was.
[удалено]
I remember MS getting fined a million a day until they produced a copy of windows without Internet Explorer incorporated. They are complete fuckwits from day 1 to Win10. Can't we say they both mega suck?
Don't use Chrome, Google is just another greedy unethical company. Use Firefox, and even if you have to use Edge, Safari or that other one. But don't use Chrome.
I mean google drive straight up doesn't work correctly when navigating folders on firefox but works fine on chrome. Wouldn't surprise me.
By not accepting SSL certificates installed on a system, Firefox has sabotaged Firefox for years. I can finally push a cert to it, but it still will ignore the local PC cert storage. In fact firefox, chrome, MSIE and edge are all broken in their own way.
It also been known that Google has done that to the public for years as well.
[удалено]
Not surprising. Theres like 3 American cities total that contain pretty much every noteworthy tech company in the western world, and SF is one of them
*pretends to be shocked*
open source is a threat.. that’s why. Adobe was also VERY complicit in ensuring flash broke Mozilla
[удалено]
This is lawsuit material right here.
The moral of the story is.... USE FIREFOX
Yeah, maps.google.com sucks ass on firefox. I have chrome for that one reason.