In regards to Mozilla creating an Electron alternative, they already tried that. It was called Proton and it never caught on but was solely bleeding money so they had to shut it down again.
Proton was never mature or stable so saying it "never caught on" is a bit of a joke. It was never released.
It also wasn't equivalent to Electron for a bunch of big architectural reasons related to required changes to Gecko that the team never prioritises because Proton wasn't a priority project.
> was solely bleeding money
Yes. Because unreleased in-progress projects should be profitable before they're released in order to be viable. How much money was it bleeding? Do you have eyes on these accounts?
Any chance we could see something like this in Pulse Browser or is that something that just requires touching too much of the underlying code base to be viable? ^^
Please not just vertical, I need my trees. Sidebery works pretty well though. Sometimes updates are a little delayed, but it's not very bad. Native support and optimizations for Sidebery should do the trick.
This would be huge for me. I can't really move away from Edge for productivity/work use cases until I have vertical tabs to a comparable usability in another browser.
Vertical tabs are indeed big for me, but I’ll add that it’s critical that it be possible to hide the unnecessarily huge and ugly sidebar header, which is the biggest problem plaguing vertical tab extensions on Firefox. Right now that requires userchrome edits which is ridiculous.
On the topic of Twiter, Mastodon, and the Fediverse, why do federated FOSS alternatives to popular platforms not offer a read-only version of said platform as one of its instances to augment its lack of content?
In the example of Twitter, Nitter already exists as an alternative front-end. Now what if there's a Mastodon instance that uses Nitter to wrap official Twitter content and serve it as if it where the twitter.com mastodon instance? Again it would need to be a read-only version as Twitter is not Mastodon but it would help fill the content gap for sure.
Now Mastodon might not have a content issue but PeerTube for example very well has and in that case masquerading YouTube as a PeerTube instance would become very interesting.
There is a lot of Twitter content out there. Too much for a single instance to proxy. I believe there are projects to mirror specific Twitter accounts to a (personal) Mastodon server so you can switch apps without needing two apps. I'm not sure what the implication would be for privacy/data usage regulations if you open those messages to the public, though; blindly reposting everything may actually violate data privacy laws (yes, even if that information is publicly available).
Engagement with the audience also is a significant factor for making social media enjoyable. A read-only mirror of Twitter would be very boring, because you can respond/tag/whatever you want for all eternity, but the Twitter authors would never notice.
Such a system would work for people primarily using Mastodon that cross-post to Twitter; you could add Twitter replies to the Mastodon replies and get a mixed content stream (that Twitter users might miss half of when discussions respond to as-of-yet unproxied messages).
Interestingly I started using Twitter as a write only medium, which means I didn't have any interactions there with anyone. This led to the subscribers stagnating, everyone who already was subscribed stayed subscribed but no new people would subscribe for years.
Nitter exists and it is open source. Why not add a mastodon API to it?
The existence of such a thing in no way has anything to do with existing mastodon instances TOS / acceptable use relationship with twitter (if such a relationship even exists).0
Yeah no, modifying logic of a binary application as large and complex as modern web browsers is slightly more involved than the Discord frontend mods that essentially just tweak some CSS and or HTML and JavaScript.
This. I didn't mean to imply that Discord modding is as easy as Chrome modding. All I meant to say is that people are willing to mod Discord with random .exes so they'd do the same with Chrome.
Repairability and device thinness are by no means mutually exclusive IMO.
When LTT did a review of the Framework laptop for example they also did a size comparison with a similarly specced Dell laptop and found that the framework both thinner and sturdier than the Dell laptop, next to being obviously more repairable ¯\_( ツ )_/¯
Yes, and they charge $129 to remove some screws, unplug an old battery, and plug in a new battery. So why do they not give people the option to just buy a battery, if they are doing all these self service repair rollouts.
The point is they are going through this song and dance of selling parts directly to customers, but have excluded extremely easily replacement batteries.
Please don't continue lazily spreading this "planned obsolescence" nonsense, especially in cases like this where it's obvious, immediately, that the claim is wholly unsupported by any facts or even possible theories. Thanks.
