honestly, Mozilla is a lost cause.

[gbargoud@masto.nyc]

@fasterandworse @dartov

There is http://servo.org which was started and abandoned by mozilla before being picked back up by others. As I understand it, that is the main contender for the next new browser.

There's also http://ladybird.org but I recommend you do a quick search about the community around that one before seriously checking it out.

[spinnyspinlock@infosec.exchange]

@fasterandworse I wouldn't be surprised. I am mildly upset ever since they fired the Servo team. Even if the community picked it up, I have a vague idea of how big an undertaking it would be (I know a very small part of the codebase, only familiar because it was present in chromium)

SeaMonkey is still maintained, some others too; It may be cope, but it feels Mozilla knows better than abandoning the single reason people still use their browser.

[jwz@mastodon.social]

@fasterandworse They've been doing that for years on iOS, haven't they? Firefox for iOS is just Chrome wearing a skin-suit like Edgar from Men In Black.

[edent@mastodon.social]

@fasterandworse @jwz that's an iOS restriction. Apple don't allow alternative rendering engines.
https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/overview/ios.html

You can track Mozilla's progress on an iOS build of Gecko at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1882872

[jwz@mastodon.social]

@Edent @fasterandworse I am well aware. This buck-passing makes it no less absurd.

[edent@mastodon.social]

@jwz What do you mean by "buck passing"?

If Apple refuse to certify the app, what do you want them to do?

[slightlyoff@toot.cafe]

@Edent @jwz Browser vendors have many options, including rebranding these knockoff browsers "Lite" or something (e.g., "FF Lite", "Chrome Lite", etc.) to indicate how Apple is holding everyone back.

Most browser leaders (across the board) do not understand how much lack of autonomy is hurting their platform's chances. It's an omniscandal.

[slightlyoff@toot.cafe]

@Edent @jwz Mozilla is not the worst offender here; Chromies are trapped in the Android/Play team's machinations and the terms of the iOS deal (now > $20BN/yr), making Google the biggest disappointment by a country mile. But failure to use the one true asset the Mozilla Foundation has nurtured -- its independence -- for the cause of an open web where the wealthy can see it too is also indefensible. And unlike Google, you can't chalk it up to profit motive; it's just strategic incompetence.

[jwz@mastodon.social]

@Edent @fasterandworse Calling it Firefox is just flat-out deception. They should have just not done it at all.

[jwz@mastodon.social]

@Edent @fasterandworse And by "buck passing" I mean, "Oh, it's not our fault that the thing we call Firefox is actually Chrome. We had no choice."

Yeah. Yeah you did. Sometimes the only way to win is not to play.

[leonardo@mastodon.bida.im]

@Edent @fasterandworse @jwz the recent mozilla history shows us they just prefer not to remember this quote

[jwz@mastodon.social]

@Edent @fasterandworse Had they stuck to their principles, they could have still been hammering the conversation, "Why is there no Firefox on iOS? Because Apple won't let us." That's what an org with the mission of preserving the open web would do.

Instead, they released a zombie skin suit to *pretend* there's an iOS Firefox and nipped that conversation in the bud. That's what an organization only interested in juicing their market share numbers would do.

And it does Apple's PR for them.

[sil@mastodon.social]

@jwz @Edent @fasterandworse 100% agreed. It's not Firefox, and it wasn't when they did it. I never did eat a hat 11 years ago to express my total surprise that Mozilla were prepared to do this; maybe if I had they'd have listened.

[l_inadapte@framapiaf.org]

@fasterandworse
Sounds like:
"We serve poison in our bar, but you are free not to drink it."