ranson

About

Username
ranson
Joined
Visits
31
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
367
Badges
1
Posts
66
  • Firefox wants to level the browser playing field with Microsoft, Google, and Apple

    Firefox is a has-been browser that has failed due to its own incompetence.

    Its own code is hugely buggy, insecure, and resource intensive which is why Apple forced WebKit engines only on iOS devices.

    Firefox had its time years ago.

    Hell, even Opera ditched its own engine for Chromium as did Microsoft. Not that I think Chromium is better. I refuse to use Chrome and Google is not making me desire it with the stupid systems being implemented. But I’d prefer a Chromium browser to a Mozilla engined browser any day.

    This is a really hot take, and I'm not sure what the point is of bashing an open source browser that is being maintained and improved by a community of volunteers.

    It is unfortunate that more mainstream users (including myself) do not use Firefox, because it is actually a decent browser that is quite privacy-conscious.

    "Hugely buggy" is certainly untrue - it objectively has about as many bugs and vulnerabilities as chrome and safari - measured by outstanding bug reports + cadence of issues fixed.

    "Insecure" is patently false. In fact, a quick stroll over to any browser-related forum on ArsTechnica - a community of the most technical folks on the internet - shows that a measurable portion of the community has consciously switched from Chrome to Firefox in the last year - _because_ it is viewed by them as more secure and private. Firefox is the preferred browser of most Linux users. In fact, Safari could arguably be the _least_ secure, since it cannot currently be patched without a Apple issuing a new minor or bugfix OS release, whereas the others only require an update to the browser application itself. Meaning that actively exploited vulnerabilities can linger longer on Apple devices due to the time it takes them to publish an OS release and the time it takes most users to patch an OS versus getting automated app updates overnight while charging the device. And on iOS, since all browsers must use the OS-provided webkit library, that makes all browsers on iOS inherently more insecure than those browsers's releases on other platforms - and the browser maker can't even do anything about it (!!!). What Apple is doing with webkit lock-in on iOS should be illegal (and someday will be).

    There was definitely a time where the quality/performance of FF was suspect. But over the last 5 or so years, they have largely rejoined the pack in those matters. It certainly hurt them at the time. But Mozilla's contention now (about which they are correct) is that, despite having a comparable browser to the rest of the pack, the largest forces in desktop and mobile OSes are making it increasingly harder for users to choose a browser other than one offered by the OS maker. That is exactly what got Microsoft in trouble in the late 90's over Internet Explorer, which cost them billions in antitrust fines.
    gatorguywilliamlondonmuthuk_vanalingamcitpeksRespite
  • Apple TV+ falls flat at Critics Choice Awards

    40domi said:
    Hardly surprising, their content is as woke and poor as Disney +
    I've had numerous opportunities to have it for free...not interested, it's rubbish ߘ᦬t;/div>

    If you have declined the free trial for AppleTV+ repeatedly, how do you know it is rubbish? I don't watch a lot of ATV+ content, but do occasionally. There are some great shows and movies including Ted Lasso, Lessons in Chemistry, Foundation, Killers of the Flower Moon, and more. Maybe you tried the service early on when it lacked a lot of content. But the library is growing regularly and has a number of titles worth watching on a free trial.
    ronnpscooter63steveausflagelwilliamlondontmaywatto_cobra
  • Apple TV+ falls flat at Critics Choice Awards

    On the one hand, they have some very high quality shows and movies. On the other hand, they have a very small audience of people watching and talking about these shows. Maybe it doesn’t seem fair, but it still matters. I don’t think they’re going to pull off a “CODA” style win again.
    Actually, most of the awards that are voted on by industry members (SAG, Golden Globes, Oscars) or critics (CTA) don't have much to do with popularity/reach, and focus more on originality, writing, individual standout performances, etc. That is why the Marvel movies never win (or are even nominated) in the big categories, and movies that most people have never heard of (Nomadland, CODA, Moonlight) do win. To further that point - a good many award-winning films don't even make it to wide release until after the awards season ends.
    pscooter63watto_cobra
  • Spatial Video shot on iPhone for Apple Vision Pro previewed for a select few

    netrox said:

    I imagine that would be too expensive to compute at this point. 

    Isn't that they are recorded with two 2K resolution and merged as 4K worth of data for 3D? So, it would make sense they don't do 8K at this time. 

    Not quite. It is recording two separate 1080p (aka HD) streams. When going from HD to 4K, the pixel counts are doubled on both the horizontal and vertical axes; thus four separate HD streams would be required for a combined 4K resolution.
    byronlFileMakerFellerwatto_cobragregoriusm
  • Apple admits third-party App Stores in Europe are inevitable

    chasm said:
    Here’s what will happen:

    1, Alternative App Stores will eventually open in Europe. Apple will still have some level of approval/control on how they run their business. Curious people will go check it out.
    Apple has full control of how they run their business. This regulation does not take away from that. But users have a right to install whatever they want on their devices without any say, involvement or control from Apple - or any particular government for that matter - so long as it does not facilitate criminal activity. While I would never provide my contact or payment info to a shady app store, I can certainly see a situation where there might be an App or Game that Apple has declined to list in its store (or outright banned) that I'd like to install from a reputable source. For example, I do not currently play any Epic video games, but perhaps at some point I may; and Apple has banned them. Right now, Apple is the gatekeeper with final say over what I can and cannot install on my phone. My phone is my property, so that gatekeeper should be me, and me alone.

    williamlondonavon b7