←back to thread

What's New with Firefox 142

(www.mozilla.org)
177 points keepamovin | 5 comments | 02 Sep 25 10:50 UTC | HN request time: 0.011s | source
Show context
Workaccount2 ◴[02 Sep 25 14:17 UTC] No.45103440[source]▶
I wonder if it addressed something practical and meaningful...like implementing a spell check that at least covers all of the English language. Maybe then they can start working on the 5 year trek to also make the spellchecker somewhat competent.

Or maybe we'll just keep packing features, because everyone here knows, features are what save products! Not usability!

replies(5): >>45103595 #>>45103829 #>>45103928 #>>45104020 #>>45104795 #
1. Voultapher ◴[02 Sep 25 14:47 UTC] No.45103829[source]▶
At this speed Ladybird might be the browser to use in a couple years, even though I find their decision to use a memory unsafe language for their core tech foolish in the year 2025.
replies(1): >>45103893 #
2. beng-nl ◴[02 Sep 25 14:52 UTC] No.45103893[source]▶
I remember the original reasoning for creating Firefox (first Phoenix) was to create a more lightweight and faster version of the Mozilla browser, which initially was true.
replies(1): >>45104211 #
3. dydkgbufxuf ◴[02 Sep 25 15:18 UTC] No.45104211[source]▶
a big part of making it lightweight wasn't stripping away browser bits, but stripping away non-browser bits.

mail, newsgroups, irc. mozilla (the suite) was a lot more than a browser.

replies(2): >>45104826 #>>45115843 #
4. zveyaeyv3sfye ◴[02 Sep 25 15:59 UTC] No.45104826{3}[source]▶
ftp support wasn't dropped from firefox until 2021.
5. tripletpeaks ◴[03 Sep 25 13:54 UTC] No.45115843{3}[source]▶
The browser bit was also much, much snappier than anything else in common use, except maybe Opera. Including the Mozilla browser.

Performance took a giant hit some time in the 1.x series and never recovered, but before that, it was remarkably lightweight and snappy, so much so that normal people would notice.