[General Topics] tcaudilllg:
Cont.

Later

which led to this:

Now, a bit of interpretation and analysis, given the players and factors at hand.

The current state of the software industry is emblematic of a confluence of interest between Mozilla, Microsoft, and Google. Java has been weakened both by Oracle's incompetence and pushes by these Big 3 to label it a hazard and make it hard to use (in the current version of Firefox, starting Java apps is a stability hazard as I'm sure you've noticed). What would be a future of apps driven by the browser has been eclipsed by a dominant, but not universal, ethos that browsers are meant to surf the internet, not replace the Windows/Linux desktop. Browser-based Javascript is, in its current state, the easiest programming language to develop with, thanks to HTML 5. But HTML 5 is held back by the problem of extremely tight security, which favors cloud-based solutions. The cloud-based future the web-app proponents say is coming, however, probably won't truly happen given the power of the phone/cable internet companies. They will see to it that there are always people who can't afford high speed internet, and that's where hard drives and offline apps come in.

As we can infer from the logs above, all of the browser makers fear being labeled as "insecure". It was the perception of insecurity that drove businesses away from IE in the mid 2000s. This police-state ethos of over-protectiveness, to the point of protecting users from themselves, creates an effective power umbrella that the Big 3 find exclusive opportunity in. Microsoft can continue to count on people remaking their software every 3-4 years for their new Windows version (and dropping out of the market if they don't). Google can push its terrible app system and crowd phone storage until users find they must buy new phones whether or not the processing and memory needs of their phone are otherwise sufficient. The system benefits the bigger players and makes things very hard on the smaller players, the small time app devs, because they waste time trying to keep their old apps current, causing them to lose opportunity to develop new apps, which results in lost revenue. Android, as you all know, is just as bad if not worse than Windows for this. Mozilla is creating an app store based around Javascript, which one might think a hallmark of stability because of the seeming eternity of web standardization. However their constantly shifting non-standard APIs create software dysfunction within a couple years of release. Beyond that, these three forces are now the controlling powers in the standardization process itself.

Why the focus on protecting users even at the risk of their own ire? Part of the issue is that schools and businesses are major consumers of browsers. The needs of individuals do not necessarily overlap with those of organizations, but it's easier to develop one single app and apparently the people at Mozilla have just enough of a strange combination of overconfidence and self-delusion to think they can force an app tailored for businesses on users. As such we're spoon-fed increasing amounts of drivel by all three browser vendors that "users want" a virtual nanny telling them what they can and can't do with their browser. (you can judge for yourself whether or not they are crassly attempting to manipulate my position on this from the logs).

But if you take anything from the logs, it should be this: all three browser makers intend to ignore the wishes of individual users in pursuit of the personal agendas of the personalities calling the shots. As soon as Firefox began becoming popular, Google began hiring on its developers for their Chrome project -- it's well understood at Mozilla that playing Google's game is good for your career. Google's interests are ultimately not our interests. Mozilla subsists on Google's dime, and will remain supported by Google for as long (which it's currently attempting to sustain by growing its market share in developing countries, even as it loses share in the west).

AsYouWish stands in opposition to this gambit. It is an addon for Firefox that enables local file access by webpages as the user wishes. This functionality was formerly standard, but was eliminated a couple of years ago due to it posing a "hazard" for users who were too incompetent to determine whether a request by a website for local file access was safe or unsafe. Server admins who relied on the functionality balked, and AsYouWish was created as a compromise. Although it is possible to access the file system through the addons API (without being forced to use a hard-to-explain sandboxed "virtual file system", as per Chrome), the addon API is extremely cumbersome to program, requiring a maze of callbacks and supporting infrastructure for all but the simplest tasks (you can read Mozilla's justification for this madness above). In contrast, the same thing can be done via AsYouWish in a few minutes. There are some problems with AsYouWish; particularly, it doesn't work on mobile. It's also heavily disliked by Mozilla. Although the author is a teacher by trade who insists it is safe, and was developed with advise by Mozilla staff, certain individuals at Mozilla are dogmatically fixated on the belief that browsers and local file access don't mix. As you read above, they are noncommittal to giving it a place in Mozilla's addons gallery to the point of unfairness and dishonesty.

While AsYouWish may provide a temporary fix, my views on this matter are more long range. I see an intrinsic conflict of interest between Mozilla and home users. Many of its users (perhaps even a majority) have stuck with it because it's the anti-Google, the browser of freedom. Google may say it's "not evil", but for all its progressive social values its attitude towards users isn't very different from Microsoft's, because it's a company that looks to maximize its own potential in everything it does. The days of wide-eyed idealism that made Firefox what it was are long gone at Mozilla, and as such it no longer coincides with the sensibilities and values of many of its users. The time has come for a fork, "Freedom Fox", which provides a Mozilla build that incarnates the values of the people who originally created it, the values of respect for user discretion and freedom. A browser for people who feel smart enough, capable enough to determine for themselves what websites are threatening and which aren't. A browser that is respectful enough not to ridicule users with the notion that they aren't intelligent enough. A browser that respects user preferences and expectations enough that it won't force radical redesigns on them that increase bugs and hamper usability. That is what the people signed up for. That's what is needed today, to restore freedom in the software industry and to help it grow to meet the potential of tomorrow.

MicroGoog has overtaken everything else. Let this be our last stand! :cowboy: