Why are video downloader add-ons so popular?
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
enrico.weigelt at gr13.net
Fri Jun 19 20:46:22 UTC 2015
On 19.06.2015 11:41, Gervase Markham wrote:
>> Do you really think, that would happen (and users would actually buy
>> into that) ?
> Yes, I think it's a real possibility.
Possibility. As possible as, hmm, lets say, the Vogons clean up this
sector for some hyperspace express route ?
> If we went into a full-scale war with the ad industry,
Who talk about war ?
We're just talking about spam filters. Helping users to get rid of it.
And such spam filters exist for a long time (anyways, I dont think that
this really belongs into the core browser - we've got extension
mechanisms for that)
> sites could simply refuse to load with Firefox and require e.g. Chrome or IE.
And that really scares you ? I'm really relaxed at that point, let
them run into their own knifes. Evolution will take care about that.
Assuming, some sites really do that - how long does it take to change
the browser identification ? I'd guess it primarily goes down to the
question: how long does a recompile take ? ;-o
Anyways, these sites will immediately loose a big portion of their
user base and a big load on their customer services. Oh, and that
won't be actually real websites anymore.
And I'd guess, such actions would collect enough negative charma for
certain strange things to happen. Maybe our old friend route flapping,
bit rotting on some nameservers, or some unexplained traffic peaks,
... who knows what that funny universe comes up with next.
> It would start with sites that had a low percentage of Firefox users
> and, as the Firefox market share dropped further, more sites would
> join in.
Assuming the sites at the start really wanna take the risk (isn't there
some piece of competition left between them ?)
And *if* the "market share" (what _market_ are you exactly talking
about ? who sells what exactly here ?) really drops ... fine!
The perfect time for a deep refactoring and concentrating on the
really important technical stuff (a good browser is way more than just
some html rendering ...). ... I could dig out a bunch of >10yrs old
postings about things which consequently have been ignored for over
a decade (and I've, personally, given up long long ago)
> Or, they would just degrade the user
> experience in Firefox to get people to move out of frustration.
>> hmm, just imagining ... youtube puts a big banner onto their frontside:
>> "folks dont use FF, because it allows you to easily download videos
>> and so violate our terms of service" ...
> It would say "Unfortunately, your browser is no longer supported. Here's
> a list of links to alternative browsers you can use to view YouTube."
Yeah, which means, people get frustrated and zap to another site.
Until somebody hacked up some funny "youtube enabler" extension, which
quickly will be even more popular since all existing youtube-downloader
extensions together. Of course, that extension most likely would have
automatic download functionally built-in. Maybe even showing some ads
for alternative sites.
>> Why is being "popular" really an issue ?
> Because Firefox's market share has a direct relationship to our ability
> to drive the web in the direction we want. If no-one uses our software,
> why would anyone listen to us?
Why exactly do you want to "drive" the web in some "direction" ?
We have official standards.
Yes, HTML became pretty crappy, but that's mostly caused by bad
compromises, dancing with the devil. For example ugly pandorra's boxes
metux IT consulting
More information about the firefox-dev