It is up to the user to decide WHAT they want to use. If they want to use something with features, then YES THEY CAN! Demanding that a product you do NOT like or HATE should cease their activity.. this is dictatorship! Leftist fanaticism of the worst kind - especially if it is against features.
The worst kind of community which is contra-features and contra-choice is Mozilla these days without their origin power-user target-group. Most remaining Mozilla users today are radical left, so is Mozillas management these days.And both have a serious intense hate against features and functions... hate against everything which is against conformity.
Customization is no crime. Simplicity and minimalism is way worse... You think that this is what power-users would accept? Why use people Vivaldi, Otter, Seamonkey for example?
Because they WANT features. People HAVE THE RIGHT to demand THAT. Rather selfish opinion of yours, to deny power users rights! Is this a democracy or leftist fascist dictatorship? BC that is how the leftist fascists argue.... NO features which simple users do NOT understand as that would violate their safe space!
Only someone who is either in support for Mozilla's constant moves AGAINST power-users and in benefit ONLY for Chrome/simple-users and diversity/intelligent-features-hating-leftists - or falling for Mozilla using their usual trendy buzz-words like speed... or security... can still put a bit value into that team of losers over there at Moz-HQ!
Mozilla... fully living anti-feature fascism since 2013!
-----------------------------
Why has Mozilla-new and their new user group of “progressive/leftists” a general problem with browsers like Vivaldi/Brave/Waterfox/Seamonkey or Pale Moon and customization and choice in general? No matter how hard people try to ignore that very simple issue and constantly are in denial it has anything to do with politics… it is in direct correlation towards the change of the mentality of what is considered “politically correct” today! First the public shared oversimplfied reasoning… Mozilla-new removed most power user features (and they will also remove userchrome.css in the future) to be attractive to Chrome users, to make Chrome users switch away from Googles product. The point is that Chrome users or general simple users do not accept and like “bloat” – so it was decided that all the “conservative features” had to go to enable Firefox more compatible with their needs.
-----------------------------
Now here is where politics are kicking in, and things get a LOT MORE messier… Mozilla-new has turned into a fully customization/choice and politically-moderates and conservatives hating “heavily left leaning developer” – as that would (at least also theoretically) appeal to the majority of Google Chrome users or general people with the same opinion – which have because of their ideology and believe much less tolerance and understanding for everything which provides choice/which is more conservative aligned. Mozilla-new has fully turned into a company which just betrayed their own creation and origin user-base as it was not compatible with “leftist/progressive visions/ideas” and their world-view! But there is a major problem with Mozillas way of thinking… No matter how much they try to appeal to “leftist/progressive” simple/Chrome users with ongoing feature removals and morality adjustments – The majority of this user base will stay loyal to Google and Chrome – no matter how much Mozilla tries to persuade that kind of users to use Firefox instead. Mozilla-new will only be seen as an imitation facility who additionally got greedy and jealous – who tried to adopt Chromes simple add-on system, it’s development mentality and political mentality for the sake of broadening Mozillas shrinking user-base!
-----------------------------
Mozilla-new is humiliating everything which is true and honest FOSS with their actions. Real Open-Source developers have standards, morals, loyalty… all that what Mozilla-new is missing. They abuse the legacy of a real unique and once amazing past – which just was discarded for being “non-inclusive and non-liberal”
-----------------------------
What they forget is that a honest and real liberal and inclusive concept would mean also to keep features of users who have a different opinion, mentality and especially skill level! As i see it this is a common problem with this new kind of “leftist/progressive” opinion of so many developers and it’s management today – which also affects the users they gain – they make use of concepts they do not at all understand and honor. While the users of such groups are wildly attacking people and organizations who go a different way – and not wanting to become simple and minimalist just for the majorities sake. If something is swimming into another direction it is seen as threat and danger seen as mortal enemy to the today established system what is seen as “the only correct and acceptable one” – this has direct influence on the vision how a product is developed!
-----------------------------
Nobody with a sane mind would want to support radical right-wing visions – but the issue is that today everything is getting attacked and in conclusion removed just because there is the chance that it could point to a very small degree towards a moderate middle-ground or even moderate conservative ground – all what is moving away from your typical “leftist/progressive” concept. Mozilla is supporting an excluding concept – which may be nicely wrapped as “inclusive and socially correct” but in reality fully excluding a minority who also has rights – the group of users who are sitting in the already mentioned middle-ground/moderate-conservative-ground and do not like that everything gets intentionally dumbed-down or removed to put everything out of the way for a less tolerating/accepting and rather aggressive/dismissive user group – which Mozilla wants on board.
-----------------------------
And that is in the end the ultimate reason why people and software which are sticking out from the crowd do get so much despised and demonized – or even receiving threats (Classic add-on archive) or getting in an active way monitored and even the smallest mistake is recorded and used in time to blacklist the projects or people which refuse to play the established and discriminating game of today.
Using Firefox from that sell-out developer with zero respect for power- and geek users.. from the developer who rather wants to attract Chrome/simple users and not supporting their own target user-base..
Mozilla is morally wise a totally unacceptable developer. They have been on the good side in the past, but what is left is almost as disgusting as Google itself... the Google - which Mozilla tries so hard to become itself.
I rather would use Pale Moon before i would touch Mozilla Firefox - Mozilla which killed almost all customization options just to be able to be as attractive to Chrome users as possible.
In fact, i also would use Vivaldi every day over Firefox. Mozilla has turned into a greedy sell-out developer with zero respect for power- or geek users!
Don't get me wrong, Google tricked them. But if Mozilla would have been more intelligent... they never would have allowed a third-party having such a big impact on their own influences and decisions.
Mozilla had and still has the chance to break free from Google - break free from Google's mal-intentioned suggestions and helpful advice... and instead make freedom again with their original core user base... features/customization loving geeks and nerds...
But as long as Mozilla is so arrogant to not admit they have openly allowed all that to happen... as long as that, Mozilla does not have the right to picture itself as victim!
And here does Mozilla what they can do best… blaming others for their own naivety – Have they really been thinking that Google is the friendly benefactor they acted towards Mozilla? And that removing features and choice and adopting stock features and stock design – as persuaded by Chrome engineers – would be a clever idea to mobilize the user-masses?
And now where this failed – oh.. it is Google’s fault all along… because they have…. sabotaged Mozilla! The idea that Mozilla must blame itself for being naive… Impossible taught… never ever! It is always the other party which is to blame!
In that you are right. Moonchild, Tobin and the other ones may be able to solve browser internal issues, but everything which is reaching a certain size is "patches welcome".
And to make it worse, they are rather rude against Seamonkey developers or Mozilla, or Brave or Vivaldi or against guys who dare to fulfill not 1000% the branding rules of Moonchild when creating an own version of Pale Moon/Basilisk.
While i would defend Pale Moon against Firefox trolls as i am in support of minorities, i am less than appalled to see how they are acting towards certain Linux guys or even own users who are insulted for creating forks for XP.
The whole Pale Moon project is a double edged sword.
My personal reason not to use Pale Moon - and instead Otter-Browser. I also would recommend Vivaldi more than Pale Moon.
If you are creating a browser it is pure illusion to think you can also handle engine stuff. That is such a complex matter - HTML5, CSS3, ecmascript - Take a look in the past. Moonchild, Tobin and the others had to re-base Pale Moon to be able to be compatible with today's web.
And now that should be possible when they are basically just doing it another time? Stuff does not stay complex, it gets worse the more time is progressing.
And if they have been unable to implement promises or shared array or whatever on their own.. how they actually could believe they can implement upcoming features?
If you are forking something, make sure the engine work is done by someone else. That is the only valid way to get stuff done and not becoming outdated.