• TangledHyphae@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It would stand to reason that if they were as bad as Chrome, that people would just stick with Chrome and they would miss out on profit entirely, I would think. If monetary incentive is a reason, purposely hamstringing themselves seems counter-intuitive toward that goal.

      • TangledHyphae@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        In this specific context we are talking about Manifest V3 artificially limiting the number of rules in an extension. That’s it, it’s artificial, there is no reason for it to exist other than Google purposely degrading the capability. What does Mozilla have to gain by also degrading themselves?

          • TangledHyphae@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            It will still be compatible, Firefox just doesn’t need to add a limiter, meaning the same extension will run better on Firefox than Chrome in the end. That’s how I see this all unfolding at least. (I’m a javascript developer, I audit all the extension code I run generally, my perspective is purely technical and not political on the matter.)