Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lxgr 722 days ago
> I hold that implementing DRM is what doomed them

Then again, if Firefox had refused to implement DRM, I'd probably have switched to Chrome by now, so there's that.

I'm really not a fan of DRM, but I don't think it's fair to blame Firefox for doing what probably a huge part of their user base demands, especially given their pretty dire usage stats. Sometimes, there's wisdom in knowing which battle to pick.
1 comments
lukan 722 days ago
The argument is, there would have been a patch, people could install.

I think if that click was right at netflix and a ff restart away from working, then maybe yes. But most people would just switch browsers, before looking for that patch.

link
lxgr 722 days ago
What's the difference between that and Firefox outright shipping with a DRM module, though?

I do get the ideological objection to not wanting to support DRM, although I don't think that's the battle that Mozilla should pick right now. But extra clicks probably wouldn't make anybody who does happy, while inconveniencing most other users.

link
lukan 722 days ago
It is ideological, not logical in my opinion.

And what Mozilla should do right now is rather reemploy the servo team(and more), to actually build a innovative browser again.

link
dudus 722 days ago
I agree Mozilla should be building browsers, supporting open source and being active on the committees.

But I wouldn't choose DRM as the hill to die on. There's probably better examples of things Mozilla did wrong.

link