And what features and/or technologies you’d rather not see in a web browser

Lets make this interesting: you can imagine features ( there’s no wrong answers ) , its not just about features that you already saw in other browsers

6 points
  • built-in adblocker

  • ability to have JavaScript / sound / image loading turned off by default but with a whitelist of sites that can run / play / load them

  • built-in secure password manager

  • open-source, natch

  • native ssh and ftp

  • a button that autogenerates a metadata-free, archived link to the current page

  • bring back flash

  • can open any folder of folders of images as a slideshow

  • feeds false metadata to sites trying to fingerprint the user

  • rejects / autodeletes all but whitelisted cookies

  • built-in tamagotchi / virtual pets

permalink
report
reply
12 points

bring back flash

There are really good reasons flash died. If you’re desperate for flash content, use ruffle.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

ftp

It’s crazy that Firefox was good with ftp until they just decided to not support it anymore 😕

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*
  • built-in adblocker
  • built-in secure password manager
  • built-in tamagotchi / virtual pets

I believe most would prefer a modular approach with a well built extension and addon framework.


  • can open any folder of folders of images as a slideshow
  • native ssh and ftp

I’d prefer the web browser to be good at web browsing. Excellent software already exists that does all of that.


  • bring back flash

Dear god no

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

out of curiosity, what might I use for the slideshow application?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Gwenview has a slide show option. Slideshow is not listed on the page, but it’s in the app.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Upvoted for the tamagotchi / virtual pets. The other stuff, too, but mostly the virtual pets.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I really just want web browsers to die, and be replaced by one of the slimmed down options like gemini, gopher, or some markdown viewer.

The web just keeps getting increasingly bloated and ad-ridden, and filled with popups. Web browsers are as complex as entire operating systems now, so only 2 orgs (google and mozilla) have the resources and expertise to build a browser, and mozilla might throw in the towel eventually, leaving the internet as one big google ad.

IE move viewing of mostly static content into these simple variants like gemini, and move dynamic things to local apps with API access.

permalink
report
reply
3 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

that’s a quite pessimistic stance, yes I do agree that web browsers are complexe and hard to maintain, but they can do more than viewing websites, you can play games, draw art, video chat, PDF viewing and editing, you can do a lot with just one app… that’s the beauty of Web browsers… The problem is in the Ad business model…

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

They shouldn’t be doing any of those things, html should be for simple, static content only.

For dynamic / interactive things, programmers should write programs again like they used to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

they can do more than viewing websites

The question is: should they? There is a larger philosophical divide about whether software tools should be small and purpose-built, or monolithic. Having one do-it-all tool can be convenient but also creates a huge amount of overhead and complexity.

I go back and forth myself. I love the convenience of monolithic tools, but miss the way a small, purpose-built tool can really do its job well.

permalink
report
parent
reply

One of the best cases for building a versatile tool, is accessibility to less privileged populations, for example people who can’t efford to have a reliable Internet because of their shady ISPs, they need a browser that renders web content as fast as possible, and also because they can’t afford to download apps due to slow internet speeds, Flatpaks could take gigabyte of HDD space and you have to update them later, which is painful in other parts of the world

Even if the user had a reliable Internet and solid hardware, maybe they’re a security minded individual, and want to keep their app installs to a minimum. To them many apps are considered bloat and that’s dangerous.

I think the difficulty lies in wisely choosing what features to include, before your users start asking : hey, do we really need that ? Or : who uses that ?

that’s why listening to feedback is so important

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Dark theme and accessible color contrast enforced by default.

If the site owner makes stupid choices, my browser should ignore them.

Edit: And an automatic switch to light theme if I decode to print something, obviously. I wasn’t raised in a barn.

permalink
report
reply
14 points
  • Tab-organisation features (e.g. stacking, trees)
  • Synchronised history - so you can find something you were looking at on your phone on your desktop or vice-versa
  • Containers (Firefox) are great
  • Full-page screenshot (Firefox) is very handy
permalink
report
reply
2 points
*

Synchronized favorites is pretty nice too.

About synchronization, one i’ve never seen is tabs, being able to open any tabs on one device to another. Maybe the clipboard too could also be useful to share link/text to another device…

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Containers?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

‘Multi-Account Containers’: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/containers

With it, you can open tabs in different ‘containers’, which have their own set of cookies, etc… So, for example, you can be logged into two accounts for the same website, just in different containers, or keep all your shopping accounts in one container (and set those sites to always open in that container) to reduce tracking and targeting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ah. Interesting. For work I log in to a bunch of AWS accounts and I’m only able to do two at a time. One in a normal window and another in a private window. But I can’t open a 3rd private window. So this will be the answer, I think.

Thank you!

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

As an addition to the translation tool (context menu in Firefox) it would be nice to have a conversion tool for the conversion of temperatures and lengths. I know there are addons for this purpose, but last time i checked they weren’t good or they were a hassle to use. Opera nailed it a few years ago with a little pop-up window when text got highlighted. It recognized when it was a SI unit. This is a feature that I have not seen in any other browser yet.

permalink
report
reply

Asklemmy

!asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Create post

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it’s welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de

Community stats

  • 9.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 4.9K

    Posts

  • 276K

    Comments