Pale Moon: Firefox Without DRM, Interface Breakage

[Spittie]

I don't really understand the DRM stuff.

I'm going to ignore the other part of your comments (I agree with your opinions, but still those are opinions) and link to this: https://plus.google.com/+IanHickson/posts/iPmatxBYuj2
I didn't really understand DRM I've read this. DRM is not about restricting user permission (well, not it's main scope at least) but it's about restricting the hardware/software producers.

Want to play some DRM-ed stuff legally? Fine, comply with X, Y and Z and we'll grant you a license. Don't want to comply? Too bad, forgot your license. The DRM get cracked and you produce something that play the media without complying? We'll sue the shit out of you.

Users aren't going to care, they'll just use something to remove the DRM or download a pirated version. A (big?) hardware/software producer can't do that.

[Luke]

Users don't have to support DRM using sites

I've been a long user of Pale Moon in Windows, and as soon as Pale Moon for Linux appeared there as well; but I might end up going back to Firefox again or another alternative in the future.

We may or may not be OK with DRM and the like, but sites like Netflix, Amazon Video, etc. use it and you're (i.e. your player is) required to support it if you wish to access the content. Many people that want to use DRM in content stick to Flash (even leaving Linux out of the question), maybe after a while if most browsers implement DRM in HTML5 they'd choose it over Flash.

From my experience, the average joe couldn't care less if the content he wishes to access is protected or not, he just wishes to access it, that upon pressing "Play" the content is displayed. That's what probably motivated Mozilla to implement DRM in HTML5 to begin with.

I do prefer things without DRM over things with it, but given the situation I think I'd compromise and use whatever browser allows me to access the content.

As someone who basically does not watch TV, I have zero interest in Hulu or Netflix, thus no reason to have DRM support. Blocking this should be as easy as finding the URL of the server the blob is fetched from to 127.0.0.1 it out in /etc/hosts . That would be to keep any maliciously coded video site from being able to fetch the blob but suppress asking for permission. Of course, such a site could still be coded to fetch another blob from another source...

[Remdul]

The HTML5 DRM thing is a very interesting experiment, looking forward to see how it turns out. Don't get me wrong, I'm the least in favor of anti-consumer behavior, and Mozilla collaborating. In fact, I'm actually the person who forced EA to remove DRM from Battlefield 2, and partially responsible for preventing/ending the illegal use of SecuROM for EA titles in Europe. I also believe Richard Stallman has never been wrong. But...

HTML5 DRM will standardize the DRM interface, and limit the invasiveness (no more rootkits, device drivers etc), and as such it may actually make cracking easier. It also brings DRM to platforms popular with hackers/coders, invading their safehaven and triggering appropriate action. I forsee some interesting and productive Firefox addons being created, more user-friendly, more accessible, more open, more standardized circumvention tools.

Previously Big Media used shotguns to blow their feet off. Now they're using clusterbombs in a minefield.
The real entertainment will be the drama of the system failing catastrophically. This standard will fade away like all other bad ideas in the history of HTML/W3C.

[Daktyl198]

As someone who basically does not watch TV, I have zero interest in Hulu or Netflix, thus no reason to have DRM support. Blocking this should be as easy as finding the URL of the server the blob is fetched from to 127.0.0.1 it out in /etc/hosts . That would be to keep any maliciously coded video site from being able to fetch the blob but suppress asking for permission. Of course, such a site could still be coded to fetch another blob from another source...

As with any other plugin, you should be able to set it to "Never Activate" in your about:addons plugin section. No /etc/hosts editing required.

[Delgarde]

From my experience, the average joe couldn't care less if the content he wishes to access is protected or not, he just wishes to access it, that upon pressing "Play" the content is displayed. That's what probably motivated Mozilla to implement DRM in HTML5 to begin with.

That's exactly the reason, yes. The Mozilla/Firefox developers don't like DRM any more than the rest of us do, but they've lost the fight to keep it out of the specification. Other browsers are implementing it, content providers will now start using it, and so they're left with a choice. They could stick to their principals and refuse to implement it, thus driving away most of their user base who simply want a browser that plays videos - which would effectively be suicide, throwing away what influence they do have, for no real gain. Or they can compromise, trying to serve their users needs, while implementing the DRM bit in the most minimal and contained manner possible - and still be around in years to come, still fighting (successfully or not) for the open web?

It's not exactly hard to see why they made the choice they did. There's absolutely no benefit to *anybody* if they kill themselves to make a point - all it would achieve is to drive more and more users in the direction of the *less open* browsers.

[Remdul]

[...]Or they can compromise, trying to serve their users needs, while implementing the DRM bit in the most minimal and contained manner possible - and still be around in years to come, still fighting (successfully or not) for the open web?

It's not exactly hard to see why they made the choice they did. There's absolutely no benefit to *anybody* if they kill themselves to make a point - all it would achieve is to drive more and more users in the direction of the *less open* browsers.

I can only agree with that.

[stqn]

Pale Moon seemed very interesting because of its sane GUI (as opposed to Australis and also previous versions of FF), but yeah, a single-man project, with restrictions on distribution, a closed-source tool (for Windows only) to convert a Firefox profile to Pale Moon with the mention ?will never be open-source?? I like all these things less.

(I?m considering switching from FF to Midori or Chromium?)

[0xBADCODE]

(I’m considering switching from FF to Midori or Chromium…)

As I've got annoyed by Mozilla DRM initiatives, advertising crap ideas and their interface, I'm actively seeking to replace Firefox with something more sane. PaleMoon looks reasonably interesting as one of options to be.
1) Midori: very draft and half-baked. Troublesome in day to day activity. Would choke on most complicated sites, be it HTML5 video, webGL or something else. Also could be quite unstable even on more classic web sites - tends to crash here and there, which is annoying.
2) Chromium: dumb terminal to google services! If you're not a big fan of Google stuff, its just unusable. Almost unconfigurable. Always attempts to bother with some google crap like accounts. All defaults are against user and in favor of google and somesuch. So using it looks a bit like walking through minefield. You never know when google stuff would pop up and backstab you with some unwanted or troublesome activity like user tracking and privacy violation. Google also known for attempt to ban AdBlock. And some web sites are really unusable without that. But sure, personal data traders aka Google aren't happy with it. It also horrible memory hog and I was able to run out of memory on machine with 8Gb RAM (!!!). No other apps were ever close to something like this. Chromium helds absolute record amongst browsers and other apps in terms of RAM consumption. Just open more than dozen and half tabs to read later and ... boooom! Out of memory killer comes with its chaingun.

[erendorn]

As someone who basically does not watch TV, I have zero interest in Hulu or Netflix, thus no reason to have DRM support. Blocking this should be as easy as finding the URL of the server the blob is fetched from to 127.0.0.1 it out in /etc/hosts . That would be to keep any maliciously coded video site from being able to fetch the blob but suppress asking for permission. Of course, such a site could still be coded to fetch another blob from another source...

Or you could, I don't know, just not download the DRM plugin?

[Mike Frett]

People will accept the DRM just like they do today, and it will become the new Normal. Just like with Blu-ray and it's slow loading, firmware updates, ever-changing DRM and player lock-ups/reboots. It will just become acceptable and we will all forget about how it use to be better in the "old" days with DVD where you could watch a Movie without getting up to reboot the player...It's ridiculous and ignorance.