> why don't you start a new thread? i'll be happy to engage.

https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...28#post5901328

If you could arrange with an open-source WebKit browser, here is a surprise for you.

That article is peppered with

Which I see is actually served to the browser as:

Somebody messed up their CMS...

I tried Otter earlier this year, but thought it too early in its development.
Just tried to download and install it via sbopkg and apparently there is a problem with the connection to github.
So, as I have windows Xp running in VirtualBox I installed Otter there and ran it for a while. I like what I see and hope they are successful.
Many of the same people who were involved in the original Opera are now working for the Vivaldi project, so every now and then I install it and run it for a while. Again, I like the what they are doing, but it is based on a google product and I just don't trust anything from google, hence I don't completely trust Vivaldi.

The problem is that Otter is a "one man and three contributors" project, not a professional company like Vivaldi. It seriously lacks people which are able and willing to help. :(
But it already has one killer feature: MDI windows.

> If you could arrange with an open-source WebKit browser, here is a surprise for you.

And a very pleasant one. Thanks indeed. I think this is yet another example of a new direction in Lx development. Devuan has successfully forked Debian to keep alive init instead of systemd:

http://devuan.org

... and ExeGnuLinux has preserved KDE 3.5 as the Trinity Desktop:

http://exegnulinux.net/

Now that we've got a mature, comprehensive codebase and apps suite, I think attention is turning away from "progress" as "change for the sake of change" to a refinement of the "best of breed".

> Otter is a "one man and three contributors" project

Devuan started that way, and has now been taken as a foundation by several other distros including Dynebolic, always a leader in innovation.

> Somebody messed up their CMS

Happens to the best (and worst) of us ...

Summary

After trialling Ff, Pale Moon and Waterfox, exchanging emails with Add-on developers, and sundry other things, I've arrived at the conclusion that Ff is being commercialized using the Android model.

1. The Ff Team provides very basic functionality in the base product.

2. An API is offered to Third Party "Add-on" developers.

3. Those developers add functionality in response to "market demands".

Problems:

1. The basic functionality falls well short of what users have come to expect.

2. The new API no longer connects deeply to base code, but is limited to what can be achieved in individual web pages using Javascript. This is "explained" as being due to "security concerns" (i.e. another Year 2000 fear scam).

3. Most Third Party developers have the following priorities:

i. Money: donations etc.

ii. Self-promotion via popup "begging pages" etc.

iii. Product functionality.

iv. Product quality.

As I suggested in another thread, I believe that FOSS is in trouble: it is being commercialized and corporatized using procedures already well established by Google and others, and is moving ever further away from its original spirit as established initially by Stallman, Torvalds and others.

Torvalds has not established FOSS initially.