Discussion in 'other software & services' started by JRViejo, Feb 1, 2019.
By Gregg Keizer.
Seriously, Mozilla and M$ should both be ashamed that they let Google take over the browser market. That's what you get with producing crappy browsers with no innovation.
I was a die hard Firefox user until all came to an end with their added bloatware with every release it got out of hand so I switched to Chrome permanently
Well, I find this topic very interesting. Found this bar graph of the browser market share as of December 2018 in a search online. Source. Edge's share is so tiny, right? But once it moves to Blink/Chromium, what will happen to its minuscule share? Guess we'll find out. I use Chrome now against my better wishes, as Firefox was acting badly w/my hardware. I'll dump it sometime soon. Ironically, Edge has never performed better for me 'til now, fast and clean. Guess we can only wait and see.
Spoiler: browser market share
Sadly Firefox was my first browser decades ago; then i switched to Chrome because it was simpler, faster, safer. now when i look at FF , i just see a Chrome clone , same features , same look, so why go back to it...FF made serious mistake running after Chrome than developing original features.
Repeating this over and over again doesn't make it true.
1. Yes - Mozilla adopted the Chromium architecture as it is a proven one. This step was the necessary precondition for implementing multiprocessing, process isolation, sandboxing and limiting the risks of the all-mighty legacy extensions.
2. However, under the hood there are a lot of differences. Particularly important is that more and more crucial components are being replaced by components written in the Rust language under the Servo project. This will make Firefox not only faster but inherently safer as whole classes of vulnerabilities (like the infamous buffer overflows) will be prevented from the beginning. This process is not yet over but progressing: WebRender, e.g., will be supported by more and more chips. There are still many improvements on their way. One example is PathFinder which will be integrated in WebRender.
3. While FF is also using webextensions like Chromium, Mozilla has been introducing many APIs which are not available in Chromium (and more of them will land). And the existing APIs also differ (example relating uBlock Origin). uBO-Extra, the companion add-on to uBO, e.g., is only necessary for Chromium, not for FF.
4. Firefox is still way more configurable via countless switches in about:config than Chromium with its command-line switches. The gHacks user.js is a good demonstration of this extensive configurability.
So calling Firefox a Chrome clone is a very superficial view and a misinterpretation ot the reality.
are you using google chrome or some other chromium fork?
Actually, I think Firefox runs really well on Ubuntu.
of course if we go under the hood, it isn't the same, but when you look at it from a simple view, there is no much difference.
i use FF on Kubuntu , Chrome on Win10, the experience is same, i almost setup FF as Chrome (sync, extensions, menus, etc...), it is the same except for few cosmetic details; while in the past it was way different and FF has its own identity,now if it wasn't for the icon, i wont see the difference...and that you can't deny it.
Now i didn't say FF was bad, but it is no more what it used to be.
I would argue that offering Chrome browser through their search site was main contributor to Chrome's rise in market share. I agree that MS and Mozilla could make better browser but for regular users I don't think that it would make much difference.
Well, but the differences under the hood are crucial IMO.
Besides, even FF's standard appearance is more configurable than in Chrome. And while Tab Mix Plus doesn't work yet because of still missing APIs, tab management (with lots of available add-ons) is already better.
For geeks like us? sure, for average Joe? not so much. Geeks doesn't make the market; AJs do.
But aren't you a geek as well? And you switched to Chrome
Chrome is 10 steps ahead of FF in term of security; i don't mind google & privacy, only security matters to me because if you lose the security battle, privacy is gone as well.
I always face-palming when people prioritize fancy effects over security features, maybe i am abnormal lol
I am one of them who has switched [back] to Firefox (this year). I have been using Vivaldi for years, since back in the day when I switched Firefox wasnt as fast as the chrome engine. And Vivaldi is the only chromium based browser that offered customization like Firefox. Now that I read about all the privacy features that Firefox has implemented and I have noticed that Firefox is, for me at least, as fast as Vivaldi I decided to return to Firefox. It feels like home.
Even just on the simple matter of looks, Firefox is still more flexible. userChrome.css is still functional in Firefox. Google Chrome's UI can hardly be changed.
all i change in the FF or Chrome is the color, i just download a dark theme, that is it, the rest don't care much
I seriously doubt that. FF doesn't have site isolation yet (but First-Party Isolation which works a bit differently) but crucial parts written in Rust. So what is better below the line is hard to tell. The more so if you block the bad guys out there with, e.g., uBO anyhow.
I want both
Pseudo-"Appcontainer" flag on Chromium. it runs one integrity level tighter than any other sandbox mechanisms.
Ah - Windows! Not interested
Exactly the same reason I choose Chrome over anything else.
also because I find FF to be more bloated
IMHO Chrome is better at security, but Firefox is at least "good enough" in terms of security.
If im installing for someone who's not very security conscious I often install Chrome.. But I'd never have that privacy invading trash on my own machine . Firefox, uMatrix, uBO, sandboxie etc for me.
I'm with Opera since version 6 and even moving to Chromium from Presto engine didn't persuade me to resign on it. What counts for me is being the cross platform browser with all stuff synced.
Ah if we talk Linux then the difference is indeed lesser.
Separate names with a comma.