11 ms·

This article convinced me personally to switch back to Firefox, but I'm disheartened by seeing a number of comments here which amount to "Firefox is fine," "Fir

This article convinced me personally to switch back to Firefox, but I'm disheartened by seeing a number of comments here which amount to "Firefox is fine," "Firefox is just as good," "The Foundation is fine," and so on. That attitude is a recipe for shrinking market share. FF is competing against extremely well funded, extremely aggressive and competent competitors. You don't get to stop listening to the market in an environment like this. It will run you out.

aorth 10y ago
I maintain a copy of Firefox Developer Edition on my system and I make a concerted effort to open it every few days so it can update itself and so I can test any new sites or blog posts I'm working on. I've tried to switch back to Firefox cold turkey in the past and it never works for me, but I might introduce a personal policy of one week on, one week off, alternating between Firefox and Chrome.
- ffggvv 10y ago
  This is the problem. You value your convenience more than your freedom, and the future of privacy.
  - marklgr 10y ago
    You can make people change their behavior by shifting the weights, but it is pointless to tell them what their value should be. Make FF more convenient, or show how bad competitors are regarding to privacy.
  - formula1 10y ago
    Do you honestly believe that switching to firefox will be the change? Its purely symbolic considering firefox has been heavilly funded by google in the past [0] and likely still influences their decisions. A few developers doesnt account for the millions of people that use chrome, widescale change requires influencers and those willing to stand up, not a bunch of upset introverts with a distaste for authority. Honestly, Im not sure what will help future and privacy considering your information is the number 1 comodity. But Im getting the impression that escape is impossible and we all should get used to being less "anti coorperation" and more "pro happiness" [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - Freak_NL 10y ago
      I used to think like that when I was a CS student back in 2000; “You can't beat Microsoft; their stuff is the best and you would be mad not to join their camp.”, all the while scoffing at those who used alternative OSes and browsers. At some point though I started to grasp the bigger context of software and the social impact it has, and started doubting my youthful sycophantic zeal. Then I switched to Phoenix (Firefox's forefather) and started delving into that Linux thing people were talking about soon after. Now as an adult software developer I do take the ethical side of the equation into account, and I can't imagine ever relinquishing what little control I have over my data and my computers to mega-corporations without a fight. I don't know what the best way forward is, but as long as Firefox is a decent browser (and it is) I'm doing my part by simply using it, recommending it to those who would benefit from it, and helping out here and there by submitting bugs and helping people fix their websites. I do know that giving in is not constructive.
      - distances 10y ago
        One good sales pitch: Firefox for Android has extensions (read: ad blockers), while Chrome doesn't. Faster page loads, less data quota used, less battery consumed, better privacy.
      - formula1 10y ago
        I use linux as well, though ubuntu which is the mcdonalds of linux. And I often look at software through an ethical lense. But I don't view Mozilla as this nice sweet company because ultimately their power is not decentralized. They use free labor to build cool stuff but there are owners and managers that get paid way more than the people in the gutters believing in some great "vision". Open source is a ver novel concept, but the idea that mozilla wouldn't sell your data or is the 'safe' option is absolutely absurd. They have gotten caught numerous times red handed doing shady things such as the pocket drama [0]. Once theres some sort of git/bitcoin algorithm to create truely open source / uncontrolled / decentralized software, then we are in a different scenario. I will be using servo once its out though. I am very intrigued by all the work they've put into it. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10679519 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10679519
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    I'd recommend against this line of reasoning because it makes people feel like they are sacrificing something when they switch, I always argue that IMO and for reasons x, y and z FF is the better choice for power users.
- vacri 10y ago
  A lot of it is just familiarity. I get the same thing moving from FF to Chrome - I find the Chrome UI annoying and it doesn't work for me as well as FF. Perhaps a nod to how much google wants to own your experience is how the chrome browser doesn't use your desktop's windowing decorators, instead spludging down its own horror. I prefer my own horror, thankyouverymuch!
- oAlbe 10y ago
  > it never works for me Why not? What are the factors that convinced you to stay with Chrome? (genuine questions)
  - aorth 10y ago
    I think it's just that the UI feels laggy when switching tabs, especially if another page is loading. This might be getting better, though: today I just randomly stumbled on this Mozilla wiki page discussing their plan for dealing with this UI lag: increasing the number of content threads. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis/Multiple_content_processes https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis/Multiple_content_proce... The setting defaults to 1, but will be moving to 2, and then 5 eventually. I'm testing Firefox Developer Edition 51.0a2 (2016-09-26) with this set at 4 right now. I only ever have ~10 tabs open, uBlock Origin + Privacy Badger addon, and my machine is fast and has lots of RAM.
blub 10y ago
Firefox is good. It has support for modern standards, is performant, has tracking protection built in and plenty of extensions. Google is winning because it's bundling its browser just like Microsoft used to and is aggressively advertising it on all of its web properties, which might have a reach of close to 100% of the web-using population. Firefox also has a reputation for being slow, gotten probably from people doing ridiculous things as keeping tens of tabs open and not restarting it for days - learn to use bookmarks! Silly Mozilla thought they were fighting hand in hand with Google for web standards when Google was fighing for ad money all along.
- mcintyre1994 10y ago
  > Firefox also has a reputation for being slow, gotten probably from people doing ridiculous things as keeping tens of tabs open and not restarting it for dayes Do you mean it has the reputation from people doing this 5 or 10 years ago and it's stuck? Or is this still a problem for Firefox?
  - Zancarius 10y ago
    In my use case, it's still a problem if you have a bunch of tabs loaded, but I think the class of problem is somewhat different than it is in, say, Chrome. Sure, Firefox gets a bit sluggish with 500-700 tabs open, but since I don't have a habit of keeping a single session open for days (then it IS a problem), the net effect is relatively small since restarting Firefox generally behaves as if the inactive tabs from the last session weren't open. Obviously, if you click through tabs you opened previously, then it'll load them but otherwise it's fine. So there's some truth to it, but as with most things, it depends. I use Firefox mostly because I have a terrible habit of clicking any link that looks remotely interesting with the intent to come back to it for later reading. Granted, it rarely works quite like that, but Chrome became a bear after 150-200 tabs (and often started capping my RAM). For all its faults, Firefox (again, in my use case) still manages to stay around ~2GiB unless I do something stupid or watch a bunch of YouTube videos (under Linux). Chrome does well, but the UI became unusable since you couldn't scroll through opened tabs without having specialized addons and such. I'm not sure if this is still the case, and even if it's changed, I don't think I'd go back. The RAM usage was too much, but I fully understand Chrome was probably never designed with my browsing habits in mind. Whereas I've seen claims that allege a handful of Firefox developers are tabholics. I'd believe it. Somewhat off-topic: One thing I really like about Firefox is the profile manager. I've started creating separate profiles for general browsing, documentation, and videos sometimes with extensions tailored for each. It was a slight pain to change my habits around to accommodate that, but I've noticed if one instance hangs, it's not much of a problem. With multiprocesses on the horizon, maybe this will cause me to change my browsing habits again, but I think I like the profile isolation for enough reasons unrelated to performance to continue as is. Perhaps this is abusing it somewhat, but it works for me. If you keep a relatively clean profile with few tabs open, Firefox stays pretty snappy.

aorth 10y ago

I maintain a copy of Firefox Developer Edition on my system and I make a concerted effort to open it every few days so it can update itself and so I can test any new sites or blog posts I'm working on. I've tried to switch back to Firefox cold turkey in the past and it never works for me, but I might introduce a personal policy of one week on, one week off, alternating between Firefox and Chrome.

ffggvv 10y ago
This is the problem. You value your convenience more than your freedom, and the future of privacy.
- marklgr 10y ago
  You can make people change their behavior by shifting the weights, but it is pointless to tell them what their value should be. Make FF more convenient, or show how bad competitors are regarding to privacy.
- formula1 10y ago
  Do you honestly believe that switching to firefox will be the change? Its purely symbolic considering firefox has been heavilly funded by google in the past [0] and likely still influences their decisions. A few developers doesnt account for the millions of people that use chrome, widescale change requires influencers and those willing to stand up, not a bunch of upset introverts with a distaste for authority. Honestly, Im not sure what will help future and privacy considering your information is the number 1 comodity. But Im getting the impression that escape is impossible and we all should get used to being less "anti coorperation" and more "pro happiness" [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - Freak_NL 10y ago
    I used to think like that when I was a CS student back in 2000; “You can't beat Microsoft; their stuff is the best and you would be mad not to join their camp.”, all the while scoffing at those who used alternative OSes and browsers. At some point though I started to grasp the bigger context of software and the social impact it has, and started doubting my youthful sycophantic zeal. Then I switched to Phoenix (Firefox's forefather) and started delving into that Linux thing people were talking about soon after. Now as an adult software developer I do take the ethical side of the equation into account, and I can't imagine ever relinquishing what little control I have over my data and my computers to mega-corporations without a fight. I don't know what the best way forward is, but as long as Firefox is a decent browser (and it is) I'm doing my part by simply using it, recommending it to those who would benefit from it, and helping out here and there by submitting bugs and helping people fix their websites. I do know that giving in is not constructive.
    - distances 10y ago
      One good sales pitch: Firefox for Android has extensions (read: ad blockers), while Chrome doesn't. Faster page loads, less data quota used, less battery consumed, better privacy.
    - formula1 10y ago
      I use linux as well, though ubuntu which is the mcdonalds of linux. And I often look at software through an ethical lense. But I don't view Mozilla as this nice sweet company because ultimately their power is not decentralized. They use free labor to build cool stuff but there are owners and managers that get paid way more than the people in the gutters believing in some great "vision". Open source is a ver novel concept, but the idea that mozilla wouldn't sell your data or is the 'safe' option is absolutely absurd. They have gotten caught numerous times red handed doing shady things such as the pocket drama [0]. Once theres some sort of git/bitcoin algorithm to create truely open source / uncontrolled / decentralized software, then we are in a different scenario. I will be using servo once its out though. I am very intrigued by all the work they've put into it. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10679519 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10679519
- reitanqild 10y ago
  I'd recommend against this line of reasoning because it makes people feel like they are sacrificing something when they switch, I always argue that IMO and for reasons x, y and z FF is the better choice for power users.
vacri 10y ago
A lot of it is just familiarity. I get the same thing moving from FF to Chrome - I find the Chrome UI annoying and it doesn't work for me as well as FF. Perhaps a nod to how much google wants to own your experience is how the chrome browser doesn't use your desktop's windowing decorators, instead spludging down its own horror. I prefer my own horror, thankyouverymuch!
oAlbe 10y ago
> it never works for me Why not? What are the factors that convinced you to stay with Chrome? (genuine questions)
- aorth 10y ago
  I think it's just that the UI feels laggy when switching tabs, especially if another page is loading. This might be getting better, though: today I just randomly stumbled on this Mozilla wiki page discussing their plan for dealing with this UI lag: increasing the number of content threads. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis/Multiple_content_processes https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis/Multiple_content_proce... The setting defaults to 1, but will be moving to 2, and then 5 eventually. I'm testing Firefox Developer Edition 51.0a2 (2016-09-26) with this set at 4 right now. I only ever have ~10 tabs open, uBlock Origin + Privacy Badger addon, and my machine is fast and has lots of RAM.

blub 10y ago

Firefox is good. It has support for modern standards, is performant, has tracking protection built in and plenty of extensions. Google is winning because it's bundling its browser just like Microsoft used to and is aggressively advertising it on all of its web properties, which might have a reach of close to 100% of the web-using population. Firefox also has a reputation for being slow, gotten probably from people doing ridiculous things as keeping tens of tabs open and not restarting it for days - learn to use bookmarks! Silly Mozilla thought they were fighting hand in hand with Google for web standards when Google was fighing for ad money all along.

mcintyre1994 10y ago
> Firefox also has a reputation for being slow, gotten probably from people doing ridiculous things as keeping tens of tabs open and not restarting it for dayes Do you mean it has the reputation from people doing this 5 or 10 years ago and it's stuck? Or is this still a problem for Firefox?
- Zancarius 10y ago
  In my use case, it's still a problem if you have a bunch of tabs loaded, but I think the class of problem is somewhat different than it is in, say, Chrome. Sure, Firefox gets a bit sluggish with 500-700 tabs open, but since I don't have a habit of keeping a single session open for days (then it IS a problem), the net effect is relatively small since restarting Firefox generally behaves as if the inactive tabs from the last session weren't open. Obviously, if you click through tabs you opened previously, then it'll load them but otherwise it's fine. So there's some truth to it, but as with most things, it depends. I use Firefox mostly because I have a terrible habit of clicking any link that looks remotely interesting with the intent to come back to it for later reading. Granted, it rarely works quite like that, but Chrome became a bear after 150-200 tabs (and often started capping my RAM). For all its faults, Firefox (again, in my use case) still manages to stay around ~2GiB unless I do something stupid or watch a bunch of YouTube videos (under Linux). Chrome does well, but the UI became unusable since you couldn't scroll through opened tabs without having specialized addons and such. I'm not sure if this is still the case, and even if it's changed, I don't think I'd go back. The RAM usage was too much, but I fully understand Chrome was probably never designed with my browsing habits in mind. Whereas I've seen claims that allege a handful of Firefox developers are tabholics. I'd believe it. Somewhat off-topic: One thing I really like about Firefox is the profile manager. I've started creating separate profiles for general browsing, documentation, and videos sometimes with extensions tailored for each. It was a slight pain to change my habits around to accommodate that, but I've noticed if one instance hangs, it's not much of a problem. With multiprocesses on the horizon, maybe this will cause me to change my browsing habits again, but I think I like the profile isolation for enough reasons unrelated to performance to continue as is. Perhaps this is abusing it somewhat, but it works for me. If you keep a relatively clean profile with few tabs open, Firefox stays pretty snappy.