3 ms·
> vast majority of users could switch to Chrome and get all the same extensions with almost identical functionality [4] On desktop, maybe. On mobile, definite
by vetinari 10y ago
> vast majority of users could switch to Chrome and get all the same extensions with almost identical functionality [4]
On desktop, maybe. On mobile, definitely not. Chrome for Android does not support extensions at all.
Firefox, on the other hand, does. If you want uBlock, Ghostery, whatever on your mobile browser, you don't have other choice than Firefox. And if you like your bookmarks synced between mobile and desktop, that makes Chrome on desktop no-go option too.
- spinchange 10y ago>And if you like your bookmarks synced between mobile and desktop, that makes Chrome on desktop no-go option too. The extensions/ad blocker argument is 100% legit, but unless I misunderstand you, Chrome has had history and bookmark sync across signed-in platforms (mobile/desktop) for a very long time!
- parthdesai 10y agoI think he means that since you can't use chrome on mobile because of lack of extensions, you can't use it on desktop unless you want out of sync bookmarks.
- vetinari 10y agoExactly! Thank you.
- vetinari 10y ago> Chrome has had history and bookmark sync across signed-in platforms (mobile/desktop) for a very long time! Yes it did, but the requirement above is AND, not OR - if I want 1) ad blocking in mobile browser AND 2) synced passwords/bookmarks/whatever, I cannot use Chrome at the desktop, because it sync only with mobile Chrome and mobile Chrome doesn't do 1).