7 ms·

Celebrate the web by using another browser than Google’s Chrome

121 points by AngeloAnolin 9y ago

hdhzy 9y ago
After years of using Chrome I tried Firefox just to try something different and to my surprise it's 90% as good as Chrome and even surpasses it in certain areas: - address bar history is better, Chrome wants you to google everything, not use your history, - Firefox for Android has addons, I don't even want to remember life without uBlock... I still have nightmares of vibrating website scams on Chrome. Chrome is generally better in: - speed and security, - interesting Web APIs (foreign-fetch in Service Workers, Barcode recognition on Android).
- the_common_man 9y ago
  > - speed and security, Can you clarify about the security angle? What makes Firefox less secure?
  - noinsight 9y ago
    Zero sandboxing for one?
  - hdhzy 9y ago
    Currently? Lack of multiprocess tabs [0] and native U2F (available though third party addon, not on Android). Personally I also like how Google deals with Symantec issues. [0]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox/Multiprocess_Firefox https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox/Multiprocess_Fir...
    - the_common_man 9y ago
      Ah ok, I already have electrolysis. U2F i agree
- soperj 9y ago
  I also find Firefox doesn't chew through my battery as quickly.
anilshanbhag 9y ago
I have a different opinion. I think this monoculture is great. There are many browsers all based on Chromium: Chrome, Opera, etc. While they offer different views, their core rendering engine and api's are shared with chromium. It makes life much easier as a developer. While having many implementations is great, it is a pain in the ass. For example, I have an app that uses service worker and indexeddb. It has cases where it fails to work on Safari. The author compares to Chromium monoculture to IE. That is a very unfair comparison. I would compare it to Linux. Both have open code bases that you can fork at any time and contribute to if you want. It works well on all platforms/hardware respectively. Both have corporate goodwill to pay for it. Its wasteful to re-implement things multiple times over.
- falcolas 9y ago
  What is good for a developer is rarely good for the end user. CLIs are great for developers - they're fast and easy to use. They are also remarkably unfriendly for non-developers to try and use. Dev tools? Useless for a majority of end users. Web Standards? Useful only in getting them the content they want. JavaScript execution speed? Again, only in support of the content. We as developers forget about the end users too much.
- ocdtrekkie 9y ago
  The biggest problem is, they're all still based on Chromium, who's development priorities are determined by a single profit-driven corporation. (Bear in mind, Chrome was simply the natural evolution of Sundar Pichai's work on the Google Toolbar, a way to ensure everyone is using Google Search all the time. Google was increasingly concerned Microsoft would disable or block their toolbar, hence they created their own browser.) This monoculture not only means all browsers would be vulnerable to the same flaws, but that you are okay with Google controlling the entire Internet platform. (Which is already an increasing problem in many other aspects.)
K0nserv 9y ago
The Chrome monoculture among developers is concerning. It's something each and every developer should consider and actively combat by changing their primary browser. The open web cannot flourish when built on a monopoly
- kbar13 9y ago
  There is a reason why chrome has such a large market share and it's not because it's preinstalled. It's simply the best browser experience in many ways.
  - K0nserv 9y ago
    I'm not gonna dispute that. I've found that Firefox is an adequate replacement, however it is much more sluggish for certain sites specifically those that are javascript heavy. Like David mentions it's not really about which is the best browser, but picking a browse that isn't chrome as favour to the open web. As a side effects you'll discover a lot of bugs that were likely to otherwise be missed in both your products and others'. The Chrome monoculture among developers can easily cause a negative spiral were websites aren't tested in other browsers causing users of those browsers to be discontent with the browser and switch away from it likely to Chrome which will work. It's this exact behaviour that contributed to the IE6 situation.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > The Chrome monoculture among developers can easily cause a negative spiral were websites aren't tested in other browsers If what browser developers prefer to use has a significant influence on testing of anything other than experimental prototype / proof-of-concept work, the problem that needs to be addressed is testing practices, not developer browser choices. Trying to fix it with the latter won't work, it will just make different projects having different improper testing biases, which will make the web broken in all browsers instead of just non-Chrome browsers.
      - K0nserv 9y ago
ferongr 9y ago
I would of setting up a browser for my preferences didn't take 1 hour of my time.
colept 9y ago
> But you can stop it. By balancing the browsers, choosing to use not just what’s convenient, but what’s lesser used, you can make the business case for monopoly plays a bad deal. Consider it your civic duty as a fan of the open web. Internet Explorer was a monopoly because it was the default web browser installed on the most prevalent operating system. It's the same reason Safari has a majority on Macs even while it lagged behind a couple years. Chrome is convenient, but I'm not about to start using Opera or Safari because Google is making a better browser. I tried using Safari on my phone and navigating was just so rigid compared to the gestures in Chrome. Safari is behind the times and slowly catching up on web technologies, but also has taken some weird side-steps by ignoring standards like "filter: blur()" and implementing their own "backdrop-filter" that no other browser uses. Chrome and Firefox are the leaders in feature advancement and cross-browser standards. edit: Would like to clarify that when I mean ignoring the "filter: blur()" standard - Safari will remove a background image instead of blurring it. Use what's convenient so other browsers step it up.
- chuckhendo 9y ago
  I have no idea what you are talking about regarding Safari ignoring "filter: blur()" - it's supported it since 2012, just a few months after Chrome added it. In fact - I think at the time Chrome was still using Webkit. "backdrop-filter" is a completely different thing. Rather than filtering the element itself, it filters all elements behind it. This is especially useful with blur. While you are correct that Safari is the only browser currently supporting it, it is part of the standard, although it's not yet finalized. Chrome also supports it if you enabled "Experimental Web Features"
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - colept 9y ago
    Safari "filter:blur()" is not compatible with background images. Background images on a filtered element will disappear. While "backdrop-filter" is not compatible with any other browser. You either have to choose Safari (which only has a leading-yet-declining share on Macs) or every other browser to support.
lol768 9y ago
I've happily used Firefox for over a decade now (since version 2.0). The web's changed a little since then, but I think Firefox has adapted well and has been the source of a lot of innovation. I've tried Chrome and other browsers, but never really thought much of them - but I'm very glad they exist! Variety is a great thing to have. It's disheartening to see developers with the attitude that they only care about users using the same browser as them and it's been frustrating over the years to see services neglecting non-Chrome browsers (example: Netflix + Linux up until recently). What happened to cross-browser testing, progressive enhancement and other best practices?
- amelius 9y ago
  > What happened to cross-browser testing, progressive enhancement and other best practices? It is the responsibility of browser vendors to follow the spec, not of developers. Otherwise, developers would have to test in 10+ different browsers every time they make a change in the code, which would mean madness (!)
  - kingnothing 9y ago
    Developers need to be aware of differences in browsers and implement their projects accordingly. Anything less is simply unprofessional.
    - epicide 9y ago
      Developers work on browsers, too. It's a two-way street.
    - reitanqild 9y ago
      Agree. Just a few years ago this was a common understanding. It was kind of the hard thing about web development. If course today the hard thing about web development is to keep the build environment working :-P
  - barfbuttface 9y ago
    Back when I first started, that's what it was like. Had to make special code just for different versions of IE, let alone Netscape, Opera, webkit, khtml, etc.
293984j29384 9y ago
Hard pass. I'll just change my user-agent and call it a day.
scrollbar 9y ago
Do HN users have much to say about Brave? I've been hearing quite a bit about it lately but haven't tried it out yet. I'm figuring that if I switch browsers, it would be to something with some interesting edge like this, rather than going back to Firefox.
- spcelzrd 9y ago
  I use Brave sometimes. It's nice. But I switch browsers a lot. I don't use Chrome except for development because Google is invasive.
roesel 9y ago
IE was a majority browser while being bad. Chrome is the best browser available (for average joe at least). No plea to use another browser will be heard, until there is an as-good or better alternative.
- Vinnl 9y ago
  What makes it better than the other browsers for the average Joe other than being preinstalled on Android?
  - roesel 9y ago
    I was talking about the desktop version. If you want the features chrome provides, the experience is by far the smoothest, fastest and most integrated compared to other browsers. Don't get me wrong, I hate the RAM usage and the anti-privacy defaults, but if I put idealism aside, Chrome works best :-/. (And I don't really understand the downvotes. Perhaps I explained my point better here?)
- ocdtrekkie 9y ago
  The average joe's Chrome install is loaded up with malicious browser extensions that are installed via the Chrome Web Store (which is unpoliced) at the behest of malicious websites from Google Ads which pretend to be search results. These extensions have full access to the content of people's web browsing to inject content or collect data, compromising everything they do online. Chrome is the worst browser available for the average joe, and your grandma is better off on Edge, where every extension is manually approved by an actual human.
  - roesel 9y ago
    Your first point applies to any browser which has a large enough user base and allows for extensions. AFAIK, Firefox has the same issue you described and Edge has zero to no addons, functionality and options compared to either of the two. The second depends on the grandma I guess. The ones I know use AdBlock of some sort and like their pages to work :).
supremesaboteur 9y ago
> You don’t have to be that old to remember the dark days when Internet Explorer strangled the web by its utter domination. It is not the same thing. Chromium ( upon which Chrome is based ) is open source. If Google abuses their power it is easier to correct course by forking. In fact, many browsers like Opera, Brave, Vivaldi, Yandex etc are already based on Chromium > By balancing the browsers, choosing to use not just what’s convenient but what’s lesser used, you can make the business case for monopoly plays a bad deal. Pass. People should use the best software they can get their hands on > good folks at Firefox deserve your usage just as much So contrary to popular opinion on HN, Firefox is not as good as Chrome. However, we must still use it. Consider it an act of charity I don't think so. Mozilla must earn their user base by making a good browser and marketing it well
- reitanqild 9y ago
  >> good folks at Firefox deserve your usage just as much >So contrary to popular opinion on HN, Firefox is not as good as Chrome. However, we must still use it. Consider it an act of charity >I don't think so. Mozilla must earn their user base by making a good browser and marketing it well Firefox don’t need anyone to use it as an act of charity. But you need to stop the underhanded FUD. Talking like Chrome is somehow better than all other browsers is just as dumb as saying that x model of y car brand is best... Best for what? A lot of people love Chrome, Mac, Mercedes. Sure they are good but I dont want any of them. - I want my tabs to be vertical and automatically nested, - my browser to support 100s of tabs and real extensions, - my computer to have different window management and different menus than what is available on Mac OS - my car to have a handbraķe. Going on about how chrome is the best browser is only slightly more mature IMO than me as a kid going on about how x was the beat car (just because my dad had one). In this case it is even worse as people read it everywhere and start thinking it is true.
  - epicide 9y ago
    The car analogy starts to fall apart when you are talking about something that continues to get updates. Sure, they release new versions of cars usually every year, but you are buying an entirely new car, not really updating your old one. It also starts to fall apart when talking about price. You can talk about browsers costing time, effort, privacy, etc, but this isn't the same as talking about thousands of actual dollars. > real extensions Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe Firefox is going to have those for too much longer: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-developing-firefox-add-ons/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-dev...
ldiracdelta 9y ago
Why is this a big concern when chrome is mostly open source and you can download chromium? If Google takes a very wrong step, chrome can be forked.
- falcolas 9y ago
  Chromium (not Chrome) can indeed be forked. Yet that won't help with things like DirectTV going Chrome only. Or Google's marketing of Chrome to users of other browsers. Or finding developers capable of maintaining a fork with the current flood of web standards.
Semiapies 9y ago
This article is ahistorical - it was Firefox that first shook IE's dominance. Chrome took over the Firefox niche and finally claimed dominance because it ran so much better, while still meeting web standards. I develop with Chrome not just because it's the least pain in the ass and has a good ecosystem of tools, but because it adheres to standards. I can't remember the last time I've made a page in Chrome and it didn't work in Firefox or even Edge. It's only weird, non-standard browsers I have to work around.
- soperj 9y ago
  I've made lots that don't work in Safari though.
- bactrian 9y ago
  Firefox kept the fire burning but Chrome is what stirred Microsoft into action. Chrome is creepy privacy invading software designed to help maintain Googles search monopoly. Like Search, Chrome's quality is the honey and we are the flies.
  - Karunamon 9y ago
    You say "creepy privacy invading", I say hooked up to the only search engine worth a damn and providing trivially disabled features that actually save me time and pain.
    - newscracker 9y ago
      If you start using DuckDuckGo for your searches, you can use different commands for different search platforms if you find the DDG results lacking (which I do many a times, depending on the topic/context). For example, !s would search Startpage [1] (a search engine that claims not to track but uses Google search internally), !g would search Google, !w would search Wikipedia, and so on. It takes maybe a few more seconds, but offers a lot of flexibility. [1]: https://www.startpage.com https://www.startpage.com
guelo 9y ago
To me Firefox is superior because of things like Tree Style Tabs. But Mozilla is killing Tree Style Tabs in an incomprehensible rush to become indistinguishable from Chrome. But if Firefox is indistinguishable from Chrome what reason is there to use it?
- NoGravitas 9y ago
  Firefox Test Drive has Tab Center (vertical tabs) and Snooze Tabs. Tabs in Tab Center are still not tree-nested, but that's a possibility for the future.
- M2Ys4U 9y ago
  That's not why Mozilla are changing how extensions work. They're breaking compatibility now so they can do it once and then refactor Firefox's internals to make the browser better/faster/more secure without constantly breaking extensions or - even worse - being prevented from making those internal changes in the first place.
Pica_soO 9y ago
I do not care about the cup-monopoly, when the providers of water are strangling the pipe.
- falcolas 9y ago
  It's possible to be concerned about more than one thing at a time. Otherwise, could anyone ever be concerned about anything but the fact that they're going to die?
801699 9y ago
the more reliant you become on popular corporate/"non-profit" controlled browsers the more disappointed you will be when the drm comes. but i will bet they will ease you into it to minimize the complaints. long ago someone predicted very early that the web would evolve into tv, driven by "pinheads". i believe he was correct. anyone remember a browser from nocrew called zen? had framebuffer support. i think it also allows users to add new interfaces. still compiles cleanly today even on non-linux. code is in archive.org, see nocrew.org have not tried to use it but am impressed that it is from 2004-ish and still compiles cleanly. framebuffer has had some significant improvements since 2004. could be time to revisit.
thebiglebrewski 9y ago
Uh wait though, isn't this the entire tech business? Get people to centralize on using a technology then build a monopoly/moat around it? Who's going to acquire the sexy startups if we abandon our monopolistic ideas and the massive cash troves that come with them? Is there really another way? I know, I know, nobody wants to believe this is truly what happens. But let's be honest, big companies control much of what happens on the web now. And then they acquire smaller companies that challenge them. And the government doesn't know anything about tech or not nearly enough to understand that these monopolies probably need to be broken up. Can you think of an alternative to the system we're in, or does all technology lead to centralization like this?
ferdbold 9y ago
I wish I could switch to Firefox, but I'm really dependent on sync features and I just love Chrome OS on my chromebook... Are there any solid solutions for Firefox <-> Chrome syncing?
mnm1 9y ago
Is there a tool that can sync bookmarks and addons across browsers? Especially now that Mozilla is going to support the same addons? Something that syncs things on an ongoing basis, not just once. I think FF is great but asking people to use more than one browser, yet manually sync the bookmarks and addons is asking for way too much. Even just for bookmarks this would be great. The functionality is 99% of the way there (one time sync works). Personally, I just think Mozilla no longer cares if people use its products. If it did, it would make using them a lot easier and more convenient.
Fej 9y ago
Since everyone is talking about Chrome's flaws, why does the font rendering in Chrome still suck?
johnsmith21006 9y ago
Love Chrome. Tried other options from time to time but always go back. I do run on a higher end machine. It is fast and just rock solid.
paule89 9y ago
Nice try internet explorer
luord 9y ago
I make sure to test my applications in all major browsers and iron out bugs in all of them, when possible. So, that aside, I'm too used to Chromium for me to bother switching to something else as my personal browser. Not to mention that it's handy if one uses mostly Google applications (gmail, maps, keep, etc) as it allows synchronization between devices. Besides, and this might seem a bit incendiary, I see no problem with something that's mostly open source holding the largest market share. It'd be very difficult for Google to attempt any abuse or create a captive audience, or to force developers to not use standards.
anilgulecha 9y ago
Dear firefox, Just take Chrome's devtools and put it in. I'll switch my browser, all of my extended family (that I provide tech-support to), to firefox. Thanks, A Developer
- BenjiWiebe 9y ago
  Your extended family needs Chrome dev tools?
  - anilgulecha 9y ago
    No -- but supporting them means installing extensions, compatibility with apps when supporting over phone, etc. All of this is easy when they're on the same browser as you.

121 points by AngeloAnolin 9y ago

After years of using Chrome I tried Firefox just to try something different and to my surprise it's 90% as good as Chrome and even surpasses it in certain areas: - address bar history is better, Chrome wants you to google everything, not use your history, - Firefox for Android has addons, I don't even want to remember life without uBlock... I still have nightmares of vibrating website scams on Chrome. Chrome is generally better in: - speed and security, - interesting Web APIs (foreign-fetch in Service Workers, Barcode recognition on Android).

the_common_man 9y ago
> - speed and security, Can you clarify about the security angle? What makes Firefox less secure?
- noinsight 9y ago
  Zero sandboxing for one?
- hdhzy 9y ago
  Currently? Lack of multiprocess tabs [0] and native U2F (available though third party addon, not on Android). Personally I also like how Google deals with Symantec issues. [0]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox/Multiprocess_Firefox https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox/Multiprocess_Fir...
  - the_common_man 9y ago
    Ah ok, I already have electrolysis. U2F i agree
soperj 9y ago
I also find Firefox doesn't chew through my battery as quickly.

anilshanbhag 9y ago

I have a different opinion. I think this monoculture is great. There are many browsers all based on Chromium: Chrome, Opera, etc. While they offer different views, their core rendering engine and api's are shared with chromium. It makes life much easier as a developer. While having many implementations is great, it is a pain in the ass. For example, I have an app that uses service worker and indexeddb. It has cases where it fails to work on Safari. The author compares to Chromium monoculture to IE. That is a very unfair comparison. I would compare it to Linux. Both have open code bases that you can fork at any time and contribute to if you want. It works well on all platforms/hardware respectively. Both have corporate goodwill to pay for it. Its wasteful to re-implement things multiple times over.

falcolas 9y ago
What is good for a developer is rarely good for the end user. CLIs are great for developers - they're fast and easy to use. They are also remarkably unfriendly for non-developers to try and use. Dev tools? Useless for a majority of end users. Web Standards? Useful only in getting them the content they want. JavaScript execution speed? Again, only in support of the content. We as developers forget about the end users too much.
ocdtrekkie 9y ago
The biggest problem is, they're all still based on Chromium, who's development priorities are determined by a single profit-driven corporation. (Bear in mind, Chrome was simply the natural evolution of Sundar Pichai's work on the Google Toolbar, a way to ensure everyone is using Google Search all the time. Google was increasingly concerned Microsoft would disable or block their toolbar, hence they created their own browser.) This monoculture not only means all browsers would be vulnerable to the same flaws, but that you are okay with Google controlling the entire Internet platform. (Which is already an increasing problem in many other aspects.)

K0nserv 9y ago

The Chrome monoculture among developers is concerning. It's something each and every developer should consider and actively combat by changing their primary browser. The open web cannot flourish when built on a monopoly

kbar13 9y ago
There is a reason why chrome has such a large market share and it's not because it's preinstalled. It's simply the best browser experience in many ways.
- K0nserv 9y ago
  I'm not gonna dispute that. I've found that Firefox is an adequate replacement, however it is much more sluggish for certain sites specifically those that are javascript heavy. Like David mentions it's not really about which is the best browser, but picking a browse that isn't chrome as favour to the open web. As a side effects you'll discover a lot of bugs that were likely to otherwise be missed in both your products and others'. The Chrome monoculture among developers can easily cause a negative spiral were websites aren't tested in other browsers causing users of those browsers to be discontent with the browser and switch away from it likely to Chrome which will work. It's this exact behaviour that contributed to the IE6 situation.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > The Chrome monoculture among developers can easily cause a negative spiral were websites aren't tested in other browsers If what browser developers prefer to use has a significant influence on testing of anything other than experimental prototype / proof-of-concept work, the problem that needs to be addressed is testing practices, not developer browser choices. Trying to fix it with the latter won't work, it will just make different projects having different improper testing biases, which will make the web broken in all browsers instead of just non-Chrome browsers.
    - K0nserv 9y ago

ferongr 9y ago

I would of setting up a browser for my preferences didn't take 1 hour of my time.

colept 9y ago

> But you can stop it. By balancing the browsers, choosing to use not just what’s convenient, but what’s lesser used, you can make the business case for monopoly plays a bad deal. Consider it your civic duty as a fan of the open web. Internet Explorer was a monopoly because it was the default web browser installed on the most prevalent operating system. It's the same reason Safari has a majority on Macs even while it lagged behind a couple years. Chrome is convenient, but I'm not about to start using Opera or Safari because Google is making a better browser. I tried using Safari on my phone and navigating was just so rigid compared to the gestures in Chrome. Safari is behind the times and slowly catching up on web technologies, but also has taken some weird side-steps by ignoring standards like "filter: blur()" and implementing their own "backdrop-filter" that no other browser uses. Chrome and Firefox are the leaders in feature advancement and cross-browser standards. edit: Would like to clarify that when I mean ignoring the "filter: blur()" standard - Safari will remove a background image instead of blurring it. Use what's convenient so other browsers step it up.

chuckhendo 9y ago
I have no idea what you are talking about regarding Safari ignoring "filter: blur()" - it's supported it since 2012, just a few months after Chrome added it. In fact - I think at the time Chrome was still using Webkit. "backdrop-filter" is a completely different thing. Rather than filtering the element itself, it filters all elements behind it. This is especially useful with blur. While you are correct that Safari is the only browser currently supporting it, it is part of the standard, although it's not yet finalized. Chrome also supports it if you enabled "Experimental Web Features"
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- colept 9y ago
  Safari "filter:blur()" is not compatible with background images. Background images on a filtered element will disappear. While "backdrop-filter" is not compatible with any other browser. You either have to choose Safari (which only has a leading-yet-declining share on Macs) or every other browser to support.

lol768 9y ago

I've happily used Firefox for over a decade now (since version 2.0). The web's changed a little since then, but I think Firefox has adapted well and has been the source of a lot of innovation. I've tried Chrome and other browsers, but never really thought much of them - but I'm very glad they exist! Variety is a great thing to have. It's disheartening to see developers with the attitude that they only care about users using the same browser as them and it's been frustrating over the years to see services neglecting non-Chrome browsers (example: Netflix + Linux up until recently). What happened to cross-browser testing, progressive enhancement and other best practices?

amelius 9y ago
> What happened to cross-browser testing, progressive enhancement and other best practices? It is the responsibility of browser vendors to follow the spec, not of developers. Otherwise, developers would have to test in 10+ different browsers every time they make a change in the code, which would mean madness (!)
- kingnothing 9y ago
  Developers need to be aware of differences in browsers and implement their projects accordingly. Anything less is simply unprofessional.
  - epicide 9y ago
    Developers work on browsers, too. It's a two-way street.
  - reitanqild 9y ago
    Agree. Just a few years ago this was a common understanding. It was kind of the hard thing about web development. If course today the hard thing about web development is to keep the build environment working :-P
- barfbuttface 9y ago
  Back when I first started, that's what it was like. Had to make special code just for different versions of IE, let alone Netscape, Opera, webkit, khtml, etc.

293984j29384 9y ago

Hard pass. I'll just change my user-agent and call it a day.

scrollbar 9y ago

Do HN users have much to say about Brave? I've been hearing quite a bit about it lately but haven't tried it out yet. I'm figuring that if I switch browsers, it would be to something with some interesting edge like this, rather than going back to Firefox.

spcelzrd 9y ago
I use Brave sometimes. It's nice. But I switch browsers a lot. I don't use Chrome except for development because Google is invasive.

roesel 9y ago

IE was a majority browser while being bad. Chrome is the best browser available (for average joe at least). No plea to use another browser will be heard, until there is an as-good or better alternative.

Vinnl 9y ago
What makes it better than the other browsers for the average Joe other than being preinstalled on Android?
- roesel 9y ago
  I was talking about the desktop version. If you want the features chrome provides, the experience is by far the smoothest, fastest and most integrated compared to other browsers. Don't get me wrong, I hate the RAM usage and the anti-privacy defaults, but if I put idealism aside, Chrome works best :-/. (And I don't really understand the downvotes. Perhaps I explained my point better here?)
ocdtrekkie 9y ago
The average joe's Chrome install is loaded up with malicious browser extensions that are installed via the Chrome Web Store (which is unpoliced) at the behest of malicious websites from Google Ads which pretend to be search results. These extensions have full access to the content of people's web browsing to inject content or collect data, compromising everything they do online. Chrome is the worst browser available for the average joe, and your grandma is better off on Edge, where every extension is manually approved by an actual human.
- roesel 9y ago
  Your first point applies to any browser which has a large enough user base and allows for extensions. AFAIK, Firefox has the same issue you described and Edge has zero to no addons, functionality and options compared to either of the two. The second depends on the grandma I guess. The ones I know use AdBlock of some sort and like their pages to work :).

supremesaboteur 9y ago

> You don’t have to be that old to remember the dark days when Internet Explorer strangled the web by its utter domination. It is not the same thing. Chromium ( upon which Chrome is based ) is open source. If Google abuses their power it is easier to correct course by forking. In fact, many browsers like Opera, Brave, Vivaldi, Yandex etc are already based on Chromium > By balancing the browsers, choosing to use not just what’s convenient but what’s lesser used, you can make the business case for monopoly plays a bad deal. Pass. People should use the best software they can get their hands on > good folks at Firefox deserve your usage just as much So contrary to popular opinion on HN, Firefox is not as good as Chrome. However, we must still use it. Consider it an act of charity I don't think so. Mozilla must earn their user base by making a good browser and marketing it well

reitanqild 9y ago
>> good folks at Firefox deserve your usage just as much >So contrary to popular opinion on HN, Firefox is not as good as Chrome. However, we must still use it. Consider it an act of charity >I don't think so. Mozilla must earn their user base by making a good browser and marketing it well Firefox don’t need anyone to use it as an act of charity. But you need to stop the underhanded FUD. Talking like Chrome is somehow better than all other browsers is just as dumb as saying that x model of y car brand is best... Best for what? A lot of people love Chrome, Mac, Mercedes. Sure they are good but I dont want any of them. - I want my tabs to be vertical and automatically nested, - my browser to support 100s of tabs and real extensions, - my computer to have different window management and different menus than what is available on Mac OS - my car to have a handbraķe. Going on about how chrome is the best browser is only slightly more mature IMO than me as a kid going on about how x was the beat car (just because my dad had one). In this case it is even worse as people read it everywhere and start thinking it is true.
- epicide 9y ago
  The car analogy starts to fall apart when you are talking about something that continues to get updates. Sure, they release new versions of cars usually every year, but you are buying an entirely new car, not really updating your old one. It also starts to fall apart when talking about price. You can talk about browsers costing time, effort, privacy, etc, but this isn't the same as talking about thousands of actual dollars. > real extensions Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe Firefox is going to have those for too much longer: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-developing-firefox-add-ons/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-dev...

ldiracdelta 9y ago

Why is this a big concern when chrome is mostly open source and you can download chromium? If Google takes a very wrong step, chrome can be forked.

falcolas 9y ago
Chromium (not Chrome) can indeed be forked. Yet that won't help with things like DirectTV going Chrome only. Or Google's marketing of Chrome to users of other browsers. Or finding developers capable of maintaining a fork with the current flood of web standards.

Semiapies 9y ago

This article is ahistorical - it was Firefox that first shook IE's dominance. Chrome took over the Firefox niche and finally claimed dominance because it ran so much better, while still meeting web standards. I develop with Chrome not just because it's the least pain in the ass and has a good ecosystem of tools, but because it adheres to standards. I can't remember the last time I've made a page in Chrome and it didn't work in Firefox or even Edge. It's only weird, non-standard browsers I have to work around.

soperj 9y ago
I've made lots that don't work in Safari though.
bactrian 9y ago
Firefox kept the fire burning but Chrome is what stirred Microsoft into action. Chrome is creepy privacy invading software designed to help maintain Googles search monopoly. Like Search, Chrome's quality is the honey and we are the flies.
- Karunamon 9y ago
  You say "creepy privacy invading", I say hooked up to the only search engine worth a damn and providing trivially disabled features that actually save me time and pain.
  - newscracker 9y ago
    If you start using DuckDuckGo for your searches, you can use different commands for different search platforms if you find the DDG results lacking (which I do many a times, depending on the topic/context). For example, !s would search Startpage [1] (a search engine that claims not to track but uses Google search internally), !g would search Google, !w would search Wikipedia, and so on. It takes maybe a few more seconds, but offers a lot of flexibility. [1]: https://www.startpage.com https://www.startpage.com

guelo 9y ago

To me Firefox is superior because of things like Tree Style Tabs. But Mozilla is killing Tree Style Tabs in an incomprehensible rush to become indistinguishable from Chrome. But if Firefox is indistinguishable from Chrome what reason is there to use it?

NoGravitas 9y ago
Firefox Test Drive has Tab Center (vertical tabs) and Snooze Tabs. Tabs in Tab Center are still not tree-nested, but that's a possibility for the future.
M2Ys4U 9y ago
That's not why Mozilla are changing how extensions work. They're breaking compatibility now so they can do it once and then refactor Firefox's internals to make the browser better/faster/more secure without constantly breaking extensions or - even worse - being prevented from making those internal changes in the first place.

Pica_soO 9y ago

I do not care about the cup-monopoly, when the providers of water are strangling the pipe.

falcolas 9y ago
It's possible to be concerned about more than one thing at a time. Otherwise, could anyone ever be concerned about anything but the fact that they're going to die?

801699 9y ago

the more reliant you become on popular corporate/"non-profit" controlled browsers the more disappointed you will be when the drm comes. but i will bet they will ease you into it to minimize the complaints. long ago someone predicted very early that the web would evolve into tv, driven by "pinheads". i believe he was correct. anyone remember a browser from nocrew called zen? had framebuffer support. i think it also allows users to add new interfaces. still compiles cleanly today even on non-linux. code is in archive.org, see nocrew.org have not tried to use it but am impressed that it is from 2004-ish and still compiles cleanly. framebuffer has had some significant improvements since 2004. could be time to revisit.

thebiglebrewski 9y ago

Uh wait though, isn't this the entire tech business? Get people to centralize on using a technology then build a monopoly/moat around it? Who's going to acquire the sexy startups if we abandon our monopolistic ideas and the massive cash troves that come with them? Is there really another way? I know, I know, nobody wants to believe this is truly what happens. But let's be honest, big companies control much of what happens on the web now. And then they acquire smaller companies that challenge them. And the government doesn't know anything about tech or not nearly enough to understand that these monopolies probably need to be broken up. Can you think of an alternative to the system we're in, or does all technology lead to centralization like this?

ferdbold 9y ago

I wish I could switch to Firefox, but I'm really dependent on sync features and I just love Chrome OS on my chromebook... Are there any solid solutions for Firefox <-> Chrome syncing?

mnm1 9y ago

Is there a tool that can sync bookmarks and addons across browsers? Especially now that Mozilla is going to support the same addons? Something that syncs things on an ongoing basis, not just once. I think FF is great but asking people to use more than one browser, yet manually sync the bookmarks and addons is asking for way too much. Even just for bookmarks this would be great. The functionality is 99% of the way there (one time sync works). Personally, I just think Mozilla no longer cares if people use its products. If it did, it would make using them a lot easier and more convenient.

Fej 9y ago

Since everyone is talking about Chrome's flaws, why does the font rendering in Chrome still suck?

johnsmith21006 9y ago

Love Chrome. Tried other options from time to time but always go back. I do run on a higher end machine. It is fast and just rock solid.

paule89 9y ago

Nice try internet explorer

luord 9y ago

I make sure to test my applications in all major browsers and iron out bugs in all of them, when possible. So, that aside, I'm too used to Chromium for me to bother switching to something else as my personal browser. Not to mention that it's handy if one uses mostly Google applications (gmail, maps, keep, etc) as it allows synchronization between devices. Besides, and this might seem a bit incendiary, I see no problem with something that's mostly open source holding the largest market share. It'd be very difficult for Google to attempt any abuse or create a captive audience, or to force developers to not use standards.

anilgulecha 9y ago

Dear firefox, Just take Chrome's devtools and put it in. I'll switch my browser, all of my extended family (that I provide tech-support to), to firefox. Thanks, A Developer

BenjiWiebe 9y ago
Your extended family needs Chrome dev tools?
- anilgulecha 9y ago
  No -- but supporting them means installing extensions, compatibility with apps when supporting over phone, etc. All of this is easy when they're on the same browser as you.