6 ms·

It is certainly annoying with how they try and nudge other products away in subtle ways. Like like Firefox on Android, works really well. However on Google's se

by Jonnax 9y ago

It is certainly annoying with how they try and nudge other products away in subtle ways. Like like Firefox on Android, works really well. However on Google's search, they give you a stripped down version of their search results inferior to what Chrome gets. Use an addon like this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/chrome-ua-on-google-android/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/chrome-ua-on-... And you find out that Firefox has no problem rendering the full featured chrome version. I assume the only reason they do it is so that Firefox for Android users feel slightly inconvenienced enough to remain Chrome users.

icebraining 9y ago
Curious, I find the left version preferable. More compact, and probably faster to load too.
- Jonnax 9y ago
  It's similar speeds though I've got 4G or good Wifi. But what you miss out on is the top cards. Like if you search for Weather, you can see what's the predicted forecast per hour. Or when you search for translate, you get a translate widget at the top. And for image search, it does the old page-by-page view versus infinite scrolling which isn't too bad. But the image quality is really low.
  - YCode 9y ago
    Is it possible they rolled out a "Chrome" and an "everyone else" option since some options like cards are only tested by Google on Chrome, and that's why it shows up as such? Just applying Hanlon's razor here.
    - Jonnax 9y ago
      Well they give the chrome site to Safari on iPhone OS. So possibly but this is the company that is all about web standards, right? At least I'm sure that what someone working on Chromium/Chrome/Angular/etc would say.
      - fixermark 9y ago
        Safari and Chrome are using the same basic webkit rendering engine with minimal mutations from each other. Firefox's engine is different and makes many different decisions with regards to implementation detail. Since the web standards rarely constrain things like, say, time to complete a reflow step in mutating a page when a DOM element has its visibility property changed, standards-compliant browsers can make different decisions on these bits of detail that lead to practically very different experiences. In general, if it works on Chrome it'll probably work on Safari, and it is not guaranteed to work on Firefox, IE, or Edge without further testing.
        s73ver 9y ago
        However, I do think you'd be hard pressed to claim that Google does not have the resources to test and make sure that it does work on mobile Firefox.
        reitanqild 9y ago
        Heh. I trust them less and less: Obvious problems goes unnoticed: search results page kept burning cpu if I keet it open in desktop Firefox. (Installed an extension to fix it and haven't tested lately.) It's hard to belive this can happen without anyone caring at such a big place. At a company that seems to be attracting the best and brightest it is really hard to belive this isn't intentional. Then again I've been equally wrong before.
        fixermark 9y ago
        So now assume they test and find it doesn't work on mobile Firefox. What should they do? Refrain from rolling out the design to Chrome and Safari until Firefox performance catches up, or roll out the functionality differently on different browsers? Sounds like, based on the descriptions here, they're doing the latter, right? Infinite scrolling on Chrome vs. paged viewing on Firefox, for instance.
        kuschku 9y ago
    - reitanqild 9y ago
      (My annoyed opinion.) I say they are applying an Microsoft vs Opera here and I wish EU will take a closer look at them soon. IMO basic cross-browser compability is something that everyone but the most cash-strapped or pre-beta software should apply for as long as it is publicly available at least. And for google who earns more than they know what do do with I'd say it is an embarrassingly easy-to-see-through anti-competitive behaviour.
- hadrien01 9y ago
  And no Google AMP!
lettergram 9y ago
I use DuckDuckGo as I said, but you can easily switch the default search StartPage; which shouldn't give you stripped down search results.
bildung 9y ago
> However on Google's search, they give you a stripped down version of their search results inferior to what Chrome gets. That stripped down version of Google search is why I mainly use Firefox on Android :) You can also avoid AMP results this way last time I tried.

by Jonnax 9y ago

icebraining 9y ago

Curious, I find the left version preferable. More compact, and probably faster to load too.

Jonnax 9y ago
It's similar speeds though I've got 4G or good Wifi. But what you miss out on is the top cards. Like if you search for Weather, you can see what's the predicted forecast per hour. Or when you search for translate, you get a translate widget at the top. And for image search, it does the old page-by-page view versus infinite scrolling which isn't too bad. But the image quality is really low.
- YCode 9y ago
  Is it possible they rolled out a "Chrome" and an "everyone else" option since some options like cards are only tested by Google on Chrome, and that's why it shows up as such? Just applying Hanlon's razor here.
  - Jonnax 9y ago
    Well they give the chrome site to Safari on iPhone OS. So possibly but this is the company that is all about web standards, right? At least I'm sure that what someone working on Chromium/Chrome/Angular/etc would say.
    - fixermark 9y ago
      Safari and Chrome are using the same basic webkit rendering engine with minimal mutations from each other. Firefox's engine is different and makes many different decisions with regards to implementation detail. Since the web standards rarely constrain things like, say, time to complete a reflow step in mutating a page when a DOM element has its visibility property changed, standards-compliant browsers can make different decisions on these bits of detail that lead to practically very different experiences. In general, if it works on Chrome it'll probably work on Safari, and it is not guaranteed to work on Firefox, IE, or Edge without further testing.
      - s73ver 9y ago
        However, I do think you'd be hard pressed to claim that Google does not have the resources to test and make sure that it does work on mobile Firefox.
        reitanqild 9y ago
        Heh. I trust them less and less: Obvious problems goes unnoticed: search results page kept burning cpu if I keet it open in desktop Firefox. (Installed an extension to fix it and haven't tested lately.) It's hard to belive this can happen without anyone caring at such a big place. At a company that seems to be attracting the best and brightest it is really hard to belive this isn't intentional. Then again I've been equally wrong before.
        fixermark 9y ago
        So now assume they test and find it doesn't work on mobile Firefox. What should they do? Refrain from rolling out the design to Chrome and Safari until Firefox performance catches up, or roll out the functionality differently on different browsers? Sounds like, based on the descriptions here, they're doing the latter, right? Infinite scrolling on Chrome vs. paged viewing on Firefox, for instance.
        kuschku 9y ago
  - reitanqild 9y ago
    (My annoyed opinion.) I say they are applying an Microsoft vs Opera here and I wish EU will take a closer look at them soon. IMO basic cross-browser compability is something that everyone but the most cash-strapped or pre-beta software should apply for as long as it is publicly available at least. And for google who earns more than they know what do do with I'd say it is an embarrassingly easy-to-see-through anti-competitive behaviour.
hadrien01 9y ago
And no Google AMP!

lettergram 9y ago

I use DuckDuckGo as I said, but you can easily switch the default search StartPage; which shouldn't give you stripped down search results.

bildung 9y ago

> However on Google's search, they give you a stripped down version of their search results inferior to what Chrome gets. That stripped down version of Google search is why I mainly use Firefox on Android :) You can also avoid AMP results this way last time I tried.