30 ms·

Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014)

698 points by jakub_g 8y ago

sametmax 8y ago
And it didn't work. Some people were aware of this. A few took the time to read/discuss/think about it. A minuscule fraction of passionate people acted on it. And the rest of the world took the path of least resistance, as usual. People don't shape society willingly. They mostly let life happen to them. Even when you see them protesting, it's the consequence of an emotional reaction and a group effect, not the reflect of their deep personnal vision of life. They have none. It's why people keep gaining weight, comming back to a violent spouse or voting again for the politicians that just lied in their face. I have no idea what to do about that. Education works a bit, but it's so slow and easy to destroy. And meanwhile, it's very unfair for the minority trying hard to make things better. They pay a high price, with no thanks, and little benefits except the hope the others won't screw up things more.
- Santosh83 8y ago
  Be the change you want and keep talking about it. I've stuck to Firefox through ups and downs ever since I found out about it back during version 1 point something. Internet Explorer proved that behemoths can and will fall, given enough time to shoot themselves in the foot. Firefox just needs to retain its 10% somehow.
  - zymhan 8y ago
    I've stuck with it and preached it and told people why Google is just going to repeat IE's history with Chrome, and my tech friends still mostly use Chrome. There is something about A) what everyone else is doing, and B) inertia, that is just too difficult to overcome without some sudden significant change.
    - Santosh83 8y ago
      The single biggest advantage of Chrome is that it's bundled as the default, non-removable browser on the largest mobile OS in the world: Android. And nearly all those people then expect to use the same browser on laptops and desktops and even here it is often pre-installed by OEM. If Firefox had somehow had this clinching advantage in an alternate reality, they would be the Chrome now. The actual performance and technical differences between the two browsers are by no stretch of imagination deal-breaking. But Google's marketing and bundling has been decisive. I just hope Mozilla doesn't abandon Gecko but sticks this fight out.
      - ginko 8y ago
        I would hope Mozilla will eventually retire Gecko and switch to Servo.
      - O1111OOO 8y ago
        > The single biggest advantage of Chrome is that it's bundled as the default, non-removable browser on the largest mobile OS in the world: Android. I'm still upset that Mozilla balked on Firefox OS[0]. It would have made a good ChromeOS competitor on laptops and tablets. I would have opted for a Firefox OS tablet instead of Android as a secondary device. A privacy-focused tablet would have been amazing. Honestly don't see any reason why Mozilla couldn't restart the project on larger-screen devices - skipping the phone phase for a period. Especially now that they have their rust-powered Quantum Browser showing the world what it can do. They could always do phones later on when the platform matures. I think they are failing to see that solutions are about ecosystems. Few can deny they have a rich, browser-based, ecosystem. They are still thinking in legacy terms - a single-use application. I believe they have the monetary means (and the talent) to enter hardware (or via Kickstarter). Their worst enemy... they may be a little old-school, corporate management-heavy on top. Their leadership let Firefox stagnate, the performance suffered the entire time Chrome was taking everyone's market share. We're talking years of neglect. > If Firefox had somehow had this clinching advantage in an alternate reality. The alternate reality... Google invests $22 million in the ported version of Fire OS, KaiOS[1]. They are helping to keep alive (and integrating themselves) into the very OS Mozilla created (and abandoned). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS [1] https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/27/google-kaios/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/27/google-kaios/
  - magduf 8y ago
    >Be the change you want and keep talking about it. The OP already talked about the problem with this approach to things: >"...it's very unfair for the minority trying hard to make things better. They pay a high price, with no thanks, and little benefits except the hope the others won't screw up things more." The people who stick their necks out trying to make a change usually end up sacrificing a lot and not getting anything in return, even if their efforts are successful. Basically, they're "taking one for the team". Luckily, with browser choices, it isn't nearly that bad; it's not that hard to switch browsers on a whim, after all, but for bigger issues (like political change, as the OP was referring to to a point, with his mention of protesting), "being the change you want" is usually not a winning strategy at a personal level, and a much more successful strategy is to simply go where the grass is greener.
- aduitsis 8y ago
  I'm sure a lot of people around here won't be able to hear you over the sound of how Firefox somehow doesn't feel quite right on their macs.
  - shaki-dora 8y ago
    Yeah... I dont quite understand how Firefox does invest into integration with third-party password managers, but not the one built into MacOS. Arguably Safari usage is comparable to Firefox in terms of staving off a Chromium monoculture. Safari usage on iOS is actually far more important right now to ensurage some semblance of compatibility.
    - vetinari 8y ago
      The password manager integrations are extensions made by the respective third-party password managers, not by Mozilla. If you want to use Keychain, it is either up to Apple to make an extension, or someone volunteering.
    - Yoric 8y ago
      There used to be an add-on that let users integrate the Keychain in Firefox. I seem to remember that pretty much nobody used it, which doesn't speak well of the usefulness of this integration. Also, Mozilla is working on its own cross-platform password manager/password sharing between devices. I'm not sure what the intended policy is wrt password sharing (there may be passwords that I only want to have on one device), but this should be more useful than the Keychain, which doesn't even let me move my passwords from one machine to the next one without arcane incantations.
    - pseudalopex 8y ago
      Chrome also removed Keychain support. Apple restricted access to the necessary APIs.
- js8 8y ago
  As a long time Firefox user, let me offer a different perspective. Upgrading any application is a chore, and you never know what will break or whether you lose your data. People don't want to do it, and yet they are forced to do it by companies (and open source is even worse). So if you can avoid it, you avoid it. I'll leave up to you to decide if Firefox haven't destroyed its own market share by confusing changes to UI and breaking backwards compatibility.
  - sametmax 8y ago
    Most people don't even know what an URL is, so I don't think they even think about their browser that hard.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - wutbrodo 8y ago
      I'm not sure I understand the point you're making here. Wouldn't those people be _more_ beholden to UI stability? If you understand what's under the hood, it takes a little time for your muscle memory to adjust to UI changes but it's not exactly confusing. That's decidedly not the case for the group you're describing.
- shaki-dora 8y ago
  That’s hard to prove or disprove without having an alternate universe ready for A/B testing. Although, frankly, I can’t shake the feeling I’ve been living in the B-branch for, say, the last two years. If so, let me just say: if your results are not yet conclusive, please ask your statisticians for what “multi-armed bandit” means to them, then shoot them if the quizzically look at you. You may even skip the question. Back on point: I know many people who use Firefox for “ideological” reasons. In fact, anybody who still used FF as of 6 months ago arguably fell in that group, save some extreme cases of inertia. But, even more tittilating: Firefox seems to be once again be competitive wrt performance. That may just be its salvation, and not a moment too early to make it dramatic.
  - pm215 8y ago
    Why would it be "extreme" inertia to still be using Firefox? If it's never felt like it's failing to do the job of being a web browser, then not switching is inertia, sure, but it's not extreme...
  - nchie 8y ago
    What are you even talking about? You're making it sound like Firefox has ever been a lot worse than Chrome, but that's far from the truth. I've used both quite a lot and I've always preferred Firefox, even _without_ considering the privacy aspects. I still use Chrome on my laptop as Firefox doesn't support decent pinch zooming (that's more or less my only complaint), but for desktop usage I definitely choose Firefox over Chrome.
    - RussianCow 8y ago
      Not the OP, but when Chrome came out, it was leaps and bounds ahead of Firefox in terms of performance, and it took Firefox many years (until just recently, with Quantum) to catch up. I personally endured it, but it was definitely hard after having used Chrome for a short while, and I don't blame anyone for making the switch back then. Most users don't care about features; they just want a browser that works well.
  - magduf 8y ago
- kuroguro 8y ago
  Recently finished moving away from most google stuff. Seeing how they are slowly grabbing more and more user data really scared the shit out of me (android location gathering, auto logging in to chrome from gmail, syncing all password data etc). Swapping the browser was the easy part. Not using google search and moving away from my gmail address that I've had since gmail was released were harder habits to break. Setting up a google-less android (lineageOS + microG) was a real PITA for a few weeks as I kept running into new problems and things not working properly. I don't see how anyone not into tech could pull it off.
  - antonyh 8y ago
    I dumped Chrome, stopping 'Googling' and moved to DuckDuckGo, installed uBlock Matrix so I could block as much of Google as possible (damn you reCaptcha), but it's gmail that's the tie-in. Changing email address is super hard. As for Android, I took the easy option - switched to iOS. I'd have preferred a third choice, but there's nothing viable at the moment. It's hard going but worth it for the privacy, and I agree it's not realistic for those not fully into tech. The world needs more choices for browser, more choices in mobile too. At least there's a few options for computing devices - Windows is a horrible privacy hole IMO, Apple and MacOS is a premium option but seems more private and secure, then there's Google (no comment). Linux can be a huge time sink and hard going but having run it on both desktop and laptop it's a good choice - but for the expensive commerce softwares that only run on Mac or Windows thanks to companies that make 'pro' offerings... for me its Adobe, Capture One, Reason - none of which offer Linux variants or work on Wine properly. Part of me wishes the EU to legislate more, but that's horrible in other ways.
- legends2k 8y ago
  > People don't shape society willing… Logged in just to say, “what a paragraph, haven't read anything with such clarity lately.” Thanks for it. Yes, I'm using Firefox since 2.0 and never changed once.
izacus 8y ago
How will avid Apple users on this website choose Firefox as a browser on their iPhones and iPad computers? EDIT: To clarify, mean the rendering engine (so we keep the ecosystem diversity), not the reskinned Safari. Reskinning Safari with Firefox branding does nothing for WebKit web monoculture.
- iMark 8y ago
  https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/firefox-web-browser/id989804926?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/firefox-web-browser/id989804... (but yes, I know it's still using webkit behind the scenes)
- codezero 8y ago
  They can use Firefox, just not the rendering engine. I expect that would still be considered an adequate move. Nobody I know (bias) has an iOS device and no laptop or PC, so they can also adopt it on their PC.
  - izacus 8y ago
    How is using reskinned Safari with WebKit rendering engine considered adequate move? That would be like putting a Firefox skin over IE6 engine a few years back - it would not help the ecosystem in the way this article asks for.
    - codezero 8y ago
      It would still use any bundled Firefox services. Mozilla makes (most?) of their money from search engine referrals so this alone is likely to be a direct support of them.
- amelius 8y ago
  They can run a WASM-compiled version of it.
  - Yoric 8y ago
    Does Wasm run comfortably on iOS devices? If so, that might be an idea.
askaboutit 8y ago
I chose Firefox then it made the CPU fan go nuts whilst it chewed all the available power.
- ginko 8y ago
  Even if Firefox were an objectively worse browser than Chrome(which I don't think it is these days) there is still an argument to be made to use it anyways to ensure the freedom of the web.
  - speedplane 8y ago
    > there is still an argument to be made to use [firefox] anyways to ensure the freedom of the web. Definitely. Remember when Google wanted to buy Wikipedia but promised to keep it a free resource? So happy that didn't happen, it would have been the end of Wikipedia. Services like Firefox and Wikipedia are the last vestiges we have of the original intent of the internet, an place to congregate with the user in mind. Most of everything else is walled gardens with the hope to create a monopoly via network effects.
    - anticensor 8y ago
      Or fenced yards, which only acts as echo chamber with an extra chorus.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
    And that argument is stupid. If Firefox had the dominant browser market share, they'd be the ones stripping your freedom and spying on your crap for money instead. Their history makes that pretty clear.
nindalf 8y ago
Just so we can avoid rehashing the discussion whenever a post encouraging the use of Firefox is posted. - Yes, Mozilla is still the better browser when it comes to privacy. - Yes, Mozilla has made missteps with Pocket and Mr. Robot. - Yes, it is slow/resource heavy on certain Macs with non-default resolutions. Yes, Mozilla is working on a fix. - Yes, it has become really fast for most users after Quantum improvements landed, and likely will continue to get better. - No, you can't just "fork Chromium" if you don't like the way Google is running the project. Web developers will still make their website work well with whatever Google releases, regardless of standards. - Yes, Firefox doesn't feel native on your platform of choice. - Yes, neither does Chrome (doesn't support dark mode on macOS) - Yes, Chrome has better security against malware. - Yes, Firefox removed the feature that was essential to your workflow, even though most users don't care. edit, thought of one more - No, the argument "Chrome will be the new IE if you don't use Firefox" doesn't matter to most users.
- ekianjo 8y ago
  > - Yes, Mozilla has made missteps with Pocket and Mr. Robot. and the removal of RSS support. So much for the champions of the Free Web!
  - xfitm3 8y ago
    Is the misstep with Pocket including it in the browser?
    - nindalf 8y ago
      Yes. I like Pocket, but I can't see why it shouldn't be an extension that can be removed.
      - Yoric 8y ago
        Intellectually, I agree, but - it actually doesn't hurt; - market research indicates that most people actually love it.
kanwisher 8y ago
Brendan Eich has moved out to make BAT. Lets support that instead. Firefox can die and new things can take its place
- matt4077 8y ago
  "Brave" is a morally bankrupt hustle gnawing at the foundations of civil society; it is a bro-wser spawned by a disgruntled has-been consumed by his ego's unwillingness to accept that his bank account does not reflect his former social standing. It is the rare "creative" endeavour motivated solely by a drive to destroy, and to get rich & even in the process. Also it's just another Chromium skin, so it wouldn't change anything.
  - kkarakk 8y ago
    brave is amazing to use on mobile
  - kikki 8y ago
    Are you going to provide any sources to back up these claims?
  - FeralAlien 8y ago
    At least brave works, Firefox has been completely useless for me on anything but Windows and Android since the quantum update. It drains battery like nobody's business or screws with UI elements when no one asked it to.
- zymhan 8y ago
  hahahahahahaaaaaaa I'd love to see a cogent argument for this. In no way does Brave address the issues with a monopolized web in the way that Mozilla does.
barking 8y ago
Well, this is embarrassing.
new_here 8y ago
Okay, I'll switch to Firefox now and give this a try.
- lmedinas 8y ago
  Just fyi this article is from 2014 and it was mentioned here in HN several times. But yes you are not too late :)
jf- 8y ago
I think I’m now at the point of jumping aboard this movement away from google. Not because their services are bad (they objectively are excellent) nor even because of privacy concerns (though they are legitimate), but because of the argument put forward in the OP: google are taking over everything. There is far too much power concentrated into the hands of a single company. As an individual there is not much that I can do about this, but what I can do is to use google products and services as little as possible, and to support smaller, independent alternatives. I think this has been posted on hn in the recent past, seems like a reasonable jumping-off point: https://medium.com/@ricst/de-google-your-life-now-82fad3ec0f35 https://medium.com/@ricst/de-google-your-life-now-82fad3ec0f...
mcherm 8y ago
Back in 2014 I was using g Firefox, for precisely this reason. I am still using it today, for the same reason. Please stop creating web applications that only work with Chrome (or Chrome and Safari).
- fernandotakai 8y ago
  not only that but stop testing your frontend code only on chrome. i'm the only one on my team that uses a non-chrome browser and every once in a while i find a bug or a css issue that is non-chrome only because nobody tests outside chrome.
bad_user 8y ago
Note this advice is true for email services as well. Pay for and use an alternative now, or later you won't get the choice. Google is hellbent on locking people into their ecosystem. One such move is the promotion of AMP: https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/13/amp-for-email-is-a-terrible-idea/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/13/amp-for-email-is-a-terribl... Speaking of email and browsers, the Gmail app on top of iOS presents the user with a choice between two browsers: 1. Safari 2. Chrome, which on iOS is a reskinned Safari, but with Sync and controlled by Google obviously But when Safari is selected they actually open links in an app Web View. Which does not share sessions and cookies with Safari. And their reskinned Chrome doesn't do Safari's content blocking either. Firefox on iOS doesn't do that either, but at least Firefox has its own tracking protection. Speaking of Chrome on iOS, they give the user the choice to switch search engines, supposedly, however they only list Yahoo and Bing as alternatives. No DuckDuckGo or Qwant or the ability to add your own. Android still allows users to switch their web browser or to use an alternative app store, but I wonder for how long. I mean they disallow users to uninstall their apps. My guess is that they are afraid of locking Android down more due to fines from the EU. Sadly what made Google great several years back was openness. But times are changing.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  > Firefox on iOS doesn't do that either, but at least Firefox has its own tracking protection. Firefox on iOS can't do this, unfortunately :(
  - diafygi 8y ago
    I'm curious about this. I get that firefox for ios has to use a webview, but why can't it allow extensions that can manipulate what's in the webview? The main reason I'm currently sticking with Android is that I can install firefox and use ublock origin and https everywhere.
    - saagarjha 8y ago
      You can run your own JavaScript in WKWebView, which is what Firefox uses, so you can run "extensions" to the extent of what the App Store will allow you to do. What you cannot do in this case is load content blockers, which a newer API that uses a list of selectors to block elements without JavaScript at all. Currently this API is limited to Safari itself and SFSafariViewController, which is untenable for Firefox because it is essentially "Safari in a box" in that the component provides its own UI and you essentially cannot interact with it at all.
craigsmansion 8y ago
Well, maybe if Mozilla hadn't alienated their early Freedom/Open web oriented users with their web hostile actions (or inaction). You know, the kind of users that would stick with "inferior" software because of values. That mountain ahead, Mozilla, is the accumulation of all the "hills not to die on". You got the clout you wanted by selling out, but now those users are flocking to technically better solutions as you're doomed to eternally play catch-up. Who would have thought? EDIT: Apparently people still believe in the "steward of the Open Web" image they present, and I have no right to be disenfranchised. We'll see. They made their bed...
- Jonnax 8y ago
  Okay. So they sold out and the alternative is a browser from an advert company. How do you think Mozilla should fund the development of Firefox?
  - craigsmansion 8y ago
    An alternative is an open source version of a browser from an advert company, with anti-features hopefully being kept in check by diligent maintainers. As much as I dislike that, from the advert company I know they're on the side of the advertisers. They're not presenting a "we're on the side of you, the users" face, whilst behaving more or less the same. A better alternative would be a fork of Firefox, kept up to date by a handful of overworked but dedicated-to-their-users volunteers. These exist, and maybe they would get some more recognition and funding if Mozilla were to cease to exist. I don't think Mozilla can change. They're too comfortably corporate. Having lost sight of their mission, I think it would be better if it disappeared and was replaced by something else.
    - underwater 8y ago
      Your alternative only makes sense if Chrome continues to win. Google is not going to continue investing in Chromium if a competing open source browser wins out.
    - AsyncAwait 8y ago
cataphract 8y ago
Is there any way to make Firefox use the passwords I have saved with Google (available at passwords.google.com and loaded into gnome-keyring)?
- catacombs 8y ago
  Use KeePass
- zymhan 8y ago
  When you first install Firefox, it asks if you want to import that data from other browsers that are installed. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/import-bookmarks-data-another-browser https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/import-bookmarks-data-a... Additionally, you can install a 3rd party password manager temporarily that can sync between Firefox and Chrome (e.g. LastPass, etc) https://smallbusiness.chron.com/export-settings-chrome-firefox-49457.html https://smallbusiness.chron.com/export-settings-chrome-firef...
- yinyang_in 8y ago
  One more suggestion. Try enpass
OpenBSD-reich2 8y ago
Why would I choose Firefox and all the baggage of Mozilla organizationally, when I've already chosen superior Chromium in the form of Iridium browser? The only thing left for Mozilla to do in converting Firefox into the GNOME 3 of browsers is to start viciously paring features for usability/"user experience!" I don't know if Iridium is pledged in OpenBSD, but Chrome definitely is whereas at this point it's almost impossible to pledge Firefox.
jillesvangurp 8y ago
Easy path to success for Firefox is to continue to beef up security and privacy tooling for their users and have sane defaults. They've been winning a lot of users who feel abandoned by the big companies in this space. A problem and conflict of interest for them regarding this is that they are funded mainly by Google. Firefox has a conflict of interest here because they are not doing all they can here because that would cut off their main source of revenue. So, for example, they have sort of a mute option for sound (just like other browsers) but they don't allow you to mute video by default (without blanket turning it off for all websites). I don't know anyone who loves being bombarded with video content when they want to read an article. I find the moving stuff to be distracting; even if the sound is off. Also the bandwidth is kind of not nice, especially on mobile. The BBC has started putting multiple video previews in their articles. This kind of attention whoring is highly annoying. This is not news to anyone of course. The obvious fix allow people to whitelist sites to allow autoplaying video (youtube, netflix, and other websites where people go specifically to enjoy video content) and switch that off for everything else. All the extenions for that claim to do this are basically a combination of broken or simply setting the config property that blanket bans all autoplay video for every website (just preempting the inevitable comment to try extension X here). Similarly, the containers extension is great. This should be baked into the browser and improved to the point where the default container is a private container unless you whitelist the domain. Right now private browsing happens in a separate window. It's an obvious thing to do: every site by default is private until you say otherwise. Both kind of are in direct conflict with how Google, and by extension, how Mozilla monetizes. This is the main reason this is made hard to do. I'm sure if this was easier, there'd be countless extensions doing exactly that. Instead people sort of emulate private browsing with stuff like noscript and other extensions that throw away cookies. Also nice but not user friendly. Doing all this in fool proof, user friendly way would be a great way for Firefox to differentiate. It would unfortunately cut them off from Google funding probably.
- bzbarsky 8y ago
  Just FYI, audio autoplay is being actively worked on in the current Firefox development version, precisely to solve the problem you describe. There are some issues with coming up with a UX that doesn't privilege a small set of sites out of the box over everyone else [1] and also doesn't prompt the user on every single site that tries to play video (the current Firefox Nightly behavior; it's rather annoying). So for this specific case, the reason it hasn't happened yet is not some nefarious conflict of interest but actual hard problems that need to be solved (and are being solved), coupled with resource constraints. As far as containers go, I agree they are great if you understand the model. I use them. Most users find them terribly confusing in their current form. Again, a UX issue. That said, the idea of having things in a private container by default is somewhat interesting. The hard part in some way would be the discoverability of the whitelisting flow and user confusion about why their customization information is not being remembered like in every other browser. I'll try to shop this around to people a bit and see if they can figure out a way to make this work sanely. Disclaimer: I work on Firefox, but not in UX. [1] Google's solution in Chrome; it suppresses new startups by making the experience suck there, which is good for incumbents like YouTube but maybe less good for the web as a whole in the long term.
mosselman 8y ago
I really wanted to keep using Firefox, but it is just too slow on my Mac. It makes itself and all other things I do very slow. Until this is resolved there is no way I can use it. Instead I use Brave now.
jeswin 8y ago
Taking users away from Google is still a big ask. Google has been thoroughly anti-competitive in this space - they deliberately downgrade the experience in non-Chrome browsers across many properties. For example, typing "GOOG stock" in Chrome/Android brings up a whole lot of details not found with Firefox/Android. There's no technical reason to do this, and they should be pulled up for abuse of monopoly power. Google search itself was better on Chrome till recently, though it's caught up now on Firefox/Android. Add: I've been a Firefox/Android user for a while now - and with ad-blocking the UX experience and battery life is much better than with Chrome. I encourage everyone to try it (with ad-blocking) for at least a week. Personally for me, Firefox on Android is a bigger deal than on the desktop.
- xyzal 8y ago
  An advantage to using Firefox Mobile is google search results suddenly become free of AMP crap
- antoineMoPa 8y ago
  Just downloaded Firefox on Android following your advice. I'm a heavy firefox user on the destkop, but I rarely think about installing firefox on my cellphones since 1. Firefox in Firefox OS was slow and it gave me a feeling that firefox was not for mobile (but I guess it's not true anymore) 2. The fact that Chrome is the default browser and I generally don't install many apps. The fact that it is the default on Android makes the game very unfair.
  - TheKarateKid 8y ago
    > The fact that it is the default on Android makes the game very unfair. The EU is already looking into this, and other antitrust issues with Android and even Google Search in general.
  - oAlbe 8y ago
    > Firefox in Firefox OS was slow and it gave me a feeling that firefox was not for mobile (but I guess it's not true anymore) I genuinely don't understand how Firefox on mobile is slow. I hear this complaint often (along with the complaint of Firefox on desktop not being able to run certain websites, which also never occurs to me), but for how much I try, I never managed to make Firefox on mobile (android) slow. There were a couple of days not long ago (we are talking weeks) were after an update the browser did get indeed a little slow, but it was still usable, and it got fixed very quickly. I use the hell out of my Firefox, both on desktop and mobile. I abuse it in all sorts of ways, and I am extremely demanding of it, yet it never breaks a sweat. Right now I have more than 100 tabs open in my Firefox on android - can't tell the exact number because when the 100th tab is opened, the number just becomes an infinity symbol - which is nothing more than average for me, I can easily get to 350, and it still opens and loads up instantly (at the time of the performance problem mentioned above I had ~260 tabs open). Am I just lucky? Do the performances/usability change so vastly from phone to phone and person to person?
mcemilg 8y ago
I was very afraid about syncing my data with other devices on Firefox. But today I switched to Firefox and passed all my chrome data (even stored passwords) to Firefox. It can sync with all devices such as mobile. I hope I will not get trouble about web apps :P
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
catacombs 8y ago
What are HN's thoughts on ungoogled-chrome? It's still a Chromium browser but without the Google spying.
- heuiop 8y ago
  It's not just spying. It's also unilateral actions like the recent 'trivial subdomains' example: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=881410 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=881410 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=883038 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=883038
hannasanarion 8y ago
Frankly, I don't want to choose firefox. Their priorities are utterly misplaced. I can't believe people don't talk about the dark gtk theming bug more often. It's one of the most common firefox questions on stackoverflow: If you have a dark gtk theme, like Arc-dark or Adwaita-dark, then Firefox randomly colors certain web page elements (usually text boxes) dark to match your desktop theme. Almost always resulting in black text on a black background. There are examples of this misbehavior on mozilla.org THIS BUG HAS BEEN OPEN FOR 18 YEARS https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70315 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70315 If something so obvious and so easy (why not make white the default background color, like every other browser) has gone unfixed for so long, despite its manifestation on their own home page, then why wouldn't I expect that there are tons of other common sense things that Mozilla has totally ignored, waiting for me to stumble upon them like so many land mines?
- Yoric 8y ago
  Since it's so critical to you, and if it's so obvious (I haven't checked, I take your word on it), would you consider submitting a patch to fix this issue? I can guide you on patch submission, if you need.
  - hannasanarion 8y ago
    Patches have been submitted, tons and tons of times, and are always rejected. The maintainers say "it's the website's fault for not respecting the user's theming preferences" even as their own website does it. They've been saying that user theming will sweep over the web and this issue will fix itself since the year 2000.
    - anoncake 8y ago
      > They've been saying that user theming will sweep over the web Of course not, it's an OS feature. Not everything is about the web.
- bzbarsky 8y ago
  There were lots of requests to have form controls "look native", which is why they were changed to use the desktop theme... One problem with that, as you note, is web pages that are setting a color but not a background color on elements, which is a web development 101 mistake. But there's just no way to win here: either you can use the OS theme for widgets and things fail when sites make this mistake, or the widgets don't look "native".
neilsimp1 8y ago
I've seen the comment here on HN and a few other sites in the past few days - are there sites out there that don't work in Firefox, but do work in Chrome? Like, I'm aware of a few CSS properties that work in Chrome but not FF, but I don't think I've ever come across a site that doesn't look or work completely fine in FF. The only exception to this that I can think of is Google Earth, which I'm pretty sure you can open inside of Chrome. I've always used the desktop app for that though so I'm not sure.
- astura 8y ago
  I was looking at this page yesterday in Firefox: https://www.digitalarchives.wa.gov/Collections/TitleInfo/512 https://www.digitalarchives.wa.gov/Collections/TitleInfo/512 When I enter a name and click "search" I get a page with some JSON ({"Result":true,"Status":"success","Redirect":1}) rather than the results page. Worked in chrome, however.
  - Wowfunhappy 8y ago
    ^^ The fact that this is a government website makes it particularly egregious.
  - bzbarsky 8y ago
    I just tried this in Firefox, and it seems to be working ok for me. Are you still seeing the problem? If so, and if you have some time to help diagnose what's going on here, I would really appreciate it...
    - astura 8y ago
      When I tried it yesterday from my work computer, I got the incorrect behavior. I tried it on mobile Firefox this morning when I typed this comment and it did the same (just displayed json text). Mobile chrome was fine. I put in only a last name and clicked search. Just tried it on Firefox from my work computer and it's working now!!! I didn't make it up, that json above is copied/pasted!
notbeevil5 8y ago
I think HN new should change its name to mozilla news or Wallstreet News for IT.
thegreatpeter 8y ago
Firefox is awesome. As a dev, switched from Chrome a few months ago and never looked back
Springtime 8y ago
Unfortunately the choice isn't as easy now, personally. I'm stuck having to use an older, non-Quantum version for my daily browsing following Mozilla's decision to obsolete their previous addons as of v57 (and having since deleted them from their servers). Previously Firefox was a no-brainer choice for its deep customizibility and functionality it afforded addons, which primarily distinguished it from Chromium, however since the move to Quantum I have too many addons without an equivalent to switch, with a couple favorites that did migrate to WebExtensions offering an inferior experience. Vivaldi would be my second choice should I be forced to switch since its integrated features more closely match Opera's original features, albeit less extensive. Mozilla felt the need to do what they did in that regard and I understand the various reasoning for the decision however the way it panned out didn't make for a browser I'm currently interested in upgrading to, sadly.
holtalanm 8y ago
What if I chose Opera? Personally, I've never liked Firefox; it has always felt clunky.
- justusthane 8y ago
  Opera uses Chromium under the hood. Have you used Firefox lately? Personally I don't think there's anything clunky about it.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- leavjenn 8y ago
  Opera Software is acquired by a group of Chinese companies,[1] and one of them is Qihoo 360, which has a lot of negative history.[2] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Software 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qihoo_360#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qihoo_360#Controversies
superkuh 8y ago
Mozilla made their choice to become Chrome in spirit if not engine. I don't see how picking Firefox is going to help. Maybe pick a browser that doesn't target tech ignorants that need to be protected from themselves by violating software freedoms. No browser that has a walled garden should be used.
mscasts 8y ago
I used to donate to Mozilla, but ever since they fired Brendan I haven't been able to look at them the same way. I use Firefox daily, but actually don't really care if they die because it's their own fault.
- sgift 8y ago
  Brendan Eich wasn't fired, he stepped down.
  - mscasts 8y ago
    Yeah right, Mozilla didn't even fight for him one second. > “We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act,” wrote Mozilla Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker in a blog post. “We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry.”
codehalo 8y ago
Used to use Firefox, primarily for the dev tools. Switched to Brave. Easily the best browser out here right now.
- gambler 8y ago
  What features Brave has that are missing in Firefox? Brave is based on Chromium. It doesn't seem to have any radical UI features that would put it ahead.
Engineering-MD 8y ago
It’s great to see people swapping to Firefox from chrome, but if you really want to support them, consider donating to Mozilla. As others have said, there is a conflict of interest as they getting funding from google. I donate £30/$40 a year to Mozilla for this reason, and put my money where my mouth is.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
hartator 8y ago
I don’t fully get the cult-like altitude with Mozilla. Just pick the best web browser. If it happens to be Firefox, great, if not pick, Chrome, Chromium, Brave, Opera, Safari, or whatever you feel is best for you. Mozilla has been losing marked shares since then and a moralist message is not the way to go.
- RussianCow 8y ago
  Unless you actually care about the moral issues, like privacy?
  - hartator 8y ago
    What's wrong with privacy with unGoogled Chromium, Brave, Safari or Opera? Mozilla has been careless with your privacy at least a couple of times: Mr Robot injected ad, Google Analytics in extension panel, and Pocket aggressive integration to name a few.
jdofaz 8y ago
The future is here for at least one K-12 school district that I work with. The majority of the organizations computing devices are iPad, Chromebook or Windows S. None of those devices can run Firefox.
- wutbrodo 8y ago
  You can't run Firefox on an iPad? https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/install-firefox-your-ipad-iphone-or-ipod https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/install-firefox-your-ip...
  - latexr 8y ago
    Seeing as browsers on iOS can’t have their own rendering engine, no, you can’t run Firefox on iPad in any meaningful way.
    - wutbrodo 8y ago
      Ah gotcha. I'm not super familiar with iOS, and was vaguely aware of such limitations but not that specific one. BTW, I didn't intend my question as disagreement; it was a sincere question.
- CWuestefeld 8y ago
  Recentish Chromebooks can trivially run Firefox Mobile. I actually spent last night getting a full-blown desktop FF running on my chromebook (by way of Crostini, their Linux virtualization). It's not something my mom or even my wife would ever be able to do, but it is possible. And if Mozilla really cared, they could package it in a way that would make it a whole lot easier to install.
  - jdofaz 8y ago
    I hadn't considered the android version of Firefox on a CB, good point
bitwize 8y ago
Ever since Firefox adopted its PulseAudio or gtfo policy for Linux builds, I've been a pretty happy Pale Moon user.
harikb 8y ago
Genuinely curious - how is it that people don’t trust the website they have an account/email/bank with, but still trust plug-ins that now have access to all your browser activity
- yinyang_in 8y ago
  This is my only usecase for Chrome, just for incognito mode. Installed it for that. No add-ons nothing.
gambler 8y ago
Some reasons I like using Firefox over Chrome right now: - Tags for bookmarks. - Bult-in reader view that makes pages readable again and has hassle-free test-to-speech. - I can customize toolbars to much higher extent. What I would really like to see is more tools for managing large numbers of tabs.
jdlyga 8y ago
I wasn't a huge fan of the first Firefox Quantum release, but the latest one is amazing. I switched over on my Windows computer at work, and it runs amazingly.
emiller88 8y ago
Anyone have any thoughts on Firefox vs Brave?
andrewclunn 8y ago
Good. Let it die. A unified web rendering platform? Oh no! Wait, that sounds awesome.
Slashbot 8y ago
Firefox ceased to be a best browser the day it released Quantum.. That day sealed it's fate into irrelevancy. I use Vivaldi.com now (chromium based backend, with alot more effort put in than those who work at google or mozilla or any of the fking companies with huge amounts of money doing fuck to improve the user experience with a web browser).. all the other browsers pale in comparison to the features and customization that is built into it. Sorry Mozilla not sorry you are are fking idiots for the direction you took with Firefox, you killed it. You let everyone done, you didn't care about the very user and developers who made your browser popular in the first place.
amyjess 8y ago
Honestly, the only thing the use of FUD like this headline has done is to continue to put me off of the FOSS community. Back in the '90s, it used to be big companies like MS that used FUD against FOSS. Now the FOSS community uses FUD against everyone else. FUD is bad no matter who spreads it. Hint: If your argument is "don't use our competitor, or else", you are engaging in abusive monopolistic behavior, and it gives me reason to believe that if you actually manage to destroy your competition, you will not hesitate to abuse your newfound monopoly.
Rexel 8y ago
Choose Firefox Now, or else a kitten dies? Sorry I need to use a browser that isn't complete garbage Mozilla.. you used to have such a browser. It seems you've been overrun by morons, now you need to go take a look at Vivaldi.com ...at least they know how to build a browser for users who want useful features and customization built in, and not some basic chrome crap, especially when the addons that used to provide those features don't exist because YOU FKING BROKE ALL THE GOOD ONES MOZILLA.
kahlonel 8y ago
As a non-web-dev, I'm still looking for a reason to not use Safari on my macbook. Perhaps I'm too dumb to see the difference, but I've never found chrome/firefox to be better than safari.
- z5h 8y ago
  As an exercise in trying to install the minimum amount of software on my Machine, I'm using Safari as my default browser. However, there are cases I have found where a website simply doesn't work with Safari but has been developed and tested against Chrome.
akayoshi1 8y ago
Just use both. End of comments.
collinmanderson 8y ago
Imagine someone from 2006, or even 2012 seeing the headline: "Microsoft kills closed-source IE successor, switches to open source codebase" and hearing that people are mad that IE('s successor) is dead and an open source browser has too much market share. :)
Const-me 8y ago
I never started to use Chrome. If/when MS Edge will switch to Blink, I'll indeed switch to FF. Until then I prefer MS Edge: performance, font rendering, OS integration (e.g. video codecs) are IMO better in MS Edge. Couple months ago I had to downgrade one of my PCs to Win7 (a client wanted me to develop for it), I used Firefox on that PC. Worked great.
runeks 8y ago
> I know it's not the greatest marketing pitch, but it's the truth. It's about the worst marketing pitch I can think of. Tell us reasons to choose Firefox over Chrome. If there are no reasons to prefer Firefox, it doesn't matter whether we lose the ability to choose it.
SpecialistEMT 8y ago
I really want to use firefox but always getting weird js problems and freezes on solus project os. No problems with chrome

698 points by jakub_g 8y ago

And it didn't work. Some people were aware of this. A few took the time to read/discuss/think about it. A minuscule fraction of passionate people acted on it. And the rest of the world took the path of least resistance, as usual. People don't shape society willingly. They mostly let life happen to them. Even when you see them protesting, it's the consequence of an emotional reaction and a group effect, not the reflect of their deep personnal vision of life. They have none. It's why people keep gaining weight, comming back to a violent spouse or voting again for the politicians that just lied in their face. I have no idea what to do about that. Education works a bit, but it's so slow and easy to destroy. And meanwhile, it's very unfair for the minority trying hard to make things better. They pay a high price, with no thanks, and little benefits except the hope the others won't screw up things more.

Santosh83 8y ago
Be the change you want and keep talking about it. I've stuck to Firefox through ups and downs ever since I found out about it back during version 1 point something. Internet Explorer proved that behemoths can and will fall, given enough time to shoot themselves in the foot. Firefox just needs to retain its 10% somehow.
- zymhan 8y ago
  I've stuck with it and preached it and told people why Google is just going to repeat IE's history with Chrome, and my tech friends still mostly use Chrome. There is something about A) what everyone else is doing, and B) inertia, that is just too difficult to overcome without some sudden significant change.
  - Santosh83 8y ago
    The single biggest advantage of Chrome is that it's bundled as the default, non-removable browser on the largest mobile OS in the world: Android. And nearly all those people then expect to use the same browser on laptops and desktops and even here it is often pre-installed by OEM. If Firefox had somehow had this clinching advantage in an alternate reality, they would be the Chrome now. The actual performance and technical differences between the two browsers are by no stretch of imagination deal-breaking. But Google's marketing and bundling has been decisive. I just hope Mozilla doesn't abandon Gecko but sticks this fight out.
    - ginko 8y ago
      I would hope Mozilla will eventually retire Gecko and switch to Servo.
    - O1111OOO 8y ago
      > The single biggest advantage of Chrome is that it's bundled as the default, non-removable browser on the largest mobile OS in the world: Android. I'm still upset that Mozilla balked on Firefox OS[0]. It would have made a good ChromeOS competitor on laptops and tablets. I would have opted for a Firefox OS tablet instead of Android as a secondary device. A privacy-focused tablet would have been amazing. Honestly don't see any reason why Mozilla couldn't restart the project on larger-screen devices - skipping the phone phase for a period. Especially now that they have their rust-powered Quantum Browser showing the world what it can do. They could always do phones later on when the platform matures. I think they are failing to see that solutions are about ecosystems. Few can deny they have a rich, browser-based, ecosystem. They are still thinking in legacy terms - a single-use application. I believe they have the monetary means (and the talent) to enter hardware (or via Kickstarter). Their worst enemy... they may be a little old-school, corporate management-heavy on top. Their leadership let Firefox stagnate, the performance suffered the entire time Chrome was taking everyone's market share. We're talking years of neglect. > If Firefox had somehow had this clinching advantage in an alternate reality. The alternate reality... Google invests $22 million in the ported version of Fire OS, KaiOS[1]. They are helping to keep alive (and integrating themselves) into the very OS Mozilla created (and abandoned). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS [1] https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/27/google-kaios/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/27/google-kaios/
- magduf 8y ago
  >Be the change you want and keep talking about it. The OP already talked about the problem with this approach to things: >"...it's very unfair for the minority trying hard to make things better. They pay a high price, with no thanks, and little benefits except the hope the others won't screw up things more." The people who stick their necks out trying to make a change usually end up sacrificing a lot and not getting anything in return, even if their efforts are successful. Basically, they're "taking one for the team". Luckily, with browser choices, it isn't nearly that bad; it's not that hard to switch browsers on a whim, after all, but for bigger issues (like political change, as the OP was referring to to a point, with his mention of protesting), "being the change you want" is usually not a winning strategy at a personal level, and a much more successful strategy is to simply go where the grass is greener.
aduitsis 8y ago
I'm sure a lot of people around here won't be able to hear you over the sound of how Firefox somehow doesn't feel quite right on their macs.
- shaki-dora 8y ago
  Yeah... I dont quite understand how Firefox does invest into integration with third-party password managers, but not the one built into MacOS. Arguably Safari usage is comparable to Firefox in terms of staving off a Chromium monoculture. Safari usage on iOS is actually far more important right now to ensurage some semblance of compatibility.
  - vetinari 8y ago
    The password manager integrations are extensions made by the respective third-party password managers, not by Mozilla. If you want to use Keychain, it is either up to Apple to make an extension, or someone volunteering.
  - Yoric 8y ago
    There used to be an add-on that let users integrate the Keychain in Firefox. I seem to remember that pretty much nobody used it, which doesn't speak well of the usefulness of this integration. Also, Mozilla is working on its own cross-platform password manager/password sharing between devices. I'm not sure what the intended policy is wrt password sharing (there may be passwords that I only want to have on one device), but this should be more useful than the Keychain, which doesn't even let me move my passwords from one machine to the next one without arcane incantations.
  - pseudalopex 8y ago
    Chrome also removed Keychain support. Apple restricted access to the necessary APIs.
js8 8y ago
As a long time Firefox user, let me offer a different perspective. Upgrading any application is a chore, and you never know what will break or whether you lose your data. People don't want to do it, and yet they are forced to do it by companies (and open source is even worse). So if you can avoid it, you avoid it. I'll leave up to you to decide if Firefox haven't destroyed its own market share by confusing changes to UI and breaking backwards compatibility.
- sametmax 8y ago
  Most people don't even know what an URL is, so I don't think they even think about their browser that hard.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - wutbrodo 8y ago
    I'm not sure I understand the point you're making here. Wouldn't those people be _more_ beholden to UI stability? If you understand what's under the hood, it takes a little time for your muscle memory to adjust to UI changes but it's not exactly confusing. That's decidedly not the case for the group you're describing.
shaki-dora 8y ago
That’s hard to prove or disprove without having an alternate universe ready for A/B testing. Although, frankly, I can’t shake the feeling I’ve been living in the B-branch for, say, the last two years. If so, let me just say: if your results are not yet conclusive, please ask your statisticians for what “multi-armed bandit” means to them, then shoot them if the quizzically look at you. You may even skip the question. Back on point: I know many people who use Firefox for “ideological” reasons. In fact, anybody who still used FF as of 6 months ago arguably fell in that group, save some extreme cases of inertia. But, even more tittilating: Firefox seems to be once again be competitive wrt performance. That may just be its salvation, and not a moment too early to make it dramatic.
- pm215 8y ago
  Why would it be "extreme" inertia to still be using Firefox? If it's never felt like it's failing to do the job of being a web browser, then not switching is inertia, sure, but it's not extreme...
- nchie 8y ago
  What are you even talking about? You're making it sound like Firefox has ever been a lot worse than Chrome, but that's far from the truth. I've used both quite a lot and I've always preferred Firefox, even _without_ considering the privacy aspects. I still use Chrome on my laptop as Firefox doesn't support decent pinch zooming (that's more or less my only complaint), but for desktop usage I definitely choose Firefox over Chrome.
  - RussianCow 8y ago
    Not the OP, but when Chrome came out, it was leaps and bounds ahead of Firefox in terms of performance, and it took Firefox many years (until just recently, with Quantum) to catch up. I personally endured it, but it was definitely hard after having used Chrome for a short while, and I don't blame anyone for making the switch back then. Most users don't care about features; they just want a browser that works well.
- magduf 8y ago
kuroguro 8y ago
Recently finished moving away from most google stuff. Seeing how they are slowly grabbing more and more user data really scared the shit out of me (android location gathering, auto logging in to chrome from gmail, syncing all password data etc). Swapping the browser was the easy part. Not using google search and moving away from my gmail address that I've had since gmail was released were harder habits to break. Setting up a google-less android (lineageOS + microG) was a real PITA for a few weeks as I kept running into new problems and things not working properly. I don't see how anyone not into tech could pull it off.
- antonyh 8y ago
  I dumped Chrome, stopping 'Googling' and moved to DuckDuckGo, installed uBlock Matrix so I could block as much of Google as possible (damn you reCaptcha), but it's gmail that's the tie-in. Changing email address is super hard. As for Android, I took the easy option - switched to iOS. I'd have preferred a third choice, but there's nothing viable at the moment. It's hard going but worth it for the privacy, and I agree it's not realistic for those not fully into tech. The world needs more choices for browser, more choices in mobile too. At least there's a few options for computing devices - Windows is a horrible privacy hole IMO, Apple and MacOS is a premium option but seems more private and secure, then there's Google (no comment). Linux can be a huge time sink and hard going but having run it on both desktop and laptop it's a good choice - but for the expensive commerce softwares that only run on Mac or Windows thanks to companies that make 'pro' offerings... for me its Adobe, Capture One, Reason - none of which offer Linux variants or work on Wine properly. Part of me wishes the EU to legislate more, but that's horrible in other ways.
legends2k 8y ago
> People don't shape society willing… Logged in just to say, “what a paragraph, haven't read anything with such clarity lately.” Thanks for it. Yes, I'm using Firefox since 2.0 and never changed once.

izacus 8y ago

How will avid Apple users on this website choose Firefox as a browser on their iPhones and iPad computers? EDIT: To clarify, mean the rendering engine (so we keep the ecosystem diversity), not the reskinned Safari. Reskinning Safari with Firefox branding does nothing for WebKit web monoculture.

iMark 8y ago
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/firefox-web-browser/id989804926?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/firefox-web-browser/id989804... (but yes, I know it's still using webkit behind the scenes)
codezero 8y ago
They can use Firefox, just not the rendering engine. I expect that would still be considered an adequate move. Nobody I know (bias) has an iOS device and no laptop or PC, so they can also adopt it on their PC.
- izacus 8y ago
  How is using reskinned Safari with WebKit rendering engine considered adequate move? That would be like putting a Firefox skin over IE6 engine a few years back - it would not help the ecosystem in the way this article asks for.
  - codezero 8y ago
    It would still use any bundled Firefox services. Mozilla makes (most?) of their money from search engine referrals so this alone is likely to be a direct support of them.
amelius 8y ago
They can run a WASM-compiled version of it.
- Yoric 8y ago
  Does Wasm run comfortably on iOS devices? If so, that might be an idea.

askaboutit 8y ago

I chose Firefox then it made the CPU fan go nuts whilst it chewed all the available power.

ginko 8y ago
Even if Firefox were an objectively worse browser than Chrome(which I don't think it is these days) there is still an argument to be made to use it anyways to ensure the freedom of the web.
- speedplane 8y ago
  > there is still an argument to be made to use [firefox] anyways to ensure the freedom of the web. Definitely. Remember when Google wanted to buy Wikipedia but promised to keep it a free resource? So happy that didn't happen, it would have been the end of Wikipedia. Services like Firefox and Wikipedia are the last vestiges we have of the original intent of the internet, an place to congregate with the user in mind. Most of everything else is walled gardens with the hope to create a monopoly via network effects.
  - anticensor 8y ago
    Or fenced yards, which only acts as echo chamber with an extra chorus.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  And that argument is stupid. If Firefox had the dominant browser market share, they'd be the ones stripping your freedom and spying on your crap for money instead. Their history makes that pretty clear.

nindalf 8y ago

Just so we can avoid rehashing the discussion whenever a post encouraging the use of Firefox is posted. - Yes, Mozilla is still the better browser when it comes to privacy. - Yes, Mozilla has made missteps with Pocket and Mr. Robot. - Yes, it is slow/resource heavy on certain Macs with non-default resolutions. Yes, Mozilla is working on a fix. - Yes, it has become really fast for most users after Quantum improvements landed, and likely will continue to get better. - No, you can't just "fork Chromium" if you don't like the way Google is running the project. Web developers will still make their website work well with whatever Google releases, regardless of standards. - Yes, Firefox doesn't feel native on your platform of choice. - Yes, neither does Chrome (doesn't support dark mode on macOS) - Yes, Chrome has better security against malware. - Yes, Firefox removed the feature that was essential to your workflow, even though most users don't care. edit, thought of one more - No, the argument "Chrome will be the new IE if you don't use Firefox" doesn't matter to most users.

ekianjo 8y ago
> - Yes, Mozilla has made missteps with Pocket and Mr. Robot. and the removal of RSS support. So much for the champions of the Free Web!
- xfitm3 8y ago
  Is the misstep with Pocket including it in the browser?
  - nindalf 8y ago
    Yes. I like Pocket, but I can't see why it shouldn't be an extension that can be removed.
    - Yoric 8y ago
      Intellectually, I agree, but - it actually doesn't hurt; - market research indicates that most people actually love it.

kanwisher 8y ago

Brendan Eich has moved out to make BAT. Lets support that instead. Firefox can die and new things can take its place

matt4077 8y ago
"Brave" is a morally bankrupt hustle gnawing at the foundations of civil society; it is a bro-wser spawned by a disgruntled has-been consumed by his ego's unwillingness to accept that his bank account does not reflect his former social standing. It is the rare "creative" endeavour motivated solely by a drive to destroy, and to get rich & even in the process. Also it's just another Chromium skin, so it wouldn't change anything.
- kkarakk 8y ago
  brave is amazing to use on mobile
- kikki 8y ago
  Are you going to provide any sources to back up these claims?
- FeralAlien 8y ago
  At least brave works, Firefox has been completely useless for me on anything but Windows and Android since the quantum update. It drains battery like nobody's business or screws with UI elements when no one asked it to.
zymhan 8y ago
hahahahahahaaaaaaa I'd love to see a cogent argument for this. In no way does Brave address the issues with a monopolized web in the way that Mozilla does.

barking 8y ago

Well, this is embarrassing.

new_here 8y ago

Okay, I'll switch to Firefox now and give this a try.

lmedinas 8y ago
Just fyi this article is from 2014 and it was mentioned here in HN several times. But yes you are not too late :)

jf- 8y ago

I think I’m now at the point of jumping aboard this movement away from google. Not because their services are bad (they objectively are excellent) nor even because of privacy concerns (though they are legitimate), but because of the argument put forward in the OP: google are taking over everything. There is far too much power concentrated into the hands of a single company. As an individual there is not much that I can do about this, but what I can do is to use google products and services as little as possible, and to support smaller, independent alternatives. I think this has been posted on hn in the recent past, seems like a reasonable jumping-off point: https://medium.com/@ricst/de-google-your-life-now-82fad3ec0f35 https://medium.com/@ricst/de-google-your-life-now-82fad3ec0f...

mcherm 8y ago

Back in 2014 I was using g Firefox, for precisely this reason. I am still using it today, for the same reason. Please stop creating web applications that only work with Chrome (or Chrome and Safari).

fernandotakai 8y ago
not only that but stop testing your frontend code only on chrome. i'm the only one on my team that uses a non-chrome browser and every once in a while i find a bug or a css issue that is non-chrome only because nobody tests outside chrome.

bad_user 8y ago

Note this advice is true for email services as well. Pay for and use an alternative now, or later you won't get the choice. Google is hellbent on locking people into their ecosystem. One such move is the promotion of AMP: https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/13/amp-for-email-is-a-terrible-idea/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/13/amp-for-email-is-a-terribl... Speaking of email and browsers, the Gmail app on top of iOS presents the user with a choice between two browsers: 1. Safari 2. Chrome, which on iOS is a reskinned Safari, but with Sync and controlled by Google obviously But when Safari is selected they actually open links in an app Web View. Which does not share sessions and cookies with Safari. And their reskinned Chrome doesn't do Safari's content blocking either. Firefox on iOS doesn't do that either, but at least Firefox has its own tracking protection. Speaking of Chrome on iOS, they give the user the choice to switch search engines, supposedly, however they only list Yahoo and Bing as alternatives. No DuckDuckGo or Qwant or the ability to add your own. Android still allows users to switch their web browser or to use an alternative app store, but I wonder for how long. I mean they disallow users to uninstall their apps. My guess is that they are afraid of locking Android down more due to fines from the EU. Sadly what made Google great several years back was openness. But times are changing.

saagarjha 8y ago
> Firefox on iOS doesn't do that either, but at least Firefox has its own tracking protection. Firefox on iOS can't do this, unfortunately :(
- diafygi 8y ago
  I'm curious about this. I get that firefox for ios has to use a webview, but why can't it allow extensions that can manipulate what's in the webview? The main reason I'm currently sticking with Android is that I can install firefox and use ublock origin and https everywhere.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    You can run your own JavaScript in WKWebView, which is what Firefox uses, so you can run "extensions" to the extent of what the App Store will allow you to do. What you cannot do in this case is load content blockers, which a newer API that uses a list of selectors to block elements without JavaScript at all. Currently this API is limited to Safari itself and SFSafariViewController, which is untenable for Firefox because it is essentially "Safari in a box" in that the component provides its own UI and you essentially cannot interact with it at all.

craigsmansion 8y ago

Well, maybe if Mozilla hadn't alienated their early Freedom/Open web oriented users with their web hostile actions (or inaction). You know, the kind of users that would stick with "inferior" software because of values. That mountain ahead, Mozilla, is the accumulation of all the "hills not to die on". You got the clout you wanted by selling out, but now those users are flocking to technically better solutions as you're doomed to eternally play catch-up. Who would have thought? EDIT: Apparently people still believe in the "steward of the Open Web" image they present, and I have no right to be disenfranchised. We'll see. They made their bed...

Jonnax 8y ago
Okay. So they sold out and the alternative is a browser from an advert company. How do you think Mozilla should fund the development of Firefox?
- craigsmansion 8y ago
  An alternative is an open source version of a browser from an advert company, with anti-features hopefully being kept in check by diligent maintainers. As much as I dislike that, from the advert company I know they're on the side of the advertisers. They're not presenting a "we're on the side of you, the users" face, whilst behaving more or less the same. A better alternative would be a fork of Firefox, kept up to date by a handful of overworked but dedicated-to-their-users volunteers. These exist, and maybe they would get some more recognition and funding if Mozilla were to cease to exist. I don't think Mozilla can change. They're too comfortably corporate. Having lost sight of their mission, I think it would be better if it disappeared and was replaced by something else.
  - underwater 8y ago
    Your alternative only makes sense if Chrome continues to win. Google is not going to continue investing in Chromium if a competing open source browser wins out.
  - AsyncAwait 8y ago

cataphract 8y ago

Is there any way to make Firefox use the passwords I have saved with Google (available at passwords.google.com and loaded into gnome-keyring)?

catacombs 8y ago
Use KeePass
zymhan 8y ago
When you first install Firefox, it asks if you want to import that data from other browsers that are installed. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/import-bookmarks-data-another-browser https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/import-bookmarks-data-a... Additionally, you can install a 3rd party password manager temporarily that can sync between Firefox and Chrome (e.g. LastPass, etc) https://smallbusiness.chron.com/export-settings-chrome-firefox-49457.html https://smallbusiness.chron.com/export-settings-chrome-firef...
yinyang_in 8y ago
One more suggestion. Try enpass

OpenBSD-reich2 8y ago

Why would I choose Firefox and all the baggage of Mozilla organizationally, when I've already chosen superior Chromium in the form of Iridium browser? The only thing left for Mozilla to do in converting Firefox into the GNOME 3 of browsers is to start viciously paring features for usability/"user experience!" I don't know if Iridium is pledged in OpenBSD, but Chrome definitely is whereas at this point it's almost impossible to pledge Firefox.

jillesvangurp 8y ago

Easy path to success for Firefox is to continue to beef up security and privacy tooling for their users and have sane defaults. They've been winning a lot of users who feel abandoned by the big companies in this space. A problem and conflict of interest for them regarding this is that they are funded mainly by Google. Firefox has a conflict of interest here because they are not doing all they can here because that would cut off their main source of revenue. So, for example, they have sort of a mute option for sound (just like other browsers) but they don't allow you to mute video by default (without blanket turning it off for all websites). I don't know anyone who loves being bombarded with video content when they want to read an article. I find the moving stuff to be distracting; even if the sound is off. Also the bandwidth is kind of not nice, especially on mobile. The BBC has started putting multiple video previews in their articles. This kind of attention whoring is highly annoying. This is not news to anyone of course. The obvious fix allow people to whitelist sites to allow autoplaying video (youtube, netflix, and other websites where people go specifically to enjoy video content) and switch that off for everything else. All the extenions for that claim to do this are basically a combination of broken or simply setting the config property that blanket bans all autoplay video for every website (just preempting the inevitable comment to try extension X here). Similarly, the containers extension is great. This should be baked into the browser and improved to the point where the default container is a private container unless you whitelist the domain. Right now private browsing happens in a separate window. It's an obvious thing to do: every site by default is private until you say otherwise. Both kind of are in direct conflict with how Google, and by extension, how Mozilla monetizes. This is the main reason this is made hard to do. I'm sure if this was easier, there'd be countless extensions doing exactly that. Instead people sort of emulate private browsing with stuff like noscript and other extensions that throw away cookies. Also nice but not user friendly. Doing all this in fool proof, user friendly way would be a great way for Firefox to differentiate. It would unfortunately cut them off from Google funding probably.

bzbarsky 8y ago
Just FYI, audio autoplay is being actively worked on in the current Firefox development version, precisely to solve the problem you describe. There are some issues with coming up with a UX that doesn't privilege a small set of sites out of the box over everyone else [1] and also doesn't prompt the user on every single site that tries to play video (the current Firefox Nightly behavior; it's rather annoying). So for this specific case, the reason it hasn't happened yet is not some nefarious conflict of interest but actual hard problems that need to be solved (and are being solved), coupled with resource constraints. As far as containers go, I agree they are great if you understand the model. I use them. Most users find them terribly confusing in their current form. Again, a UX issue. That said, the idea of having things in a private container by default is somewhat interesting. The hard part in some way would be the discoverability of the whitelisting flow and user confusion about why their customization information is not being remembered like in every other browser. I'll try to shop this around to people a bit and see if they can figure out a way to make this work sanely. Disclaimer: I work on Firefox, but not in UX. [1] Google's solution in Chrome; it suppresses new startups by making the experience suck there, which is good for incumbents like YouTube but maybe less good for the web as a whole in the long term.

mosselman 8y ago

I really wanted to keep using Firefox, but it is just too slow on my Mac. It makes itself and all other things I do very slow. Until this is resolved there is no way I can use it. Instead I use Brave now.

jeswin 8y ago

Taking users away from Google is still a big ask. Google has been thoroughly anti-competitive in this space - they deliberately downgrade the experience in non-Chrome browsers across many properties. For example, typing "GOOG stock" in Chrome/Android brings up a whole lot of details not found with Firefox/Android. There's no technical reason to do this, and they should be pulled up for abuse of monopoly power. Google search itself was better on Chrome till recently, though it's caught up now on Firefox/Android. Add: I've been a Firefox/Android user for a while now - and with ad-blocking the UX experience and battery life is much better than with Chrome. I encourage everyone to try it (with ad-blocking) for at least a week. Personally for me, Firefox on Android is a bigger deal than on the desktop.

xyzal 8y ago
An advantage to using Firefox Mobile is google search results suddenly become free of AMP crap
antoineMoPa 8y ago
Just downloaded Firefox on Android following your advice. I'm a heavy firefox user on the destkop, but I rarely think about installing firefox on my cellphones since 1. Firefox in Firefox OS was slow and it gave me a feeling that firefox was not for mobile (but I guess it's not true anymore) 2. The fact that Chrome is the default browser and I generally don't install many apps. The fact that it is the default on Android makes the game very unfair.
- TheKarateKid 8y ago
  > The fact that it is the default on Android makes the game very unfair. The EU is already looking into this, and other antitrust issues with Android and even Google Search in general.
- oAlbe 8y ago
  > Firefox in Firefox OS was slow and it gave me a feeling that firefox was not for mobile (but I guess it's not true anymore) I genuinely don't understand how Firefox on mobile is slow. I hear this complaint often (along with the complaint of Firefox on desktop not being able to run certain websites, which also never occurs to me), but for how much I try, I never managed to make Firefox on mobile (android) slow. There were a couple of days not long ago (we are talking weeks) were after an update the browser did get indeed a little slow, but it was still usable, and it got fixed very quickly. I use the hell out of my Firefox, both on desktop and mobile. I abuse it in all sorts of ways, and I am extremely demanding of it, yet it never breaks a sweat. Right now I have more than 100 tabs open in my Firefox on android - can't tell the exact number because when the 100th tab is opened, the number just becomes an infinity symbol - which is nothing more than average for me, I can easily get to 350, and it still opens and loads up instantly (at the time of the performance problem mentioned above I had ~260 tabs open). Am I just lucky? Do the performances/usability change so vastly from phone to phone and person to person?

mcemilg 8y ago

I was very afraid about syncing my data with other devices on Firefox. But today I switched to Firefox and passed all my chrome data (even stored passwords) to Firefox. It can sync with all devices such as mobile. I hope I will not get trouble about web apps :P

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

catacombs 8y ago

What are HN's thoughts on ungoogled-chrome? It's still a Chromium browser but without the Google spying.

heuiop 8y ago
It's not just spying. It's also unilateral actions like the recent 'trivial subdomains' example: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=881410 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=881410 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=883038 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=883038

hannasanarion 8y ago

Frankly, I don't want to choose firefox. Their priorities are utterly misplaced. I can't believe people don't talk about the dark gtk theming bug more often. It's one of the most common firefox questions on stackoverflow: If you have a dark gtk theme, like Arc-dark or Adwaita-dark, then Firefox randomly colors certain web page elements (usually text boxes) dark to match your desktop theme. Almost always resulting in black text on a black background. There are examples of this misbehavior on mozilla.org THIS BUG HAS BEEN OPEN FOR 18 YEARS https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70315 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70315 If something so obvious and so easy (why not make white the default background color, like every other browser) has gone unfixed for so long, despite its manifestation on their own home page, then why wouldn't I expect that there are tons of other common sense things that Mozilla has totally ignored, waiting for me to stumble upon them like so many land mines?

Yoric 8y ago
Since it's so critical to you, and if it's so obvious (I haven't checked, I take your word on it), would you consider submitting a patch to fix this issue? I can guide you on patch submission, if you need.
- hannasanarion 8y ago
  Patches have been submitted, tons and tons of times, and are always rejected. The maintainers say "it's the website's fault for not respecting the user's theming preferences" even as their own website does it. They've been saying that user theming will sweep over the web and this issue will fix itself since the year 2000.
  - anoncake 8y ago
    > They've been saying that user theming will sweep over the web Of course not, it's an OS feature. Not everything is about the web.
bzbarsky 8y ago
There were lots of requests to have form controls "look native", which is why they were changed to use the desktop theme... One problem with that, as you note, is web pages that are setting a color but not a background color on elements, which is a web development 101 mistake. But there's just no way to win here: either you can use the OS theme for widgets and things fail when sites make this mistake, or the widgets don't look "native".

neilsimp1 8y ago

I've seen the comment here on HN and a few other sites in the past few days - are there sites out there that don't work in Firefox, but do work in Chrome? Like, I'm aware of a few CSS properties that work in Chrome but not FF, but I don't think I've ever come across a site that doesn't look or work completely fine in FF. The only exception to this that I can think of is Google Earth, which I'm pretty sure you can open inside of Chrome. I've always used the desktop app for that though so I'm not sure.

astura 8y ago
I was looking at this page yesterday in Firefox: https://www.digitalarchives.wa.gov/Collections/TitleInfo/512 https://www.digitalarchives.wa.gov/Collections/TitleInfo/512 When I enter a name and click "search" I get a page with some JSON ({"Result":true,"Status":"success","Redirect":1}) rather than the results page. Worked in chrome, however.
- Wowfunhappy 8y ago
  ^^ The fact that this is a government website makes it particularly egregious.
- bzbarsky 8y ago
  I just tried this in Firefox, and it seems to be working ok for me. Are you still seeing the problem? If so, and if you have some time to help diagnose what's going on here, I would really appreciate it...
  - astura 8y ago
    When I tried it yesterday from my work computer, I got the incorrect behavior. I tried it on mobile Firefox this morning when I typed this comment and it did the same (just displayed json text). Mobile chrome was fine. I put in only a last name and clicked search. Just tried it on Firefox from my work computer and it's working now!!! I didn't make it up, that json above is copied/pasted!

notbeevil5 8y ago

I think HN new should change its name to mozilla news or Wallstreet News for IT.

thegreatpeter 8y ago

Firefox is awesome. As a dev, switched from Chrome a few months ago and never looked back

Springtime 8y ago

Unfortunately the choice isn't as easy now, personally. I'm stuck having to use an older, non-Quantum version for my daily browsing following Mozilla's decision to obsolete their previous addons as of v57 (and having since deleted them from their servers). Previously Firefox was a no-brainer choice for its deep customizibility and functionality it afforded addons, which primarily distinguished it from Chromium, however since the move to Quantum I have too many addons without an equivalent to switch, with a couple favorites that did migrate to WebExtensions offering an inferior experience. Vivaldi would be my second choice should I be forced to switch since its integrated features more closely match Opera's original features, albeit less extensive. Mozilla felt the need to do what they did in that regard and I understand the various reasoning for the decision however the way it panned out didn't make for a browser I'm currently interested in upgrading to, sadly.

holtalanm 8y ago

What if I chose Opera? Personally, I've never liked Firefox; it has always felt clunky.

justusthane 8y ago
Opera uses Chromium under the hood. Have you used Firefox lately? Personally I don't think there's anything clunky about it.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
leavjenn 8y ago
Opera Software is acquired by a group of Chinese companies,[1] and one of them is Qihoo 360, which has a lot of negative history.[2] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Software 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qihoo_360#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qihoo_360#Controversies

superkuh 8y ago

Mozilla made their choice to become Chrome in spirit if not engine. I don't see how picking Firefox is going to help. Maybe pick a browser that doesn't target tech ignorants that need to be protected from themselves by violating software freedoms. No browser that has a walled garden should be used.

mscasts 8y ago

I used to donate to Mozilla, but ever since they fired Brendan I haven't been able to look at them the same way. I use Firefox daily, but actually don't really care if they die because it's their own fault.

sgift 8y ago
Brendan Eich wasn't fired, he stepped down.
- mscasts 8y ago
  Yeah right, Mozilla didn't even fight for him one second. > “We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act,” wrote Mozilla Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker in a blog post. “We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry.”

codehalo 8y ago

Used to use Firefox, primarily for the dev tools. Switched to Brave. Easily the best browser out here right now.

gambler 8y ago
What features Brave has that are missing in Firefox? Brave is based on Chromium. It doesn't seem to have any radical UI features that would put it ahead.

Engineering-MD 8y ago

It’s great to see people swapping to Firefox from chrome, but if you really want to support them, consider donating to Mozilla. As others have said, there is a conflict of interest as they getting funding from google. I donate £30/$40 a year to Mozilla for this reason, and put my money where my mouth is.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

hartator 8y ago

I don’t fully get the cult-like altitude with Mozilla. Just pick the best web browser. If it happens to be Firefox, great, if not pick, Chrome, Chromium, Brave, Opera, Safari, or whatever you feel is best for you. Mozilla has been losing marked shares since then and a moralist message is not the way to go.

RussianCow 8y ago
Unless you actually care about the moral issues, like privacy?
- hartator 8y ago
  What's wrong with privacy with unGoogled Chromium, Brave, Safari or Opera? Mozilla has been careless with your privacy at least a couple of times: Mr Robot injected ad, Google Analytics in extension panel, and Pocket aggressive integration to name a few.

jdofaz 8y ago

The future is here for at least one K-12 school district that I work with. The majority of the organizations computing devices are iPad, Chromebook or Windows S. None of those devices can run Firefox.

wutbrodo 8y ago
You can't run Firefox on an iPad? https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/install-firefox-your-ipad-iphone-or-ipod https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/install-firefox-your-ip...
- latexr 8y ago
  Seeing as browsers on iOS can’t have their own rendering engine, no, you can’t run Firefox on iPad in any meaningful way.
  - wutbrodo 8y ago
    Ah gotcha. I'm not super familiar with iOS, and was vaguely aware of such limitations but not that specific one. BTW, I didn't intend my question as disagreement; it was a sincere question.
CWuestefeld 8y ago
Recentish Chromebooks can trivially run Firefox Mobile. I actually spent last night getting a full-blown desktop FF running on my chromebook (by way of Crostini, their Linux virtualization). It's not something my mom or even my wife would ever be able to do, but it is possible. And if Mozilla really cared, they could package it in a way that would make it a whole lot easier to install.
- jdofaz 8y ago
  I hadn't considered the android version of Firefox on a CB, good point

bitwize 8y ago

Ever since Firefox adopted its PulseAudio or gtfo policy for Linux builds, I've been a pretty happy Pale Moon user.

harikb 8y ago

Genuinely curious - how is it that people don’t trust the website they have an account/email/bank with, but still trust plug-ins that now have access to all your browser activity

yinyang_in 8y ago
This is my only usecase for Chrome, just for incognito mode. Installed it for that. No add-ons nothing.

gambler 8y ago

Some reasons I like using Firefox over Chrome right now: - Tags for bookmarks. - Bult-in reader view that makes pages readable again and has hassle-free test-to-speech. - I can customize toolbars to much higher extent. What I would really like to see is more tools for managing large numbers of tabs.

jdlyga 8y ago

I wasn't a huge fan of the first Firefox Quantum release, but the latest one is amazing. I switched over on my Windows computer at work, and it runs amazingly.

emiller88 8y ago

Anyone have any thoughts on Firefox vs Brave?

andrewclunn 8y ago

Good. Let it die. A unified web rendering platform? Oh no! Wait, that sounds awesome.

Slashbot 8y ago

Firefox ceased to be a best browser the day it released Quantum.. That day sealed it's fate into irrelevancy. I use Vivaldi.com now (chromium based backend, with alot more effort put in than those who work at google or mozilla or any of the fking companies with huge amounts of money doing fuck to improve the user experience with a web browser).. all the other browsers pale in comparison to the features and customization that is built into it. Sorry Mozilla not sorry you are are fking idiots for the direction you took with Firefox, you killed it. You let everyone done, you didn't care about the very user and developers who made your browser popular in the first place.

amyjess 8y ago

Honestly, the only thing the use of FUD like this headline has done is to continue to put me off of the FOSS community. Back in the '90s, it used to be big companies like MS that used FUD against FOSS. Now the FOSS community uses FUD against everyone else. FUD is bad no matter who spreads it. Hint: If your argument is "don't use our competitor, or else", you are engaging in abusive monopolistic behavior, and it gives me reason to believe that if you actually manage to destroy your competition, you will not hesitate to abuse your newfound monopoly.

Rexel 8y ago

Choose Firefox Now, or else a kitten dies? Sorry I need to use a browser that isn't complete garbage Mozilla.. you used to have such a browser. It seems you've been overrun by morons, now you need to go take a look at Vivaldi.com ...at least they know how to build a browser for users who want useful features and customization built in, and not some basic chrome crap, especially when the addons that used to provide those features don't exist because YOU FKING BROKE ALL THE GOOD ONES MOZILLA.

kahlonel 8y ago

As a non-web-dev, I'm still looking for a reason to not use Safari on my macbook. Perhaps I'm too dumb to see the difference, but I've never found chrome/firefox to be better than safari.

z5h 8y ago
As an exercise in trying to install the minimum amount of software on my Machine, I'm using Safari as my default browser. However, there are cases I have found where a website simply doesn't work with Safari but has been developed and tested against Chrome.

akayoshi1 8y ago

Just use both. End of comments.

collinmanderson 8y ago

Imagine someone from 2006, or even 2012 seeing the headline: "Microsoft kills closed-source IE successor, switches to open source codebase" and hearing that people are mad that IE('s successor) is dead and an open source browser has too much market share. :)

Const-me 8y ago

I never started to use Chrome. If/when MS Edge will switch to Blink, I'll indeed switch to FF. Until then I prefer MS Edge: performance, font rendering, OS integration (e.g. video codecs) are IMO better in MS Edge. Couple months ago I had to downgrade one of my PCs to Win7 (a client wanted me to develop for it), I used Firefox on that PC. Worked great.

runeks 8y ago

> I know it's not the greatest marketing pitch, but it's the truth. It's about the worst marketing pitch I can think of. Tell us reasons to choose Firefox over Chrome. If there are no reasons to prefer Firefox, it doesn't matter whether we lose the ability to choose it.

SpecialistEMT 8y ago

I really want to use firefox but always getting weird js problems and freezes on solus project os. No problems with chrome