7 ms·

Honest question. Why not Firefox? What are your concerns with it?

aphextron 8y ago
I've tried over and over for decades to like Firefox, but I just don't. I can't say it's a rational decision entirely. But beyond that, I just think that Mozilla's motives can't really be trusted at face value with the amount of revenue they have these days, and their whole profile sync service. It just comes down to incentives, and any company which collects any kind of data has the incentive to profit at our expense regardless of ideology. Especially where people's salaries could depend on it.
- ceejayoz 8y ago
  What about the profile sync service can't be trusted? It's end-to-end encrypted. Mozilla doesn't have the keys.
  - aphextron 8y ago
    It's just an attack vector I wish didn't exist at all. There's also metadata. Sure Mozilla doesn't have your passwords, but they know who you have passwords with. That creeps me out. There's nothing wrong with the all-purpose heavily featured approach of stuff like Chrome and Firefox, and I get that other people like Sync, I just really wish there was a totally stripped down basic internet browser I could trust.
    - danso 8y ago
      Isn't profile sync opt-in?
    - jlg23 8y ago
      >Sure Mozilla doesn't have your passwords, but they know who you have passwords with. Do they? I just skimmed the source and could not find anything that hints at that (and implementing it the way you said it is makes for much more complex code..)
    - geofft 8y ago
      I just don't enable it. It's not on by default. For the average user—think your uncle who's about to ask you tech support questions this weekend—using Firefox Sync is way better for their privacy and security than reusing the same password everywhere. And for those of us who have and use password managers, Firefox Sync is not on by default—unlike Brave's attention-tracking or Chrome's Google logins.
- asadotzler 8y ago
  What about the whole profile sync service? It's designed to be privacy preserving by encrypting everything locally with a key only you have. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/11/firefox-sync-privacy/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/11/firefox-sync-privacy/
- gaadd33 8y ago
  Is Mozilla run that lean even with >$500M in revenue?
  - notyourwork 8y ago
    If we didn't do business with any company that was run inefficiently we would not do business with a lot of places. I'm not sure how the efficiency of the business is entirely coupled to whether or not the product is usable and meets user needs in ways that other competing products cannot.
  - danso 8y ago
    The majority of that funding seems to come from royalties ($504M of $520M) [0]. What would be the leaner way of collecting those royalties? [0] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/
- reidrac 8y ago
  Sorry if I misunderstood you, but you said you were using Brave. Perhaps you should review how you evaluate the products you use because your record isn't great. If you were wrong about Brave, your concerns about Firefox and Mozilla could be wrong as well.
- jlg23 8y ago
  "Face value"? Try "source value". What exactly is your problem with an opt-in service?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
woolvalley 8y ago
Firefox runs worse than chrome still, and it doesn't work well at all on my 2 core 2015 macbook pro. It works fine on my 6 core & 4 core machines although. I would also like something like the easy user switching that chrome has, since once user would have one set of session tab logins (twitter, fb, google, etc), and another user would have another. firefox -no-remote isn't that smooth of an experience compared to chrome's user switcher.
- beering 8y ago
  The Containers add-on[0] for Firefox that Mozilla makes has satisfied my need for partitioning. It's on a per-tab basis and also lets you define certain domains to automatically open in a specific container (e.g. Jira always opens in my Work container). I can't really speak to Firefox's performance issues though. I feel like they're just as good on rendering and JS speed, but the overall UI doesn't have the same "fast" feel that Chrome does. Chrome has also seemingly gotten slower for me too. [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...
  - subway 8y ago
    Every time the containers add-on gets updated, it forgets all your preferences.
    - sftwds 8y ago
      Really? Is that a known issue? I haven’t experienced that and I’ve been using containers on Firefox since they were introduced.
    - bichiliad 8y ago
      I've been using containers for some time now (probably since not long after it was announced) to keep my twitter accounts separate, and I've never had to reset or update my preferences.
      - 8y ago
rchaud 8y ago
Firefox absolutely sucks on Android. It's fine on Mac OS, but it is so much slower than Brave (Chromium based) and Chrome itself, that it becomes irritating to use. That being said, it does support extensions like Ublock Origin and Ghostery. Mobile Chrome means zero extensions and ad hell, so Brave it is. Same Chrome engine and UI (swipeable tabs is something I miss in Firefox Android) and adblocking.
- jammygit 8y ago
  I'm using Firefox right now om android and its a nice experience. Chrome variants are smoother scrolling I guess but the sync is sure nice in Firefox.
- zamalek 8y ago
  > Firefox absolutely sucks on Android. Have you tried it lately? I agree that it used to, but it has improved vastly. It's my daily driver now.
  - pedrocx486 8y ago
    I did, tried it for a week, honestly the scrolling still feels horrible when compared to Chrome.
    - zamalek 8y ago
      I absolutely agree with that, scrolling feels really janky but I did get used to it.
    - sombremesa 8y ago
      Agreed that scrolling is still janky, but the syncing of prefs (especially add-ons) is well worth it, imo. Heck, even just the one add-on that lets you sleep your phone while a YouTube video continues playing is well worth using Firefox. Such a basic functionality isn't enough reason to get YouTube Red. And then, you have add-ons like ublock origin that give you the Brave-like functionality without all this brouhaha.
- 8y ago

I've tried over and over for decades to like Firefox, but I just don't. I can't say it's a rational decision entirely. But beyond that, I just think that Mozilla's motives can't really be trusted at face value with the amount of revenue they have these days, and their whole profile sync service. It just comes down to incentives, and any company which collects any kind of data has the incentive to profit at our expense regardless of ideology. Especially where people's salaries could depend on it.

ceejayoz 8y ago
What about the profile sync service can't be trusted? It's end-to-end encrypted. Mozilla doesn't have the keys.
- aphextron 8y ago
  It's just an attack vector I wish didn't exist at all. There's also metadata. Sure Mozilla doesn't have your passwords, but they know who you have passwords with. That creeps me out. There's nothing wrong with the all-purpose heavily featured approach of stuff like Chrome and Firefox, and I get that other people like Sync, I just really wish there was a totally stripped down basic internet browser I could trust.
  - danso 8y ago
    Isn't profile sync opt-in?
  - jlg23 8y ago
    >Sure Mozilla doesn't have your passwords, but they know who you have passwords with. Do they? I just skimmed the source and could not find anything that hints at that (and implementing it the way you said it is makes for much more complex code..)
  - geofft 8y ago
    I just don't enable it. It's not on by default. For the average user—think your uncle who's about to ask you tech support questions this weekend—using Firefox Sync is way better for their privacy and security than reusing the same password everywhere. And for those of us who have and use password managers, Firefox Sync is not on by default—unlike Brave's attention-tracking or Chrome's Google logins.
asadotzler 8y ago
What about the whole profile sync service? It's designed to be privacy preserving by encrypting everything locally with a key only you have. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/11/firefox-sync-privacy/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/11/firefox-sync-privacy/
gaadd33 8y ago
Is Mozilla run that lean even with >$500M in revenue?
- notyourwork 8y ago
  If we didn't do business with any company that was run inefficiently we would not do business with a lot of places. I'm not sure how the efficiency of the business is entirely coupled to whether or not the product is usable and meets user needs in ways that other competing products cannot.
- danso 8y ago
  The majority of that funding seems to come from royalties ($504M of $520M) [0]. What would be the leaner way of collecting those royalties? [0] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/
reidrac 8y ago
Sorry if I misunderstood you, but you said you were using Brave. Perhaps you should review how you evaluate the products you use because your record isn't great. If you were wrong about Brave, your concerns about Firefox and Mozilla could be wrong as well.
jlg23 8y ago
"Face value"? Try "source value". What exactly is your problem with an opt-in service?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

woolvalley 8y ago

Firefox runs worse than chrome still, and it doesn't work well at all on my 2 core 2015 macbook pro. It works fine on my 6 core & 4 core machines although. I would also like something like the easy user switching that chrome has, since once user would have one set of session tab logins (twitter, fb, google, etc), and another user would have another. firefox -no-remote isn't that smooth of an experience compared to chrome's user switcher.

beering 8y ago
The Containers add-on[0] for Firefox that Mozilla makes has satisfied my need for partitioning. It's on a per-tab basis and also lets you define certain domains to automatically open in a specific container (e.g. Jira always opens in my Work container). I can't really speak to Firefox's performance issues though. I feel like they're just as good on rendering and JS speed, but the overall UI doesn't have the same "fast" feel that Chrome does. Chrome has also seemingly gotten slower for me too. [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...
- subway 8y ago
  Every time the containers add-on gets updated, it forgets all your preferences.
  - sftwds 8y ago
    Really? Is that a known issue? I haven’t experienced that and I’ve been using containers on Firefox since they were introduced.
  - bichiliad 8y ago
    I've been using containers for some time now (probably since not long after it was announced) to keep my twitter accounts separate, and I've never had to reset or update my preferences.
    - 8y ago

rchaud 8y ago

Firefox absolutely sucks on Android. It's fine on Mac OS, but it is so much slower than Brave (Chromium based) and Chrome itself, that it becomes irritating to use. That being said, it does support extensions like Ublock Origin and Ghostery. Mobile Chrome means zero extensions and ad hell, so Brave it is. Same Chrome engine and UI (swipeable tabs is something I miss in Firefox Android) and adblocking.

jammygit 8y ago
I'm using Firefox right now om android and its a nice experience. Chrome variants are smoother scrolling I guess but the sync is sure nice in Firefox.
zamalek 8y ago
> Firefox absolutely sucks on Android. Have you tried it lately? I agree that it used to, but it has improved vastly. It's my daily driver now.
- pedrocx486 8y ago
  I did, tried it for a week, honestly the scrolling still feels horrible when compared to Chrome.
  - zamalek 8y ago
    I absolutely agree with that, scrolling feels really janky but I did get used to it.
  - sombremesa 8y ago
    Agreed that scrolling is still janky, but the syncing of prefs (especially add-ons) is well worth it, imo. Heck, even just the one add-on that lets you sleep your phone while a YouTube video continues playing is well worth using Firefox. Such a basic functionality isn't enough reason to get YouTube Red. And then, you have add-ons like ublock origin that give you the Brave-like functionality without all this brouhaha.
8y ago