2 ms·
This is plain wrong. 1. Firefox worked very well, thank you and I'm no natural saint when it comes to patience with software. 2. I am frontend (and backend) d
by eitland 8y ago
This is plain wrong.
1. Firefox worked very well, thank you and I'm no natural saint when it comes to patience with software.
2. I am frontend (and backend) developer so I should know the difference between using bleeding edge features that doesn't exist in all browsers yet, non standard quirks that developers abuse, and performance problems.
- Aeolun 8y agoVery well is relative. Chrome is better, even now, from a feature and performance perspective, but the tradeoff has become acceptable for a sense of privacy. That’s my opinion anyway.
- eitland 8y agoWon't argue about the performance, you might very well be right and I cannot prove anything. Feel free to expand on what features you still miss in Firefox that exists in Chrome though. Looking from the other side Chromes extension API looks like a toy compared to Firefox, even after Mozilla "nerfed" it. (And ours is improving while Chrome is actively trying to remove even some of the most used features from theirs.)
- speedplane 8y agoMy issue with Firefox is that it's just slower. I've read the articles showing that the rendering engine is just as fast or faster, and I don't doubt it, but it definitely feels a lot slower in real-life tasks with dozens of tabs and windows, constantly switching, opening, closing. I know Chrome "fakes" it's speediness using tricks, but I wish Firefox did the same.
- eitland 8y agoI don't know who downvoted you but here's my upvote. Your experience is as valid as mine. I wish we could be honest about things like you && at the same time behave like grown ups. Yes: I've been arguing against a couple of Chrome fans here but hopefully only when they're plain wrong or are presenting their personal ideas as truisms without any evidence :-)