5 ms·

What are those technical reasons?

zelly 7y ago
JavaScript engine optimization Devtools Every benchmark: https://arewefastyet.com/linux64/overview?numDays=365 https://arewefastyet.com/linux64/overview?numDays=365 Anecdotally, Firefox uses a lot more CPU, memory, and battery. Makes sense since the JS engine is so much worse. In this era the browser is just a VM for JavaScript.
- sp332 7y ago
  Your benchmark page shows FF winning 29 benchmarks and Chrome winning 14.
- abdulmuhaimin 7y ago
  So how is that "won on technical reasons"? more than half of those benchmarks, Firefox are faster
- floatboth 7y ago
  For CSS, Firefox devtools are far, far ahead of everything else. JS debugging was a bit behind Chrome, but it should be on par now, except maybe in performance tracing.
  - Vinnl 7y ago
    Firefox has pretty good performance tools now: https://profiler.firefox.com/ https://profiler.firefox.com/
- inetknght 7y ago
  Javascript is a terrible language and many users actively fight it by turning it off. Those users don't typically show up in whatever javascript-based metrics you're looking at. I don't think you'd care, either. You're literally building an echo chamber and then yelling into it that it's the best echo chamber. Chrome is neither the "best" nor the "worst" javascript VM, nor is Firefox. Chrome is simply the most prolific. And that has nothing to do with Chrome's javascript implementation and everything to do with Google pushing hard for users and developers to switch to Chrome by putting it in front of their faces as much and often as possible. Everything from default-homepage being defaulted to Google.com, to that home page then asking users to switch to Chrome, and even "open sourcing" the engine and pushing for games and "competitors" to utilize it. I have yet to find Firefox use more CPU, memory, or battery than Chrome. Of course I don't go around with Javascript turned on with every website either. Given that so many websites utilize Google-based services it makes me wonder just how much of the "more CPU, more memory, and more battery" is also just "more of the same underhanded tactics from Google". Google already demonstrably does that for other products; why leave out third parties' websites from the shenanigans?
- cleandreams 7y ago
  Eyeballing the last 365 days Firefox does very well. If you look at previous year, not so much. Firefox has overall pulled ahead I'd say.

JavaScript engine optimization Devtools Every benchmark: https://arewefastyet.com/linux64/overview?numDays=365 https://arewefastyet.com/linux64/overview?numDays=365 Anecdotally, Firefox uses a lot more CPU, memory, and battery. Makes sense since the JS engine is so much worse. In this era the browser is just a VM for JavaScript.

sp332 7y ago
Your benchmark page shows FF winning 29 benchmarks and Chrome winning 14.
abdulmuhaimin 7y ago
So how is that "won on technical reasons"? more than half of those benchmarks, Firefox are faster
floatboth 7y ago
For CSS, Firefox devtools are far, far ahead of everything else. JS debugging was a bit behind Chrome, but it should be on par now, except maybe in performance tracing.
- Vinnl 7y ago
  Firefox has pretty good performance tools now: https://profiler.firefox.com/ https://profiler.firefox.com/
inetknght 7y ago
Javascript is a terrible language and many users actively fight it by turning it off. Those users don't typically show up in whatever javascript-based metrics you're looking at. I don't think you'd care, either. You're literally building an echo chamber and then yelling into it that it's the best echo chamber. Chrome is neither the "best" nor the "worst" javascript VM, nor is Firefox. Chrome is simply the most prolific. And that has nothing to do with Chrome's javascript implementation and everything to do with Google pushing hard for users and developers to switch to Chrome by putting it in front of their faces as much and often as possible. Everything from default-homepage being defaulted to Google.com, to that home page then asking users to switch to Chrome, and even "open sourcing" the engine and pushing for games and "competitors" to utilize it. I have yet to find Firefox use more CPU, memory, or battery than Chrome. Of course I don't go around with Javascript turned on with every website either. Given that so many websites utilize Google-based services it makes me wonder just how much of the "more CPU, more memory, and more battery" is also just "more of the same underhanded tactics from Google". Google already demonstrably does that for other products; why leave out third parties' websites from the shenanigans?
cleandreams 7y ago
Eyeballing the last 365 days Firefox does very well. If you look at previous year, not so much. Firefox has overall pulled ahead I'd say.