7 ms·

Every single Google product is slower on Firefox and it’s hard to not call this malice and artificial. Many people check out Gmail and GMaps on Firefox and go b

Every single Google product is slower on Firefox and it’s hard to not call this malice and artificial. Many people check out Gmail and GMaps on Firefox and go back to Chrome because of their clunkiness on Firefox.

iso1631 7y ago
I try out google products on occasion and find them rubbish compared with alternatives, so go back to non-google products.
- michaelmrose 7y ago
  Regarding google properties what do you prefer and why?
  - iso1631 7y ago
    Google maps does tend to be better than OSM when it comes to route finding, I use !gm when I want routing. On my phone I use apple maps though. Gmail is painful compared with OWA (work) and zoho (home), I stopped using my gmail account for new stuff about a year ago.
    - michaelmrose 7y ago
      I prefer mu4e (mu for email) although ultimately I'm still using my gmail account just with another interface. I like the idea of ultimately just setting up a mail server but realistically its really really hard to switch everything at once when you have a lot of existing accounts so I'll probably be maintaining a gmail account forever. I'm trying maps.me because unlike google it does offline walking directions but I haven't used it enough. I really want to like duck duck go but it feels like google still provides better results.
      - iso1631 7y ago
        > I really want to like duck duck go but it feels like google still provides better results. I find I get better results with ddg than google. YMMV I guess.
    - namibj 7y ago
      I us brouter for my usecase of foot/bike nav in hilly terrain. Using OSM And for the UI.
ricktdotorg 7y ago
> malice and artificial are you actually asserting that Google is purposefully adding code/"tweaking" their web apps to run slowly on browsers other than Chrome? do you have any evidence at all for this other than anecdotes about people experiencing Google web app clunkiness on Firefox?
- dijit 7y ago
  If there was direct evidence it would warrant its own post, so I think your comment has been made in bad faith since people are talking about their own experiences. That said; if it's possible to measure firefox/chrome performance (with altered user-agents) it would make for a good blog post.
  - adrianmonk 7y ago
    How is "hard to not call this malice and artificial" people talking about their own experiences?
    - Talanes 7y ago
      The "hard not to call" portion takes it from the realm of objective fact and into subjective measure.
      - adrianmonk 7y ago
        Huh, I guess "hard not to call" could be interpreted as a disclaimer or qualifier meaning "I can't prove this, and it's only my opinion". However, I interpreted it differently, to basically mean that because of objective fact, of all the explanations you can think of, only one of them is defensible. In other words, it's similar to saying "admit it, this is the only reasonable conclusion".
      - sjruckle 7y ago
        The original post had the phrase "hard to not call" rather than "hard not to call". The meaning is inverted by swapping the "to" and "not".
mindcrime 7y ago
"Google ain't done, till Firefox won't run"?
arendtio 7y ago
In fact, just this week I thought about why Google doesn't make its mobile maps website fast again. It is such a pain to use it on older phones and I totally don't get, why it has to be that slow (doesn't matter if chrome or Firefox).
Wowfunhappy 7y ago
As a semi-counter: Slack, Skype, and Zoom video calls don't work in Firefox, even though WebRTC is an open standard. But Google Hangouts works perfectly. I'm loath to give Google credit for something that ought to be standard practice, but of the major (key word) free video conferencing options, they seem to be the only one that's Firefox-compatible.

iso1631 7y ago

I try out google products on occasion and find them rubbish compared with alternatives, so go back to non-google products.

michaelmrose 7y ago
Regarding google properties what do you prefer and why?
- iso1631 7y ago
  Google maps does tend to be better than OSM when it comes to route finding, I use !gm when I want routing. On my phone I use apple maps though. Gmail is painful compared with OWA (work) and zoho (home), I stopped using my gmail account for new stuff about a year ago.
  - michaelmrose 7y ago
    I prefer mu4e (mu for email) although ultimately I'm still using my gmail account just with another interface. I like the idea of ultimately just setting up a mail server but realistically its really really hard to switch everything at once when you have a lot of existing accounts so I'll probably be maintaining a gmail account forever. I'm trying maps.me because unlike google it does offline walking directions but I haven't used it enough. I really want to like duck duck go but it feels like google still provides better results.
    - iso1631 7y ago
      > I really want to like duck duck go but it feels like google still provides better results. I find I get better results with ddg than google. YMMV I guess.
  - namibj 7y ago
    I us brouter for my usecase of foot/bike nav in hilly terrain. Using OSM And for the UI.

ricktdotorg 7y ago

> malice and artificial are you actually asserting that Google is purposefully adding code/"tweaking" their web apps to run slowly on browsers other than Chrome? do you have any evidence at all for this other than anecdotes about people experiencing Google web app clunkiness on Firefox?

dijit 7y ago
If there was direct evidence it would warrant its own post, so I think your comment has been made in bad faith since people are talking about their own experiences. That said; if it's possible to measure firefox/chrome performance (with altered user-agents) it would make for a good blog post.
- adrianmonk 7y ago
  How is "hard to not call this malice and artificial" people talking about their own experiences?
  - Talanes 7y ago
    The "hard not to call" portion takes it from the realm of objective fact and into subjective measure.
    - adrianmonk 7y ago
      Huh, I guess "hard not to call" could be interpreted as a disclaimer or qualifier meaning "I can't prove this, and it's only my opinion". However, I interpreted it differently, to basically mean that because of objective fact, of all the explanations you can think of, only one of them is defensible. In other words, it's similar to saying "admit it, this is the only reasonable conclusion".
    - sjruckle 7y ago
      The original post had the phrase "hard to not call" rather than "hard not to call". The meaning is inverted by swapping the "to" and "not".

mindcrime 7y ago

"Google ain't done, till Firefox won't run"?

arendtio 7y ago

In fact, just this week I thought about why Google doesn't make its mobile maps website fast again. It is such a pain to use it on older phones and I totally don't get, why it has to be that slow (doesn't matter if chrome or Firefox).

Wowfunhappy 7y ago

As a semi-counter: Slack, Skype, and Zoom video calls don't work in Firefox, even though WebRTC is an open standard. But Google Hangouts works perfectly. I'm loath to give Google credit for something that ought to be standard practice, but of the major (key word) free video conferencing options, they seem to be the only one that's Firefox-compatible.