4 ms·

I asked myself this question a lot of times. The reason is: memories attached to FF. I used FF for ca. 7 years until Chrome came out. Every time I install Fire

I asked myself this question a lot of times. The reason is: memories attached to FF. I used FF for ca. 7 years until Chrome came out. Every time I install FireFox (to give it a try again) all the bad memories come back using it. The whacky design, The Big Slowdown when you had more than 5 tabs open, the accumulation of dead memory, needing me to restart the damn thing every couple of hours or so. The slow Javascript. When Chrome came out I was amazed, like, I didn't even know how pleasant a browser experience can be until I tried Chrome. It felt revolutionary. Now Firefox might have caught up but 7 years with all of these problems are still glued to that red/orange logo. A project like ungoogled-chrome is a welcomed effort, as I cannot imagine going back to FF permanently. They just missed the train, IMHO.

hnaccy 6y ago
That seems fairly irrational. In my experience current FF handles many tabs much better than Chrome.
- cleansy 6y ago
  Of course it is irrational. It's fairly well studied that humans make a lot of their decisions out of emotions and rationalize it later. It doesn't make rational sense to buy a coffee from Starbucks. It doesn't make sense to shout in an argument. The fact that people make purchase decisions based on branding doesn't make sense on a rational level. It's irrational to disregard the influence of emotions on the decision making progress.
  - dao- 6y ago
    What's weird is that you reflect on your emotions, understand that decisions you made are irrational, and still can't see yourself make a different decision going forward. Why did you reflect in the first place? Are you not interested in making rational decisions?
    - cleansy 6y ago
      The question is: is FF the "better" browser over Chrome/-ium? From a technical perspective: the differences are IMHO negligible. Last time I tried FF I couldn't tell any difference. The reaction time of the brain for visual input is something like 180ms(?) and Chrome and FF are faster than that for locally bound functions. From a moral perspective: sure, Firefox might be the better choice, although the Mozilla Org has a fair share of controversies. Usability wise: from my last evaluation: minimal. There are functionalities that I liked in FF more, and others in Chrome. So again: from my personal view negligible. Then there is what I stated above: the memory of cursing about Firefox because it simply "sucked" and Chrome was the best solution for it, you can argue that without Chrome FF would still suck. The first time I seriously considered switching was when Chrome announced that they would change their API to make uBlock origin's life harder. So far, I cannot see a strong reason why I should put effort into switching. I run several businesses and projects, all of them are on Gmail and using other Google Services, I have one profile for each business in Chrome, including Chrome's password manager that is storing locally the passwords for all the accounts. It's a lot of effort to switch to Firefox and as stated above at the time of this writing I don't see why I should bother. I rather put in time to run my projects than switching to a different browser, because a lot of HN people are into rust, anti google or whatever. Chrome is integrated with a lot of Google Products and this makes my work overall more efficient than whatever the switch to FF would gain me as of now. That might change in the future, and, of course, YMMV. Edit: > Why did you reflect in the first place? Are you not interested in making rational decisions? Actually, I didn't reflect about it until I read the comment of the original parent. I saw a lot of times the comment about "why not FF" on HN, whenever there was anything submitted about "fixing chrome". To answer your last question: I also don't always force myself to make rational decisions. I DO get a Starbucks coffee once every couple months, I DO like to buy branded products sometimes even though it's not rational (running shoes for example). I DO engage in arguments online once in a while even though it adds not much to my life. So generally I am interested in rationality but I pick my battles and am ok with it when I just give in to my primal instincts. :-)
SkyMarshal 6y ago
>The Big Slowdown when you had more than 5 tabs open, the accumulation of dead memory, needing me to restart the damn thing every couple of hours or so. The slow Javascript. Firefox hasn’t been the same Firefox ever since Mozzila replaced the rendering engine with the new Rust-based Servo (https://servo.org/ https://servo.org/). It’s fast and amazing and handles memory as well (and on my Mac, better) than Chrome/ium.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
  > Firefox hasn’t been the same Firefox ever since Mozzila replaced the rendering engine with the new Rust-based Servo I don't think that's right; they may have cherry picked some parts, but gecko is not servo.
  - emayljames 6y ago
    Servo was specifically created, in Rust, to be the functional replacement of the old Gecko; of which is has been since Quantum.
    - AnonC 6y ago
      I think the GP’s point is that Firefox still uses Gecko and some parts of Servo, which is true. Servo is not a complete engine yet and it’s not fully merged into Firefox yet.

hnaccy 6y ago

That seems fairly irrational. In my experience current FF handles many tabs much better than Chrome.

cleansy 6y ago
Of course it is irrational. It's fairly well studied that humans make a lot of their decisions out of emotions and rationalize it later. It doesn't make rational sense to buy a coffee from Starbucks. It doesn't make sense to shout in an argument. The fact that people make purchase decisions based on branding doesn't make sense on a rational level. It's irrational to disregard the influence of emotions on the decision making progress.
- dao- 6y ago
  What's weird is that you reflect on your emotions, understand that decisions you made are irrational, and still can't see yourself make a different decision going forward. Why did you reflect in the first place? Are you not interested in making rational decisions?
  - cleansy 6y ago
    The question is: is FF the "better" browser over Chrome/-ium? From a technical perspective: the differences are IMHO negligible. Last time I tried FF I couldn't tell any difference. The reaction time of the brain for visual input is something like 180ms(?) and Chrome and FF are faster than that for locally bound functions. From a moral perspective: sure, Firefox might be the better choice, although the Mozilla Org has a fair share of controversies. Usability wise: from my last evaluation: minimal. There are functionalities that I liked in FF more, and others in Chrome. So again: from my personal view negligible. Then there is what I stated above: the memory of cursing about Firefox because it simply "sucked" and Chrome was the best solution for it, you can argue that without Chrome FF would still suck. The first time I seriously considered switching was when Chrome announced that they would change their API to make uBlock origin's life harder. So far, I cannot see a strong reason why I should put effort into switching. I run several businesses and projects, all of them are on Gmail and using other Google Services, I have one profile for each business in Chrome, including Chrome's password manager that is storing locally the passwords for all the accounts. It's a lot of effort to switch to Firefox and as stated above at the time of this writing I don't see why I should bother. I rather put in time to run my projects than switching to a different browser, because a lot of HN people are into rust, anti google or whatever. Chrome is integrated with a lot of Google Products and this makes my work overall more efficient than whatever the switch to FF would gain me as of now. That might change in the future, and, of course, YMMV. Edit: > Why did you reflect in the first place? Are you not interested in making rational decisions? Actually, I didn't reflect about it until I read the comment of the original parent. I saw a lot of times the comment about "why not FF" on HN, whenever there was anything submitted about "fixing chrome". To answer your last question: I also don't always force myself to make rational decisions. I DO get a Starbucks coffee once every couple months, I DO like to buy branded products sometimes even though it's not rational (running shoes for example). I DO engage in arguments online once in a while even though it adds not much to my life. So generally I am interested in rationality but I pick my battles and am ok with it when I just give in to my primal instincts. :-)

SkyMarshal 6y ago

>The Big Slowdown when you had more than 5 tabs open, the accumulation of dead memory, needing me to restart the damn thing every couple of hours or so. The slow Javascript. Firefox hasn’t been the same Firefox ever since Mozzila replaced the rendering engine with the new Rust-based Servo (https://servo.org/ https://servo.org/). It’s fast and amazing and handles memory as well (and on my Mac, better) than Chrome/ium.

yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
> Firefox hasn’t been the same Firefox ever since Mozzila replaced the rendering engine with the new Rust-based Servo I don't think that's right; they may have cherry picked some parts, but gecko is not servo.
- emayljames 6y ago
  Servo was specifically created, in Rust, to be the functional replacement of the old Gecko; of which is has been since Quantum.
  - AnonC 6y ago
    I think the GP’s point is that Firefox still uses Gecko and some parts of Servo, which is true. Servo is not a complete engine yet and it’s not fully merged into Firefox yet.