> I believe Firefox is a good enough browser to go toe-to-toe with Chrome. It and it's developer are not without problems. However, at this point I'd use Firefo

> I believe Firefox is a good enough browser to go toe-to-toe with Chrome. It and it's developer are not without problems. However, at this point I'd use Firefox even if Mozilla was just as bad as Google because I think the diversity is worth it. But what good is it if it won't deviate from Google's vision of the web? It will go toe-to-toe with Chrome at being Chrome, and almost nothing more. Mozilla is fine with DRM being a core part of the web, and they completely validated and enabled EME extensions. They deprecated useful technologies that have not been replaced. I can't forgive them for validating the direction that the web is going in. They had enough leverage to slow it down, and they didn't. They have the same arrogance as Google but they don't have any of the success. Firefox (then Firebird) didn't beat Microsoft and IE6 by trying to implement half-baked Windows ActiveX and Janus DRM support. They didn't even bother implementing stuff that they didn't think should be part of the vision of Microsoft, Adobe, etc. I wish they would aim for the web they want, not just follow in the footsteps of others. I for one use Palemoon, alongside Chrome for sites that need it. There are incredibly useful XUL based extensions that I rely on still, and Palemoon is much friendlier to sandbox and modify. And for modern web garbage, I have Chrome. I don't need Firefox.