4 ms·

>I think Google is a troubled company and very large and very rich, and likely to use their browser in power plays against their competitors, with little regard

>I think Google is a troubled company and very large and very rich, and likely to use their browser in power plays against their competitors, with little regard for users. I like to look for the best in Google, but I found this baseless assertion... to be rather baseless, especially given (my perception) of the quality of Chrome and what it has done for the web in the last two short years. As a Chrome-convert, I enjoy watching people stray away from Firefox 3.6.x only to go sprinting back when they're an inch out of their comfort zone. If all you know is FF4, 5 and Aurora... I can see why auto-updating, cutting-edge would be terrifying. Author, I invite you, download Chrome, get on the Dev channel. You'll never have an extension that breaks, no modal dialog boxes on every boot checking compatibility. Fast-updating doesn't have to mean unstable... but I certainly understand why you feel that way. Mozilla is in the process of converting to a nimbler and lighter development and release cycle. They're not very good at it so far, in my opinion (I'm also a jaded Linux user, though).

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
zobzu 15y ago
Unfortunately you do sound like a Chrome dev or promoter. Chrome's way ain't bad. Firefox way ain't bad, and it's their first iteration of their new development and release strategy. Firefox's extension incompatibility comes from something that is important to understand: Firefox can be 100.00% modified using extensions, including the start-up mechanism, everything. Chrome cannot do that. Most Firefox extensions are written that way, mostly because of Firefox's history (extensions were only doable that way for a long time). The drawback is such control require browser restart and compatibility check and there is NO possible way around that. Firefox also supports on-the-fly extensions which do not require restart or anything like that - like Chrome. However, like Chrome they also allow lesser control and thus these are not very widely used, at least, yet. Firefox nighties, Aurora, and beta are also far from unstable. It's rare for nighties to ever break, and I've been using them for a decade. It never happened to any other channel. In fact, that's one strong point of Firefox vs Chrome. Chrome is not actually very stable. It usually doesn't matter too much as tabs are per process and can be easily reloaded or reopened when Chrome crashes so I find it mostly ok. But the bottom line is that Chrome annoys me by crashing every now and then. Firefox nearly NEVER crashes (once a year?). I would however agree that Firefox is a lot faster and slicker on Windows than any other platform, that said, it's not so bad on OSX and Linux. In comparison Chrome is mostly identically good on these 3 platforms.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

zobzu 15y ago

Unfortunately you do sound like a Chrome dev or promoter. Chrome's way ain't bad. Firefox way ain't bad, and it's their first iteration of their new development and release strategy. Firefox's extension incompatibility comes from something that is important to understand: Firefox can be 100.00% modified using extensions, including the start-up mechanism, everything. Chrome cannot do that. Most Firefox extensions are written that way, mostly because of Firefox's history (extensions were only doable that way for a long time). The drawback is such control require browser restart and compatibility check and there is NO possible way around that. Firefox also supports on-the-fly extensions which do not require restart or anything like that - like Chrome. However, like Chrome they also allow lesser control and thus these are not very widely used, at least, yet. Firefox nighties, Aurora, and beta are also far from unstable. It's rare for nighties to ever break, and I've been using them for a decade. It never happened to any other channel. In fact, that's one strong point of Firefox vs Chrome. Chrome is not actually very stable. It usually doesn't matter too much as tabs are per process and can be easily reloaded or reopened when Chrome crashes so I find it mostly ok. But the bottom line is that Chrome annoys me by crashing every now and then. Firefox nearly NEVER crashes (once a year?). I would however agree that Firefox is a lot faster and slicker on Windows than any other platform, that said, it's not so bad on OSX and Linux. In comparison Chrome is mostly identically good on these 3 platforms.