4 ms·

That's OK, Firefox would just melt the MBP if you tried to do a streaming call on it anyway. It's my browser of choice, but it uses 40x more power to do streami

That's OK, Firefox would just melt the MBP if you tried to do a streaming call on it anyway. It's my browser of choice, but it uses 40x more power to do streaming (vs. Safari), and has serious heat issues. Wish they'd fix it. Until they do, no reason for Apple to try and support it... likely Firefox can't give a user a good streaming experience on MacOS given how long this issue has been a problem and how little has been done to fix it to date.

celsoazevedo 5y ago
Firefox performance has improved a lot on my 2019 MBP over the past year or so. For video streaming, it doesn't seem to be much worse than Chrome. One of the reasons why Firefox and Chrome use more power than Safari for video streaming is that they support modern/open video codecs that don't have hardware decoding on Macs. For example, YouTube has been using VP9 for years. Until Catalina, Safari would load a h.264 video (that's why Safari used to be limited to 1080p) which has hardware decoding, while Chrome and Firefox would load a VP9 video at higher resolutions and use software decoding, using way more power than Safari. Now YouTube is starting to use AV1 and again, Chrome and Firefox supports it, but Safari doesn't.