5 ms·

Chrome is already the standard. Firefox usually works, but more and more often nowadays I encounter a glitchy or poorly performing page, which I switch to Chrom

Chrome is already the standard. Firefox usually works, but more and more often nowadays I encounter a glitchy or poorly performing page, which I switch to Chrome to use properly. I use Firefox to not be part of the Chrome monopoly, not because it's actually a fundamentally better browser.

yaomtc 5y ago
> I encounter a glitchy or poorly performing page When you have the time, you should note it here: https://webcompat.com/ https://webcompat.com/
xcambar 5y ago
Chrome is not better because you witness some pages to render better in Chrome. It is actually the opposite: pages are more and more built for and with Chrome in mind. And that omnipresence of Chrome allows Google to force their own moves as de facto standards, which is dangerous overall. Firefox is better because it follows standards and it is open-source and it is not tied to a behemoth like Google. The authors of pages you see perform better in Chrome are indeed not building for the web but rather building for Chrome.
- TranquilMarmot 5y ago
  Especially with the prevalence of sites that "work" in browser but really expect you to download yet-another-Electron-app (i.e. Slack) Develop for Chrome first, all other browsers second. Why worry if other browsers don't work when the solution is "download our desktop Electron application :)"
nightski 5y ago
I have used Firefox for about a decade now and I can't think of a single page that did not work. I'm not saying it's impossible, but incredibly rare. I'd be more inclined to just give up on the site than install Chrome.
- eightails 5y ago
  Stuff doesn't always completely break -- e.g. Google forcing new Chrome-only web standards on certain sites and making other browsers like Firefox resort to alternatives which can end up being 5x slower [0], or serving a more dated design of google search on FF mobile vs Chrome. I suspect this sort of thing might be enough to make some people switch. And I have had a few experiences with sites not loading properly in the last few months. Try windy.com for example: on FF 90 with no extensions enabled and tracking protection on 'balanced' I get blue and yellow banding on the map, and the wind gusts graphics fail to load properly. I have reported a few of these instances in the past, but a lot of the time I'd rather just switch to chromium temporarily and continue with what I'm doing. [0] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/mozilla-exec-says-google-slowed-youtube-down-on-non-chrome-browsers/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/mozilla-exec...
  - kiwijamo 5y ago
    Just out of interest I looked at Windy.com on Firefox/Linux and it looks fine? No blue/yellow banding. Wind gusts seem to show up fine. I've also had a look at the other stuff (e.g. waves, clouds, etc) which all seem to work as expected. This is with Firefox 78 LTS. Unless things have regressed in between version 78 to 90, I wonder if there is something else causing your issues?
    - eightails 5y ago
      So it seems like it was caused by FF blocking HTML5 canvas fingerprinting. Enabling that allowed it all to load correctly. I guess I must've hit disallow without thinking when I first visited, and that response was saved even after clearing cache, so that example at least is probably my fault. I do wonder if every user would be aware that the 'Allow site to extract canvas data?' popup can break site functionality though -- its not as though there's a warning to that effect in browser.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
BenoitEssiambre 5y ago
That's my experience too. Unfortunately I don't think it's possible for complex standards to be well specified in human language instead of in code so a reference implementation is what will always win in the end. At least chromium is open source. The best we can hope is maybe that organizations adopting chromium other than Google can wield more influence over it. As I point out here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27222818 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27222818 human language is not precise enough to write good specifications. Natural language words are polysemic and contextual. See the meaning of "break" for example: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/break https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/break Kolmogrov showed that fully specified information distills down to computer programs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_description_length https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_description_length The ideal language for a specification might be a mix of natural language and code with a test suit, something like Literate Programming (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literate_programming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literate_programming) or its descendants along with modern pull request based discussions that are tied to version controlled code. I wish Mozilla or a similar organization adopted the chromium core. We really need a well funded non-profit managed release of the reference browser.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > complex standards to be well specified in human language instead of in code so a reference implementation is what will always win in the end. > At least chromium is open source. That source code is 12-15 million lines of code. They implement literally thousands of specs. Chrome adds 40-70 new web APIs [1] with each release which happen roughly once every 40 days and contain god knows how many code changes. Good luck deducing "precise specs" from that. > I wish Mozilla or a similar organization adopted the chromium core That would mean cementing Google's monopoly of the web. [1] https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence
  - BenoitEssiambre 5y ago
    >That source code is 12-15 million lines of code. Exactly, it's impossible to describe that in human language which doesn't have precise enough semantics. That's why the spec has to be in code, in the form of a reference implementation and/or test suit. The goal should be to move chromium away from being controlled too much by Google.
eitland 5y ago
> I use Firefox to not be part of the Chrome monopoly, not because it's actually a fundamentally better browser. For me there is - in addition to not wanting to support Chrome - still a few things that Firefox does better. As for websites that only support Chrome I consider them broken which means I don't use them or if I have to I try to notify the operator.

yaomtc 5y ago

> I encounter a glitchy or poorly performing page When you have the time, you should note it here: https://webcompat.com/ https://webcompat.com/

xcambar 5y ago

Chrome is not better because you witness some pages to render better in Chrome. It is actually the opposite: pages are more and more built for and with Chrome in mind. And that omnipresence of Chrome allows Google to force their own moves as de facto standards, which is dangerous overall. Firefox is better because it follows standards and it is open-source and it is not tied to a behemoth like Google. The authors of pages you see perform better in Chrome are indeed not building for the web but rather building for Chrome.

TranquilMarmot 5y ago
Especially with the prevalence of sites that "work" in browser but really expect you to download yet-another-Electron-app (i.e. Slack) Develop for Chrome first, all other browsers second. Why worry if other browsers don't work when the solution is "download our desktop Electron application :)"

nightski 5y ago

I have used Firefox for about a decade now and I can't think of a single page that did not work. I'm not saying it's impossible, but incredibly rare. I'd be more inclined to just give up on the site than install Chrome.

eightails 5y ago
Stuff doesn't always completely break -- e.g. Google forcing new Chrome-only web standards on certain sites and making other browsers like Firefox resort to alternatives which can end up being 5x slower [0], or serving a more dated design of google search on FF mobile vs Chrome. I suspect this sort of thing might be enough to make some people switch. And I have had a few experiences with sites not loading properly in the last few months. Try windy.com for example: on FF 90 with no extensions enabled and tracking protection on 'balanced' I get blue and yellow banding on the map, and the wind gusts graphics fail to load properly. I have reported a few of these instances in the past, but a lot of the time I'd rather just switch to chromium temporarily and continue with what I'm doing. [0] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/mozilla-exec-says-google-slowed-youtube-down-on-non-chrome-browsers/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/mozilla-exec...
- kiwijamo 5y ago
  Just out of interest I looked at Windy.com on Firefox/Linux and it looks fine? No blue/yellow banding. Wind gusts seem to show up fine. I've also had a look at the other stuff (e.g. waves, clouds, etc) which all seem to work as expected. This is with Firefox 78 LTS. Unless things have regressed in between version 78 to 90, I wonder if there is something else causing your issues?
  - eightails 5y ago
    So it seems like it was caused by FF blocking HTML5 canvas fingerprinting. Enabling that allowed it all to load correctly. I guess I must've hit disallow without thinking when I first visited, and that response was saved even after clearing cache, so that example at least is probably my fault. I do wonder if every user would be aware that the 'Allow site to extract canvas data?' popup can break site functionality though -- its not as though there's a warning to that effect in browser.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]

BenoitEssiambre 5y ago

That's my experience too. Unfortunately I don't think it's possible for complex standards to be well specified in human language instead of in code so a reference implementation is what will always win in the end. At least chromium is open source. The best we can hope is maybe that organizations adopting chromium other than Google can wield more influence over it. As I point out here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27222818 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27222818 human language is not precise enough to write good specifications. Natural language words are polysemic and contextual. See the meaning of "break" for example: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/break https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/break Kolmogrov showed that fully specified information distills down to computer programs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_description_length https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_description_length The ideal language for a specification might be a mix of natural language and code with a test suit, something like Literate Programming (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literate_programming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literate_programming) or its descendants along with modern pull request based discussions that are tied to version controlled code. I wish Mozilla or a similar organization adopted the chromium core. We really need a well funded non-profit managed release of the reference browser.

dmitriid 5y ago
> complex standards to be well specified in human language instead of in code so a reference implementation is what will always win in the end. > At least chromium is open source. That source code is 12-15 million lines of code. They implement literally thousands of specs. Chrome adds 40-70 new web APIs [1] with each release which happen roughly once every 40 days and contain god knows how many code changes. Good luck deducing "precise specs" from that. > I wish Mozilla or a similar organization adopted the chromium core That would mean cementing Google's monopoly of the web. [1] https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence
- BenoitEssiambre 5y ago
  >That source code is 12-15 million lines of code. Exactly, it's impossible to describe that in human language which doesn't have precise enough semantics. That's why the spec has to be in code, in the form of a reference implementation and/or test suit. The goal should be to move chromium away from being controlled too much by Google.

eitland 5y ago

> I use Firefox to not be part of the Chrome monopoly, not because it's actually a fundamentally better browser. For me there is - in addition to not wanting to support Chrome - still a few things that Firefox does better. As for websites that only support Chrome I consider them broken which means I don't use them or if I have to I try to notify the operator.