8 ms·

> That's 250 megawatts saved, the equivalent of an average coal power plant. Because some Microsoft engineer missed a bug. Are you sure you want to invoke this

> That's 250 megawatts saved, the equivalent of an average coal power plant. Because some Microsoft engineer missed a bug. Are you sure you want to invoke this logic? Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome.

axolotlgod 4y ago
Does Chrome really use significantly less resources than Firefox? Are there numbers there?
- IntelMiner 4y ago
  It took a lot longer for Firefox to get GPU accelerated video playback on Linux iirc Perhaps a "niche" use case for some, but there's a lot more Firefox users on Linux in particular
  - tristan957 4y ago
    Isn't Chromium hardware acceleration currently broken on Linux?
- haupt 4y ago
  According to Tom's Guide[1] Microsoft Edge beats out both when it comes to RAM utilization but Chrome just edges out Firefox when loading >10 tabs. That was in 2021. I'd be interested to see any other comparisons or benchmarks. 1. https://www.tomsguide.com/news/chrome-firefox-edge-ram-comparison https://www.tomsguide.com/news/chrome-firefox-edge-ram-compa...
  - prmoustache 4y ago
    This is with no extensions installed right?
LeoPanthera 4y ago
> Are you sure you want to invoke this logic? Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Ironically, Mac users routinely complain about how power-hungry Chrome is on the Mac. Safari is significantly more efficient.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  >Safari is significantly more efficient. Based on the increased laptop battery life I notice, so is using Edge on Windows. It makes sense that both Apple and Microsoft can extract the best out of their OS + browser. There's no way Firefox can compete on such OS specific optimizations.
  - 908B64B197 4y ago
    > so is using Edge on Windows. The new Edge based on Chromium performs better than Chrome with regards to power consumptions. The old Edge was even better in terms of power consumption. Like a few extra hours of battery life.
    - gorby91 4y ago
      To continue to overextend the analogy though, that's asking people to use Edge over Chrome or Firefox is like trying to market the Smart Car. Few people want to be seen driving it, fuel efficiency be damned.
      - BizarroLand 4y ago
        And no browser is more efficient that simply turning off your computer and reading by daylight.
- Karunamon 4y ago
  Is that because of the quality of Chrome or because Safari is a "blessed" application and probably gets to do things other applications do not? Entirely serious question. Apple is known to severely privilege their own applications over competitors.
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Or the energy used by all the electron apps on all operation systems.
airza 4y ago
There are good reasons to not use chrome over firefox, but few reasons to leave firefox bugged. I don’t think the same utilitarian logic applies.
- throwbadubadu 4y ago
  Yeah, finally as the market share is where it should be for Firefox Microsoft had no more reasons to leave it on :D
omneity 4y ago
It's not too bad an analogy. Think of it this way: - Switching from Firefox to Chrome might be similar to switching between two car models, one consuming less energy than the other. - Fixing this bug is more like going to a car workshop to fix an injector issue in your car that was causing higher fuel consumption and more pollutants. The first one is really a matter of tradeoffs and personal choices. The second one is less of a choice and more of an actual issue that was left due to negligence. Hardly similar.
- sgtnoodle 4y ago
  Isn't it more like an auto maker issuing a recall to fix an injector issue in all their cars?
  - omneity 4y ago
    An analogy can only get you so far, but in this case the bug is caused by Microsoft Defender, yet Firefox, the car manufacturer, is a different entity. So I wouldn't call it a recall.
    - sgtnoodle 4y ago
      A bunch of cars across many manufacturers were recalled in the 2010's due to a defect in the airbags made by the same manufacturer. One could also argue that the OS is the car, the browser is the chauffeur, and the user is the passenger.
      - jmspring 4y ago
        With regard to browsers, I think we need more manufacturers, not just the GM (Google/Chrome) of browsers. I want Ford in there as well. (Sticking with US automotive companies).
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        4y ago
lotsofpulp 4y ago
The cause and effect exists whether or not some commenter on HN writes about it. The reason it is not “invoked” is because energy prices are sufficiently low (due to not pricing in externalities) that there exists little incentive for end users to optimize for power usage.
- gruez 4y ago
  >The reason it is not “invoked” is because energy prices are sufficiently low (due to not pricing in externalities) that there exists little incentive for end users to optimize for power usage. You're right in principle, but in practice even factoring in externalities electricity prices won't be high enough for people to care. Using current US carbon intensity for electricity generation[1] and the higher end estimates for the social cost of carbon[2] gets us carbon costs of $0.142 per kWh. The average prices in US is $0.168. Adding in carbon costs would almost double the price, but there are countries with even higher electricity prices[4] and they're not exactly switching to more efficient software in droves to save energy. [1] https://emissionsindex.org/ https://emissionsindex.org/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cost_of_carbon#Carbon_pricing_recommendations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cost_of_carbon#Carbon_p... [3] https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices... [4] https://www.statista.com/statistics/263492/electricity-prices-in-selected-countries/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/263492/electricity-price...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
lkbm 4y ago
I mean, sure, I could also just turn off my computer. Presumably people use Firefox for a reason, and making that a option use less energy is pure upside, and it's very interesting to see how big of an upside it might be.
volkk 4y ago
> Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome i've read everywhere that Firefox at this point is far more energy efficient than Chrome...is that not true?
Georgelemental 4y ago
If one user switches to Chrome, the energy savings are only for that one user. If one Microsoft engineer fixes a bug, the energy savings are for the many thousands who use Firefox on up-to-date Windows.
kramerger 4y ago
> imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Nah, I like my privacy. How about replacing Electron apps with native apps instead?
ouid 4y ago
Using firefox without memory errors is a pareto optimization over using firefox with memory errors.
tgv 4y ago
Think more like this: this bug cost an average coal power plant, all other things being equal. I doubt it's that much, but it certainly did waste a lot of energy. > imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Imagine the privacy savings if Chrome users switched to Firefox.
tyingq 4y ago
Maybe compare manifest v2 friendly Firefox with uBlock Origin vs eventual Chrome without it :)
- revolvingocelot 4y ago
  Serious savings indeed when the Javascript cryptominer some ad network blithely serves up is ad-blocker'd, but we prefer synthetic benchmarks. In seriousness, though, this is an issue. Elsewhere, I observe arguments about eg userbenchmark rankings, and the comparative relevance of single-core vs multicore performance. Are you playing a game, or rendering video 24/7 -- or running some entirely synthetic workload that allows for a peak performance the real world would never achieve? Same kinda problem.
  - rahmeero 4y ago
    Not sure if this is related, but Chrome on my Macbook regularly gets to a state where one process (a tab?) is consuming 4 Gb RAM and 20%+ CPU. This happens on both M1 and Intel CPUs, on multiple releases of OS. Situation seems to happen some time after visiting ad-heavy sites (yeah I know I should install an ad-blocker). Have others noticed this? Seems to be Chrome. I also use Firefox and occasionally Safari but have not noticed that with those browsers.
  - saagarjha 4y ago
    Web browser benchmarks are typically designed to track real-world applications
shapefrog 4y ago
> imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome This is why I left firefox.
xxs 4y ago
>Firefox users switched to Chrome. Far worse due to privacy/adblock addons.
wiseowise 4y ago
> Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Enlighten us.
harry8 4y ago
Imagine the power savings if chrome users switched to lynx. Imagine the power savings if everyone used pihole, ublock etc. Second uses more power than the first and is better. Do it!
hanoz 4y ago
> imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Imagine the energy squandered on all the extra goods and services bought by users using a browser owned by an advertising company, instead of Firefox.
everdrive 4y ago
Now do one for javascript.
mr_toad 4y ago
> Are you sure you want to invoke this logic? Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. And then imagine Safari on an M1.
viraptor 4y ago
It works for a single case, but not sure about long term. We still have at least a little bit of competition. All browsers improve because the other ones improve. If we all switched to Chrome or Safari because of the power saving, we'd just get another version of IE monopoly/stagnation which could result in more power wasted longterm. The optimum is likely somewhere where most people use the currently most efficient solution and others keep alternatives alive and competitive.
midoridensha 4y ago
Imagine the energy savings if all users installed a good ad-blocker.
michaelcampbell 4y ago
How many megawatts saved if everyone learned how to do all their work on text-only consoles running linux?
rhaway84773 4y ago
Those are 2 very different things. In switching browsers, you get different features, workflows and functionality, many of which you prefer on Firefox, which is why you’re using it. With this bug fix, there is absolutely no loss or change in functionality (other than increased battery life), and yet you’re getting the benefits. This bug is pure waste.

axolotlgod 4y ago

Does Chrome really use significantly less resources than Firefox? Are there numbers there?

IntelMiner 4y ago
It took a lot longer for Firefox to get GPU accelerated video playback on Linux iirc Perhaps a "niche" use case for some, but there's a lot more Firefox users on Linux in particular
- tristan957 4y ago
  Isn't Chromium hardware acceleration currently broken on Linux?
haupt 4y ago
According to Tom's Guide[1] Microsoft Edge beats out both when it comes to RAM utilization but Chrome just edges out Firefox when loading >10 tabs. That was in 2021. I'd be interested to see any other comparisons or benchmarks. 1. https://www.tomsguide.com/news/chrome-firefox-edge-ram-comparison https://www.tomsguide.com/news/chrome-firefox-edge-ram-compa...
- prmoustache 4y ago
  This is with no extensions installed right?

LeoPanthera 4y ago

> Are you sure you want to invoke this logic? Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Ironically, Mac users routinely complain about how power-hungry Chrome is on the Mac. Safari is significantly more efficient.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>Safari is significantly more efficient. Based on the increased laptop battery life I notice, so is using Edge on Windows. It makes sense that both Apple and Microsoft can extract the best out of their OS + browser. There's no way Firefox can compete on such OS specific optimizations.
- 908B64B197 4y ago
  > so is using Edge on Windows. The new Edge based on Chromium performs better than Chrome with regards to power consumptions. The old Edge was even better in terms of power consumption. Like a few extra hours of battery life.
  - gorby91 4y ago
    To continue to overextend the analogy though, that's asking people to use Edge over Chrome or Firefox is like trying to market the Smart Car. Few people want to be seen driving it, fuel efficiency be damned.
    - BizarroLand 4y ago
      And no browser is more efficient that simply turning off your computer and reading by daylight.
Karunamon 4y ago
Is that because of the quality of Chrome or because Safari is a "blessed" application and probably gets to do things other applications do not? Entirely serious question. Apple is known to severely privilege their own applications over competitors.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

Or the energy used by all the electron apps on all operation systems.

airza 4y ago

There are good reasons to not use chrome over firefox, but few reasons to leave firefox bugged. I don’t think the same utilitarian logic applies.

throwbadubadu 4y ago
Yeah, finally as the market share is where it should be for Firefox Microsoft had no more reasons to leave it on :D

omneity 4y ago

It's not too bad an analogy. Think of it this way: - Switching from Firefox to Chrome might be similar to switching between two car models, one consuming less energy than the other. - Fixing this bug is more like going to a car workshop to fix an injector issue in your car that was causing higher fuel consumption and more pollutants. The first one is really a matter of tradeoffs and personal choices. The second one is less of a choice and more of an actual issue that was left due to negligence. Hardly similar.

sgtnoodle 4y ago
Isn't it more like an auto maker issuing a recall to fix an injector issue in all their cars?
- omneity 4y ago
  An analogy can only get you so far, but in this case the bug is caused by Microsoft Defender, yet Firefox, the car manufacturer, is a different entity. So I wouldn't call it a recall.
  - sgtnoodle 4y ago
    A bunch of cars across many manufacturers were recalled in the 2010's due to a defect in the airbags made by the same manufacturer. One could also argue that the OS is the car, the browser is the chauffeur, and the user is the passenger.
    - jmspring 4y ago
      With regard to browsers, I think we need more manufacturers, not just the GM (Google/Chrome) of browsers. I want Ford in there as well. (Sticking with US automotive companies).
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - 4y ago

lotsofpulp 4y ago

The cause and effect exists whether or not some commenter on HN writes about it. The reason it is not “invoked” is because energy prices are sufficiently low (due to not pricing in externalities) that there exists little incentive for end users to optimize for power usage.

gruez 4y ago
>The reason it is not “invoked” is because energy prices are sufficiently low (due to not pricing in externalities) that there exists little incentive for end users to optimize for power usage. You're right in principle, but in practice even factoring in externalities electricity prices won't be high enough for people to care. Using current US carbon intensity for electricity generation[1] and the higher end estimates for the social cost of carbon[2] gets us carbon costs of $0.142 per kWh. The average prices in US is $0.168. Adding in carbon costs would almost double the price, but there are countries with even higher electricity prices[4] and they're not exactly switching to more efficient software in droves to save energy. [1] https://emissionsindex.org/ https://emissionsindex.org/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cost_of_carbon#Carbon_pricing_recommendations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cost_of_carbon#Carbon_p... [3] https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices... [4] https://www.statista.com/statistics/263492/electricity-prices-in-selected-countries/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/263492/electricity-price...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

lkbm 4y ago

I mean, sure, I could also just turn off my computer. Presumably people use Firefox for a reason, and making that a option use less energy is pure upside, and it's very interesting to see how big of an upside it might be.

volkk 4y ago

> Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome i've read everywhere that Firefox at this point is far more energy efficient than Chrome...is that not true?

Georgelemental 4y ago

If one user switches to Chrome, the energy savings are only for that one user. If one Microsoft engineer fixes a bug, the energy savings are for the many thousands who use Firefox on up-to-date Windows.

kramerger 4y ago

> imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Nah, I like my privacy. How about replacing Electron apps with native apps instead?

ouid 4y ago

Using firefox without memory errors is a pareto optimization over using firefox with memory errors.

tgv 4y ago

Think more like this: this bug cost an average coal power plant, all other things being equal. I doubt it's that much, but it certainly did waste a lot of energy. > imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Imagine the privacy savings if Chrome users switched to Firefox.

tyingq 4y ago

Maybe compare manifest v2 friendly Firefox with uBlock Origin vs eventual Chrome without it :)

revolvingocelot 4y ago
Serious savings indeed when the Javascript cryptominer some ad network blithely serves up is ad-blocker'd, but we prefer synthetic benchmarks. In seriousness, though, this is an issue. Elsewhere, I observe arguments about eg userbenchmark rankings, and the comparative relevance of single-core vs multicore performance. Are you playing a game, or rendering video 24/7 -- or running some entirely synthetic workload that allows for a peak performance the real world would never achieve? Same kinda problem.
- rahmeero 4y ago
  Not sure if this is related, but Chrome on my Macbook regularly gets to a state where one process (a tab?) is consuming 4 Gb RAM and 20%+ CPU. This happens on both M1 and Intel CPUs, on multiple releases of OS. Situation seems to happen some time after visiting ad-heavy sites (yeah I know I should install an ad-blocker). Have others noticed this? Seems to be Chrome. I also use Firefox and occasionally Safari but have not noticed that with those browsers.
- saagarjha 4y ago
  Web browser benchmarks are typically designed to track real-world applications

shapefrog 4y ago

> imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome This is why I left firefox.

xxs 4y ago

>Firefox users switched to Chrome. Far worse due to privacy/adblock addons.

wiseowise 4y ago

> Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Enlighten us.

harry8 4y ago

Imagine the power savings if chrome users switched to lynx. Imagine the power savings if everyone used pihole, ublock etc. Second uses more power than the first and is better. Do it!

hanoz 4y ago

> imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. Imagine the energy squandered on all the extra goods and services bought by users using a browser owned by an advertising company, instead of Firefox.

everdrive 4y ago

Now do one for javascript.

mr_toad 4y ago

> Are you sure you want to invoke this logic? Because following it through imagine the energy savings if Firefox users switched to Chrome. And then imagine Safari on an M1.

viraptor 4y ago

It works for a single case, but not sure about long term. We still have at least a little bit of competition. All browsers improve because the other ones improve. If we all switched to Chrome or Safari because of the power saving, we'd just get another version of IE monopoly/stagnation which could result in more power wasted longterm. The optimum is likely somewhere where most people use the currently most efficient solution and others keep alternatives alive and competitive.

midoridensha 4y ago

Imagine the energy savings if all users installed a good ad-blocker.

michaelcampbell 4y ago

How many megawatts saved if everyone learned how to do all their work on text-only consoles running linux?

rhaway84773 4y ago

Those are 2 very different things. In switching browsers, you get different features, workflows and functionality, many of which you prefer on Firefox, which is why you’re using it. With this bug fix, there is absolutely no loss or change in functionality (other than increased battery life), and yet you’re getting the benefits. This bug is pure waste.