5 ms·

I use Firefox, and Google's sites are literally the only ones where I consistently have issues. There was a period of about a month this summer where Google Map

by foob 3y ago

I use Firefox, and Google's sites are literally the only ones where I consistently have issues. There was a period of about a month this summer where Google Maps was just completely broken for me, the map wouldn't update at all when attempting to search or pan. There was recently a several day span where chat in Gmail had a 10+ second input lag due to some font-related JavaScript code spinning the CPU nonstop. It's literally gotten to the point where I keep a Chrome window open and use it exclusively for Gmail, Google Meet, YouTube, and Google Maps. It's pretty obvious from the outside that supporting Firefox is not a product priority for Google. It also seems clear that it's in their best interest to have users choose Chrome over Firefox. My guess is that this likely emerges from a lot of very reasonable sounding local decisions, like "prioritize testing on browsers with the most market share," but it is convenient how those align with the anti-competitive incentives.

joelanman 3y ago
Gmail has recently become extremely slow for me in Safari on a well specced M1 max
- ryukoposting 3y ago
  Same here on Firefox, for both my laptop running Windows 11 on Alder Lake, and my desktop running Ubuntu on Zen 2.
1980phipsi 3y ago
Using Google sites with a VPN on Firefox has been really annoying for the past couple of months as well.
vmfunction 3y ago
These sounds like classic MS behaviour. It is kind of thing that ought to addressed in anti-trust case.
- giancarlostoro 3y ago
  I've posted this here on HN numerous times over the years, and it's been a while since I last posted it: Google is the new "Microsoft", they embrace, they extend, then extinguish. Look at their email offering, messaging offerings, they built on top of XMPP, then they pulled the plug eventually. Android is Linux based, but insanely proprietary, the app store is not open by any means, you're fully at their whims to get your apps on there. Chrome is basically the IE of old, implementing proprietary things or APIs that are not yet standard for Google products, and pushing out competing browsers.
  - f4c39012 3y ago
    don't forget the old Microsoft is still here. We have two Microsofts now!
    - da_chicken 3y ago
      The old, old Microsoft is still here, too. IBM is still there, a dinosaur in the mist.
orbisvicis 3y ago
Recently, play store images don't load (about 60% - 80% missing per app) in Firefox.
- zelphirkalt 3y ago
  It is fascinating, how the simplest things on websites can be made arbitrarily involved, convoluted, over-complicated. And how those over-complications can then serve as a credible deniability.
whalesalad 3y ago
bigquery console in ffx has like +120 latency potion
taylodl 3y ago
It's clear Google is only testing for chrome engine and safari: which comprise 97% of the browsers being used. Would you increase your testing by 50% to thoroughly test for 3% of the market?
- beej71 3y ago
  _I_ would in their shoes because I'm not just in it for the money and I care about the craft. But clearly I am not them. :-) Mathematically it doesn't make sense for Google. It might make sense from an anti-trust perspective...
  - taylodl 3y ago
    It's hard to argue anti-trust when all these browsers are based on Chromium - which is maintained in part by Google, Microsoft, Opera, Vivaldi, Intel, ARM, and Canonical plus several volunteers.
    - Kwpolska 3y ago
      Google is the largest contributor. The others chose Chromium because making a browser that's compatible with all the bloated standards invented by Google would require too much effort.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
      > hard to argue anti-trust Makes me wonder if it's the wrong strategy and what an alternative might be. In context, one might assume that Google will use the Chromium monoculture to... ahem more assertively deliver advertisements, which would be "a real dick move" as it goes. I don't know how a concerned citizen might bring attention to or possibly prevent the actualization of such a strategy by Google.
- hotnfresh 3y ago
  In most companies, when 3% represents an in-fact huge number because you have a very successful product, you absolutely do test for that 3%. It’s tiny companies that may ignore 3% as too expensive to worry about.
MSFT_Edging 3y ago
A few weeks ago I posted on here about the maps lag, and it literally felt like it was fixed after the comment got some attention. There's 100% targeted de-optimization for firefox users and the burden of finding it is on the users it seems.
- gbraad 3y ago
  i believe for anything non-Chrome? Even Vivaldi has issues with some Google products.
- Pathogen-David 3y ago
  Not to diminish the other sketchy stuff Google's doing, but I think the maps lag issue might actually be Firefox's fault. Whenever it happens to me WebGL stops working across all websites and restarting the entire browser fixes it. It's almost like when Firefox has been open a long time it just forgets how to use graphics acceleration.
  - MSFT_Edging 3y ago
    The thing that bothered me is it didn't always happen, at one point there was performance parity, and things changed in a way that specifically worked worse in firefox. Which means: A) Firefox had bad webgl implementations(I didn't experience what you did, but I wont say it doesn't happen) and google added features that regressed the experience on other browsers. B) Google knowingly made performance worse on Firefox, regardless of webgl implementations. C) Google leverages its own browser to only test on their browser, to influence the market to have to use googles browser in order to use their services(not the same as the IE/Windows monopoly lawsuit, but sure smells like it).
hospitalJail 3y ago
Spotify web doesnt work good on Firefox. Need to call out them. I'm basically forced to use Chromium on Linux.
waveBidder 3y ago
dupe?
spicykraken 3y ago
I use Firefox across Windows, Mac, OpenBSD, and Ubuntu. I've not seen any specific issues with Google sites at all. I only really use Docs, Maps, and Youtube with any regularity but I've not really seen any of these issues.
- trinsic2 3y ago
  Yea, I also haven't noticed any speed issues, but I do use noscript exclusively on Firefox.
ikidd 3y ago
I had the same Gmaps issue, I disabled LocalCDN for the site and panning etc worked again. Apparently the addon must be fixed to account for whatever they were doing.
shadowgovt 3y ago
You're basically looking at testing being done on Chrome (because it is Google's, and because of its large market share), Safari (because it runs on a large percentage of completely exclusive platforms where the customer can't switch, and because of its large market share), and Edge (because there are still many corporations that do "Nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft" and lock down browser options to just Microsoft's offering). At this point, Firefox is very much an also-ran on two axes: market share is tiny and nobody forces it on their captive audiences. We may as well ask why Google isn't optimizing testing on Opera, or Samsung Internet. (There is also the issue of under-the-hood engine. Since so many browsers have converged on a few core and JS stacks, testing on one exemplar of that stack has a tendency to suss out bugs in the other stacks. Firefox still being its own special snowflake in terms of JS engine and core means it has more opportunities to be different, for good or for ill. So there's a force-multiplier testing the other browsers that one lacks testing Firefox).

by foob 3y ago

joelanman 3y ago

Gmail has recently become extremely slow for me in Safari on a well specced M1 max

ryukoposting 3y ago
Same here on Firefox, for both my laptop running Windows 11 on Alder Lake, and my desktop running Ubuntu on Zen 2.

1980phipsi 3y ago

Using Google sites with a VPN on Firefox has been really annoying for the past couple of months as well.

vmfunction 3y ago

These sounds like classic MS behaviour. It is kind of thing that ought to addressed in anti-trust case.

giancarlostoro 3y ago
I've posted this here on HN numerous times over the years, and it's been a while since I last posted it: Google is the new "Microsoft", they embrace, they extend, then extinguish. Look at their email offering, messaging offerings, they built on top of XMPP, then they pulled the plug eventually. Android is Linux based, but insanely proprietary, the app store is not open by any means, you're fully at their whims to get your apps on there. Chrome is basically the IE of old, implementing proprietary things or APIs that are not yet standard for Google products, and pushing out competing browsers.
- f4c39012 3y ago
  don't forget the old Microsoft is still here. We have two Microsofts now!
  - da_chicken 3y ago
    The old, old Microsoft is still here, too. IBM is still there, a dinosaur in the mist.

orbisvicis 3y ago

Recently, play store images don't load (about 60% - 80% missing per app) in Firefox.

zelphirkalt 3y ago
It is fascinating, how the simplest things on websites can be made arbitrarily involved, convoluted, over-complicated. And how those over-complications can then serve as a credible deniability.

whalesalad 3y ago

bigquery console in ffx has like +120 latency potion

taylodl 3y ago

It's clear Google is only testing for chrome engine and safari: which comprise 97% of the browsers being used. Would you increase your testing by 50% to thoroughly test for 3% of the market?

beej71 3y ago
_I_ would in their shoes because I'm not just in it for the money and I care about the craft. But clearly I am not them. :-) Mathematically it doesn't make sense for Google. It might make sense from an anti-trust perspective...
- taylodl 3y ago
  It's hard to argue anti-trust when all these browsers are based on Chromium - which is maintained in part by Google, Microsoft, Opera, Vivaldi, Intel, ARM, and Canonical plus several volunteers.
  - Kwpolska 3y ago
    Google is the largest contributor. The others chose Chromium because making a browser that's compatible with all the bloated standards invented by Google would require too much effort.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
    > hard to argue anti-trust Makes me wonder if it's the wrong strategy and what an alternative might be. In context, one might assume that Google will use the Chromium monoculture to... ahem more assertively deliver advertisements, which would be "a real dick move" as it goes. I don't know how a concerned citizen might bring attention to or possibly prevent the actualization of such a strategy by Google.
hotnfresh 3y ago
In most companies, when 3% represents an in-fact huge number because you have a very successful product, you absolutely do test for that 3%. It’s tiny companies that may ignore 3% as too expensive to worry about.

MSFT_Edging 3y ago

A few weeks ago I posted on here about the maps lag, and it literally felt like it was fixed after the comment got some attention. There's 100% targeted de-optimization for firefox users and the burden of finding it is on the users it seems.

gbraad 3y ago
i believe for anything non-Chrome? Even Vivaldi has issues with some Google products.
Pathogen-David 3y ago
Not to diminish the other sketchy stuff Google's doing, but I think the maps lag issue might actually be Firefox's fault. Whenever it happens to me WebGL stops working across all websites and restarting the entire browser fixes it. It's almost like when Firefox has been open a long time it just forgets how to use graphics acceleration.
- MSFT_Edging 3y ago
  The thing that bothered me is it didn't always happen, at one point there was performance parity, and things changed in a way that specifically worked worse in firefox. Which means: A) Firefox had bad webgl implementations(I didn't experience what you did, but I wont say it doesn't happen) and google added features that regressed the experience on other browsers. B) Google knowingly made performance worse on Firefox, regardless of webgl implementations. C) Google leverages its own browser to only test on their browser, to influence the market to have to use googles browser in order to use their services(not the same as the IE/Windows monopoly lawsuit, but sure smells like it).

hospitalJail 3y ago

Spotify web doesnt work good on Firefox. Need to call out them. I'm basically forced to use Chromium on Linux.

waveBidder 3y ago

dupe?

spicykraken 3y ago

I use Firefox across Windows, Mac, OpenBSD, and Ubuntu. I've not seen any specific issues with Google sites at all. I only really use Docs, Maps, and Youtube with any regularity but I've not really seen any of these issues.

trinsic2 3y ago
Yea, I also haven't noticed any speed issues, but I do use noscript exclusively on Firefox.

ikidd 3y ago

I had the same Gmaps issue, I disabled LocalCDN for the site and panning etc worked again. Apparently the addon must be fixed to account for whatever they were doing.

shadowgovt 3y ago

You're basically looking at testing being done on Chrome (because it is Google's, and because of its large market share), Safari (because it runs on a large percentage of completely exclusive platforms where the customer can't switch, and because of its large market share), and Edge (because there are still many corporations that do "Nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft" and lock down browser options to just Microsoft's offering). At this point, Firefox is very much an also-ran on two axes: market share is tiny and nobody forces it on their captive audiences. We may as well ask why Google isn't optimizing testing on Opera, or Samsung Internet. (There is also the issue of under-the-hood engine. Since so many browsers have converged on a few core and JS stacks, testing on one exemplar of that stack has a tendency to suss out bugs in the other stacks. Firefox still being its own special snowflake in terms of JS engine and core means it has more opportunities to be different, for good or for ill. So there's a force-multiplier testing the other browsers that one lacks testing Firefox).