26 ms·

Choose the browser that best suits your privacy needs

• wkat4242 3y ago
  Firefox is an amazing browser. Especially since they finally fixed Webauthn on Linux a couple months ago, so I can log in with my yubikeys in passwordless mode. It was the last thing I still used chrome for sometimes.
• meatjuice 3y ago
  I really hope uBo for Safari would get some love thanks to chrome banning
• 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
  ublock origin and not ublock. there is a very important distinction. please fix this
  • hosteur 3y ago
    Agree. This is important! Hope someone will fix the title.
  • Alifatisk 3y ago
    What’s the digference?
    • erinnh 3y ago
      It’s the original project that the original developer gave to somebody else, but then decided to continue working on the project anyway under the „Origin“ moniker. At some point ublock was sold and to quote Wikipedia: „since February 2019, uBlock began allowing users to participate in "Acceptable Ads",[21][22] a program run by Adblock Plus that allows some ads which are deemed "acceptable", and for which the larger publishers pay a fee.“
    • AraceliHarker 3y ago
      Originally, Raymond Hill developed uBlock, but he gave it away because it was too much work. However, the new owner of uBlock turned it into a spamware, so Hill forked uBlock and created uBlock Origin, which is still under development today.
• ekianjo 3y ago
  Isnt Firefox trying to copy EXACTLY what Chrome is doing with extensions?
  • wodenokoto 3y ago
    Yes, except for the parts that stops adblockers.
  • Svip 3y ago
    Firefox is also supporting Manifest V3, like Chrome, but Firefox is not removing support for Manifest V2, unlike Chrome.
    • ekianjo 3y ago
      How long is that going to last?
  • pythux 3y ago
    No, there are some meaningful differences in the Manifest v3 implementation in Firefox: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/05/18/manifest-v3-in-firefox-recap-next-steps/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/05/18/manifest-v3-in-fi... One such difference (and not the least) is: > Mozilla will maintain support for blocking WebRequest in MV3. To maximize compatibility with other browsers, we will also ship support for declarativeNetRequest.
  • INTPenis 3y ago
    Can you elaborate? Firefox had extensions before Chrome existed. Firefox has always been the most versatile and secure way to browse the web. The only reason Chrome is even in the discussion is because Google abused its monopoly to push it on people. And yes a lot of people will say it's faster, all that speed lead you straight into the claws of Google doing whatever they want with you.
    • rfoo 3y ago
      > Firefox has always been the most versatile and secure way to browse the web. Currently, a Chrome full-chain is notably harder than a Firefox full-chain, with the former being at "state actor ITW" level, and the latter being at "your friends started a never-heard of consultancy and they decided to do the classical trick - pwning Firefox at Pwn2Own" level.
• jpdus 3y ago
  Don't switch to FF if you're a heavy user. I am on Firefox as my main browser for web and mobile since 4 years. I am just in the process of switching back to Chrome, as Firefox got continuously worse over time. Can't handle lots of tabs, crashes/freezes randomly, weird UI bugs... It's just very disappointing :/.
  • sabellito 3y ago
    I don't have this experience at all, not even close.
  • HenryBemis 3y ago
    I am sorry to see you have a bad experience with FF. It must be you and only you. I am sure that in your BAU you enjoy being tracked for everything you do, every page you see, etc. etc. I've been using FF since 2005 and I cannot remember when was the last time it crashed. Perhaps it did in 2008 (I remember having problems and FF crashing - and I was living in 'that flat' at the time. But no probs since.
    • vandahm 3y ago
      I've had a similar experience. I've been using Firefox since it was Phoenix and I can count on my fingers the times when the browser actually crashed.
  • fredoliveira 3y ago
    Could this be your particular profile acting up? My experience is that it is pretty stable across multiple machines, multiple OSses and for many many years.
  • dageshi 3y ago
    Works just fine for me.
    • b112 3y ago
      Probably referring to firefox on android. There way they rewrote it, and put an alpha version in the hands of end users was pathetic. It was a long time before it even had extensions again, it was horribly unstable, it lacked functionality, and it still does. You really couldn't work harder at torpedoing a product, than do what Mozilla did with Firefox on Android. I've often wondered if Google offered the team in charge a hire away, and massive pay raises to do this, because what else would allow for such incompetence? Something is horribly broken at Mozilla.
• b800h 3y ago
  Don't Google give Mozilla lots of money? Presumably at some point they will just stipulate that blocking WebRequest be made unsupported? I mean, speaking as a Firefox user who never switched in the first place.
  • robin_reala 3y ago
    Google give money to Mozilla primarily as a hedge against monopoly status. Forcing anticompetitive requirements into the bargain defeats that purpose.
    • b800h 3y ago
      Fair point.
  • rpigab 3y ago
    It's just a web browser, not your wife. Why not just use Firefox until that hypothetical point comes, then switch to another if there still exists one? Of course, there are ways to continue after end of support, you can stay on the same version and stop updating, which is unconvenient in some websites and might block some, but if many people do it, then websites won't be able to safely rely on the features being available on their users browsers. You can also fork it or use a fork someone made, but browser dev is a lot of work (in the engine mostly) and disagreements.
• deusex_ 3y ago
  Edge is easy to switch to and could be a great way to break the Chrome dominance. Safari also started catching up over the last 2 years
  • clouddrover 3y ago
    Edge is based on Chromium. You're better off with Firefox.
  • kyriakos 3y ago
    Is there any evidence that edge won't switch to manifest v3? As far as I understand Edge merges in Chrome updates.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • fHr 3y ago
    Safari oh my lord
  • Garvi 3y ago
    I would not recommend Safari as I have completely stopped supporting it many years ago due to Apples hostile approach towards developers and the fact it's broken beyond internet explorer levels and has been in this sorry state for at least a decade. I don't know if people still using it have some special use cases or just don't know you can install another browser.
    • Klonoar 3y ago
      Oh for crying out loud, no, it is not broken "beyond internet explorer levels".
  • nicman23 3y ago
    are you high?
• bilekas 3y ago
  I love Firefox, but for some reason I can't pull away from Brave at the moment for my daily driver. Time will tell how long they can hold out against the changes that will eventually filter into chromium. I see the future of adblocking etc being put back to the network side, things like piHole should get a 'new' lease of life.
  • cik 3y ago
    I do both. I block at the network level with pihole, and then engage in in-browser blocking. Sadly, the combination is necessary.
    • HenryBemis 3y ago
      I always suggest (not affiliated in any way - just been using their HOSTS for sooooo many years) the "https://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ https://someonewhocares.org/hosts/" for my HOSTS file.
      • bilekas 3y ago
        While I would always advise against copy pasting from the web to your win host file, this actually looks like a really nice list to block.
  • jackjeff 3y ago
    > things like piHole should get a 'new' lease of life. You could never implement what ublock origin does with simple DNS blocking. The way ublock origin works is by going after cross domain requests. But I imagine an HTTP proxy of some kind could do it. You’d get slightly higher latency (because you’d have to parse the HTML doc twice) But installing a chrome extension is piece of cake. Setting up a “pi hole” or proxy will never be as easy. So if even a few percent of users don’t bother, then Google makes more money selling ads. $$ That’s all that matters really. We’re taking about a company that stopped innovating and releasing new products eons ago. They’re just milking what they have until it dies.
    • 3y ago
• roydivision 3y ago
  Mozilla get a lot of funding directly from Google for making Google the default search site [0]. Seems to me that this may be a problem going forward if Mozilla continue to allow ad blockers in Firefox. [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-google-keeps-paying-mozilla-s-firefox-even-as-chrome-dominates https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-go...
  • HenryBemis 3y ago
    The curse of the default tells us that this will never be a problem. Do you honestly believe that 99% of the Android Firefox users spend time to change the settings on the browser? (change to DDG, block all 3rd party cookies, etc.) I did a quick search on DDG but no meaningful results came up with search engine for firefox on android. Gut feeling tells me 'minimal'. People do like their google remembering stuff. Convenience is the enemy of security (privacy in this case).
    • jraph 3y ago
      To be an Android Firefox user, you already went to the trouble of installing an alternative browser on Android. The motivations to switch browsers might as well be the same as those which will push you to switch search engines. I would totally expect a reasonable number of Android Firefox users, of all apps, to change at least the search engine. (I'm with you on the general case)
      • zo1 3y ago
        Chrome is embedded in Android way more than people realize. It's at a level of what IE was with windows, probably way worse too depending on how you look at it.
    • MrStonedOne 3y ago
      I think you might be missing their concern. The concern is that google basically funds firefox, and can choose to revoke that funding at the most inconvenient time for mozilla, risking bankruptcy. Companies ebb and flow on cash flow, and a unexpected drop at the exact wrong moment can cripple even the most well funded ones. Or just threaten to do so to exert pressure.
• self_awareness 3y ago
  Firefox looks ugly, I really can't accept it. The only way of it looking less ugly is to do some unofficial tweaks which break from version to version. I was a Firefox user for years until they've changed the UI, and now I can't go back because of how it LOOKS. Also, the Mozilla ideology. Why can't the browser be just a piece of software and that's it? I just use Vivaldi. Edit: I can sense that Firefox zealotry is strong in this topic. People who downvote: you don't accept that someone has a different aesthetics than you, or what's the reason? That just reinforces my choice to stay away, people who Mozilla attracts are not really on the same wavelength as me I guess.
  • MattPalmer1086 3y ago
    Funny, I use Firefox and think Chrome looks a bit uglier. A lot is simply what you're used to. Don't let your initial aesthetic reaction dictate your browser choice. It's really not ugly; just a tiny bit different.
    • calmoo 3y ago
      Same here, I much prefer the Firefox UI. Chrome feels somehow dated to me.
    • ranguna 3y ago
      Same. Specially the developer tools. I don't know how people can work with chrome's developer tools when Firefox's looks waaaaay better.
    • self_awareness 3y ago
      > Don't let your initial aesthetic reaction dictate your browser choice. Why? Also "initial reaction"? You mean, "fake it till you make it"? For others this may be a nitpick, for me it's a barrier I'm not able to cross.
      • MattPalmer1086 3y ago
        I guess because it seems a trivial reason to dismiss what could otherwise be a good bit of tech. Of course, if it really bugs you after using it for a while, then that's fine. I just think most software takes a bit of getting used to.
• HenryBemis 3y ago
  (semi-sarcastic post ensues:) Folks.. come on.. some of us have invested in Google stock (ok.. it's not much, but it is what it is). And for the Google stock to go up people have to use Android without a firewall, Chrome browser in all their devices, Gmail, and so on.. so they be tracked, their data to be harvested and sold x10000 so that the ad machine makes billions and the stock price goes up. I decided to STOP pestering my friends on switching to Signal, Firefox, etc. and instead I just bought stocks of Google, Meta, Microsoft, etc.. Since people don't want to protect their own privacy and the one of their children, and I cannot help them.. well then I can help myself. I will 'forever' use FF and suggest it ONCE to friends and family, and then move on with my life (on the 'consulting friends & family on privacy focused solutions). EDIT: Unfortunately I am not joking on the above.. it made me throw up a bit in my mouth the first time I sat down and bought Google and Meta stock (I was a mutual funds guy until then). I use "dollar cost averaging" so I buy a little, but very often (monthly). I got tired of debating with people on why THEIR privacy is CRITICAL for them and their children. Insurance companies will screw them in the future, Pedophiles are monitoring their instagram, Google (and everyone they sell the data to) knowing where they keep and spend their money, Google knowing who they email and what/when/why/etc. It is insane what type and how much data 'we' are freely giving away, only to bite us in the a$$. For me the cost-benefit of convenience vs what-will-come is very much against us.
  • jraph 3y ago
    Don't you aspire to do the right things, or at least to avoid doing the wrong things? I don't understand what drives you. You were pestering your friends to switch to Signal and Firefox for privacy reasons and then you bought GAFAM stock? Aren't you actively going against your ideals by doing this? Also, what a mix up! You managed to mention pedophiles in your comment?! Your reasoning is very hard to follow. You mention being semi-sarcastic and then you write "Unfortunately I am not joking on the above". What a mess. You really need to clear up your writing if you want to be understood. And that "Unfortunately": you have leverage on what you do, you know? If you find what you do "unfortunate", change something! We can't do it for you.
    • HenryBemis 3y ago
• dale_glass 3y ago
  Unfortunately, Firefox isn't quite keeping up. One issue is that for me at least, Firefox crashes too often, and when it does, the entire browser goes away, not just the tab. That's annoying. Another issue is that something seems to be lacking performance-wise. I messed around a bit with Invoke AI, and the canvas is painfully slow even on modern, high end hardware. I thought it was just the code sucked. Nope, it's silky smooth in Chromium.
  • calmoo 3y ago
    YMMV. Firefox hasn’t crashed in years for me.
    • OvbiousError 3y ago
      Same. I vaguely remember a time where this happened from time to time, but that is years and years ago.
  • dkarras 3y ago
    interesting. I can't remember a time where a browser crashed on me during the last 15 years or so. and I do heavy dev work with them, and also browse with tens of open tabs multiple hours pretty much every day.
  • erklik 3y ago
    I use Firefox daily as my default, have roughly about 250 tabs open at this stage. I've not closed my browser in the last 6 or 7 months.. It's not crashed yet. Is it possible that it's some specific website your visiting?
    • abhinavk 3y ago
      Is your browser or system unpatched since then?
      • erklik 3y ago
        .... Let's not talk about that ;) But yes.
• beebmam 3y ago
  I'm happy with my Lynx/w3m browsers.
• JonathanBeuys 3y ago
  My problem with Firefox is that a new Firefox windows can only be launched from the same environment (or only from a child process?) from which the first window has been started. Even the same user who started FF cannot launch a new window from a new shell. That constantly interferes with my workflow. Example: Say firefox has been started from the Destop already and now I want to start a new Firefox window from a root terminal: su desktopuser firefox It does not work. It gives me "Firefox is already running, but is not responding.".
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • gerwim 3y ago
    If you create a new profile for the different user, you can start a second session: firefox -new-instance -P "Another Profile"
    • JonathanBeuys 3y ago
      I don't have (nor want) multiple users. I just want to open a new window for my one user.
      • TheCapeGreek 3y ago
        So what's wrong with Super+N? I'm struggling to see the need for a completely new browser instance when you only want another window.
        • JonathanBeuys 3y ago
          https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38429815 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38429815
          • iinnPP 3y ago
            Can you do it in an alternate version such as the developers edition?
• mgaunard 3y ago
  I won't use Firefox due to the way Mozilla is wasting its money and mismanaging its projects.
  • OsrsNeedsf2P 3y ago
    So you'd rather watch ads? Seems like a weird take.
  • ranguna 3y ago
    Sure it's pretty bad, but the chrome team isn't any better mandating manifest v3, experimenting with cohorts, etc.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • kome 3y ago
    weird take on so many levels. as if google is any better.
• ochronus 3y ago
  I would, if Mozilla focused on features users want :)
  • elaus 3y ago
    If I may ask: What features are you missing that prevent you from switching?
    • ochronus 3y ago
      See above :)
  • 8organicbits 3y ago
    What's your wishlist? Browsers feel pretty complete to me in that I can open all the websites I want to open, and atleast with FF I can easily block ads.
    • ochronus 3y ago
      Two things stand out: 1. native vertical tabs 2. native tab groups Yes, I know there are extensions for these things, but I, personally, find them horrible.
      • nicman23 3y ago
        > native tab groups that addon is semi official
        • ochronus 3y ago
          which one?
          • ranguna 3y ago
            Multi account containers is a extension developed by mozzila.
• seanthemon 3y ago
  Highly recommend brave (with all the crypto nonsense shut off), it's a pretty fast browser, nice features and works with chrome extensions. I've used it successfully for the past 3 or something years
  • gardenhedge 3y ago
    When I tried Brave, it blocked website ads but gave me browser ad popups on the top right. No thanks. Stick to Firefox.
    • yulaow 3y ago
      you can deactivate them. In my installation on linux they were disabled by default and it asked me if I wanted to activate them (just one time) to support the browser
    • silisili 3y ago
      Brave Rewards, which is what you are complaining about, is opt in.
      • wccrawford 3y ago
        They saw it by default, which means it's "opt out".
        • silisili 3y ago
          It isn't. It asks you on install if you want to enroll.
          • gardenhedge 3y ago
            Then I got tricked. I wasn't expecting ads in the format they came in.
    • subtra3t 3y ago
      I feel like this comment was made in bad faith. Brave Rewards, the thing you're complaining about, is OPT-IN. That means you had to manually enable it in Brave's settings. You're complaining about something you consciously enabled.
• rrreese 3y ago
  I tried moving to Firefox a year ago but found that the lack of Tab Groups really killed me. There are several extensions that try to emulate this behaviour, but I didn't find that they worked particularly well. And then there are the security concerns. I guess when Chrome break uBlock Origin next year I'll give Edge a go, or one of the various chromium builds
  • ranguna 3y ago
    Give it another go. Mozilla's own extension called multi account containers is pretty good and it has more features than just grouping tabs together. And there's also the panorama view extension, which looks really nice and I've seen people use it extensively.
    • pcthrowaway 3y ago
      Does it allow "saving" tab groups and having them sync with what you've actually put in them? Last I checked this was still an experimental feature in Chrome (it might be auto-available now), but it's a killer feature for me (it auto-syncs with whatever you add to or remove to the tab group also). Mozilla providing the same would be required for me to make the switch altogether (though I happily use it for some things already)
      • ranguna 3y ago
        Yep, the extension support syncing your groups across devices. You'll need a Mozilla account for this. I'm not sure this is the case for panorama view. https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2020/02/06/multi-account-containers-sync/ https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2020/02/06/multi-account-c...
  • bratwurst3000 3y ago
    What is the security concern of Firefox over chromium?
    • rrreese 3y ago
• theclansman 3y ago
  Honestly I've been using Firefox for more than 10 years and never felt the need to switch. Every time I try a new browser there's features from Firefox that I end up missing. And seeing the shitshow with the ad blockers in Chrome there's no way I'm trying that lol.
• nomilk 3y ago
  FWIW I got annoyed with chrome's distracting home screen, and pondered how long it would take for a 10+ year chrome user to switch to firefox. The answer (on macOS) was 5 minutes. I was shocked how easy it was (and, frankly, how similar it was). When you first open firefox, it gives options to import all your chrome settings (including saved passwords etc). Super cool.
  • frameset 3y ago
    It's amusing to me how similar this comment is to the ones I heard in the mid to late 2000s from Internet Explorer users expressing surprise at just how easy to was to switch. :) plus ça change!
  • mariusmg 3y ago
    Yeah, you're switching browsers not 3D modelling software. It's easy people. Switch to Firefox today.
    • insanitybit 3y ago
      I don't use 3D modeling software, but I use a browser for like... 95% of my day. Any minor UX differences are going to be like nails on a chalkboard, given that. It's no wonder why people don't want to switch, really.
      • adrianN 3y ago
        I use a browser a lot too, but I almost never interact with Firefox UX. Firefox just displays a website and I interact with that.
      • fyokdrigd 3y ago
        yet huge ux changes between chrome updates are fine? *ponderingfaceemoji
        • theGeatZhopa 3y ago
          It's also happening with Firefox. Stupid redesign, felt, each new version. It's not about the design.. but it is, because less readability, less contrast, less visible difference between active/inactive tabs.. and so on.. but you're right. Changing browser is a no-go, but having suddenly different UI is not???? Lol.
• Santosh83 3y ago
  My Firefox says its DNS-over-HTTPS provider (default Cloudflare) can't find this domain. I wonder why?
• PikachuEXE 3y ago
  For those who can't switch away from Chrome extensions yet I recommend trying Vivaldi Made by Opera browser Founder https://vivaldi.com https://vivaldi.com
  • degosuke 3y ago
    But if vivaldi is based on chromium doesn't that mean that the same Chrome problems will apply?
    • self_awareness 3y ago
      In theory the answer is no, but in practice nobody really knows that, even Vivaldi devs. For example, Manifest V3: https://vivaldi.com/blog/manifest-v3-webrequest-and-ad-blockers/ https://vivaldi.com/blog/manifest-v3-webrequest-and-ad-block... > Will the Vivaldi Ad Blocker be affected by the Manifest V3 changes? I made some architectural choices early on that I believe should keep it functional, regardless of the Manifest V3 changes. Of course, there is always a possibility that the underlying Chromium architecture will change now or in the future, forcing us to do some extra work to keep this working.
• bad_user 3y ago
  I keep seeing Edge mentioned as a worthy alternative, and I just don't get it. First, all Chromium-based browsers will eventually block uBlock Origin for the sole reason that they can't maintain Manifest v2 on their own, and they all rely on Chrome's Web Store anyway. This won't happen immediately because Manifest v2 will probably stick around for longer because of enterprise users, but the writing is on the wall. Then there's the fact that Edge is just Microsoft's spyware, being worse in my book than Google's Chrome. And people forget that Microsoft is also an advertising company. Even if that's not their main revenue source, they also hate your ad-blockers. In the EU, when you open Edge for the first time, they ask you to agree to sharing your personal data with the entire advertising industry, via an IAB dialog. And there's no way to workaround it, you have to answer it (with the rejection being an agreement to “legitimate interest” claims, which are BS). Google's Chrome does not do this, and searching on google.com only asks for sharing of data with Google itself. Edge also exposes an advertising ID, meant for Bing's Ads, much like what Chrome does for Google. And in true Microsoft spirit, it also has telemetry, which you can't turn off. Edge doesn't end-to-end encrypt your synchronized data. Compared with Chrome, which at least supports an “encryption passphrase” that does e2e encryption. Don't get me wrong, Chrome is also cursed because with a passphrase, they don't synchronize all your history. And also, they keep turning on that option for sharing your browsing history with Google, for the purpose of improving search. But in terms of what browser is more adversarial towards users, Edge is worse, IMO. And Edge is hard-coded to use Bing. It's harder to use Edge without Bing or Microsoft's online services, than it is to use Chrome without Google. Personally, I don't want my browser to tie me to certain online services. Seriously, Edge is just Microsoft's spyware and a piece of crap. Other Chromium alternatives, like Vivaldi or Brave, are better, firstly because they aren't so adversarial. Or if you're on macOS, give Arc a try.
  • subtra3t 3y ago
    I use Vivaldi (and firefox before that) but a reason to use Edge is because it's supposedly very resource-efficient.
    • bad_user 3y ago
      It's the same Chromium, it can't be more resource-efficient. It did have some tricks, but “energy saver” and “memory saver” modes have been added to Chromium.
• kachurovskiy 3y ago
  I've switched from Chrome to Firefox couple years ago. Very happy with ad blocking. The few problem are: PayPal asks for an SMS code way too often, some PayPal checkout flows don't work and occasionally some website form isn't functional because they didn't test in Firefox - for those cases I just open Chrome.
  • lopis 3y ago
    Cloudflare also loves to bully Firefox users with incessant captchas.
• arunharidas 3y ago
  My main issue with Firefox is the unavailability of a decent profile switching. I know there's some hacky way to get the profile system done, but it is not comparable with Chrome's current profile-switching
  • sergiosgc 3y ago
    Won't container tabs fit your use case?
    • jacklbk 3y ago
      Not the same thing. I want them to be completely separate, just like Chrome profile.
• bratwurst3000 3y ago
  Some interesting data point in the discussion is in the unlock origin wiki article. „ As of January 2021, the uBlock Origin Chrome extension had over 10 million active users and the Firefox version had 5 million active users „ There are 5-10 times more chrome users then Firefox . Chrome users are for some reasons using less ublock then Firefox users.
• masfoobar 3y ago
  I have been a happy Firefox user for 15 years... maybe more. I have seen people use and complain Internet Explorer in my younger days, from version 6 to 7, etc. Even though I mention Firefox to them, they stay with IE. What amazes me is how quick they transitioned to Google Chrome when it released. This was around 2009. It amazes me how quick people jump to something especially when it has a big company behind advertising it. I see this a lot in my career as well (software engineer) - when some cool, flashy new toy comes backed by companies like Microsoft, Google, Sun/Oracle. etc. Anyway.. I only recently found out there was a thing called hardened firefox. There is me thinking "Oh! This might be worth a look" - and it is basically firefox with private settings enabled, etc, in the config section. (which is what I have been doing for years. lol) I just don't understand why people would use Chrome. Most people, I guess, just dont care about their privacy. However, even if you use something else, I would not be surprised in modern Windows listens in on your microphone "for advertising" purposes. I might not be able to eliminate privacy issues, but if I can reduce the best I can, I will. Back to browsers - I hear good things about Brave. Not used it, though. Happy with FF.
  • pharmakom 3y ago
    Some things (e.g. Slack calls) will not work in Firefox. It’s pretty annoying. Personally I still use Firefox.
    • prox 3y ago
      But if Slack developers would use Firefox, they could support it? Chicken/egg problem?
    • dimask 3y ago
      If we are talking about a paid service (like slack), not supporting firefox imo means it is a bad product. A service for which one pays for should not force them use a specific browser. This is essentially an argument of not using slack, not firefox.
      • maccard 3y ago
• lemper 3y ago
  gentle reminder that chrome people are doing "web environment integrity" bullshit. use firefox or any non-chrome based browser if you like the open and free web.
• ecmascript 3y ago
  I use Librewolf (https://librewolf.net https://librewolf.net) which is a fork of firefox and truly privacy oriented.
• jillesvangurp 3y ago
  Use whatever makes you happy. But it's worth pointing out that Chrome and Chromium are developed by Google. The whole point of using Chromium as a browser developer (Brave, Edge, Opera, ...) is to have Google own and take care of all the difficult bits, drive the technical roadmap, and decide on what is and isn't going to be in the next version. So, you don't gain much by switching to those as the teams behind those Chromium based alternatives don't actually develop most of the browser and you are not really cutting loose from Google. Brave does a little more than others but still. Sticking with Chrome/Chromium is a bit of a form of Stockholm syndrome. People keep convincing themselves it isn't that bad and that the ads are fine and not that intrusive and that Google means well. Etc. Firefox is technically independent; not financially. It and Safari are the only non Chromium based browsers left in addition to a small number of early stage attempts to implement a browser that don't look like they are going to be a credible alternative any time soon. Google is paying both Apple and Mozilla to be the default search engine in their browser. And unlike Mozilla, Apple isn't exactly dependent on charity and also getting a lot more from Google than Mozilla because they have hundreds of millions of iphone users. Browser real estate is valuable; especially on mobile. But we live in a weird world where we are dependent on a single company financing the development of essentially all browsers that are commonly used through advertising. I don't think it's particularly healthy and especially the Apple deal smells like a classic anti competitive move that ought to trigger some legal action. It would be nice to see the search and browser markets open up a bit. Especially on mobile. Especially on IOS where Apple enforces a Safari monopoly. Every other browser has to use the Safari rendering engine.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • thejohnconway 3y ago
    > It would be nice to see the search and browser markets open up a bit. Especially on mobile. Especially on IOS where Apple enforces a Safari monopoly. Every other browser has to use the Safari rendering engine. Do that and Chrome becomes the monopoly everywhere. Not that I’m in favour of the way Apple does things on mobile, but break the Chrome monopoly elsewhere first, then go after Safari.
• malakai521 3y ago
  How is Internet Explorer mainstream browser? It has finally died and can't even be used anymore on Windows (unless you're running some old version with updates turned off)
• joshlk 3y ago
  What’s the website support of Firefox like? I tried switching to Safari last year and a small minority of websites didn’t work as expected. Even though it was small, it was a big enough problem that I switched back to Chrome.
  • nicbou 3y ago
    Everything works. In some cases you have to disable the strictest security level, a bit like disabling your ad blocker. Even that is very rare. I do the remember encountering actual problems that would affect my experience.
  • moonleay 3y ago
    Good. Personally, I haven’t encountered any big issues with FF yet, just the occasional bug in the web version of ms teams.
• majani 3y ago
  Honestly, in Google's eyes, nothing of value will be lost here. And Firefox gaining some market share will help get regulators off their back, so it's a win-win
• exxos 3y ago
  There are many other good Chromium-based web browsers. Arc, Brave, Opera, Vivaldi...
  • hackideiomat 3y ago
    But they are still based on chromium lol
• prima-facie 3y ago
  I've found two major roadblocks when switching browsers: 1. Migrating your passwords, 2. Migrating the bookmarks. If you use an external password manager (Bitwarden, 1Password, even KeePassXC) and an external bookmark manager (Raindrop is excellent, Pocket is barely usable) then switching browsers becomes very easy – to the point where you could switch to a new one every month if you wanted. The browser is no longer a place where you store your stuff, it just becomes a UI to browse the internet.
  • miclill 3y ago
    https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/import-data-another-browser https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/import-data-another-bro...
  • Dah00n 3y ago
    I don't understand this at all. Both password and bookmark import have worked flawlessly in Firefox for, well, as long as Firefox have been named Firefox as far as I can remember.
• YuccaGloriosa 3y ago
  Is it weird that Google should go to all the effort to advertise Chrome as much as they do? I'm thinking of the las Vegas grand Prix, and the sphere lit up like a big chrome ball
• Gareth321 3y ago
  Sadly Firefox doesn’t translate most languages like Danish in the iOS app. They have chosen not to add that feature for some reason. It rules out Firefox for me because I want bookmark and history syncing between mobile and PC. A LOT of people are waiting for better language support on iOS.
  • prox 3y ago
    Since it is open source, couldn’t it be added by a dedicated developer?
  • Dah00n 3y ago
    Maybe because all browsers in iOS are Safari with a skin? Apple doesn't allow other browsers. I guess it is too much work for Mozilla to make all features available.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• romanovcode 3y ago
  I use Safari with AdGuard and everything works perfectly fine. I like "hide my email" feature so much from iCloud that this is a dealbreaker now. As well as obvious password sharing with the iPhone.
• utybo 3y ago
  Please, Firefox, for the love of everything, add a good, easy, natively integrated, one-click-to-enable vertical tab list like Edge's. That's the only thing keeping me on Microsoft Edge and it's a dealbreaker for me. The extensions that add ones are just not as good.
  • GreenWatermelon 3y ago
    Vertical tabs are The Reason why I stick to Edge despite the constant annoyances Microsoft throws my way. That, and the fact I can still hide most annoying things (like the tools sidebar and bing chat and stuff. Has has also gotten split screen tabs which is awesome, though I keep forgetting about it and don't use it.
    • beretguy 3y ago
      Consider switching to Vivaldi.
  • starky 3y ago
    Vertical tabs aren't a good reason to stick with Edge. Vivaldi is better and supports vertical tabs, but is still Chromium. If you want a Firefox based browser with vertical tabs there is Floorp. I tried to switch to switch to Floorp and while it is pretty good, there are things like tab pinning and tiling that work so much better in Vivaldi (compared to every other browser I've tried) that keeps me there.
• exxos 3y ago
  Firefox Money: Investigating the bizarre finances of Mozilla https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4387539/firefox-money-investigating-the-bizarre-finances-of-mozilla https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4387539/firefox-money-invest...
• Timber-6539 3y ago
  With uBlock Origin working as it works best on Firefox, I get a 3-5 sec lag on launch [0] as it prepares the browser to block ads. With Chrome, the launch happens in an instant. I should also mention that Firefox has always had a slow start up time on my machine. While am sure there is a setting to turn the uBlock feature off, it probably won't make enough of a difference to beat Chrome's start up time. [0] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox#browser-launch https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • Sirenos 3y ago
    I fail to understand this line of thinking. How often are you restarting the browser that this makes any significant difference in your productivity?
    • Timber-6539 3y ago
      It was significant enough for me to notice. And it's about the subject. Doesn't matter how many times a day I launch my main browser.
  • gorhill 3y ago
    > I get a 3-5 sec lag on launch [0] as it prepares the browser to block ads. uBO is typically ready in a fraction of second, so "3-5 sec" is not normal. In Firefox all extensions sit in the same process, so it's possible another extension is preventing uBO to be ready in a timely manner, this has happened[1]. [1] https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/issues/13163 https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/issues/13163
• baxuz 3y ago
  I just use Adguard as a system-level ad blocker. Works in every browser, and unlike simple DNS filtering it can inject userscripts.
• phero_cnstrcts 3y ago
  I would but only Vivaldi lets me customize all app shortcuts. Vimium doesn’t always work in Firefox.
• netika 3y ago
  I really, really want to switch from Vivaldi to Firefox, but I am just too accustomed to the workflow. The interface is too slick and it "just works". I use vertical tabs with different workspaces, and although I am aware I can do it with extensions or userchrome in Firefox, I've found both variants pretty rough and unpolished -- and I don't have the time and energy to polish stuff that bothers me. The biggest question for me is why nobody creates browsers based on FF engine and everyone uses chromium as a backbone for the browser. I would love to see something like Vivaldi or nyxt based on FF engine.
  • mre 3y ago
    I've used Tree Style Tab before and switched to Sidebery (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sidebery/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sidebery/). Never used Vivaldi, but you might want to give that a try. It works well in combination with container tabs.
    • netika 3y ago
      Hmm, looks like that was what I was looking for. I'll check it out, thanks for recommendation.
• olliebrkr 3y ago
  All I really need is 1Password, and I just installed that extension. Let's do it!
• larodi 3y ago
  Friends complain of FF being slower than Chrome for some actions. The CEO of Mozilla is accused of lots of things. Still - the whole Google/Chrome monopoly and tracking is just another level of irritation and I’d happily love to see and use alternatives in both browser and search. FF is absolutely okay for everyday use even the betas are quite stable. Give it a try, guys. It’s worth the effort.
• fazlulkarimweb 3y ago
  Use Brave instead!
• mhrmsn 3y ago
  One of the best things about switching to Firefox was that it has the option to "Close tabs to the Left". I never understood why you can't do that natively in Chrome.
• dingi 3y ago
  I would consider Firefox if Mozilla wasn't a total sucker for Google's money. They'll get onboard with anything google does sooner or later. As it stands now, I don't see much difference between aligning with either of them.
• agumonkey 3y ago
  The only thing I miss from chrome is the easy tab grouping.
• alkonaut 3y ago
  The problem with FF I find is being a bit slower on the uptake of new features. WebGPU being the current best example. It's annoying to have to swap to Edge for specific pages.
  • bcook 3y ago
    Which specific pages are you referring to?
    • alkonaut 3y ago
      Pages that use the features that are enabled in edge but not in FireFox. Such as WebGPU.
• whywhywhywhy 3y ago
  Because I don't want to support the (in)actions of the Mozilla Foundation
• gbraad 3y ago
  or any other browser that is not Chrome; Brave, Vivaldi (which use the same engine) or Firefox.
• idkwhoiam 3y ago
  The moment uBlock Origin stops working I'm switching to Firefox. Websites are completely unusable without an ad blocker.
• doktrin 3y ago
  Google is effectively willing to sacrifice part of their moat to reenforce their core. Is this move born out of (over)confidence, or desperation?
• patates 3y ago
  Although I personally use Firefox and actively promote its use, I believe that a significant number of users may not be aware of the developments and will continue to stick with Chrome. From a pragmatic standpoint, it makes sense to advocate for the rights of Chrome users as well, even in the presence of alternatives.
  • thejohnconway 3y ago
    The best way to help Chrome users is to get a significant number of people to stop using Chrome, so they Google needs to compete for users properly again, and backs off some of these changes. Complaining without action won’t do anything.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• davidgerard 3y ago
  uBO also works well in Firefox Android, which is much less well known than it should be.
• medv 3y ago
  FF has so many bugs, it literally unusable.
  • timbit42 3y ago
    It works perfectly fine for me. Maybe you fubar'ed your OS.
• da39a3ee 3y ago
  I use Chrome profiles to separate my work and personal (and other) identities. This is helpful per se, but of course especially helpful because my different identities have different Google accounts. Last time I looked, Firefox lacked this feature. This isn't the use case for Firefox "Containers" and indeed they could not be used for it. There was something very inconvenient involving starting Firefox with different command line flags to create instances with different profiles. For this reason I could not switch to Firefox.
• medv 3y ago
  An interesting thing about posts like this: you would recommend, and you think everybody is using Firefox. But in fact everybody’s using Chrome Firefox user base is just so tiny
• RadixDLT 3y ago
  I think you mean, Time so switch to Brave!?
• DanielHB 3y ago
  Anyone knows if that manifest v3 is going to be pushed into Brave and similar chromium browsers?
• nickelpro 3y ago
  It's weird to me that no one on Hacker News has pointed out the MV3 version of uBlock works fine. At least I haven't noticed any difference except for the rare minor annoyance of cosmetic filtering (which gorhill removed for political, not technical reasons) Whatever you feel about the politics surrounding MV2 and webRequest, MV3 is by no means blocking uBlock, or ending adblock on Chrome across the board. That's FUD. It's far more convincing to speak about the on-the-ground technical facts than the paranoia of these gossip rags.
  • lima 3y ago
    HN has always been an echo chamber :-) I've been using the MV3 version for months because it does not require permissions. It works just fine. And in the rare case where I do need cosmetic filtering, I can simply click the extension icon, drag the slider to "more" and grant an individual permission for the site. It's great. Another benefit is that a permissionless adblocker works in many corporate environments which would otherwise block any extension with far-reaching permissions.
  • gorhill 3y ago
    > rare minor annoyance of cosmetic filtering (which gorhill removed for political, not technical reasons) Please clarify. No political motivation went into uBO Lite. It supports cosmetic filtering just fine -- it's a matter of picking the appropriate filtering mode.
    • nickelpro 3y ago
      I'm misremembering from the initial "uBO Minus" release [1] [1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/commit/a559f5f2715c58fea4de09330cf3d06194ccc897 https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/commit/a559f5f2715c58fea4d...
      • gorhill 3y ago
        This was the first commit, and the commit message is accurate about the technical limitations of this first version. If you want cosmetic filtering and other advanced filtering in the current, more mature version, you need to explicitly grant host permission for either the site or everywhere.
• usrbinbash 3y ago
  I use both Firefox and Brave. No, I am not disturbed by Braves "involvement with crypto". It took me all of 3 minutes to deactivate every crypto-feature the browser has, they are pretty obvious in the settings. It forces nothing on me, works great, and the best builtin anti-tracking features of a non-TOR browser I have ever seen. I have yet to check out Vivaldi browser.
• xdennis 3y ago
  While switching would be nice, you don't have to. You can just use Firefox to browse YouTube.
• _Nat_ 3y ago
  What makes some folks so attached to particular browsers? Personally, I'm using a mix of Edge, Firefox, and Chrome. While in theory I could just use one of them (which would probably be Firefox), it's kinda like having 3 different super-profiles for a web-browser (where each browser is its own super-profile), so I'm mostly just using all 3 out of laziness. I don't particularly trust Chrome nor Edge, so I just don't use them for anything important. Not that I'm 100% confident in Firefox, but if I've got to do something important, Firefox is the easy pick. Then I guess I end up favoring Chrome or Edge for everything else, since I don't want to junk up Firefox with nonsense (so Firefox'll remain solid for when it's appropriate). Between Chrome and Edge, I guess I favor Chrome for junk-level tasks since Chrome feels the most separated (being neither used for important stuff like Firefox nor being tied to the OS like Edge). I get that some folks might have a business-critical app with compatibility-issues limiting their freedom-of-choice when it comes to certain tasks, but outside of such niche cases, what's the big deal?
  • scotty79 3y ago
    When I was doing webdevelopment I was attached to chrome tools for that.
  • yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
    I'm not sure if I'm agreeing or disagreeing or just providing context, but for me personally it's not about being attached to a particular browser, rather it's about being repulsed by most of them. Edge is user-hostile spyware, Chrome is approximately the same but Google flavored and very very marginally better, I don't trust most Firefox forks to stay on top of security issues, and I don't use a Mac. The result is that my only options really are Firefox, or maybe some of the lesser WebKit browsers. And even then... I'm writing this comment in Firefox, but I don't even particularly like it, it just sucks less than the alternatives.
• jpc0 3y ago
  I almost exclusively use Firefox personally and Chrome for work. I couldn't switch to Chrome for work because some google services are randomly broken on Firefox. At time google drive will fail to load at all (not that it's great on chrome either) and YouTube uploads will randomly break. UI claims it's uploading but no network activity at all and upload is stalled.
• JBGruber 3y ago
  I switched to Google Chrome when it came out (14 years ago according to Wikipedia) and to Chromium when I got sufficiently annoyed by Google. In August I switched back to Firefox. Here are some thoughts: - the experience is 90% the same. - Sync between Android app and desktop is just as flawless (that one made me switch back to Chromium on my first try a few years ago) - Theming is nicer - switching between home and work profile is great with the profile switcher extension - Firefox seems less well integrated into many websites. I keep entering my credit card info on many sites, because the option to use saved cards either does not appear or does not work. Same is true for suggesting passwords. So I use keepass' for both now (which might be good) -the developer tools are a little annoying. I use them mainly for Web scraping and sometimes I give up and copy the curl call from Chromium because the formatting is nicer and the network tab looks cleaner I won't switch back to Chrome and miss it less and less. Only during black Friday and when I taught my webscraping course I missed Chromium a little.
• alexander2002 3y ago
  I love the firefox screenshot feature that they have making it easier to screenshot specific div/containers
• rollcat 3y ago
  The article is bollocks. Recommending Pale Moon in 2023 is plain irresponsible. No process isolation/sandboxing for tabs/websites/addons, playing constant catch-up with Firefox on implementing security fixes/mitigations (made more difficult by how far back the fork has happened), disregarding all the optimizations that brought Firefox closer to being on par with Chrome (which translates to higher power usage). In my opinion Pale Moon should never be recommended as an alternative to Chrome for the average person; it should be seen as a specialized tool for people who are willing to trade away security and performance for customization. If you don't have customization needs that are this specific, using it is a net loss.
  • poszlem 3y ago
    The reason for the article is not to give a good recommendation to people but to promote Tuta (looks like an ad campaign that started about 2 weeks ago: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=tuta.com https://hn.algolia.com/?q=tuta.com).
    • rollcat 3y ago
      Great point. I think this brings up the question of ethics in advertising - how far are you willing to mislead your audience in order to support your claim? It's likely that Tuta didn't even mean to intentionally mislead (10 is a nice round number, so why not throw in something completely random), but they should be held to a higher standard, considering they're speaking from a position of authority. Going a bit offtopic, in my opinion this supports the argument that users should in general be free to block ads, on the basis of being able to filter the content they consume, based on the credibility of the source. Establishing the credibility of the advertiser seems impossible even for the websites (ad network: "just load this 10mb JS from our CDN"), so blocking ads entirely (or allowing them selectively) seems like a reasonable recourse.
    • RamblingCTO 3y ago
      Just came to comment this. Didn't they have a breach or something? Was also on hackernews. Pretty pathetic article, no idea why this content lands here. @dang any insights if this is authentic?
• matheusmoreira 3y ago
  Firefox even supports uBlock Origin on Android. It's priceless.
• nimishk 3y ago
  yeessirr
• blacklight 3y ago
  YouTube? Chrome? uBlock? Firefox? What's all this fuss about? Just avoid the youtube.com domain like pest, period. Set up a Piped instance or use your favourite one. You even get your playlists and subscriptions over RSS feeds instead of using Google's stinky, unstandardized and limited APIs, how cool is that? And wire it to Platypush + yt-dlp if you want the ability to scrape the media URL and cast it wherever you like. If you still go directly to youtube.com to consume videos, without even using a Piped proxy as a digital condom, then it's your own fault. Ad blockers can only do that much against overtly hostile businesses that have enough engineering resources to invest in their overtly hostile practices. What else is Google supposed to do to tell you that you can't trust them with anything? Is Sundar Pichai supposed to wear an evil mask like a Marvel villain before you understand that that company and whatever it touches is rotten and morally bankrupt to its core, that the only thing that prevents them from turning their products into big billboards with zero added value is the backlash from their own users, and that they're trying to find a sweet spot where they can enshittify their user experience to a point where they maximize the money they make out of data collection and ads, but without pushing too much to the point that too many users leave the platform? The only way out is for EVERYONE to STOP sending a single direct byte to youtube.com. Pirate the shit out of them. And I honestly don't give a f*k anymore about hurting the creators that are still on YouTube. If you're a creator still publishing videos on that sewage, even if so many alternatives are available today, then you're part of the problem, and I no longer care if you lose your revenue.
• 3ln00b 3y ago
  Never gave up on Firefox, still my primary browser.
• qwertox 3y ago
  Is there an extension which stores a history of all my visited tabs, also with some kind of window id in order to group them per window? I'm not talking about the integrated history which will be lost when cleared (and may have a limit of how long entries are kept) I've (and Google as well) found my Chrome's Activity History to be pretty useful when I need to search for something I was looking for years ago.
  • ditsuke 3y ago
    [dead]
• hk1337 3y ago
  If you’re on Mac, try Safari. Otherwise, yes, go Firefox.
• matthewfelgate 3y ago
  Unpopular opinion: I don't care about 'privacy'.
• methou 3y ago
  Wish can see more of these from mainstream/corporate medias, so I can just share them on Facebook/iMessage/Whatsapp with Friends & Family.
• SergeAx 3y ago
  This is the beauty of the Web - an open set of protocols and standards. You just change whatever you want: browser, server, language interpreter, proxy, etc. This is highly underappreciated.
• jacquesm 3y ago
  If there ever was an anti-trust argument to be made against Google this is it. You don't want a dominant search company, dominant advertiser and a browser vendor to be the same entity (or closely related). At the same time: this also goes for Microsoft/Edge.
• Karolis_K 3y ago
  I don't get why FF is mainly advertised as a 'privacy first' browser. I think most people first want ease of use and features, not privacy. And for them, Firefox may look like a niche program only for those who are paranoid or have something to hide. But in my opinion even if we don't count privacy, Firefox will still be a serious contender in all other areas and winner in many. At least for me it's not privacy that wins.
• humpydumpy 3y ago
  Even when chrome was new, it was known that it included heavy tracking by google. I briefly checked out iron back in the day, a chromium version without google tracking. But I realised that even just opening the settings resulted in requests to google (for some spelling library if I remember correctly). So obviously it was difficult to remove all the tracking, and it was clear that it would be difficult to keep removing it in all versions. Also it was clear already back then that google would try to capture as much of the browser market as possible, to control the browser, many online services, and just get the power to do whatever it wants. Now they are pushing hard for DRM in the browser, to take power away from the user. Firefox is definitely not perfect, but back in 2008 it was obvious that we, the users, should not support chrome. So I stayed with firefox, and don't need to swtich back now.
• saidinesh5 3y ago
  These days i am switching between Firefox and Brave browser. Missing functionality in Firefox: * WebSerial/WebUSB - needed for IoT projects, flashing devices like drones etc.. * Firefox Android honestly feels a lot slower than Brave on my device. * For some odd reason Google Meet has stopped working on my Firefox since last month. * Touchscreen support by default on my 2in1 laptop. * Super annoying to have to restart firefox whenever i do a firefox upgrade via. package manager Missing functionality in Brave: * Proper Tree style tab. * RAM usage is probably not as low as Firefox
• artzmeister 3y ago
  One additional bit of recommendation for Firefox: the Tridacyl extension only works on it. It's a vim motions extension that works much better than the ones on Chrome/Brave. You can use it on every page except the Firefox settings, etc.
• bitsandboots 3y ago
  I stopped trying to understand why people don't use firefox. It's been the only browser worth using since opera died. Vivaldi is a fun toy, but it's still got chromium baggage that keeps it from true greatness. Now, where's the arm64 linux builds? Currently have to rely on the distro or build it yourself. Is it too much to ask of their automation?
• Cort3z 3y ago
  I have been using many different browsers over the years. I regularly use safari, firefox, chrome, and occasionally even Edge and so on. I keep going back to firefox. Why? It has some power-features I haven't really found in many other browsers. It lets you easily explicitly search through your tabs (% in url bar). It has first party plugin for containers, letting you log in to multiple accounts on the same domain without having to log out all the time. It's also worth noting that Rust, the language, as far as I understand was essentially invented to make features in firefox memory safe. With all the praise for firefox, it should be mentioned that their business model is centered around passing on searches to google.
• zare_st 3y ago
  One of the impediments in migrating to another software are different UIs. Let's forget for a second that Chrome and Firefox have a really, really similar UI for the sake of this example. Let's also discard that UI is changed for the sake of itself. It has changed to benefit the software somehow. How to get around the need for someone to redesign the UI and the expectation of a user to have a same routine workflow every day? Standardize more keyboard shortcuts. Standardize important browser settings under a tree, with prescribed OIDs and such. Start supporting keyboard workflows for all the actions in the software. Keyboard is the most stable interface there is. Everyone looking to advance in his domain needs to start using the keyboard. Even if you're in construction, engineering, architecture, visual design, you'll find out your software suite has extensive shortcuts and macros or scripting that can boost your productivity N-fold.
• renegat0x0 3y ago
  Some people say use browser that supports manifest v2 extensions, but where will anybody find such extensions? I think Google will remove all manifest v2 extensions eventually from their store.
• Terretta 3y ago
  On MacOS, consider Orion Browser by Kagi. Very fast. Zero telemetry. Lightweight, natively built with WebKit, made for you and your Mac. Industry-leading battery life, privacy respecting by design, and native support for web extensions. Orion offers native support for many Firefox and Chrome browser extensions allowing access to the world's largest eco-system of browser extensions. Even UBlock Origin. Not that you need it, since Orion has been engineered from ground up as a truly privacy-respecting zero telemetry browser. Your private information will never leave Orion by default, and to protect your privacy on the web, Orion comes with industry-leading anti-tracking technology as well as a powerful built-in ad-blocker. https://kagi.com/orion/ https://kagi.com/orion/
  • gnicholas 3y ago
    Also has tree style tab browsing built in! Though I’ve found it doesn’t work 100% with all Chrome extensions; seems like it might be an MV3 issue, as it’s popped up more recently.
• RunSet 3y ago
  Librewolf is a conspicuous omission from a list of privacy-focused browsers that (for some reason) includes Brave.
• hospitalJail 3y ago
  I'm like 50/50 on firefox(for linux). Spotify doesnt work on it. I have far more issues rendering 5,000x5x000 px images on firefox than Chrome. Might not be an issue for most people, but when doing AI art and making 10x10 images, it is common. After a side by side comparison, I use chrome for nearly everything. I weirdly use firefox for everything google services lol.
• ezfe 3y ago
  Coming out swinging saying Safari is a Big Tech Privacy Invader, and then providing no further commentary on why. You can say many things about Safari, but I don't recall that being one of them.
• redundantly 3y ago
  To add to the other anecdotes here: I've always used multiple browsers at the same time. On my local workstation I used Edge (used to be Chrome) for corporate and customer stuff, Firefox for everything else. Firefox runs faster with less headaches than the others, even with ADO, which is funny to me. When I encounter environments where only Chrome is available (e.g., jump box or application server in a customer's network) I have to deal with Chrome eating up too many resources. I often have to kill other users inactive sessions due to how much memory their Chrome process is using. I've seen it affect production performance due to it eating up so much memory. The only user app I've seen that sometimes uses more memory on those customer hosted systems is Oracle SQL Developer. Firefox is simply better for me. However, I won't argue with others on personal preference, hence why I don't just uninstall Chrome where I find it. Also I don't want those people to lose their bookmarks and browsing history.
• drtgh 3y ago
  When I open the firefox I see the following [0]interface rows : 1. previows/next | history | Menubar-bookmarks button | --URL BAR-- | reload | home | some addons | Decentral eyes | CookieAutoDelete | uMatrix | uBlockOrigin | Multi-Acount containers | Addons icon | Menu bar icon |. 2. Toolbar-bookmarks row | Button for unfolding the bookmarks that don't fit in such row. 3. Pinned tabs (they are only icons) | < | Tab_1, Tab_2, Tab_3, ... | > | + | unfold vertical list of the opened tabs |. 4. The page for the selected Tab. This allows us to use two bookmarks visual groups, the ones that are unfolded through the Menubar-bookmarks, and the ones always visible when Toolbar-bookmarks are enabled (what in reality is a subfolder from menubar's bookmarks) and are shown as 2nd row in my interface. Also the easy access to Containers and the CookieAutoDelete, uMatrix, uBlockOrigin current page options are essential. In the Toolbar-bookmarks, for being able to visually have more folders as "quick access" row line, I use acronyms as folder names (just for the first ones until fill that space). This between separators, and also mere url icons bookmarks (by removing the bookmark title name its just showed the page icon). When one push one those folders are unfold all the related sub-folders and sub-bookmarks. Also, equally important, the folders and bookmarks that don't fit in such row are easily accessible by pushing an icon at the right corner, what unfolds a vertical list with the rest the bookmarks. This is important because in such toolbar one usually have several hundreds of independent bookmarks and folders by topics, with infinite sub-folders and their respective bookmarks, etc. This let us in Firefox with: Pinned tabs, the current session opened tabs, the usability of to have the Toolbar-bookmarks with folders as topics by clicking the folder or icon, and a second different visual group of bookmarks through Menubar-bookmarks. By other side, if one want to add to those folders/topics the page that is being visited it's just needed to drag and drop the url there. Also all those bookmarks' folders have their option for to open their content in tabs. I cannot think of browsing comfortably without such an interface and tools as a starting point. [0] Thankfully and fortunately, with Firefox it is possible to have a browser focused in usability by enabling its options, and also to do adjustments in the interface under our needs with custom stylesheets. By default in FF the tabs are shown over the url bar, but in my case I use as base [1]customcssforfx for to put the tabs under toolbar-bookmarks, and from there I add a couple of lines with custom padding, sizes and icons. [1] https://github.com/aris-t2/customcssforfx https://github.com/aris-t2/customcssforfx
• H4ZB7 3y ago
  why is this absolutely oblivious, joke of an article voted so high? web browsers are bloated and insecure, and there is practically no difference between them. tor browser tries (keyword) to reduce fingerprintability to make tor actually work as intended, beyond that there is no difference between firefox. icecat, palemoon, and all those forks are just firefox with 0.01% of the bloat removed. any "privacy" or "security" plugin just increases your attack surface and makes your fingerprint more unique (and 99% of websites collect this fingerprint and use it). browsers are bloated and unfixable. consuming "privacy" and "security" products does not fix this. > Mullvad Browser: Best Built-in VPN Support this text is literally written by a bot
• jcmontx 3y ago
  If you plan on switching to Firefox, consider using an User-Agent extension that tricks Google web apps into thinking they're interacting with Chrome. Improves performance for me.
• mancerayder 3y ago
  Am I the only person who is obsessed with Autoplaying media? Ads are one thing, but even a news site or blog that immediately blasts moving pictures greatly bothers me. Very often you hit a small X which then doesn't do its job as an X, instead moving the media into a floating window. X is the new "open in separate window" Chrome is vicious when it comes to forcing auto play. Brave+Turn off Scripts works great. Turning off scripts helps in many other ways to make the web more readable. Wait, I should emphasize my unique use-case here: in contrast to apparently the vast majority of web users, I actually like reading words, and sometimes the words are a whole page long. When flashy, talky, moving stuff is in between the sentences and words, they become difficult and frustrating to read.
• Ikatza 3y ago
  Firefox for Android, unfortunately, is plagued with UX issues, which makes switching much more difficult. I cannot even render HN well.