9 ms·

I've been reminding everyone I know who still uses Chrome to try Firefox again. Many have switched back. It's simply a better browser. One e10s is in stable, it

by skrowl 12y ago

I've been reminding everyone I know who still uses Chrome to try Firefox again. Many have switched back. It's simply a better browser. One e10s is in stable, it's going to be even better. Google is a for-profit company that makes money selling your data and targeted, personal ads. Mozilla is not-for-profit and just wants to make the web better.

taf2 12y ago
I don't think there is actually any evidence they use Chrome for much more than 1. disrupt IE/MS - i can say for certain they originally backed Firefox for this effort and only decided to split away to build chrome in the first place because they felt starting fresh they could build a better core and i believe they did. 2. enabling more people to build on the web, enables more of their ads to be shown. Firefox achieves this just as well as chrome. IE was dominating not too long ago and you could argue much of google's ad revenue growth can be attributed to more people having access to a higher quality web. That said... I don't see why you should believe google would need or desire to sell data from what it might collect from Chrome. More likely they see it as a means to ensuring web dominance by ensuring the web is never locked down by one mega corp. It's similar in away to what they have done in the mobile space. Android is more of a technology to disrupt Apple and ensure it can't be dominate, but really does google have any control over Android?
- chimeracoder 12y ago
  > More likely they see it as a means to ensuring web dominance by ensuring the web is never locked down by one mega corp. I wouldn't let Google off the hook so easily. More like, they want to ensure that if/when it is, they are that one mega corp: https://i.imgur.com/AIxYzl9.jpg https://i.imgur.com/AIxYzl9.jpg If you ask me, the only reason they haven't moved even faster in this direction is because they're afraid of triggering the same legal action that Microsoft did back in the 90s with IE, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't love to have that form of dominance - it can only help them.
- bzbarsky 12y ago
  1) Google never backed Firefox with a billion-dollar-a-year advertising campaign like they have Chrome for several years now. 2) It's not an accident that Google's webservices work best (sometimes only) in Chrome. They're way past the "disrupt IE" goal. They're into the "tightly couple our web service and Chrome and try to force out other options" goal.
  - wodenokoto 12y ago
    I'd like to see a source for the billion-dollar-a-year campaign, that sounds crazy. That's 3 times Mozilla's entire budget, if memory serves me right.
    - whatusername 12y ago
      What do you think it would cost to put an Ad on the google homepage?
    - hyperbovine 12y ago
      $1 billion is Apple's ad budget as of two years ago and a non-trivial fraction of Coke's overall annual ad budget. I call bs. (http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Screen-Shot-2013-11-04-at-11-4-4.55.03-PM.png http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Screen-Shot...)
    - asadotzler 12y ago
      365 days a year for several years Google has had a Chrome banner ad on www.google.com showing to Firefox users. That page is the most lucrative property on the web in terms of eyeballs, so take your most outrageous ad rate you can find and do the math. It's billions per year worth of advertising.
      - SquareWheel 12y ago
        It's also completely free for Google to advertise on their own website.
        12y ago
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  Google has used it's position in Android and Chrome to undermine privacy. Both platforms encourage users to "knowingly" give up privacy. This is beyond simply preventing monopolies.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  There never was a good reason for Chrome to exist in the first place. Content companies should not produce browsers, it is too much of a temptation for them to optimize their content for their own browser and vv.
  - IvyMike 12y ago
    > There never was a good reason for Chrome to exist in the first place. Chrome kicked off the browser performance wars, especially javascript. A fast and performant web was important to any strategy Google could have had, regardless of their status as a good or evil company.
    - sphink 12y ago
      I agree. IE kicked everyone else's butt first (in terms of market share), and the Web stagnated. Then Firefox kicked IE's butt, and the Web didn't stagnate quite as much, but let's be honest -- it stagnated. At the moment, Chrome is dominant but no browser is really trampling its competition, especially not in terms of overall quality. And the Web is improving faster than it ever has. (Well, not quite -- the "catch up" phases of the browser wars probably saw faster improvement while they were happening.)
    - bzbarsky 12y ago
      Please check your history. There was a JavaScript performance war in full swing, with both Firefox and Safari producing new JITs and working on improving them, before Chrome ever appeared.
      - IvyMike 12y ago
        My memory was that there was a cold war, but not hot-and-heavy competition until chrome, although this article seems to agree with you. But man, Chrome sure got good fast. http://www.cnet.com/news/browser-war-centers-on-once-obscure-javascript/ http://www.cnet.com/news/browser-war-centers-on-once-obscure...
        12y ago
- indygreg2 12y ago
  If you sign in to Chrome, your bookmarks and full browsing history are uploaded to Google's servers. Only your passwords are encrypted locally before being sent to Google. https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/1181035 https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/1181035 contains info on how the encryption works. chrome://terms/ links to https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/privacy/ https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/privacy/ which links to http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/ http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/ to define "how we use information we collect." From that page: "We use the information we collect from all of our services to provide, maintain, protect and improve them, to develop new ones, and to protect Google and our users. We also use this information to offer you tailored content – like giving you more relevant search results and ads." Your full browsing history is a treasure trove of information useful for making Google's core services (search and ads) more effective. They would be stupid not to use it to improve the quality of their services. I challenge your assertion that Chrome is an altruistic endeavor.
  - ChrisAntaki 12y ago
    Don't forget about omnibox predictions. By default, all keystrokes in the address bar are being sent, even while you're logged out. References: "Get predictions in the address bar" https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95656?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95656?hl=en "Logging policies for omnibox predictions" https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/180655?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/180655?hl=en
    - 0942v8653 12y ago
      uhh… with any "omnibox" UI in any browser, every keystroke is sent to Google.
      - espadrine 12y ago
        Based on my current knowledge, I believe you are wrong. Firefox' Desktop Awesomebar (which actually predates Chrome's omnibox) does not send every keystroke to Google[0], and never has. Even Firefox' Mobile Awesomebar doesn't do that[1] unless you click that "Yes" button. On the other hand, Google's Chrome browser is clear about the fact that it does send everything in the omnibar[2]: > When you type URLs or queries in the Chrome address bar (omnibox) or App Launcher search box, the letters you type may be sent to your default search engine so that the search engine’s prediction feature can automatically recommend terms or URLs you may be looking for. If you still believe you are right, I would be interested in seeing your sources. [0]: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/awesome-bar-find-your-bookmarks-history-and-tabs https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/awesome-bar-find-your-b... [1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/privacy/2013/01/08/search-suggestions-for-firefox-for-android-another-example-of-mozillas-approach-to-privacy-by-design/ https://blog.mozilla.org/privacy/2013/01/08/search-suggestio... [2]: https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/ https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/
- cwyers 12y ago
  Disrupting MS is a big goal of Google's, but that ambition runs far beyond displacing IE. Google, via Chrome (and ChromeOS) and their online services, wants to displace Windows, Office and Exchange. Firefox helped (and still helps) to fend of Microsoft's browser share, but development of Chrome is what Google is using to push browsers towards being able to replace Windows and Office for enterprise customers.
quaunaut 12y ago
Honestly, my issue with Firefox all comes back to the Omnibar: I just like how Google does it better. And the only Firefox plugin I've seen that gets similar to that behavior, is slower at every step of the way. Also, having to manually add every search engine is a hassle even if you are willing to put up with the extra steps that plugin asks. I really like Google, but I want to support open source(and am not quite willing to put up with Chromium). But for me, core usability is still king, and nothing really touches Chrome for that.
- CarlHoerberg 12y ago
  That's fixed in 33: http://msujaws.wordpress.com/2014/08/01/faster-and-snappier-searches-now-in-firefox-aurora/ http://msujaws.wordpress.com/2014/08/01/faster-and-snappier-...
  - quaunaut 12y ago
    That doesn't really fix what I like most. I like being able to hit a, see Amazon.com hilighted, hit tab, and have that be searching Amazon. Or to do the same thing with GMail, Wikipedia, Youtube. It's the core functionality I like most with Chrome.
    - cpeterso 12y ago
      How do I enable the Omnibar search behavior you describe? When I enter "a" in the Omnibar, I see amazon.com in the Omnibar drop down list, but when I hit tab, Chrome just highlights the next item in the drop down list. It doesn't search Amazon. Have you manually added Amazon to Chrome's "Manage search engines" list? Firefox has something similar: "Keyword Searches" bookmarks. I define my own search shortcuts, such as "am" for Amazon, "imdb" for IMDB, "nf" for Netflix, and "w" for Wikipedia. Using "am Harry Potter" or imdb or nf or w will use those respective website's own search forms to find "Harry Potter". https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-search-from-address-bar https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-search-from-address... http://kb.mozillazine.org/Using_keyword_searches http://kb.mozillazine.org/Using_keyword_searches
baddox 12y ago
I try Firefox quite frequently. It's still nowhere near better for me than Chrome.
x0x0 12y ago
No, no it's not. I just spent an hour trying to figure out why ff freezes on the partner's computer. Yay 780mb sqlite wal. Who the fuck knows what that's doing. Why on earth does using a browser require vaccuming sqlite files? Dunno, because there's no good reason. If she'll finally switch to chrome I'll stop hearing complaints the internet is slow.
- jesup 12y ago
  Try Help -> Troubleshooting -> Reset Profile (upper right). That fixes most problems of that sort with (often ancient, migrated since FF 2.0 or 3.0) profiles. Most things are retained, even cookies. It does remove some things (often things that can cause problems, like badly out-of-date-unmaintained extensions, clears DOM storage, download history, plugin settings): https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/reset-firefox-easily-fix-most-problems https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/reset-firefox-easily-fi...
SquareWheel 12y ago
>makes money selling your data To... other advertisers? Google is the advertiser. It not only goes against their Terms of Service to sell that data, but also makes zero business sense. I swear people just make things up when it suits their world views.
wingerlang 12y ago
I went back to FF after using Chrome since its release, for about 2 weeks before I was fed up with it not playing every youtube video.
- josteink 12y ago
  So because of non-standard DRMed content, you decided that the best way of preventing that to be a problem in the future is to install the only non-standard browser which renders this non-standard DRMed content from the same provider? Would you even considered that if that one provider was anyone but Google? No? If so, why do you give Google a free pass?
  - wingerlang 12y ago
    It just said "cannot play video", did not inspect why because it said something about a plugin, and it made me annoyed, so I switched. This page http://www.youtube.com/html5 http://www.youtube.com/html5 had only 2/6 checkmarks in FF.
WorldWideWayne 12y ago
> It's simply a better browser. Mozilla does not respect the rules of my native OS. For over five years, they insisted that double-clicking the upper-left corner of the window should not close the window like every other app on the system. Nope. They insisted on doing it their way ignoring the complaints of thousands of users. Firefox also makes you press Shift to use access keys. Totally non-standard amongst browsers and OSes and annoying for devs and users. Is Firefox the only browser left that hasn't switched to multiple processes? No, Firefox isn't better and I don't trust Mozilla anymore than Google.

by skrowl 12y ago

taf2 12y ago

I don't think there is actually any evidence they use Chrome for much more than 1. disrupt IE/MS - i can say for certain they originally backed Firefox for this effort and only decided to split away to build chrome in the first place because they felt starting fresh they could build a better core and i believe they did. 2. enabling more people to build on the web, enables more of their ads to be shown. Firefox achieves this just as well as chrome. IE was dominating not too long ago and you could argue much of google's ad revenue growth can be attributed to more people having access to a higher quality web. That said... I don't see why you should believe google would need or desire to sell data from what it might collect from Chrome. More likely they see it as a means to ensuring web dominance by ensuring the web is never locked down by one mega corp. It's similar in away to what they have done in the mobile space. Android is more of a technology to disrupt Apple and ensure it can't be dominate, but really does google have any control over Android?

chimeracoder 12y ago
> More likely they see it as a means to ensuring web dominance by ensuring the web is never locked down by one mega corp. I wouldn't let Google off the hook so easily. More like, they want to ensure that if/when it is, they are that one mega corp: https://i.imgur.com/AIxYzl9.jpg https://i.imgur.com/AIxYzl9.jpg If you ask me, the only reason they haven't moved even faster in this direction is because they're afraid of triggering the same legal action that Microsoft did back in the 90s with IE, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't love to have that form of dominance - it can only help them.
bzbarsky 12y ago
1) Google never backed Firefox with a billion-dollar-a-year advertising campaign like they have Chrome for several years now. 2) It's not an accident that Google's webservices work best (sometimes only) in Chrome. They're way past the "disrupt IE" goal. They're into the "tightly couple our web service and Chrome and try to force out other options" goal.
- wodenokoto 12y ago
  I'd like to see a source for the billion-dollar-a-year campaign, that sounds crazy. That's 3 times Mozilla's entire budget, if memory serves me right.
  - whatusername 12y ago
    What do you think it would cost to put an Ad on the google homepage?
  - hyperbovine 12y ago
    $1 billion is Apple's ad budget as of two years ago and a non-trivial fraction of Coke's overall annual ad budget. I call bs. (http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Screen-Shot-2013-11-04-at-11-4-4.55.03-PM.png http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Screen-Shot...)
  - asadotzler 12y ago
    365 days a year for several years Google has had a Chrome banner ad on www.google.com showing to Firefox users. That page is the most lucrative property on the web in terms of eyeballs, so take your most outrageous ad rate you can find and do the math. It's billions per year worth of advertising.
    - SquareWheel 12y ago
      It's also completely free for Google to advertise on their own website.
      - 12y ago
MichaelGG 12y ago
Google has used it's position in Android and Chrome to undermine privacy. Both platforms encourage users to "knowingly" give up privacy. This is beyond simply preventing monopolies.
jacquesm 12y ago
There never was a good reason for Chrome to exist in the first place. Content companies should not produce browsers, it is too much of a temptation for them to optimize their content for their own browser and vv.
- IvyMike 12y ago
  > There never was a good reason for Chrome to exist in the first place. Chrome kicked off the browser performance wars, especially javascript. A fast and performant web was important to any strategy Google could have had, regardless of their status as a good or evil company.
  - sphink 12y ago
    I agree. IE kicked everyone else's butt first (in terms of market share), and the Web stagnated. Then Firefox kicked IE's butt, and the Web didn't stagnate quite as much, but let's be honest -- it stagnated. At the moment, Chrome is dominant but no browser is really trampling its competition, especially not in terms of overall quality. And the Web is improving faster than it ever has. (Well, not quite -- the "catch up" phases of the browser wars probably saw faster improvement while they were happening.)
  - bzbarsky 12y ago
    Please check your history. There was a JavaScript performance war in full swing, with both Firefox and Safari producing new JITs and working on improving them, before Chrome ever appeared.
    - IvyMike 12y ago
      My memory was that there was a cold war, but not hot-and-heavy competition until chrome, although this article seems to agree with you. But man, Chrome sure got good fast. http://www.cnet.com/news/browser-war-centers-on-once-obscure-javascript/ http://www.cnet.com/news/browser-war-centers-on-once-obscure...
      - 12y ago
indygreg2 12y ago
If you sign in to Chrome, your bookmarks and full browsing history are uploaded to Google's servers. Only your passwords are encrypted locally before being sent to Google. https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/1181035 https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/1181035 contains info on how the encryption works. chrome://terms/ links to https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/privacy/ https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/privacy/ which links to http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/ http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/ to define "how we use information we collect." From that page: "We use the information we collect from all of our services to provide, maintain, protect and improve them, to develop new ones, and to protect Google and our users. We also use this information to offer you tailored content – like giving you more relevant search results and ads." Your full browsing history is a treasure trove of information useful for making Google's core services (search and ads) more effective. They would be stupid not to use it to improve the quality of their services. I challenge your assertion that Chrome is an altruistic endeavor.
- ChrisAntaki 12y ago
  Don't forget about omnibox predictions. By default, all keystrokes in the address bar are being sent, even while you're logged out. References: "Get predictions in the address bar" https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95656?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95656?hl=en "Logging policies for omnibox predictions" https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/180655?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/180655?hl=en
  - 0942v8653 12y ago
    uhh… with any "omnibox" UI in any browser, every keystroke is sent to Google.
    - espadrine 12y ago
      Based on my current knowledge, I believe you are wrong. Firefox' Desktop Awesomebar (which actually predates Chrome's omnibox) does not send every keystroke to Google[0], and never has. Even Firefox' Mobile Awesomebar doesn't do that[1] unless you click that "Yes" button. On the other hand, Google's Chrome browser is clear about the fact that it does send everything in the omnibar[2]: > When you type URLs or queries in the Chrome address bar (omnibox) or App Launcher search box, the letters you type may be sent to your default search engine so that the search engine’s prediction feature can automatically recommend terms or URLs you may be looking for. If you still believe you are right, I would be interested in seeing your sources. [0]: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/awesome-bar-find-your-bookmarks-history-and-tabs https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/awesome-bar-find-your-b... [1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/privacy/2013/01/08/search-suggestions-for-firefox-for-android-another-example-of-mozillas-approach-to-privacy-by-design/ https://blog.mozilla.org/privacy/2013/01/08/search-suggestio... [2]: https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/ https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/
cwyers 12y ago
Disrupting MS is a big goal of Google's, but that ambition runs far beyond displacing IE. Google, via Chrome (and ChromeOS) and their online services, wants to displace Windows, Office and Exchange. Firefox helped (and still helps) to fend of Microsoft's browser share, but development of Chrome is what Google is using to push browsers towards being able to replace Windows and Office for enterprise customers.

quaunaut 12y ago

Honestly, my issue with Firefox all comes back to the Omnibar: I just like how Google does it better. And the only Firefox plugin I've seen that gets similar to that behavior, is slower at every step of the way. Also, having to manually add every search engine is a hassle even if you are willing to put up with the extra steps that plugin asks. I really like Google, but I want to support open source(and am not quite willing to put up with Chromium). But for me, core usability is still king, and nothing really touches Chrome for that.

CarlHoerberg 12y ago
That's fixed in 33: http://msujaws.wordpress.com/2014/08/01/faster-and-snappier-searches-now-in-firefox-aurora/ http://msujaws.wordpress.com/2014/08/01/faster-and-snappier-...
- quaunaut 12y ago
  That doesn't really fix what I like most. I like being able to hit a, see Amazon.com hilighted, hit tab, and have that be searching Amazon. Or to do the same thing with GMail, Wikipedia, Youtube. It's the core functionality I like most with Chrome.
  - cpeterso 12y ago
    How do I enable the Omnibar search behavior you describe? When I enter "a" in the Omnibar, I see amazon.com in the Omnibar drop down list, but when I hit tab, Chrome just highlights the next item in the drop down list. It doesn't search Amazon. Have you manually added Amazon to Chrome's "Manage search engines" list? Firefox has something similar: "Keyword Searches" bookmarks. I define my own search shortcuts, such as "am" for Amazon, "imdb" for IMDB, "nf" for Netflix, and "w" for Wikipedia. Using "am Harry Potter" or imdb or nf or w will use those respective website's own search forms to find "Harry Potter". https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-search-from-address-bar https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-search-from-address... http://kb.mozillazine.org/Using_keyword_searches http://kb.mozillazine.org/Using_keyword_searches

baddox 12y ago

I try Firefox quite frequently. It's still nowhere near better for me than Chrome.

x0x0 12y ago

No, no it's not. I just spent an hour trying to figure out why ff freezes on the partner's computer. Yay 780mb sqlite wal. Who the fuck knows what that's doing. Why on earth does using a browser require vaccuming sqlite files? Dunno, because there's no good reason. If she'll finally switch to chrome I'll stop hearing complaints the internet is slow.

jesup 12y ago
Try Help -> Troubleshooting -> Reset Profile (upper right). That fixes most problems of that sort with (often ancient, migrated since FF 2.0 or 3.0) profiles. Most things are retained, even cookies. It does remove some things (often things that can cause problems, like badly out-of-date-unmaintained extensions, clears DOM storage, download history, plugin settings): https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/reset-firefox-easily-fix-most-problems https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/reset-firefox-easily-fi...

SquareWheel 12y ago

>makes money selling your data To... other advertisers? Google is the advertiser. It not only goes against their Terms of Service to sell that data, but also makes zero business sense. I swear people just make things up when it suits their world views.

wingerlang 12y ago

I went back to FF after using Chrome since its release, for about 2 weeks before I was fed up with it not playing every youtube video.

josteink 12y ago
So because of non-standard DRMed content, you decided that the best way of preventing that to be a problem in the future is to install the only non-standard browser which renders this non-standard DRMed content from the same provider? Would you even considered that if that one provider was anyone but Google? No? If so, why do you give Google a free pass?
- wingerlang 12y ago
  It just said "cannot play video", did not inspect why because it said something about a plugin, and it made me annoyed, so I switched. This page http://www.youtube.com/html5 http://www.youtube.com/html5 had only 2/6 checkmarks in FF.

WorldWideWayne 12y ago

> It's simply a better browser. Mozilla does not respect the rules of my native OS. For over five years, they insisted that double-clicking the upper-left corner of the window should not close the window like every other app on the system. Nope. They insisted on doing it their way ignoring the complaints of thousands of users. Firefox also makes you press Shift to use access keys. Totally non-standard amongst browsers and OSes and annoying for devs and users. Is Firefox the only browser left that hasn't switched to multiple processes? No, Firefox isn't better and I don't trust Mozilla anymore than Google.