Firefox Is the Superior Browser(asindu.xyz)
asindu.xyz
Firefox Is the Superior Browser
https://asindu.xyz/posts/switching-to-firefox/
76 comments
Truth
Firefox is the last major independent browser engine standing. As engineers, it's our responsibility to keep the fox strong and help it reclaim the popularity it once enjoyed. Let's rally behind it!
>As engineers, it's our responsibility to keep the fox strong and help it reclaim the popularity it once enjoyed.
That's the problem: Mozilla makes ~590 million, but the vast majority is not for engineers, but for:
https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/women-in-ai-ethics-ex...
Not to mention firing a CEO with cancer, throwing a Party (Feminist, Decolonial, LGBTQIA+, Climate Justice using Al) in Zambia (no joke) after firing 1/3 of the staff and so on. Firefox/Mozilla is the best paid OSS project (apart from Linux), but spends most of the money on non-technical stuff (same with the Linux Foundation).
Mozilla.org/Mozilla is now a Ad-Company not a OSS-Project.
That's the problem: Mozilla makes ~590 million, but the vast majority is not for engineers, but for:
https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/women-in-ai-ethics-ex...
Not to mention firing a CEO with cancer, throwing a Party (Feminist, Decolonial, LGBTQIA+, Climate Justice using Al) in Zambia (no joke) after firing 1/3 of the staff and so on. Firefox/Mozilla is the best paid OSS project (apart from Linux), but spends most of the money on non-technical stuff (same with the Linux Foundation).
Mozilla.org/Mozilla is now a Ad-Company not a OSS-Project.
According to Mozilla's financial filings, CEO Mitchell Baker's compensation increased from $5,591,406 in 2021 to $6,903,089 in 2022. During that period, Mozilla's revenues – long dominated by payments from Google to make it Firefox's default search – dipped from $527,585,000 to $510,389,000 [...] "Fully 30 percent of all expenditure goes on administration" [1]
In 2018, Baker received a total of $2,458,350 in compensation from Mozilla, a 400% payrise since 2008. Over the same period, Firefox market share was down 85%. [..] In 2020, after returning to the position of CEO, Baker's salary rose to in excess of $3 million. In 2021, her salary rose again to more than $5 million, and again to nearly $7 million in 2022). In August 2020 the Mozilla Corporation laid off approximately 250 employees due to shrinking revenues, after previously laying off roughly 70 in January [2]
I'm of the opinion that there should exist mechanisms for nonprofits to reclaim ill gotten remuneration from ex CEOs
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/09/mozilla_ceo_mitchell_...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Baker
In 2018, Baker received a total of $2,458,350 in compensation from Mozilla, a 400% payrise since 2008. Over the same period, Firefox market share was down 85%. [..] In 2020, after returning to the position of CEO, Baker's salary rose to in excess of $3 million. In 2021, her salary rose again to more than $5 million, and again to nearly $7 million in 2022). In August 2020 the Mozilla Corporation laid off approximately 250 employees due to shrinking revenues, after previously laying off roughly 70 in January [2]
I'm of the opinion that there should exist mechanisms for nonprofits to reclaim ill gotten remuneration from ex CEOs
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/09/mozilla_ceo_mitchell_...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Baker
Unfortunately, many Ex-Mozilla people thought she deserved the money.
They loved Mitchell Baker's focus on culture: Mozilla's progressive social causes and performances. They loved their culture more than their business and their own browser.
Like other companies in the ZIRP era, the staff wanted a fun tech company culture that made them feel like they were good people. Even great people. They preferred a celebrity CEO with pleasant illusions over a business leader with hard truths.
They loved Mitchell Baker's focus on culture: Mozilla's progressive social causes and performances. They loved their culture more than their business and their own browser.
Like other companies in the ZIRP era, the staff wanted a fun tech company culture that made them feel like they were good people. Even great people. They preferred a celebrity CEO with pleasant illusions over a business leader with hard truths.
>I'm of the opinion that there should exist mechanisms for non-profits to reclaim ill gotten remuneration from ex CEOs
Absolutely on your side, also the foggy connection between Mozilla Corporation and Mozilla.org leaves a sour taste.
Absolutely on your side, also the foggy connection between Mozilla Corporation and Mozilla.org leaves a sour taste.
please look at their financials. how much money they spend on salary, remuneration to managers, administrative and finally moonshots.
besides, how would YOU finance to pay around 1200-1800 employees (from my initial online search) salaries that are competitive to Facebook and google or microsoft? why would someone work at mozilla for less money when they could work in the same city at a bigger office for more cash?
now, if mozilla took to employing foreigners, like from asia, they could reduce their salary spend by 5-10 times which would make them less dependent on external funding or employ 5-8 times many people for same money.
point is, building a browser takes money so how will YOU finance the company/non profit if you were given the charge
edit: also, how much would you consider your remuneration be commensurate to the level of work you are putting in?
besides, how would YOU finance to pay around 1200-1800 employees (from my initial online search) salaries that are competitive to Facebook and google or microsoft? why would someone work at mozilla for less money when they could work in the same city at a bigger office for more cash?
now, if mozilla took to employing foreigners, like from asia, they could reduce their salary spend by 5-10 times which would make them less dependent on external funding or employ 5-8 times many people for same money.
point is, building a browser takes money so how will YOU finance the company/non profit if you were given the charge
edit: also, how much would you consider your remuneration be commensurate to the level of work you are putting in?
>point is, building a browser takes money so how will YOU finance the company/non profit if you were given the charge
My point is that they dont invest it into the browser but:
>managers, administrative and finally moonshots.
>how would YOU finance to pay around 1200-1800 employees
Get rid of most of the non-technical staff and work on the software you get your donations for. Out with the leeches, in with the makers, it's software, not a political campaign.
Google Chrome has/had ~23 paid developers, then we bring back the MDN team, let's say 8 people, administrative stuff 5 for a total of 36 people, let's double that because we have $590 million to spend and round it up to 80 people, okay?
But hey, look at that ("Firefox Maker Rebrands as 'Global Crew of Activists'"), this is where the money is going:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJ5emSxK7A
My point is that they dont invest it into the browser but:
>managers, administrative and finally moonshots.
>how would YOU finance to pay around 1200-1800 employees
Get rid of most of the non-technical staff and work on the software you get your donations for. Out with the leeches, in with the makers, it's software, not a political campaign.
Google Chrome has/had ~23 paid developers, then we bring back the MDN team, let's say 8 people, administrative stuff 5 for a total of 36 people, let's double that because we have $590 million to spend and round it up to 80 people, okay?
But hey, look at that ("Firefox Maker Rebrands as 'Global Crew of Activists'"), this is where the money is going:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJ5emSxK7A
> Google Chrome has/had ~23 paid developers,
If you believe this, you maybe shouldn't be making claims about the economics of browser development. That's off by ludicrous amounts.
If you believe this, you maybe shouldn't be making claims about the economics of browser development. That's off by ludicrous amounts.
2019:
>Chrome, with an emphasis on making the web great for the next billion users. The team consists of around 40 engineers, in addition to a number of PMs, test engineers, UX designers, researchers, and others. We built a lot of features in Chrome that are used by more than a billion people.)
https://mdwdotla.medium.com/some-thoughts-on-running-success...
"MY" Mozilla has 46 engineers ;)
But if you think ludicrous big teams can make "much" product you should read "The Mythical Man-Month"..again ;)
The ~23 was from 2012, sorry about the outdated information
>Chrome, with an emphasis on making the web great for the next billion users. The team consists of around 40 engineers, in addition to a number of PMs, test engineers, UX designers, researchers, and others. We built a lot of features in Chrome that are used by more than a billion people.)
https://mdwdotla.medium.com/some-thoughts-on-running-success...
"MY" Mozilla has 46 engineers ;)
But if you think ludicrous big teams can make "much" product you should read "The Mythical Man-Month"..again ;)
The ~23 was from 2012, sorry about the outdated information
You've accidentally left off some pretty important context from that quote:
> Chrome Mobile teams in Seattle and Kirkland, spanning four sub-teams in Chrome, with an emphasis on ...
It's not the number of engineers working on Chrome. It's the number of engineers who worked in that guy's Chrome Mobile team in a specific location. (It's not clear whether there were other teams working in Chrome Mobile in other offices). That's a team making mobile-specific improvements to Chrome or adapting it to the mobile environment, not a team making a browser from scratch. So it's ignoring the people working on the layout engine, rendering engine, the javascript engine, security, the desktop UI, codecs, web APIs, developer tools, networking and protocols, extension APIs and store, etc.
There is also absolutely no way Chrome had 23 engineers in 2012, but since you didn't give the source, I have no idea of exactly what tiny subset that number was actually representing.
> Chrome Mobile teams in Seattle and Kirkland, spanning four sub-teams in Chrome, with an emphasis on ...
It's not the number of engineers working on Chrome. It's the number of engineers who worked in that guy's Chrome Mobile team in a specific location. (It's not clear whether there were other teams working in Chrome Mobile in other offices). That's a team making mobile-specific improvements to Chrome or adapting it to the mobile environment, not a team making a browser from scratch. So it's ignoring the people working on the layout engine, rendering engine, the javascript engine, security, the desktop UI, codecs, web APIs, developer tools, networking and protocols, extension APIs and store, etc.
There is also absolutely no way Chrome had 23 engineers in 2012, but since you didn't give the source, I have no idea of exactly what tiny subset that number was actually representing.
2012:
>Officially chrome has 23 members.
https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-work-on-Google-Chrome
2008:
https://web.archive.org/web/20240227122339/http://s.niallken...
>Officially chrome has 23 members.
https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-work-on-Google-Chrome
2008:
https://web.archive.org/web/20240227122339/http://s.niallken...
Ok, so let's check that quora link. The answer is by some random web designer. Their source is this:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120116201141/http://code.googl...
And what does that page say? Right at the top:
> Here are some members of the Developer Relations team
It's not the Chrome engineering team. It's some part of just the team doing developer outreach (not necessarily even the entirity of that team).
You keep finding these obviously incorrect references to support your arguments, and presenting them as facts. And by obvious I mean really obvious. There is no way you can read that page and mistakenly think it's the Chrome engineering team. At this point the best case is that you're not actually reading any of these sources, and just randomly pasting them here. The worst case is that you've noticed that your sources are bogus, and just don't care.
Neither of those is arguing in good faith.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120116201141/http://code.googl...
And what does that page say? Right at the top:
> Here are some members of the Developer Relations team
It's not the Chrome engineering team. It's some part of just the team doing developer outreach (not necessarily even the entirity of that team).
You keep finding these obviously incorrect references to support your arguments, and presenting them as facts. And by obvious I mean really obvious. There is no way you can read that page and mistakenly think it's the Chrome engineering team. At this point the best case is that you're not actually reading any of these sources, and just randomly pasting them here. The worst case is that you've noticed that your sources are bogus, and just don't care.
Neither of those is arguing in good faith.
> The ~23 was from 2012, sorry about the outdated information
In 2011, when asked "How many engineers work full-time on Chrome[...]?", a member of the Chrome team already said there were "enough to fill many buildings around the world". So even in 2012, ~23 seems way off.
https://old.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/gdyun/iama_we_are_thr...
In 2011, when asked "How many engineers work full-time on Chrome[...]?", a member of the Chrome team already said there were "enough to fill many buildings around the world". So even in 2012, ~23 seems way off.
https://old.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/gdyun/iama_we_are_thr...
Yes 40 engineers, 200 PM's and 300 "privacy/add's" advisors in typical google fashion.
Just look who wrote the second article i linked, i never said Google is slim and fast, but at least they have invite money.
And look at the second question from your "reddit" post:
>I don't understand. There are enough devs to fill many buildings for Chrome, that work on things exclusive to Chrome, not Chromium? In this post it sounds like Chrome is not much more than Chromium. What gives?
...no answer, WHAT a SOURCE
Just look who wrote the second article i linked, i never said Google is slim and fast, but at least they have invite money.
And look at the second question from your "reddit" post:
>I don't understand. There are enough devs to fill many buildings for Chrome, that work on things exclusive to Chrome, not Chromium? In this post it sounds like Chrome is not much more than Chromium. What gives?
...no answer, WHAT a SOURCE
pretty much this. Firefox is the twitter of software projects. You can Elon the workforce and end up way better off releasing features people care about again if you get a decent elon knockoff to skillfully fire everybody.
Sorry you got voted down, it's not right.
I knew it was going to happen and said it anyway. This place doesn't like truth when that truth is they or someone they know should be unemployed. What's the point of getting upvoted if you don't spend those points getting downvoted where it matters?
Side note, one thing that is good about this place is the downvoting is never that crazy, maybe -5 worst case most of the time. Reddit is far more expensive to say true things that are uncomfortable and that's a big problem.
Side note, one thing that is good about this place is the downvoting is never that crazy, maybe -5 worst case most of the time. Reddit is far more expensive to say true things that are uncomfortable and that's a big problem.
"help it reclaim the popularity it once enjoyed"
It sounds like they were just unlucky, but they are part of the loss.
First they loss the mass, that's a Google marketing problem.
But then they loss the power users and that was their issue. (Since then I'm a blink engine user)
If I must rally behind something that is something browsable I would pick servo or ladybird.
It sounds like they were just unlucky, but they are part of the loss.
First they loss the mass, that's a Google marketing problem.
But then they loss the power users and that was their issue. (Since then I'm a blink engine user)
If I must rally behind something that is something browsable I would pick servo or ladybird.
Loosing the general audience was do to Google using their dominant search position to shove constant ads like: "Use a secure, fast Browser: Switch to Goole Chrome!" during user searches.
While browser projects like servo or ladybird are certainly appreciated, I think their state of "something browsable" is not really what most users, even technical ones, would like for their daily browsing.
/
How do you think Firefox has lost the power users/devs?
While browser projects like servo or ladybird are certainly appreciated, I think their state of "something browsable" is not really what most users, even technical ones, would like for their daily browsing.
/
How do you think Firefox has lost the power users/devs?
Google didn't steal many Firefox users initially. They absorbed more new users in a rapidly growing market. They used to pay sites and downloads to install Chrome alongside whatever the user actually wanted to install (sometimes done without the user consent)
Later the network effects started going against Firefox but most people go by percentage of market and assume they were losing users long before they actually did.
Later the network effects started going against Firefox but most people go by percentage of market and assume they were losing users long before they actually did.
A example addon from the good time https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-us/firefox/addon/sqlite-ma...
Now we have a addon system that's the same as chrome(+ manifest v2).
Now we have a addon system that's the same as chrome(+ manifest v2).
Not to forget the magnificent growth of Android with Chrome being the standard browser since 2012, with absolutely no incentive to install any other browser.
I honestly prefer Firefox forks that switch off all the telemetry.
Mozilla recently becomes more and more greedy in terms of breaking down privacy.
Mozilla recently becomes more and more greedy in terms of breaking down privacy.
Anonymous telemetry is more than justified if it improves system stability. I don't think they do remotely the tracking other browser vendors like Microsoft or Google do.
Except when the browser won't start, and then loses all your previous session, because your internet is out when you start it and so it can't do whatever 'necessary' telemetry and verification it needs.
Yes, just happened to me. Not happy about losing my session. Even less happy about the dependency and what might be being telemetered or 'verified'.
Yes, just happened to me. Not happy about losing my session. Even less happy about the dependency and what might be being telemetered or 'verified'.
Telemetry is spyware. As such, it is never justified. The anonymous card is for fools.
> [article with many words about why you should use firefox].
Tree Style Tabs. uBlock Origin.
There, I rewrote it for you.
Tree Style Tabs. uBlock Origin.
There, I rewrote it for you.
I converted from TST to Sidebery years ago and haven't looked back, but generally agree with the sentiment.
I got Firefox with tree style tabs. Then it looked odd so I followed the youtube instructions about copying some code into some obscure file to make it look ok. Then yesterday it changed appearance and put another bar in. Dunno. I'm kind of back on Chrome which just works without all that.
The worst part of Firefox is Mozilla.
Yup, I've been using it on Android for the last few years and it has been great. Fast, customisable, lots of power-user features.
Chrome feels like it was written for the benefit of Google, not for me.
Chrome feels like it was written for the benefit of Google, not for me.
I was a Firefox user for more than a decade. I switched to Brave earlier this year and it’s been great.
I think Firefox is truly superior on the desktop, but Firefox on mobile is inferior. I also once switched to Brave (on mobile and as a secondary browser on desktop), but lately, in the last year or so, Brave has become bloated with services and features that I don't need and can't disable. I am back with Firefox (Fennec, to be precise). Not a great experience, but good enough for me.
I am not convinced at all:
> extensions
You can use a Chromium browser like Samsung Internet
> View PDFs in browser
Chrome is adding support for that https://www.androidauthority.com/open-pdf-files-chrome-andro...
Not to mention, performance is better on Chrome (and Samsung Internet), and the difference is obvious in Speedometer benchmark.
> extensions
You can use a Chromium browser like Samsung Internet
> View PDFs in browser
Chrome is adding support for that https://www.androidauthority.com/open-pdf-files-chrome-andro...
Not to mention, performance is better on Chrome (and Samsung Internet), and the difference is obvious in Speedometer benchmark.
uBlock Origin and other adblocker performance will never be as good on Chrome as they are on Firefox, since Chrome forced MV3 on users (which they pushed specs-wise to keep their ad empire running), while Firefox stated they will always keep MV2 also supported.
Source: https://ublockorigin.com/
Source: https://ublockorigin.com/
Chrome is adding, not added. His point is still valid.
Har har.
I've just had the third experience over just a couple of months, where FF has completely lost all my tabs etc. Previously I've been able to recover some state by moving the sessionstore-backups files around, but this time, completely gone.
The trigger this time was starting FF when my internet was down. It could not 'verify' all the addons, and just seemed to hang indefinitely. Really, why does it need t 'verify' the extensions on startup? And what does that involve, actually? Is it phoning-home all my addons and settings just to even start up?
I've really lost trust in this browser.
I've just had the third experience over just a couple of months, where FF has completely lost all my tabs etc. Previously I've been able to recover some state by moving the sessionstore-backups files around, but this time, completely gone.
The trigger this time was starting FF when my internet was down. It could not 'verify' all the addons, and just seemed to hang indefinitely. Really, why does it need t 'verify' the extensions on startup? And what does that involve, actually? Is it phoning-home all my addons and settings just to even start up?
I've really lost trust in this browser.
Sync does not work reliably. Features are missing or forever in development. Not sure where lies the superiority except in virtue of not being Google.
And let’s not talk about the pleas to keep the funnel of Google’s money.
And let’s not talk about the pleas to keep the funnel of Google’s money.
I am currently using Brave after switching from Chrome. Chrome changed the way accessibility worked last year which didn't work for me. Instead of scaling text it zooms in on pages which results in an undesirable scrollfest.
Once in a while I retry Firefox but text scaling is a hot mess. On some sites it simply doesn't work, on others content will go outside of the bounding box and on some sites it just clips text. For me it is barely usable in its current form leaving me at Brave.
Once in a while I retry Firefox but text scaling is a hot mess. On some sites it simply doesn't work, on others content will go outside of the bounding box and on some sites it just clips text. For me it is barely usable in its current form leaving me at Brave.
I use it most of the time. But it's indeed not perfect.
For example, on Linux, quite a few Youtube videos won't play and sometimes they even crash the browser. Other websites have also crashed it for me, but I can't remember which ones, it just happens every now and then on random websites... The problem was so bad that I switched to using Chromium on my Linux machine.
On Mac and iOS, it seems to be more stable and it's still my main browser.
On Mac and iOS, it seems to be more stable and it's still my main browser.
I feel you should investigate this more, as this isn't normal. I feel it could be related to a combination of OS or ram as I have found FF to be the most stable browser I've used running it on Fedora and Android. I've had no crashes and no issues with any media consumption.
Do you have links to some of those videos? I haven't noticed anything like that on my system. Actually, YouTube on Firefox works so well on my Linux machine that it doesn't even start its fan when I'm watching videos, whereas on my similar work machine with Edge on Windows it's fairly loud.
On iOS, all browsers (well except Safari) use Safari webview with customized browser GUI.
never had any problems with firefox on Linux, absolutely none at all
[deleted]
"Superior" ... unless you don't use IoT, Arduino etc that most if not all of the programming/debugging webapps are using things that the Mozilla folks refuse to implement : webUSB/webSerial , sorry we are not on 90s!
I know the author is talking about the mobile experience, so a bit of a tangent but
Multi account containers, especially with temporary containers improved my web experience so much that I don’t think I could ever go back.
It’s so much more fluid than profiles.
Multi account containers, especially with temporary containers improved my web experience so much that I don’t think I could ever go back.
It’s so much more fluid than profiles.
If I’m not mistaken all of this is available on Safari too. Does that make Safari its equal?
true, I only wish Firefox could bridge some of the performance gap, but frankly, it's pretty fine as it is
- Firefox Sync is much better than Safari/Chrome options, you can close tabs remotely, sending tabs is instantaneous and never fails (Chrome IME was flaky)
- as the article mentions, a lot of mobile addons, including Stylus and the *Monkey userscript addons, I have cloud sync set up for both and it's nice to have userscripts running on all platforms
- Tree Style Tabs is still the best UI for managing tabs in any browser I've used
- browser UI customization via userChrome.css file, and user.js for persistent about:config flags, every time you set up a new Chrome profile, have to set up flags manually
- it's fast (enough), ironically I switched from Chrome after I started have inexplicable slowdowns that I couldn't solve by disabling extensions or a new profile, since the Manifest V2 moment was upon us, I took the opportunity to give Firefox a try again
- Firefox Sync is much better than Safari/Chrome options, you can close tabs remotely, sending tabs is instantaneous and never fails (Chrome IME was flaky)
- as the article mentions, a lot of mobile addons, including Stylus and the *Monkey userscript addons, I have cloud sync set up for both and it's nice to have userscripts running on all platforms
- Tree Style Tabs is still the best UI for managing tabs in any browser I've used
- browser UI customization via userChrome.css file, and user.js for persistent about:config flags, every time you set up a new Chrome profile, have to set up flags manually
- it's fast (enough), ironically I switched from Chrome after I started have inexplicable slowdowns that I couldn't solve by disabling extensions or a new profile, since the Manifest V2 moment was upon us, I took the opportunity to give Firefox a try again
Not to mention Firefox is much less RAM-blocking and battery draining!
Firefox, uBlock Origin, Sideberry. No complaints. I just hope Mozilla doesn't ruin it with their misguided investments and laying off devs.
It is a great piece of software
[deleted]
HD DVD was superior, Betamax was superior, 8-track was superior.
I feel the issue with all of these was general uptake required for companies to produce enough content for it to be worth owning.
Firefox doesn't have that issue. It is a more fully featured browser across mobile and desktop with access to the exact same content as Chrome or Safari.
Firefox doesn't have that issue. It is a more fully featured browser across mobile and desktop with access to the exact same content as Chrome or Safari.
HD DVDs all rotted from the red dye in the packaging. You can't play them anymore if they were stored in the original cases.
not the most in depth article
Please return Brendan Eich and the old mos://a logo instead of the green yelling bird.
omg I didn't notice that had changed.
The mos://a logo is (was) iconic and completely sums up what the org should be about.
To me the new logo looks like a dinosaur, or a lizard or a snake. Quite appropriate.
The mos://a logo is (was) iconic and completely sums up what the org should be about.
To me the new logo looks like a dinosaur, or a lizard or a snake. Quite appropriate.
Really?! It's even a bigger memory hog than Chrome!
Not in my experience, though likely it depends on what you're running in the browser. My experience with web apps designed only against chrome are they perform worse in Firefox (Gmail, etc). This is not a Firefox issue though.
I specifically switched to Firefox 2 years ago because the inverse is/was true. Even if Chrome has improved, it can't be as dramatically.
I tried many times to switch to Firefox from Chrome and went back every single time. Yesterday by mistake I started Firefox with a few hundred tabs - it was using 128GB of memory and simply died. Chrome handles thousands of tabs without an issue. The only lean browser is Safari. Many sites don't work on Firefox or Chrome, but never had any issues with Safari.
Why has this thread been flagged?
> Firefox Is the Superior Browser
Original article title:
> Switching to Firefox
An important thing that both titles miss: this is talking about Firefox for Android. The things discussed in the first section mostly actually happened around desktop Firefox, but the rest of the article is exclusively about Firefox for Android.
Please, HN, a request: given that this is what the article is about, could we please make this discussion about Firefox for Android, and leave desktop Firefox alone as much as possible? Firefox versus Chrome on desktop gets discussed frequently¹, we all know the arguments; but Firefox versus Chrome on Android doesn’t, and the calculus is quite interestingly different. For example, the first two points raised are mobile-only, as they’re things both give you on desktop, but only Firefox on Android.
—⁂—
¹ My guess is that there’s a dedicated Firefox- or Chrome-related thread that ends focusing on such matters in some way at least once every couple of months, and a few more minor subtheads in between.