Ask HN: For those who use Chrome, why do you?
117 comments
I've used every popular browser (chrome/edge/old edge/firefox/opera/brave/chromium/vivaldi) on Windows. Chrome works most smooth of the time without any funny issues.
Supposedly people said Edge is Chromium based, and is better, less memory usage, etc. I tried it, it just feels more clunky, takes longer to open, pages take longer to load. I also dislike the interface, chrome's interface seems more natural to me. And of course doesn't have the same extensions.
Firefox feels faster than chrome for certain sites, but I find it has issues with other sites. Might be because sites design for Chrome these days. Also Firefox like the original Netscape has random freezes and bugs. A lot less, but I find chrome just works most of the time with less problems.
An example site I can think of, off the top of my head, youtube works way smoother in chrome than firefox. I'm not a huge youtube fan but lately I've been trying to view content that happens to be only available on youtube. Opera has even worse youtube support.
I can't remember why I stopped using Chromium but I think it was a lack of extension support. I recalled it lacked something Chrome had that was important to me. If it's important to you, I can use it again so I can remind myself what it was.
For the record I do use Firefox as my backup browser, and I would say it's better than Chrome at some things (it loads certain sites faster, and has better extension support), and better privacy options, but overall Chrome works better for every site.
Supposedly people said Edge is Chromium based, and is better, less memory usage, etc. I tried it, it just feels more clunky, takes longer to open, pages take longer to load. I also dislike the interface, chrome's interface seems more natural to me. And of course doesn't have the same extensions.
Firefox feels faster than chrome for certain sites, but I find it has issues with other sites. Might be because sites design for Chrome these days. Also Firefox like the original Netscape has random freezes and bugs. A lot less, but I find chrome just works most of the time with less problems.
An example site I can think of, off the top of my head, youtube works way smoother in chrome than firefox. I'm not a huge youtube fan but lately I've been trying to view content that happens to be only available on youtube. Opera has even worse youtube support.
I can't remember why I stopped using Chromium but I think it was a lack of extension support. I recalled it lacked something Chrome had that was important to me. If it's important to you, I can use it again so I can remind myself what it was.
For the record I do use Firefox as my backup browser, and I would say it's better than Chrome at some things (it loads certain sites faster, and has better extension support), and better privacy options, but overall Chrome works better for every site.
You can install any chrome extension from the chrome store in Edge, you just click the usual 'add to chrome' button and Edge will install it.
You can simply open youtube links with mpv.
Do you know which extensions are not available on Firefox? I'm considering moving to Firefox and feel like after I move there'll be that one Chrome extension that isn't on Firefox.
Firefox + Multi-Account Containers [1] + Container Proxy [2] + Cookie Auto-Delete [3] have completely changed the way I use the web. I can now have multiple Discord accounts open, multiple e-mail accounts, etc.
Cookie Auto-Delete removes all persistent traces of my browsing (Cache, IndexedDB, LocalStorage, Plugin Data, Service Workers, Cookies) unless I have whitelisted a site. And you can whitelist sites on a per-container basis - the integration with Multi-Account Containers is solid.
Container Proxy lets me set up different SOCKS proxies per container. For example, if you have a system-wide VPN with a killswitch running, but want to stream from Netflix or HBO, you can attach a SOCKS proxy to a new "Streaming" container that connects to a SOCKS server running on your local network, effectively bypassing your VPN. Alternatively, if you want to make sure a container is unable to connect to anything without going through a VPN connection, you can bind the container to the SOCKS server on localhost created by your VPN client. You can then use this to set up multiple geographically separate "identities" that don't mix with each other.
All three extensions are reviewed by Mozilla - and Multi-Account Containers is actually written by Mozilla!
After using this setup, I feel that context separation is the future to privacy (and perhaps even security, as Qubes OS demonstrates.)
[1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...
[2]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/container-pro...
[3]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autode...
Cookie Auto-Delete removes all persistent traces of my browsing (Cache, IndexedDB, LocalStorage, Plugin Data, Service Workers, Cookies) unless I have whitelisted a site. And you can whitelist sites on a per-container basis - the integration with Multi-Account Containers is solid.
Container Proxy lets me set up different SOCKS proxies per container. For example, if you have a system-wide VPN with a killswitch running, but want to stream from Netflix or HBO, you can attach a SOCKS proxy to a new "Streaming" container that connects to a SOCKS server running on your local network, effectively bypassing your VPN. Alternatively, if you want to make sure a container is unable to connect to anything without going through a VPN connection, you can bind the container to the SOCKS server on localhost created by your VPN client. You can then use this to set up multiple geographically separate "identities" that don't mix with each other.
All three extensions are reviewed by Mozilla - and Multi-Account Containers is actually written by Mozilla!
After using this setup, I feel that context separation is the future to privacy (and perhaps even security, as Qubes OS demonstrates.)
[1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...
[2]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/container-pro...
[3]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autode...
I'd add temporary containers to that list (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...)
So you get an automatically generated container for each domain (even navigating from an existing one) and whitelisting per wildcard/container
I need to try this. Are those features available on Android too?
I don't have Android, but it can't hurt to check: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/addon/multi-account...
Nope, but that is OK. I can use this capability on my laptop at times. Somehow I just missed it.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Firefox on Android currently only has 15 addons in total [0] (!).
[0] https://addons.mozilla.org/sv-SE/android/search/
[0] https://addons.mozilla.org/sv-SE/android/search/
* Switched a couple of years ago from Firefox because of better dev tools.
* GPU acceleration doesn't work properly with Firefox/Linux (Dell G5 SE, Ryzen 4800H). Some sites I use daily, such as Google Maps, are painfully slow/laggy on Firefox.
* There's something about the Firefox's scrolling behaviour that I find really annoying.
* It works well across all platforms (Firefox on Android wasn't great last time I checked).
* It's the most tested browser. Many websites don't bother to test with Firefox.
* Chrome has the richest extension ecosystem.
* Some of the alternatives, such as Brave are not as trustworthy. Security is a bigger concern than privacy for me. Google has one of the best security track records.
* I'm heavily invested in the Google ecosystem, and I use dozens of their products. There's always a switching cost involved. Just changing the browser has a negligable effect on privacy if I'm constantly using the other Google services.
* Personally had overall an overwhelmingly positive experience over the last 15+ years I've been in the Google ecosystem. Google hasn't done anything to betray my trust so far.
* GPU acceleration doesn't work properly with Firefox/Linux (Dell G5 SE, Ryzen 4800H). Some sites I use daily, such as Google Maps, are painfully slow/laggy on Firefox.
* There's something about the Firefox's scrolling behaviour that I find really annoying.
* It works well across all platforms (Firefox on Android wasn't great last time I checked).
* It's the most tested browser. Many websites don't bother to test with Firefox.
* Chrome has the richest extension ecosystem.
* Some of the alternatives, such as Brave are not as trustworthy. Security is a bigger concern than privacy for me. Google has one of the best security track records.
* I'm heavily invested in the Google ecosystem, and I use dozens of their products. There's always a switching cost involved. Just changing the browser has a negligable effect on privacy if I'm constantly using the other Google services.
* Personally had overall an overwhelmingly positive experience over the last 15+ years I've been in the Google ecosystem. Google hasn't done anything to betray my trust so far.
> * It works well across all platforms (Firefox on Android wasn't great last time I checked).
I've made Firefox my default browser on Android a couple of months ago and I'd say it's basically completely usable at this point.
I am running it with NoScript on, which is probably more of an exercise in masochism than anything else - more or less every site loads broken, of course, without JS these days, and a recent change to the Firefox addon interface means selectively enabling scripts to get it working is a multi-tap pain in the ass. I am probably going to switch to uBlock Origin (which someone here mentioned works now in FF mobile).
Performance wise I'd say it's probably a bit slower but still perfectly usable (running it on a Pixel 3 and a Motorola OneVision).
I enabled sync on it as well, with an account created just to sync between my two mobile devices, and it works fine.
I've made Firefox my default browser on Android a couple of months ago and I'd say it's basically completely usable at this point.
I am running it with NoScript on, which is probably more of an exercise in masochism than anything else - more or less every site loads broken, of course, without JS these days, and a recent change to the Firefox addon interface means selectively enabling scripts to get it working is a multi-tap pain in the ass. I am probably going to switch to uBlock Origin (which someone here mentioned works now in FF mobile).
Performance wise I'd say it's probably a bit slower but still perfectly usable (running it on a Pixel 3 and a Motorola OneVision).
I enabled sync on it as well, with an account created just to sync between my two mobile devices, and it works fine.
I wanted to switch. The (albeit limited amount of) extensions on Firefox for Android made it even more appealing. However it´s so unbearable slow that I quickly moved back to Chrome.
> There's something about the Firefox's scrolling behaviour that I find really annoying.
Old versions didn't enable fractional scrolling by default. On Debian 9 XFCE, GTK3 apps and chromium both had it baked in.
Fractional scrolling is what lets you move just a pixel at a time with your trackpoint or trackpad scrolling. Maybe it has been patched since then, but at the time firefox needed a tweak. Afterwards trackpoint scrolling felt more precise than my W10 thinkpads.
Fractional scrolling is what lets you move just a pixel at a time with your trackpoint or trackpad scrolling. Maybe it has been patched since then, but at the time firefox needed a tweak. Afterwards trackpoint scrolling felt more precise than my W10 thinkpads.
Why do you see Brave as less trustworthy? I don't think the news has reached me.
* Brave is derivative software. In case of security issues, there might be some lag from when the issue is fixed in Chrome to when it'll be fixed in Brave.
* Brave adds custom code that generally has less eyes on it.
* The business model is potentially problematic. Which can lead to incidents such as this one: [1]
* I don't know how good are Brave's security development and operational practices.
* Trust is something that is built over time. Brave hasn't been around so long, so doesn't have an established security track record.
1. https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-aff...
* Brave adds custom code that generally has less eyes on it.
* The business model is potentially problematic. Which can lead to incidents such as this one: [1]
* I don't know how good are Brave's security development and operational practices.
* Trust is something that is built over time. Brave hasn't been around so long, so doesn't have an established security track record.
1. https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-aff...
I believe Brave removes a lot of the telemetry and tracking code from Chromium, so I consider it more trustworthy.
You don't consider tracking your location against your explicit settings a betrayal? Or the pushing of AMP?
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/aug/13/google-lo...
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/aug/13/google-lo...
I've enabled the Timeline feature in Google Maps, which records everywhere I go. The benefit I get out of that feature outweighs the privacy concerns for me.
Since I use Google as my main search engine, Google already knows what I've clicked on, so in that case AMP is just an annoyance, not a privacy concern.
Google spent enormous efforts to make the internet fast (Chrome, V8, QUIC, SPDY & HTTP/2, BBR, TLS 1.3, etc.) I will give them the benefit of the doubt that they developed AMP for performance reasons and not for tracking reasons.
I'm personally less concerned about the recording of the data, than the security of the data. Leaks due to security incomptence (e.g. the Facebook leak) seem like a much bigger imminent threat to me.
Since I use Google as my main search engine, Google already knows what I've clicked on, so in that case AMP is just an annoyance, not a privacy concern.
Google spent enormous efforts to make the internet fast (Chrome, V8, QUIC, SPDY & HTTP/2, BBR, TLS 1.3, etc.) I will give them the benefit of the doubt that they developed AMP for performance reasons and not for tracking reasons.
I'm personally less concerned about the recording of the data, than the security of the data. Leaks due to security incomptence (e.g. the Facebook leak) seem like a much bigger imminent threat to me.
> I'm personally less concerned about the recording of the data, than the security of the data. Leaks due to security incomptence (e.g. the Facebook leak) seem like a much bigger imminent threat to me.
This reminds me of an old joke: it's not the fall that kills you; it's the sudden stop at the end.
You wouldn't have to worry about leaks if they didn't collect the data in the first place.
This reminds me of an old joke: it's not the fall that kills you; it's the sudden stop at the end.
You wouldn't have to worry about leaks if they didn't collect the data in the first place.
So Google never betrayed your trust because they simply haven't needed to - you gave them everything willingly.
Chrome dev tools are great. Or maybe I'm just use to them by this point.
Chrome also just by far has the best compatibility throughout the web. Whenever I try going to another browser, I always keep a copy of Chrome just so that I can pay utilities (because, of course, their site is broken on Safari, for example).
Also, I use all three major desktop OSes, and Chrome has been the most consistent throughout all 3. Firefox use to have serious rendering issues on macOS; I believe they may have been fixed but I can't be arsed to keep track of that.
Chrome also just by far has the best compatibility throughout the web. Whenever I try going to another browser, I always keep a copy of Chrome just so that I can pay utilities (because, of course, their site is broken on Safari, for example).
Also, I use all three major desktop OSes, and Chrome has been the most consistent throughout all 3. Firefox use to have serious rendering issues on macOS; I believe they may have been fixed but I can't be arsed to keep track of that.
This subject has gotten extremely political and I simply don’t trust most of what’s posted on Hacker News. Everything looks like motivated reasoning to me. Only a small minority really understand the issues and they use motivated reasoning too.
It’s much like deciding which nutritional studies to trust when most people aren’t scientists and are just reposting memes.
And although I don’t know what’s going on anymore, I have residual trust in the Chrome team since I used to work for Google.
It’s much like deciding which nutritional studies to trust when most people aren’t scientists and are just reposting memes.
And although I don’t know what’s going on anymore, I have residual trust in the Chrome team since I used to work for Google.
I think what you are saying is privacy concerns are a straw man. But just to accuse HN doesn't really help me. Can you share with us a bit about what is going on in Chrome. I would be genuinely interested to hear more about how it was made/runs etc.
Oh, I don't know anything. I didn't work closely with the Chrome team, and even if I did, I left Google years ago.
But I don't think my co-workers were evil, and though I didn't work personally with them much, I think the folks on the privacy and security teams know their business.
Public blog posts can be extremely difficult to understand though, I'm guessing because it's gotten so political. You can get a bit more from "intent to ship" emails on the public mailing lists.
But I don't think my co-workers were evil, and though I didn't work personally with them much, I think the folks on the privacy and security teams know their business.
Public blog posts can be extremely difficult to understand though, I'm guessing because it's gotten so political. You can get a bit more from "intent to ship" emails on the public mailing lists.
> But I don't think my co-workers were evil,
You don't have to be evil to do things that result in terrible outcomes.
I genuinely don't think anyone at Facebook wanted to create a propaganda tool, but that was the aggregate outcome.
I don't think anyone at Google set out to build an invasive surveillance platform. But in aggregate that's what's happened.
There's real danger in assuming you will only get bad outcomes because of bad people. Unintended consequences are a thing and I personally think most of the negatives of big tech come from precisely that.
If we can't acknowledge that because we insist on labelling everything and everyone good or evil, we'll never actually solve these issues.
You don't have to be evil to do things that result in terrible outcomes.
I genuinely don't think anyone at Facebook wanted to create a propaganda tool, but that was the aggregate outcome.
I don't think anyone at Google set out to build an invasive surveillance platform. But in aggregate that's what's happened.
There's real danger in assuming you will only get bad outcomes because of bad people. Unintended consequences are a thing and I personally think most of the negatives of big tech come from precisely that.
If we can't acknowledge that because we insist on labelling everything and everyone good or evil, we'll never actually solve these issues.
Yes, unintentional outcomes do happen, despite everyone’s best efforts. Sometimes we call them bugs, security holes, or design flaws. They aren’t unique to Chrome, either. There are bug bounties and hacking contests to encourage outside investigation.
Links about things like that do get posted here and that keeps me coming back. But it seems like for certain topics, good-faith critiques are often intermingled with large amounts of contempt. Often the contempt gets upvoted too, just because a lot of people agree with the sentiment.
I wonder if it would be possible to discuss such things without the contempt? Even the Chrome team’s attempts to improve security and privacy get discussed with contempt.
Links about things like that do get posted here and that keeps me coming back. But it seems like for certain topics, good-faith critiques are often intermingled with large amounts of contempt. Often the contempt gets upvoted too, just because a lot of people agree with the sentiment.
I wonder if it would be possible to discuss such things without the contempt? Even the Chrome team’s attempts to improve security and privacy get discussed with contempt.
Mainly because it's look and feel. I'm not a "power user". Chrome just looks lightweight and feels fast. The only browser that is similar in these aspects is Safari.
Firefox looks bad. For example:
- the spacing between the home button and the search bar
- why there's a line at the top of the current tab? The way Chrome distinguishes the current tab looks "better""
- the "back", "forward" and "refresh" buttons look big
Firefox looks bad. For example:
- the spacing between the home button and the search bar
- why there's a line at the top of the current tab? The way Chrome distinguishes the current tab looks "better""
- the "back", "forward" and "refresh" buttons look big
Right click the open space and select "Customize...", or "Customize Toolbar" from the menu, and you can change the button sizes a bit and remove those default spacers.
The people at Firefox who has sacrificed so much customizability in favour of "usability" and "good default experience" should read this :-/
For me it is still OK, my point is that it used to be possible to make it smashing.
For me it is still OK, my point is that it used to be possible to make it smashing.
Fast, stable, feature-rich, well tested, excellent security, continuously updated, first-rate support on all websites, cross-platform continuity, best extension ecosystem, excellent developer tools, easy to run different channels (e.g. stable and canary) simultaneously. I would use it on mobile if it supported extensions.
Because if feels faster.
I open a lot of tabs and keep my browser open for days. After a while, Firefox becomes slow, while Chromium always feels fast. It's hard to measure, but it's real. In addition, sometimes I encounter sites that do not work or are slower in Firefox (I don't have an example in my mind right now).
Also, more than once, I see that something is not supported/slower in Firefox just because of some unresolved bugs. They get fixed after a while, but that makes Chrome always ahead and ready when you need a specific feature right away. See for example:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26189604 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25916574 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24801058 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23690908 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22943131 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24896489
I open a lot of tabs and keep my browser open for days. After a while, Firefox becomes slow, while Chromium always feels fast. It's hard to measure, but it's real. In addition, sometimes I encounter sites that do not work or are slower in Firefox (I don't have an example in my mind right now).
Also, more than once, I see that something is not supported/slower in Firefox just because of some unresolved bugs. They get fixed after a while, but that makes Chrome always ahead and ready when you need a specific feature right away. See for example:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26189604 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25916574 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24801058 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23690908 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22943131 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24896489
I try to use Firefox (I do) but there are still issues every now and then and I find that I have to use Chrome for something at least once a day.
Most developers develop for Chrome and don't even consider Firefox.
I'm not particularly fond of Google (and growing less fond by-the-week) but the best I can do for now is use Firefox for 95% of things and keep Chrome around for the rest.
Most developers develop for Chrome and don't even consider Firefox.
I'm not particularly fond of Google (and growing less fond by-the-week) but the best I can do for now is use Firefox for 95% of things and keep Chrome around for the rest.
I won't make a blog-post detailing things, since you could just as well google your way into those details. Instead I'll note down:
- Best devtools, particularity regarding how the tools feel to browse around in.
- Feels slightly better to browse with. Only small differences, like how scroll is just a bit "smooth".
- Looks better ui-wise. (arguably a personal take, but also arguably not)
- (as others will note) Because it's essentially standard at this point, and I work with webdev.
I use chromium though, at least it makes things less google-y. And I thoroughly dislike the Alphabet-monopoly situation and all the bad things it brings. I really wish browsers were far less centralized than they are right now, and that some kind of web-standards consortium worked better than it does. But I don't pretend to be able to fix things like that right now. Besides, at this point, the whole Alphabet-monopoly situation is arguably a political issue rather than a technical one. (Political issues require political solutions)
- Best devtools, particularity regarding how the tools feel to browse around in.
- Feels slightly better to browse with. Only small differences, like how scroll is just a bit "smooth".
- Looks better ui-wise. (arguably a personal take, but also arguably not)
- (as others will note) Because it's essentially standard at this point, and I work with webdev.
I use chromium though, at least it makes things less google-y. And I thoroughly dislike the Alphabet-monopoly situation and all the bad things it brings. I really wish browsers were far less centralized than they are right now, and that some kind of web-standards consortium worked better than it does. But I don't pretend to be able to fix things like that right now. Besides, at this point, the whole Alphabet-monopoly situation is arguably a political issue rather than a technical one. (Political issues require political solutions)
>Best devtools, particularity regarding how the tools feel to browse around in.
been using firefox for about 5 years now, whenever i have to debug in chromium based browser I think the exact same thing about firefox. I feel like this could be a case of whatever you are used to. Like how android feels vs ios
been using firefox for about 5 years now, whenever i have to debug in chromium based browser I think the exact same thing about firefox. I feel like this could be a case of whatever you are used to. Like how android feels vs ios
Agree with you there. I find Firefox css devtools the best and while other browsers copied them they were the ones that implements them first. The big ones are the flex and grid layout tools and having a list of styles changes you made in the devtools.
Good reminder about chromium, I should install that too. The phone home requests while not even browsing with chrome is simply said excessive
This bothers me. I wonder if it is legal at all. Browser does not need to call home to work, so what gives?
This is not a loaded question. A loaded question would be something like "For those who use Chrome, do you like having no privacy?" The question as posed contains no malicious presumptions and thus is not loaded.
Why did I start? Performance and dev tools. But that was a long time ago. Being technically competent doesn't mean you keep up to date on how all the major options for all major categories of software compare on all major features. Maybe Firefox is better on both counts now.
Why don't I switch? I haven't seen anything about Chrome re. privacy that has really bothered me personally, but I'm also the guy who clicks accept on cookie prompts. More immediately, I'm kept on Chrome by the Google ecosystem and not wanting to configure+migrate with something new.
Why don't I switch? I haven't seen anything about Chrome re. privacy that has really bothered me personally, but I'm also the guy who clicks accept on cookie prompts. More immediately, I'm kept on Chrome by the Google ecosystem and not wanting to configure+migrate with something new.
One reason is that chrome vulnerabilities are between 3 and 5 times more expensive. And thus, I would guess, more rare.
Sources: https://www.zerodium.com/program.html
https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/blog/2021/1/25/announcing-...
Sources: https://www.zerodium.com/program.html
https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/blog/2021/1/25/announcing-...
Super interesting way to look at it! Though I think you could make the argument that they're also more expensive because their potential impact is so much huger because of the size of the user base? i.e. maybe noone cares about Firefox vulns because if you land one you're only going to hit some tiny percentage of users.
Late to this but: I still use Chromium (and Iridium, a derivative that hopefully doesn't send info to Google), specifically on OpenBSD, for reasons summarized here (lower chance of privilege escalation, limiting bad behavior, easier to configure and quickly change javascript/images/cookies behavior generally and per-site):
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21566041
(...and discussed further in the parents of the above link, like: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21559122 or the full recent related discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21557309 ).
Given which, I might have switched to Firefox for some uses after a recent OpenBSD release where I think it got the pledlge/unveil support (preventing it from accessing the computer beyond config-specified limits), except for the JS/cookies/images config stuff (and that I got the impression the pledge/unveil stuff might be less useful in a less-well-organized code base...?).
One thing I wish I knew about firefox is a way, without extensions/add-ons, to limit which sites can use javascript/images/etc., and/or to open multiple config tabs at once to quickly turn those on by exception for occasional specific sites, as I do with chrome. Exception lists, even better. This was discussed a little bit at those above links.
[When I said those things before, someone replied helpfully, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21724710 ].
Given which, I might have switched to Firefox for some uses after a recent OpenBSD release where I think it got the pledlge/unveil support (preventing it from accessing the computer beyond config-specified limits), except for the JS/cookies/images config stuff (and that I got the impression the pledge/unveil stuff might be less useful in a less-well-organized code base...?).
One thing I wish I knew about firefox is a way, without extensions/add-ons, to limit which sites can use javascript/images/etc., and/or to open multiple config tabs at once to quickly turn those on by exception for occasional specific sites, as I do with chrome. Exception lists, even better. This was discussed a little bit at those above links.
[When I said those things before, someone replied helpfully, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21724710 ].
I use a Chrome just for watching Twitch streams. Despite Twitch only officially supporting 1080p60fps as the max, streamers are able to feed 1080p90fps or 1080p120fps streams to Twitch's RTMP servers. With my 60Hz monitor, Firefox is an absolute judder-fest when playing these streams, both on my desktop (Windows + Nvidia 2080TI w/HW H.264 decode) and my laptop (Fedora + Intel 630 w/VAAPI HW H.264 decode). Chromium-based browsers seem to handle these streams very well with no noticeable judder.
EDIT: I used to use Webex with Chrome also, but it mostly works fine now on Firefox, even for screen sharing. The only bug I've encountered is that the mute button occasionally doesn't work (audio not muted, but button says "unmute" and has no effect) and I have to rejoin the meeting. When the button works, it stays working for the duration of the meeting.
EDIT: I used to use Webex with Chrome also, but it mostly works fine now on Firefox, even for screen sharing. The only bug I've encountered is that the mute button occasionally doesn't work (audio not muted, but button says "unmute" and has no effect) and I have to rejoin the meeting. When the button works, it stays working for the duration of the meeting.
I use Chrome once a week or so when I suspect malfunctioning webware is failing Firefox or is having a fight with my fistful of antitracker plugins.
I believe I saw (2,8) cases where the error (was not, was) also present in Chrome.
I believe I saw (2,8) cases where the error (was not, was) also present in Chrome.
It's a very good question, I'm afraid the answers will mostly be shallow post-defacto justifications. I think we do many things autonomosly, reflexively, and come up with justifications after-the-fact.
I use Chrome because of its built in password manager. Every time I set up a day to move some of those passwords somewhere else I feel I have something more "important" to do.
I used to use Firefox a lot, but at one point it has so many performance issues, it was unusable for me and Chrome was like a breath of fresh air.
I have Firefox installed now, and sometimes browse with it, but I get the feeling that websites look odd in that browser, as if I was not seeing the websites as if they supposed to look.
I use Chromium to access a few mis-programmed websites which don't work well with other browsers, such as instagram.com and maps.google.com.
Chrome is like Starbucks. It may not be the best coffee in the town, but it has acceptable quality and you can find one everywhere you go, with (more or less) the same quality.
I don't want to think about browsers - I use a browser to visit websites. Chrome works for virtually all websites I visit, and doesn't cause too many issues. Maybe Firefox does as well, but I'm too lazy to try out, unless it has something seriously better to offer.
I don't want to think about browsers - I use a browser to visit websites. Chrome works for virtually all websites I visit, and doesn't cause too many issues. Maybe Firefox does as well, but I'm too lazy to try out, unless it has something seriously better to offer.
I don't but I can share a reason someone I know uses it instead of Firefox: profile switcher.
In Chrome you have pretty little button you click on that lists all your profiles in a nice looking way; with two actions you're done.
In Firefox, you have to type about:profiles, you get a horrendously looking list with all sorts of useless information, it's just a pain to access and look at.
Implement the same UX Chrome has for profiles in Firefox and you'll get more people on board.
In Chrome you have pretty little button you click on that lists all your profiles in a nice looking way; with two actions you're done.
In Firefox, you have to type about:profiles, you get a horrendously looking list with all sorts of useless information, it's just a pain to access and look at.
Implement the same UX Chrome has for profiles in Firefox and you'll get more people on board.
Not sure what your use case is, but Firefox’s containers might solve your problem with the older profile system: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...
Containers are 1000 times better than profiles!
I'm afraid you're both wrong, containers are an add-on, profiles are a core functionality.
That person does not want something new, they just want to use their existing workflow, which is possible, but inconvenient due to bad UX and ugly UI. These are their words, not mine.
As a user of both containers and profiles in Firefox I have to agree with them. The UX needs to improve and the UI needs to be prettyfied.
That person does not want something new, they just want to use their existing workflow, which is possible, but inconvenient due to bad UX and ugly UI. These are their words, not mine.
As a user of both containers and profiles in Firefox I have to agree with them. The UX needs to improve and the UI needs to be prettyfied.
container is a core functionality in Firefox, but it is mostly hidden away.
the add-ons are basically just the interfaces for you to access that core functionality.
If you don't want to trust the add-on developer just use the official one made by Mozila. It is the one i use.
https://addons.mozilla.org/pt-BR/firefox/addon/multi-account...
the add-ons are basically just the interfaces for you to access that core functionality.
If you don't want to trust the add-on developer just use the official one made by Mozila. It is the one i use.
https://addons.mozilla.org/pt-BR/firefox/addon/multi-account...
This has nothing to do with trust, a profile gives you a different set of add-ons, bookmarks, search history, saved passwords, cache and cookies, a container only gives you a different set of cookies.
This does not change the fact that container is a core functionality in Firefox.. and for some using addon is a matter of trust.. Also does not change the fact that chrome does not have anything like it..
Additionally Firefix also have profiles as a core funtionality, it already had it before chrome even existed so it had it much longer then chrome had.. But again is mostly hidden away..
You can access it with the command below:
firefox -ProfileManager
But as with containers there are add-ons to make as easy as chrome to switch between profiles.. Although i don't think there is an official one by Mozilla..
Additionally Firefix also have profiles as a core funtionality, it already had it before chrome even existed so it had it much longer then chrome had.. But again is mostly hidden away..
You can access it with the command below:
firefox -ProfileManager
But as with containers there are add-ons to make as easy as chrome to switch between profiles.. Although i don't think there is an official one by Mozilla..
I use Chrome for a few specific things (though Firefox is my primary browser):
* Netflix - I think I started doing this back when it wasn't fully supported in Firefox and now it's more of a reflex than for any major reason.
* Google Meet/Slack video calls. Every so often I try to run a Meet in Firefox. The audio works flawlessly but video seems to regularly freeze.
* For the few sites that the devs didn't test in Firefox and something weird happens :)
* Netflix - I think I started doing this back when it wasn't fully supported in Firefox and now it's more of a reflex than for any major reason.
* Google Meet/Slack video calls. Every so often I try to run a Meet in Firefox. The audio works flawlessly but video seems to regularly freeze.
* For the few sites that the devs didn't test in Firefox and something weird happens :)
Either opera or Chrome. Edge has become slower recently. Opera has been the memory efficient one. When FLV video downloader extension went down, there's no point in using Chrome. Whenever I start chrome, sound comes from CPU. Right now using Chrome when ever I use GCP. They will have to make it more efficient. It almost takes 1100MB memory in windows...
I use a Chromebook as my main computer and development system. No other real option. Chrome runs fast and reliably on ChromeOS.
On my iPad and iPhone I use Safari.
I mainly do web development. Anecdotally I hear about more problems from Firefox users than from Chrome, Safari, or Edge users. Sometimes that's not a problem with Firefox but it does seem to exist as the outlier.
On my iPad and iPhone I use Safari.
I mainly do web development. Anecdotally I hear about more problems from Firefox users than from Chrome, Safari, or Edge users. Sometimes that's not a problem with Firefox but it does seem to exist as the outlier.
I started to use Chrome on phone because it worked well with many tabs.
And I am in process of moving from Firefox on desktop to one of the Chromium based browsers because the upcoming Firefox redesign is the final straw in the long line of Firefox usability destruction by Mozillas "designers"
Probably my biggest reason to switch back to chrome from firefox was firefox not supporting the content only zoom made from trackpad on Macos. It is so handy that you can just zoom webpages like they are pictures without site reflow etc. And interestingly enıugh firefox did not support it when i switched.
FF can do that now. Not gonna lie, very useful feature especially for webdev
Every time I try to use Firefox instead, I give up and switch back to Chrome because:
1. Scrolling works really badly. 2. Save as PDF usually doesn’t work well.
I have noticed that quite a few posts mention the bad scrolling. Firefox devs just copy how Chrome works and you will make more people switch.
1. Scrolling works really badly. 2. Save as PDF usually doesn’t work well.
I have noticed that quite a few posts mention the bad scrolling. Firefox devs just copy how Chrome works and you will make more people switch.
Chrome tab bar reduces width and overflows, Firefox tab bar scrolls
That’s makes chrome more power user friendly. Sadly
That’s makes chrome more power user friendly. Sadly
To me it's the opposite! I'm a tab hoarder. A tab bar like ||||||||||||||||||| is unusable, but Firefox's approach scales infinitely (and I'm on track to have inifinity+1 tabs open)
When I get to ||||||||||||||||||| situation, I just close the browser and start fresh and then type in sites I had opened if I remember any. I am left with just a few really important to me at the time and I find this less distracting.
I’m a tab hoarder as well. I often have 500+ tabs open.
Usually that means I open a ton of windows and can still see all the tabs in each window
Usually that means I open a ton of windows and can still see all the tabs in each window
Firefox also has vertical tab extensions you could switch on as needed.
Vertical tabs mean that all web sites (that are usually built to be somewhat symmetric) are no longer centered on the screen
I don't understand that complaint, but I rarely maximize my browser.
Habit, extensions that doesn't exist under FF, and I like the UI more. ungoogled-chromium is what I use https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium
Habit. Also my employer some years ago settled on GMail and Google Sheets/Docs/etc. (Not that they don't work well enough in Firefox.) I tend to use Chrome for work and Firefox for personal stuff, just as a convenient way to keep GMail accounts separate.
Page translation. This remains the feature I miss the most in Firefox (mobile app included).
Firefox doesn't save credit card numbers.
The feature was there, then was removed, readded, may be US-only now? I don't know WTF they're doing, but for shopping/donations I need to launch a non-Firefox browser.
The feature was there, then was removed, readded, may be US-only now? I don't know WTF they're doing, but for shopping/donations I need to launch a non-Firefox browser.
Why not use a browser-agnostic plugin instead? I have all my card details stored in Bitwarden so they're available in any browser i choose to use.
Alternatively, if this is your _only_ reason for using Chrome, then just type them in? It's a minor inconvenience at the most.
Alternatively, if this is your _only_ reason for using Chrome, then just type them in? It's a minor inconvenience at the most.
This was annoying to me as well, but I simply just memorised all my cards. I had to type in so many times it kind of happened. Now I can type in my number faster than if I had to reach for mouse and select a card from a drop down.
Live Captions, mostly, though lately I've been using other browsers and just dragging URLs into Chrome if I need captioning for them.
I'm really hoping Apple introduces a comparable feature soon for iOS and macOS.
I'm really hoping Apple introduces a comparable feature soon for iOS and macOS.
Firefox's security team was gutted last year. I don't think they have enough resources to properly secure their browser. The alternatives are webkit or chromium based browsers.
I use Chromium, but I've always had a better experience using hardware acceleration and it runs a lot faster than Firefox when playing videos and having multiple tabs open and uses less resources.
Only one reason: Chrome has hands down the best security track record.
Why not use Brave instead, then?
I’m sure it says somewhere but i could not find out what version of chrome(chromium?) brave is based on while trying to find this out for maybe 5 minutes. So, just to be sure i am not installing an browser with known vulnerability I’ll stick with chrome for now.
If you look at README in the repo [1], it says that the Chromium version can be found in `package.json`, currently 90.0.4430.61, released 4 days ago [2].
[1]: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser
[2]: https://github.com/chromium/chromium/releases/tag/90.0.4430....
[1]: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser
[2]: https://github.com/chromium/chromium/releases/tag/90.0.4430....
Because Brave have a worse track record than chrome. Chromium would be a better pick if security track record is your measuring stick.
I heard Chrome is faster. It might not be, given that I'm running a bunch of privacy extensions. But I don't really know how to benchmark this.
If privacy + security is your goal, you ought to change from Chrome to Brave. Brave is Chromium-based but actually protects your privacy.
If privacy above all is your goal, then Firefox is your best bet.
If privacy above all is your goal, then Firefox is your best bet.
I want speed, security, privacy. I'm not aware of any public comparisons between browsers using privacy and adblock extensions.
Brave have been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar multiple times. I don't know if it's more secure than Firefox but it's definitely less private.
Literally, or figuratively, or both?
Source?
It's no secret that Brave started injecting affiliate id's on some links some time back. These affiliate programs (Binance, Coinbase, Ledger, Trezor) allow Brave to view a detailed overview of purchases made by everyone who signed up to these services using Brave.
ETA: Don't take my word for it:
https://gizmodo.com/brave-blows-up-its-whole-reason-for-exis...
https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/06/07/brave-browser-caugh...
ETA: Don't take my word for it:
https://gizmodo.com/brave-blows-up-its-whole-reason-for-exis...
https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/06/07/brave-browser-caugh...
I am actually suprised nobody mentions profiles.
I seperate stuff using profiles (little avatar next to menu button on top-right corner)
Especially important if you want to split your clients' stuff and with your own things. (History, bookmarks, sync)
And sync is the second reason. Of course firefox would work too but they were just late to the game. I already had lots of stuff (bookmarks, history, passwords) to migrate to...
I would prefer Safari for longer battery life, less resource consumption and overall smooth experience (plus privacy features) than Chrome.
I seperate stuff using profiles (little avatar next to menu button on top-right corner)
Especially important if you want to split your clients' stuff and with your own things. (History, bookmarks, sync)
And sync is the second reason. Of course firefox would work too but they were just late to the game. I already had lots of stuff (bookmarks, history, passwords) to migrate to...
I would prefer Safari for longer battery life, less resource consumption and overall smooth experience (plus privacy features) than Chrome.
> And sync is the second reason. Of course firefox would work too but they were just late to the game. I already had lots of stuff (bookmarks, history, passwords) to migrate to...
You probably know this but if you install Firefox now it will prompt you to import all your settings from Chrome. You can also set up sync between all your Firefox instances (including mobile).
You probably know this but if you install Firefox now it will prompt you to import all your settings from Chrome. You can also set up sync between all your Firefox instances (including mobile).
First couple months it didn't even worked for me. (I was in Turkey at the time)
Also sync matters mostly with mobile. I guess whoever downvoting me just thinks syncing is for desktop...
Also sync matters mostly with mobile. I guess whoever downvoting me just thinks syncing is for desktop...
On sync, Firefox has had sync from before Google Chrome was publicly released. Depending on when you started using Google Chrome and on which platform, you may have missed noticing that Firefox had it.
Firefox's fragmentation in Linux was so bad that I stopped using it. Debian shipped with Iceweasel or ESR, some parts patched/changed.
Compared to chrome (which kept very stable line of features or bugs) ff was mess.
Compared to chrome (which kept very stable line of features or bugs) ff was mess.
I was there when IE was better than Netscape. Gmail became a thing and I loved Google and their quality since.
[deleted]
I use it on my work laptop.
- Most of our web-app users are on Chrome anyway.
- The dev-tools are excellent.
- I'm lazy and it already has all my passwords.
- Most of our web-app users are on Chrome anyway.
- The dev-tools are excellent.
- I'm lazy and it already has all my passwords.
I settled on Chrome years ago, and it hasn't caused enough grief for me to investigate alternatives.
I use Firefox 99.9% of the time, but I will note that Chrome performs better on lower end hardware.
Better dev tools. So I only use it for localhost. Everything else in Firefox.
No matter what my current dreamboat browser is at home, I always use Chrome at work. Their dev tools are unparalleled. I’m amazed MS hasn’t poached the Dev Tools director to work on VS.
It remembers all my (unimportant) passwords.
Firefox has a password manager too now.
Passwords and autocomplete.
it's excellent; it works and doesn't get in my way. I care about privacy a little, but i'm not even interested in looking for an alternative at the moment.
Because monoculture force me to (I only use it to test with).
It makes me wonder, for those of you who use Chrome and browse this site (implying you're above average in tech knowledge, privacy worries, etc), why do you use Chrome?