Firefox Devtools Network tab still does not allow to resize columns in 2019...
We Need Chrome No More
471–480 of 536 posts
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#472Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm surprised there aren't more people on here who moved to chome for the dev tools. That is what moved me over there. Firebug was great in it's day but at some point Chrome's dev tools just became too much better to make staying on Firefox possible.
That was true back then, but the FF dev tools are much superior now. Chrome lags behind severely. Last I checked, clicking an XHR link in the console just took me to the network tab instead of actually showing that request. FF shows it inline in the console. Not to mention code caching bugs in Chrome even with the cache turned off. This is the primary reason I switched back to FF.
Sadly I find that the Firefox debugger is more likely to stall and flail about.
I keep trying to change to Firefox, but bring dragged back to Chrome.
I mostly work on stupidly big Single Page Apps, which may be part of the issue.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#473Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a long time Firefox user I think the change in its extensions APIs is one of the greatest moves they did and I’m glad they did it. Chrome’s extensions were isolated, easy to develop and had a permissions system in place. To this day Firefox is still lagging behind in its isolation. For example Chrome can disable extensions in Incognito, but Firefox does not. Also if you’re not paying attention, Chrome won and it’s…
Isolation isn’t a benefit for extensions: the whole point of extensions, bookmarklets, etc. is to be able to modify arbitrary aspects of the browsing experience in arbitrary ways.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t trust all the extensions that I want to use.
Especially in Private/Incognito Mode I only want extensions for blocking ads/trackers + 1Password and that’s it.
Also being able to see what the extension does is really valuable to me, because allowing an extension to read the data on all websites you visit is really suspicious for a majority of extensions.
Mozilla has had a good review process in place and truth be told Chrome's Web Store has suffered from spyware and malicious extensions more than Firefox. But that's only because it is more popular and Google is known for really screwed / non-existent human support (e.g. extensions being reported as being malware with no immediate action).
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#474Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are though. There are no Edge forks or free iOS distributions.
No, they’re not. They’re based on open source software. But by that measure safari is open source because WebKit is open source.
> But by that measure safari is open source because WebKit is open source.
There's a lot more closed source code in Safari than there's in Chrome. But sure: Why not give them credit for open-sourcing WebKit? Safari is closer to open-source than IE.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#475Earlier quoted context omitted.
I gave Firefox a solid test last year (about 3 months of dedicated use at work + home) and I ended up coming back to Chrome. There are some really great things about Firefox. It has gotten so much better and faster than it was, but Chrome still struggles less with troublesome websites, and seems to load all pages faster overall. I'm keeping my eye on Firefox, but Chrome still gets my business for now.
Same here - made a switch and switched back quickly after. 1. Compatibility - random sites would just break...I reckon 15% of the time 2. Battery life - FF destroyed my battery life. To the tune of 8 hours on Chrome vs like 2 on FF.
I don't think 15% is accurate, I only know of 1 site that breaks under Firefox and that is operated at minimum budget by a chinese electronics shop. I've literally never found any other site that broke on Firefox.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#476The problem with these articles is that the recommendation always ends up just preaching to the choir: people who already switched away from Chrome nod in appreciation, but people who haven't switched literally get nothing out of these posts to convince them to switch to what is basically the same application made by a different company, with completely different conventions on where everything is, without any concre…
I gave Firefox a solid test last year (about 3 months of dedicated use at work + home) and I ended up coming back to Chrome. There are some really great things about Firefox. It has gotten so much better and faster than it was, but Chrome still struggles less with troublesome websites, and seems to load all pages faster overall. I'm keeping my eye on Firefox, but Chrome still gets my business for now.
> and I ended up coming back to Chrome
same, except i use Brave (Chromium minus the Google crap/tracking.)
I try Firefox after every major update, but for me "pinch to zoom" not working for the trackpad is the biggest flaw. It's so frustrating/such a basic feature.
Safari and Chrome have had this feature for at least 6 years.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#477It left a sour taste in my mouth that Microsoft joined Chrome instead of investing in FireFox and helping them advance their multi-process architecture quicker.
This is kind of weird, because if there is anything Microsoft doesn't like, they can patch it and make it work differently. Just like Apple did with KHTML and Google did with Webkit. I don't really get why people judge source code by politics rather than "stealing" (forking) from the best.
Writing and maintaining a modern webbrowser isn't cheap or easy; exactly why MS switched to Chromium as an engine.
Google is the main power behind all Chromium development and there have already been plenty of examples of the devs going "our way or the highway" with noone forking the browser engine. Upcoming is the new change to block adblockers from working properly in chrome. I see nobody willing to fork chromium over that.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#478Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to break this to you, but as a web developer you should only care about standards, otherwise you have no standards. The standards are a single source of truth for your production, if you build solely to a single browsers quirks (in this case Chrome) then those quirks can change at any time.
This point of view is as ignorant of reality as the grammarians that say Webster's English is the only true English. Every standard is a three-edged sword: the spec, the intent behind the spec, and the practical application of the spec in the real world (which all-too-often, unfortunately, includes things like "Yeah, that's what the spec says, but then scammers realized you could exploit that to use people's browsers…
By your argument we should only need a single dictionary, Websters, because your language is real and not the imagined one people in other english places speak, Webster just happens to be the one that aligns closest to your usage of english.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#479Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, they’re not. They’re based on open source software. But by that measure safari is open source because WebKit is open source.
> But by that measure safari is open source because WebKit is open source. There's a lot more closed source code in Safari than there's in Chrome. But sure: Why not give them credit for open-sourcing WebKit? Safari is closer to open-source than IE.
And yet I trust Safari a fucking lot more than I trust Chrome. Something about not being a business reliant on harvesting every bit of personal information possible.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#480Earlier quoted context omitted.
> remove support for 3rd Party Ad Blocking that's a bit misleading, no?
Google maintains plausible deniability but it's an odd coincidence that they first introduce their own Ad Blocker, and then soon after propose to remove an API that's necessary for 3rd Party Ad Blockers. If you keep in mind that Google is an Ad company then adding an Ad Blocker to their product doesn't make sense until you consider that by doing so they diminish the need for 3rd party Ad Blockers. Once you can succes…
Embrace, extend, exterminate