71–80 of 245 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Leveraged their monopoly ? How does that work exactly for Windows, MacOS and iOS in your mind ?
they implement features.only supported by chromium. see google meets blur background.
If anything, it is impressive how Chrome has managed to be the majority browser, given that by default we get Edge on Windows, Safari on MacOS/iOS and Firefox on Ubuntu.
Good points have already been raised, but don't neglect the rise of smartphones. When you get a Google phone that already has Google's browser installed, and it works relatively well, why would you change? Add Chromebooks into the mix, and those meet a lot of people's needs, why change? Then, if you get a laptop, you'll want to have all of your passwords and bookmarks synced, so instead of using Edge, you grab Chrome…
I seem to recall Microsoft getting some unfavorable government attention when they did something similar in the 90s...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting, I have not come across any broken websites in a while. Or well, there was a booking website recently where I switched to Chrome to have my booking go through. But it would need to be a lot of those instances before I would even consider switching to Chrome. You have any (anecdotal) stats on how many websites are broken? What kind of sites are those?
Same, it's mostly Google sites that work better with Chrome, like the GCP console.
Network effect I'd say. If tomorrow opera, brave, edge switched to Firefox, people won't notice but Firefox share would rise dramatically. Extensions is another issue. Today, any tom dick and harry who want to create a browser extension only build for chrome "why not". Firefox comes from complaining users who don't want to switch otherwise they don't bother. Its the same chicken or egg thing. Low market share of Fire…
You don't need to build for Firefox these days, extension APIs are to a large extent identical. But then, unlike with Chrome forks, you still have to support a separate version and deal with another "app store", so I can see why people don't do that.
You are right, they are somewhat similar but the "why bother" attitude, same as with every startup doing support and documentation on discord.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been using Firefox for the past 2 years and I've had no such problems.
Yes, if you have been using Firefox you'll not notice problems. A large number of people used IE5 and IE6 without apparent problems.
I switched from Firefox to Vivaldi about 18 months ago because (mobile) Firefox scrolling would stutter on site like the New York Times, and it would force reload inactive tabs when I went back to them. On desktop I wanted the "reading list" and mail client of Vivaldi.
Firefox (or NYT) seems to have fixed the stuttering scroll on mobile. Multi account containers on Firefox are an incredible isolation mechanism that needs a little bit of UX refinement.
I'm probably switching back to FF for beta testing before cutting my defaults back to it.
I like being able to just close it and the history is wiped.
Use Firefox for a day if you are a Chrome user, you’ll quickly realize the experience is far subpar. JS stuff is slower, random websites break, the UI feels a bit sluggish. I understand there are ideological reasons to support Firefox, and that some of these issues are easily attributed to other parties. But for users, there aren’t too many reasons to switch over from Chrome or even Safari, like it was the situation…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same, it's mostly Google sites that work better with Chrome, like the GCP console.
Google meet works fine on firefox. The GCP console is an affront to the web on any browser, though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same, it's mostly Google sites that work better with Chrome, like the GCP console.
I know this at least used to be the case, but is it still? Using Safari, it seems like the GCP console has gotten far better in recent weeks, to the point that I no longer feel the need to reach for a Chromium browser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When you get a Google phone that already has Google's browser installed, and it works relatively well, why would you change? I know you're speaking in the context of the general public, but I've found that uBlock on Firefox Mobile does so much to make the web usable again that I'd never go without it.
On the other hand, as someone on an old android device, the performance difference between the two is massive and it isn't getting better. Some sites (usually the ones that are actually important such as restaurant menu) are perfect on Chrome and nearly unusable on Firefox, even with an adblocker. Performance already matters a lot on desktop browsers, but when battery life is thrown into the mix, it matters even more…
You can just compare it yourself or look at the some of the zillion benchmarks.