undefined

points

[-]

If you look at the spending of the Mozilla Foundation they most certainly do not need our support they need to spend their resources on their browser instead of frivolities.

by nine_k3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

The support here is mindshare and evangelism, not monetary donations.

by esskay4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Just a shame its a tiny bit slower than chromium based browsers still (the ui, not the web page rendering), and you dont have to take my word for it, a web search for something like 'firefox sluggish compared to chrome' will back this up too as I've tried switching multiple times but always end up back on a chromium variant because the firefox ui just doesn't feel like an upgrade.

Personally I've just given up trying with firefox and I now put up with brave - its certainly not perfect but at least the ad blocker isnt about to break.

by aleksandrm4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Not in my experience. Never had issues with FF feeling sluggish at all.

by dawnerd4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Only place I feel it slow is on Google Meet and clickup.

by sheept4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Google Meet is definitely not going to perform better outside Chrome since based on recent web APIs proposed by Chrome (e.g. document PIP[0], element capture[1]), the Chrome team has shown they'll change the browser specifically to improve the UX of Google Meet.

[0]: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/web-platform/document-pict...

[1]: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/web-platform/element-captu...

by wpm3 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Almost as if it's on purpose

by skeledrew3 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

> a tiny bit slower

And that automatically disqualifies it? I find that wild. I've been using Firefox since it was at v2 I think, and never once considered switching for some speed gain. I actually use Vivaldi on the side sometimes for sites that aren't very Firefox-with-my-extensions-friendly, and find no difference in performance.

by ramijames4 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Not using adware seems like a big upgrade to me.

by neogodless3 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Let me know how fast the internet without working ad block feels...

(Personally I find Firefox is plenty fast! And the benefits vastly outweigh trying to deal with a Google-powered web browser.)

by esskay3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I dont need to, as I said I'm on brave, which isnt losing its adblocker.

by drnick13 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

> a tiny bit slower

This is no longer the case, at least not uniformly. My Speedometer 3.1 results are:

- Chromium: 30.0 (± 1.2)

- Firefox: 32.1 (± 1.6)

Using the latest browser version on Arch Linux.

by palmotea3 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

> Just a shame its a tiny bit slower than chromium based browsers still (the ui, not the web page rendering)

IIRC, it's got a much smaller memory footprint.

by lenkite2 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

I believe Firefox without ads is faster & safer than Chrome with Ads.

by kgwxd4 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

tiny bit slower, all things being equal, maybe. For one, who cares? No one can see tenth of a millisecond speed difference. Second, without a proper ad blocker, rendering speed is meaningless, because all the power will be used to render garbage you never wanted to see in the first place.

by tbeseda3 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Firefox might need my support, but Mozilla does not.

by troyvit2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

So you can just use Firefox and turn off all the Mozilla-related junk you don't like. Best of both worlds.

by toomuchtodo4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

The UX aesthetically could use more polish, but agree it is an excellent browser replacement for Chrome.