upvote
Not in my experience. Never had issues with FF feeling sluggish at all.
reply
Only place I feel it slow is on Google Meet and clickup.
reply
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...

reply
Almost as if it's on purpose
reply
> 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.

reply
Not using adware seems like a big upgrade to me.
reply
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.)

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

reply
> 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.

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