So now I'm back on Chrome. Felt good to be on FF for awhile, felt like I was preserving freedom or whatever. But now that I'm on Chrome, I won't switch back until Firefox actually becomes a better browser.
It's also worse on power. FF tends to drain my battery much faster than Chrome. That's with <20 tabs open, mostly light weight sites.
I'm still using FF as my main browser but will probably switch to Chrome again.
Swings and roundabouts. I find chrome uses much more memory, and the plugins I care about (tab group view, NoScript) don't have effective parallels in chrome last I looked. I also have a pet hate for any application which decides that it needs its own look-and-feel and you should discard your own window decorations.
Also, the mozilla entity is much more about preserving freedom, and I think that's worth the minor inconveniences you get from webdevs who think that chrome is the only browser in existence.
I thought Chrome was famous for being a resource hog. It consumes more RAM on my Windows PCs, though I confess I use more tabs than are viable in Chrome....
That's only in comparison to Safari and Edge. If you open enough tabs to cause memory issues on Chrome, Firefox would have frozen and slowed down to a crawl before filling the memory, anyhow, and electrolysis still isn't in a state where it could change that: there's still one process for the renderer so if enough intensive webpages are run your web browsing experience will still slow down.
That kind of marketing is an admission that their browser is not as good as its competitors. If Firefox was the best, Mozilla would drop the freedom-fighter baloney and simply say "Choose Firefox because it has the best features and user experience."
People say that IE didn't adapt fast enough, and that's why it died. But imagine how behind we'd be today if Firefox had never come along!
In a world where almost every piece of software you run (from your OS to your favorite toolbar) and every site you visit, tries to gather as much information about you. Mozilla's open-source stance and mission to improve privacy is protecting the web, by protecting us.
Perhaps privacy is not your favorite feature, perhaps it does not enhance your user experience, but for many others it does. It serves an important niche, and I hope that it succeeds and continues to disrupt what could otherwise be a browser monopoly.
But it is now 2017, and when I decide which browser I should use, I choose one that is good today, and I don't care about the blows its parent company struck for or against freedom 13 years ago.
I also disagree with the assertion that Firefox is better for security or privacy than Chrome is. They are comparable in their security and privacy features.
It's totally fine to prefer one browser or the other. It's great to have an actual choice. But the ideals and values aren't just for show.
What has Mozilla actually done in the past few years to push the web forward in security or ensure that a web specification protects user freedom?
Things that Microsoft or Google or Apple were also trying to do don't count -- what good things did Mozilla succeed in doing that the other browser companies opposed?