There are definitely websites that don't work with Firefox out of the box. Just one example that annoys me is https://mtgarena-support.wizards.com. "Firefox users: Firefox's Enhanced Tracking Protection may interfere with Sign In. Temporarily disable it in Firefox Privacy Settings to load the sign in screen."

I use Chrome at work (corporate provisioned device) and Firefox at home so both get a good amount of usage

I know of several sites that break if you go beyond Standard, but none if you don't.

That’s not “working out of the box”, but leads to a much less broken experience than chrome (especially with the manifest v3 BS).

Honestly, we should take the same stand against them. Those who are hostile towards Firefox should be publicly named and shamed for sheer incompetence and/or malice.

This is usually the case if there might be forms or something like that. It's minor enough that it doesn't bother me.

Now, on the other hand, tab management is so much better with chrome and I've considered using Chrome for that reason alone. At work I do use chrome because I usually have 10-15 websites open at a time (for example I like to keep one tab group per ticket and every related item to it there).

I do use simple tab groups on Firefox but it's not good enough at least to replace my workflow at work.

[1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta...

https://github.com/jessebeard/firefox_settings

Never even heard of these... hmm

If no engineering time was spent on Firefox, and it’s broken in Firefox, that’s a Firefox problem.

If active engineering time was spent on _deliberately breaking_ Firefox, then yes, I don’t think that’s a Firefox problem. I think it’s a website problem at that point.

im curious to see what effect ublock not working as well on chrome as it will on firefox will have to the demographics, if there's no shift then that's a hurdle that has to be overcome by either firefox by some sort of engineering, google, or via legislation

Besides specific Google products, most everything works across all 3 major engines.

In addition, Mozilla adds specific code to Firefox to counteract anti-competitive practices on specific websites

Both of those will seriously hamper a more advanced adblock like UBlock Origin

The limits are 30,000 static rules and 30,000 dynamic rules. Running tens of thousands of regexs for each request can lead to a performance impact. Allowing for even higher limits may result in people having a worse experience from the browser becoming slower. The API was designed such that these limits can be increased in the future as available computation and user needs change over time. Getting extension developers to design their extensions in a way where they have to think about not slowing down the browser too much I think is a good thing and I would not call these current limits severe.

>also prevents plugins from updating block lists themselves

declarativeNetRequest lets rules be added and removed dynamically by the extension.

>forces those updated lists to go through the plugin store

The Chrome team has said that configuration can be updated outside of a store update. What the Chrome web store does not want are extensions that download and run code. This policy does not related to mv3.

Do people honestly believe that if they keep recommending FF, people will magically switch to FF and Google will be forced to stop its anti-competitive practices?

Because holding that against Firefox is exactly what Google is counting on. And the more you recommend it the harder it is for Google to continue its anti-competitive practices.

The more you fall a fool for Google's (or Microsoft a decade ago) practices, the worse the experience for everyone is in the future.

Anyways, there's simple extensions that will sidestep Chrome's bs. In addition, you'll soon to be able to get an adblocked experience that you can only get on Firefox. That means less network traffic, faster loading websites, and better user privacy

Before that they had a popup that would timeout after 15s (?). At that point I tried disabling uBlock on Youtube but found the ads stacked up to much longer, so the 15s delay was more acceptable.

As expected, this will probably continue to be a cat and mouse game.

Do you honestly believe that it's OK for Google to just keep being anti-competitive? Or that this is a completely inevitable and unfixable state of affairs?

We can, should, and will hold Google accountable for its monopolistic conduct, and this is absolutely part of that.

My move back to FF has been slow (as mentioned already too) but I've been recommending it to others, who don't have my self-inflicted blocker, for some time. Maybe some will stop listening if I keep mentioning it, but people online I'll never meet in person are hardly a great loss in my life. The sort of people who are going to take such issue in RealLife™ are likely those just paying me attention in exchange largely for free tech support (the matter isn't likely to come up in other contexts) and they can do one anyway too.

Unless you use Edge on Windows you still have the same limitation (or the windows store Netflix app).

It is unfortunate that Firefox doesn’t do more to help us avoid sites programmed by devs who are too incompetent to follow standards, really.

I regulary ran across something that does not work or has a broken style. And I know how to turn UO off.

And why should that be a surprise? FF has way less manpower than Chrome. (And even fired lots of engineers, to raise the CEO bonus)

Chrome leads the way and probably the vast majority developes for chrome and with chrome dev tools. So most of the time FF works, but not always. And performance is just worse, but not noticable on a desktop and on mobile it is offset by the working adblock. Meaning perceived performance is usually better, because ads are blocked, unlike in chrome mobile.

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Firefox-Chrome-109-Benchmarks

And sadly it can be worse, with my quite complex app, that I absolutely did not tailor for chrome, but gone out of my way to also support FF - the result is that chrome is just 3x faster.

Yes some sites are "broken" with uBlock Origin. I don't find it to be many, however. I run into paywalls much more often than I do problems with my browser settings.

Firefox doesn't cause broken websites. Websites developers that target only Chrome cause websites to inadvertently become broken in Firefox.

Be evil

I have good luck just using a private window, since that has no extensions by default. Bonus: It's really fast; ctrl-l ctrl-c ctrl-shift-p ctrl-c enter

FTFY

EDIT: Mine was wrong too. Thanks to ipython for the correction.

Remember when Google killed the Edge render engine per YouTube problems?

So I'm curious, which sites are broken in vanilla FF?

Occasionally, sites are obstinate and I need to use Normie mode (e.g. for Maps)

Normie mode just has uBlock O, containers. I really have zero problems with sites breaking here.

What can go wrong is if you've set a certain site to always open in a certain container and another site redirects you to this site. This can happen with Identity Providers like Okta, ADFS etc. They will then open in a different container (the assigned one) and lose context. Especially microsoft services have an annoying habit of redirecting through 25 different URLs on every sign-in. But if configured correctly it's a godsend, you can use this tool to sign into multiple MS tenants at the same time, something with chrome and not even Edge can do right now (switching teams between multiple tenants is a nightmare).

But I don't think it's the multi accounts containers at fault here, it's the user. Just don't do that :P

Not the same problem, but I wonder when faxes will disappear... For example, Progressive Insurance wanted me fax, mail pictures or bring them in person... email didn't work... Of course they didn't have a safe way to transfer them digitally but I would not care if everyone in the world saw those emails.

The useless requirements that they set just proves that they don't understand technology.

This, again, can be restated as incompetent developers cause broken websites (!)

("... do not attribute to bad faith that which can be explained by stupidity")

    about:profiles

Exactly, simply use a second “plugin-less” FireFox profile.

And if you really need a Chromium browser, Brave is a better choice than Google Chrome (for privacy reasons…)