Look, we're having a good time on Firefox since November 9, 2004. Come join us!

I use both daily and Chrome is still faster and more intuitive, which is unfortunate because I'd really like to degoogle.

My Ad Limiter add-on is down to 19 users on Firefox. Used to be thousands. It won't work on Chrome at all now. I'm shutting down SiteTruth, after almost 20 years.[1]

[1] https://www.sitetruth.com

Then again, our laptop battery only lasts 1/3 as much on MacOS.

I know, I know. The community keeps pretending this isn’t an issue for the last, hum, 15 years? But it is, and for people that are looking for a tool and not for a statement, it quickly drives them away from Firefox back to Chrome browsers.

I've used Firefox across devices, across the years. This just isn't my experience, at all, remotely. And I have had to use Chrome (now it is Edge) for many work functions, so I do have the A/B comparisons. I'm not doubting your experience, fine, but I also know I'm not "pretending" anything in my own experience.

Firefox on Android 16, it sucks the battery up in background mode (even with permission to use background turned off).

If I manually close it no issue.

I believe you.

I also do not, and have never, experienced this. I've been using Pixel phones since the 3a in 2019/2020.

doesn't happen in my case (OnePlus 15/Android 16, Firefox background usage allowed in some "smart" mode whatever that means, doesn't suck the battery in background although it's on most of the time).

Anything to back those claims up? I use Firefox and didn't really notice this (although I am rarely on battery), and other than Google Meet making my machine throttle (and I blame that on Google not on Mozilla), I don't use Chrome for anything else for my browsing.

[deleted]

Firefox did similar 10 years ago when they discontinued XPCOM and XUL

Right after they reach at least ~80% of customization Vivaldi offers!

This isn't the gotcha you think it is. Every time I try Vivaldi I am right back at Firefox and I am surely not alone. I have never understood the obsession with tree style tabs or vertical tabs. I don't need to customise my browser at all and I like supporting engine diversity.

The motivation for vertical tabs is pretty straightforward, screens are mostly wider than they are tall, browsers are often used in fullscreen mode, yet much of the web does not use much of the screen's width. So it's a better use of screen space to put tabs on the side than on top.

[dead]

> I don't need to customise my browser

Ok, but not every use case is so primitive? I do need my custom shortcuts and what not, so it is exactly the correct "gotcha" I think it is even if that's beyond your understanding.

went from Firefox to Vivaldi, never looked back for many years

on Android phone tried many, most recently was using Kiwi Browser, then for some time Firefox until they fucked up UI, so moved to Cromite, though my phone broke (never buy Google Pixel again, first broken phone after 15 years with smartphones and various brands including very low budget), so now I am on my old phone which for some reason doesn't support Cromite, so I am back at Firefox temporarily

Why not Vivaldi on android as well, and benefit from sync etc? That's what I've been doing for about 8 months now. Generally quite happy.

no extensions, cant live without uBlock Origin and few others

Was that the year they fired the Rust team to focus on paying their executives?

Let's not exchange crap behaviour. I think google would win hands down. Firefox at least has adblocking.

The classic 'those guys did something bad, so I am going to go with the guys who are absolute assholes doing several orders of magnitude more bad things now instead' response.

That usually means that whoever utters it was just looking for a sycophantic excuse to go with the bigger threat because it is more convenient to them (for now).

It's remarkable how often this happens, isn't it? One incident of someone not living up to standards is suddenly an opportunity to abandon standards and go with known bad actors. It's like people giving up on the MSM and immediately latching onto propaganda Youtubers instead.

People latch onto consistency and hypocrisy as their filters.

The problem is that anyone trying to actually be better is usually inconsistent and hypocritical at some level as in that "you criticize society, yet you participate in it" comic.

If you attempt to filter out all traces of hypocrisy from your trusted sources, you wind up listening to the absolute worst people.

The people trying to do better are usually the ones struggling with conflicts and inconsistencies.

Let's be real. People love their shiny big brands, and will find any tiny excuse to keep using them.

Not at all. Firefox is a trap to keep motivated people from banding together to create a real user-respecting alternative.

As a user at least I have an option to use ublock origin extension in Firefox. So I'm somewhat grateful I can still browse the net peacefully and safely.

No it doesn't. Unlike Brave, Firefox needs an extension to block ads just like Chrome.

Yes, though it has the most powerful and customizable adblocker available.

[deleted]

or even since 2002 when it started as Phoenix

https://website-archive.mozilla.org/www.mozilla.org/firefox_...

I never went back to Firefox after they killed the Pimpzilla theme.

Firefox and Firefox-derivative browsers have and continue to be seriously sluggish and memory and energy hogs. This should not be swept under the rug.

Even today it is difficult for me to use Firefox, Mullvad, etc. When I used to use them, almost every time my machine became slow the solution was to kill Firefox.

EDIT: It's true folks, I would love to be able to use Firefox as my primary browser. But all my experience with it (and I used it for more than a decade) has been dogged by its sluggishness.

I use Firefox mobile pretty much exclusively. I haven't noticed any meaningful performance difference between it & Chrome. It also seems to perform fine on my Fedora laptop.

Mobile is different. I rarely even use mobile. I do however use a lot of tabs on desktop, and Firefox is found very wanting in the performance department.

I don't even think its about number of tabs. Just yesterday and today, Mullvad browser takes minutes to load a set of about 7 pinned tabs (with no other tabs) on startup, whereas Helium (which is based on Chromium) loads in a second or two close to a hundred tabs.

My Firefox currently has 33 tabs open (way more than usual). It opens in seconds on my 9 year old i7-7700k desktop.

Firefox is only sluggish because Chrome uses your data to prefetch pages.

This does not make sense. Firefox would be taking minutes to open a page that Chrome opens within a second or two. And if Chrome was doing aggressive pre-fetching, then it should be using more memory, no? And yet the opposite is the case.

Not denying your experience but if it is taking "minutes" then that sounds like a highly specific glitch that you should try to debug.

Speaking personally I have used Firefox pretty much exclusively for 20+ years, always on low-end hardware. It's been years since I last had any performance issues.