I think people think Chrome is a best browser is because it performs better on Google products than any other browser. And as people are using GMail, Youtube or other, they see Chrome as the best browser.
Actually GMail and YouTube are the only tolerable experiences using FF.
Try watching random FB video, Twitch streams, etc. on a Linux FF and you'll get greeted with a nice "please download Adobe Flash" or some such nonsense.
With Chrome it just works, it bundles Flash, I don't have to care which version it is, how to get it for my system, etc.
I would like to use FF because the theme makes it match my Gnome theme (silly but it would make me switch browsers) but it just breaks on multimedia.
You have something that works out of the box, and something that doesn't.
Doesn't matter why it's your fault, you are using it wrong, it's your operating system, you aren't holding it properly these are the excuses of poorly designed products.
Web developers continue to use an inferior solution to deliver rich content on the web.
Adobe offers such technology under a nonfree license.
Open source browser Firefox can't include flash because of the license.
Purely open source distros also cant include this.
Oems can and should ensure end users don't have to worry about this.
Distros less concerned about purity may choose to set this up for their users.
Not only is this not mozillas problem it's a wholly imaginary one. The set of people who CAN install their OS but are incapable of installing an additional package is very nearly the empty set or at least it will be when said user doesn't learn to install software on their shiny new OS.
If that's too hard tell the people that work on the package manager gui and tell them how they ought to do better. The answer however isn't making it easier to go to the vendors website and download an exe.
The ficticious grandma that people want to cater to will experience Linux when it comes preinstalled on the pc she bought at Walmart and if flash doesn't work out of the box tell dell.
Sorry but that is just not true, Firefox has miserable DOM performance that results in laggyness, freezes on pages that work fine with Chrome. Until the Firefox people accept that their browser sucks can they finally try to make it better.
There is no sandboxing (in the works for how many years now?), their pdfjs is not as fast as the chrome native plugin, they force me to use the insecure and terribe flash plugin that crashes every time, one frozen tab still freezes the entire browser.
No I don't want to use Chrom{e,ium}. I wasn't tricked into choosing google. I just want something that works.
Maybe it works best on Chrome, just because more and more web developpers test and optimize their app/site for... Chrome? (I've really saw this). Is this the return of the "IE era"?
If pages lag or freeze it might be the developers fault. I realize some are providing complex app like experiences but most web sites are just text and images artfully arranged. Making this simple thing slow requires dedicated stupidity.
They can use competitors sites. I'm going to assume that you don't regularly go to physical locations receive terrible service and blame Honda and Ford.
This is right for me at least. I spend a big chunk of my day in Google Docs. I'd rather use Safari or Firefox, but I just can't deal with the janky Google Docs performance in those browsers.
Although occasionally a Docs tab in Chrome will go crazy and gobble up RAM and max the CPU.
Try watching random FB video, Twitch streams, etc. on a Linux FF and you'll get greeted with a nice "please download Adobe Flash" or some such nonsense.
With Chrome it just works, it bundles Flash, I don't have to care which version it is, how to get it for my system, etc.
I would like to use FF because the theme makes it match my Gnome theme (silly but it would make me switch browsers) but it just breaks on multimedia.