[drdaeman]

Sorry to sound negative, but what exactly?

Both browsers communicate with their owners under various circumstances. Both have it relatively well documented (both with some omissions, as the docs lag behind). Both had screw-ups (probably, non-malicious but just accidental - YMMV) and were caught communicating something (IIRC, non-severe) when they shouldn't have been. Both have their own ecosystem/services (starting with Google and Firefox Accounts respectively) that they actively promote.

This is subjective, but I believe in the large picture neither of browsers has some consistent technological advantage in terms of user privacy (fingerprinting, data leaks, options to block unsafe modern stuff etc). One or another wins over specific cases or introduces some measures before another does, but they feel to be generally on par - at least if we consider available extensions (adblocking, etc) and not just the core features.

The only significant difference I see is that one of the browsers markets itself with heavy use of term "privacy", and other doesn't.

[falcolas]

When it comes down to it, Google is a for-profit company that makes money by selling targeted ads. Mozilla is not.

Or, in their own words, Google: to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful

Mozilla: ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and accessible to all

Intentions and goals matter.

[drdaeman]

Sure, but isn't it a variant of ad hominem? Or, well, ad collegium.

As long as Chrome itself really doesn't do anything particularly wrong, of course. But I think Google (probably because of lots of various rumors) went to great lengths to actually describe what they do and what they don't, and I haven't spotted anything particularly alarming in their privacy whitepapers.