[everydaypanos]

Seems so sad that Mozilla is literally begging people to give Firefox a try. Even if someone believes that the browser Game of Thrones seems to go to Google, I cannot see how anyone would settle for the second-best choice especially when everything is FREE..

They plainly admit that Firefox can just hold it’s own and it is still NOT the fastest and best browser experience out there.

When I launch Chrome I just get this feeling that it is a super lightweight desktop app that manages a ton of tabs efficiently.

[dictum]

> Seems so sad that Mozilla is literally begging people to give Firefox a try.

Your security matters. Google recommends using Chrome, a fast and secure browser. Try it?

https://i.stack.imgur.com/0zXc4.png

[acdha]

> They plainly admit that Firefox can just hold it’s own and it is still NOT the fastest and best browser experience out there.

The reason why is that those are complex judgements rather than easily measured objective facts. Browsers are extremely complex and what “fastest” means depends on what you're measuring and where it's running. Chrome's memory usage is a great example — if you have tons of RAM and nothing else running, it's often faster but if either of those is true, Firefox being so much more memory efficient more than balances it out, especially for people who keep tons of tabs open — and all of the comparison points are changing regularly as browser development teams adjust.

[everydaypanos]

How much of what you say is due to the “extremely complex” rendering engine and how much to just “simple” app design?

[acdha]

I’m not sure what you’re asking. My point was just that you can’t distill the performance of a complex system down to a single number and each browser is going to have areas where they’re ahead on something which some group of people cares about.

As an extreme example, this is far from true but assume that the next version Chrome was faster on every part of the browser from networking to JavaScript, CSS, etc. Firefox might still be faster for most users on the metric they care about the most because its default tracking protection blocks 90% of the page weight on most sites and so every single one of those people would say it’s faster because that’s what they actually experience.

[ohithereyou]

Sample size of one:

i7 laptop, 16 GB of RAM, nothing else running

Chrome: ~45 seconds to become usable, blank white window appears at 5 seconds into that wait time and just sits there

Firefox: ~10 seconds to become usable

[Karunamon]

Oddly, it's always been the reverse for me. Especially after a month or so has passed. Both of them are pretty light, Chrome definitely gets perceptibly slower after some heavy usage, but only Firefox manages to become unbearably slow. There's still some kind of design about Firefox that causes it to bog down after daily driving for a long while.

[thesandlord]

Are you using an SSD? What extensions are both browsers running? Did you do a fresh reboot? This seems pretty slow for both.

[ohithereyou]

Yes, I am using an SSD. No extensions in either browser.

[everydaypanos]

You launch vanilla Chrome and you wait 45 seconds to be able to do anything? How is that even possible

[ohithereyou]

Some Internet sites at work require Chrome, so if I want to be able to file a timesheet or request vacation I have to wait on Chrome.

[a_imho]

It is not about features, Moz://a could integrate a content blocker right now (or 5 years earlier..), and see whether Chrome can match that performance and pro customer stance. But Moz://a can't do that, because of reasons.