[Ygg2]

> adblocker extensions to abandon Chrome.

Ha. As if that will ever happen. They'll probably just pivot to something else.

The reason Chrome can try to ditch ad blockers is that they are big enough, that your only choice is Chrome or GTFO.

[Iolaum]

Your choice can well be firefox and chrome as a fallback when a website doesn't work and you care enough to bother opening chrome for it. Chrome has already ditched adblockers on mobile, firefox with adblockers and reader mode is a MUCH better mobile web experience.

[jefftk]

> Chrome has already ditched adblockers on mobile

nit: chrome has never had extensions (or ad blockers) on mobile

(Disclosure: I work for Google)

[SquareWheel]

That's not even a nitpick. The parent got it completely wrong.

If Chrome mobile never supported extensions, then it's false to claim they "ditched" them.

[awalton]

From the original post, it's more like a language parsing issue - Chrome was original a desktop-only application and it had extensions. When it was ported to Android, they ditched extensions, as well as jettisoning numerous other features.

Thus, not "completely wrong."

[michaelmrose]

They being an ad company were smart enough not to ever allow the camel to get its nose under the tent.

[Ygg2]

> firefox with adblockers and reader mode is a MUCH better mobile web experience

Oh, I fully agree. But just having a better, faster, less ad ridden browser is not enough. The sheer networking effect is propping up Chrome on Android.

I only had a few issues with some videos playing.

[clairity]

do you really need the fallback? i've yet to need chrome for anything, since i rarely use google products other than maps.

i've found the use of google captcha on governmental, financial, and some commercial sites frustrating though. i'll abandon a site that has google captcha if usage is anything less than critical.

[Rebelgecko]

Like you alluded to, some websites perform much better in Chrome (in particular Google's own websites, but there's some other offenders like roll20.net).

There's an FF extension called Buster made someone here on HN that helps workaround Google's current generation of captchas. It doesn't work 100% of the time, but the success rate is still higher than doing it myself.

[iamnotacrook]

Some sites need NoScript disabled to work. Even using the "temporarily trust everything" option doesn't work. Since it's easier to just paste the URL into chrome than disable a plug-in and remember to re-enable it later, I do that.

[ferzul]

linkedin doesn't work for me on firefox, so i rarely even attempt to use it. but if someone a care about wants to link to me, i have to use chromium for that.

[clairity]

that's odd. does the whole site not load, or just certain features don't work?

i use firefox with all kinds of privacy/blocking extensions and can access linkedin just fine (as long as first-party javascript can execute).