[ndriscoll]

I don't even understand the "it's fast" argument. I'm on an 8 year old computer, and pages load "instantly" (according to the profiler, ~50 ms after getting the response, which takes a few hundred ms anyway) in Librewolf. Are people getting out high-speed cameras to measure the difference here? I expect that as malware blocking becomes less effective in Chromium, it will end up being overall slower as well.

[vehemenz]

Exactly. There haven't been perceptible performance differences between browsers in a very, very long time. This isn't a reason to switch browsers anymore.

[0points]

While I never left Firefox behind, I absolutely can relate to the "its fast", because I remember when it was true.

15 years ago, the laptops never fast enough and I watched most of my friends started to abandon Firefox for Chrome after trying it out.

> I expect that as malware blocking becomes less effective in Chromium

Why do you expect malware blocking to become less effective... ? Adblock is not antivirus.

[ndriscoll]

Chrome may have been faster, but I don't really remember Firefox ever being particularly slow.

Adware, spyware, and crypto miners are all types of malware, and ublock origin can block all of them. Antivirus is probably the least useful type of anti-malware program as viruses aren't particularly common unless you're on the shady parts of the web.

[leros]

Firefox was a huge memory hog. People called it bloated. Chrome was the lightweight alternative.

[BenjiWiebe]

It can take seconds for modern bloated web apps. Does Facebook load in <1 second for you too?

[ndriscoll]

Attempting just now, looks like Chromium took ~9.5 seconds total and Librewolf ~11.5 seconds. Essentially all of that time in both cases was waiting for responses to `/login` and `/` though, so still any difference in browser speed seems to be imperceptible and well under the noise threshold for how long the server takes.