[Drybones]

IDK where you have been for the last decade, but Firefox has not been the better option since Chromium was made

Disliking Google Chrome proper is one thing, but Chromium is superior in every way. Rendering, features, speed, memory management

[foresto]

Chromium has more than a few flaws that I'm sure you can discover if you choose to. Here's an incident that I cannot forgive:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=786909

[BloodyIron]

Show me a piece of software without flaws and I'll show you either a liar, or perhaps the program "ping".

[lelanthran]

> Chromium is superior in every way. Rendering, features, speed, memory management

Being faster, prettier and using less memory[1] is pointless if the browser won't let me block all ads.

I mean, it's like comparing a turd sandwich made with expensive exotic bread, and a cheese sandwich made with cheap grocery store break.

Sure, the one has great exotic bread, but I don't want the turd it comes with.

So, yeah, it actually doesn't matter how much prettier, faster or smaller web pages are with Chrome, at least FF lets me (currently) block almost anything.

---------------------------------------

[1] Chrome beats out FF in exactly one of those, and it's not the memory or speed. Turns out ads take up a lot of RAM, and slow down pages considerably.

[pseidemann]

The person is asking for the better option.

[drtgh]

I coincide with the person, by the moment Firefox is the better option, the comparative form is confusing.

[savolai]

-1 tab containers

Please elaborate on ”features”.

Does chromium have non-google sync?

[Drybones]

Chromium based browsers have non-google sync. Vivaldi implements their own encrypted sync service and I believe Brave does as well.

But I am talking about browser feature support, not stuff that can supplemented with an extension like a password manager.

Firefox has poor support for modern web features including video processing and encoding which makes it very bad at web conferencing/video calls or in-page streaming.

Firefox's developer tools and console is also much worse and missing important features.

Other features Firefox is missing or has poor support for compared to Chromium are WebGPU, WebTransport, Periodic Background Sync, and parts of WebRTC. Plus various APIs for web serial, badging, and Web Share are missing partial or full support.

Firefox still doesn't have functional HDR for images and videos including AV1.

[savolai]

Oh I thought you meant actual chromium browser.

Those seem rather marginal features from my pov but of course once you need them, you need them, I guess.

[savolai]

Also, for context: ’Some truth here, but it’s overstated.

Firefox does WebRTC fine. AV1 works, simulcast works, calls and streaming work. Chrome still leads on performance tweaks and extra APIs, but “very bad” is just wrong.

DevTools aren’t “much worse.” Different, less popular, sometimes better (CSS, network). Chrome wins mainly because everyone targets it first.

API gaps are real but the list is sloppy. WebGPU and WebTransport exist in Firefox now, just behind on advanced bits. Periodic Background Sync barely matters. WebRTC support keeps closing the gap.

Missing stuff like Web Serial, Badging, fuller Web Share? True, and mostly intentional.

HDR is the weakest claim that actually holds. AV1 decode exists, but HDR support still feels half-done.

TL;DR: Firefox lags Chromium in breadth and polish, not in core modern web capability. Calling it bad for video or modern apps doesn’t match reality.” ’