Look, I’m a Linux user, and I prefer to use Free apps. However, the truth must be told: Firefox is not as optimized as Chrome. On older devices, Chrome is twice as fast in youtube playback, and it uses way less RAM overall. Chrome is the better browser in terms of architecture, at least for older PCs (and I have a whole bunch of them). On my main PC, running Debian-Testing, which is a newer PC, I do use Firefox, because it can handle stuff ok with enough CPU power. But for all my older PCs (anywhere from 5 to 15 years old), I have to use Chrome.
Now, if you find me a de-googled, Free, WELL-MAINTANED Chromium browser, I rather use that than Chrome. No, Brave, etc don’t cut it. I want a community-driven, well maintained Chromium browser. Currently, all de-googled versions are not well maintained, or not available as native packages on Debian.
It’s a company that wants google’s spot in the ad business with a different approach, in the long run we’ll have the same shit as Google if they succeed.
A proprietary browser is a non-starter for me, especially when there are many free alternatives, even Chromium based ones. I’d take Ungoogled-Chromium on desktop or Cromite on mobile, heck I’d take Brave even.
Yes, Vivaldi isn’t fullFOSS, because 5% of the script of the unique UI is proprietary of Vivaldi, but it’s 100% auditable and even moddeable by the user, they even show how to do it in its community. Edge and Chrome would fork it in the same moment when Vivaldi make it OpenSource, killing all other Chromium and Vivaldi itself. Maybe in the future it will go full OpenSource, there are still intern debates about it.
The sense of OpenSource is to be capable to collaborate in new products, but with almost 100 browsers and forks in the market, this value is pretty debatable. For the user is more important the ethics of the company respect the user, in this case a european, employee-owned cooperative, which is given with a full transparency in all it’s services included in the account (mail, calendar, feed, blog, the Vivaldi Mastodon instance, e2ee sync in own server, etc.).
I will continue to maintain that it is bitterly ironic for a product which is 95% based on free software to be so hostile to software freedom. They feel so entitled to take but don’t want to give back, and they justify it by saying that that others will do the same thing they did if they do make it fully free.
So, downvoted, huh? By fellow open source users who don’t want to hear the truth?
The truth is that you might have experienced this, but this might not reflect the average user’s experience. My older ThinkPad feels no difference in better life based on the web browser.
Google has a history of sabotaging Firefox in YouTube, because they can. This is a YouTube problem more than a Firefox problem. I know that’s not really helpful for you as an end user, but I want to mention it because really, Google deserves the blame.
I can’t downvote you from my instance, but you do realise it’s been pretty well-known, for at least a decade in certain circles, that YouTube specifically slows down on Firefox? I’m pretty sure you can test this yourself by changing user agents. So that hardly seems like a fair test of a browser’s speed.
the truth must be told: Firefox is not as optimized as Chrome
what are you talking about? my desktop pc is amd fx4300. definition of old and subpar - https://i.imgur.com/WBm5Ub1.png - and i have 313 open tabs right now.
granted, that is slightly more affected by memory, before i updated from 8 to 32 gb recently, it was admittedly slightly more sluggish.
but at the same time normal people don’t really have 300 open tabs at once and also you have to ask what is the threshold where you are willing to sacrifice your privacy for slight speed increase.
do you have some numbers to support that speed difference, or is it just your feeling, or anecdote that is being passed around and everyone repeats it and everyone believes it, because everyone says so?
Look, I’m a Linux user, and I prefer to use Free apps. However, the truth must be told: Firefox is not as optimized as Chrome. On older devices, Chrome is twice as fast in youtube playback, and it uses way less RAM overall. Chrome is the better browser in terms of architecture, at least for older PCs (and I have a whole bunch of them). On my main PC, running Debian-Testing, which is a newer PC, I do use Firefox, because it can handle stuff ok with enough CPU power. But for all my older PCs (anywhere from 5 to 15 years old), I have to use Chrome.
Now, if you find me a de-googled, Free, WELL-MAINTANED Chromium browser, I rather use that than Chrome. No, Brave, etc don’t cut it. I want a community-driven, well maintained Chromium browser. Currently, all de-googled versions are not well maintained, or not available as native packages on Debian.
Why doesnt brave cut it? Also ungoogled chromium is available as an appimage and a deb
It’s a company that wants google’s spot in the ad business with a different approach, in the long run we’ll have the same shit as Google if they succeed.
Vivaldi, good maintaned, no calls to Google, inbuild and customizable ad and trackerblocker. If Chromium, than this one.
A proprietary browser is a non-starter for me, especially when there are many free alternatives, even Chromium based ones. I’d take Ungoogled-Chromium on desktop or Cromite on mobile, heck I’d take Brave even.
Yes, Vivaldi isn’t fullFOSS, because 5% of the script of the unique UI is proprietary of Vivaldi, but it’s 100% auditable and even moddeable by the user, they even show how to do it in its community. Edge and Chrome would fork it in the same moment when Vivaldi make it OpenSource, killing all other Chromium and Vivaldi itself. Maybe in the future it will go full OpenSource, there are still intern debates about it. The sense of OpenSource is to be capable to collaborate in new products, but with almost 100 browsers and forks in the market, this value is pretty debatable. For the user is more important the ethics of the company respect the user, in this case a european, employee-owned cooperative, which is given with a full transparency in all it’s services included in the account (mail, calendar, feed, blog, the Vivaldi Mastodon instance, e2ee sync in own server, etc.).
I will continue to maintain that it is bitterly ironic for a product which is 95% based on free software to be so hostile to software freedom. They feel so entitled to take but don’t want to give back, and they justify it by saying that that others will do the same thing they did if they do make it fully free.
The truth is that you might have experienced this, but this might not reflect the average user’s experience. My older ThinkPad feels no difference in better life based on the web browser.
Google has a history of sabotaging Firefox in YouTube, because they can. This is a YouTube problem more than a Firefox problem. I know that’s not really helpful for you as an end user, but I want to mention it because really, Google deserves the blame.
I can’t downvote you from my instance, but you do realise it’s been pretty well-known, for at least a decade in certain circles, that YouTube specifically slows down on Firefox? I’m pretty sure you can test this yourself by changing user agents. So that hardly seems like a fair test of a browser’s speed.
what are you talking about? my desktop pc is amd fx4300. definition of old and subpar - https://i.imgur.com/WBm5Ub1.png - and i have 313 open tabs right now.
granted, that is slightly more affected by memory, before i updated from 8 to 32 gb recently, it was admittedly slightly more sluggish.
but at the same time normal people don’t really have 300 open tabs at once and also you have to ask what is the threshold where you are willing to sacrifice your privacy for slight speed increase.
do you have some numbers to support that speed difference, or is it just your feeling, or anecdote that is being passed around and everyone repeats it and everyone believes it, because everyone says so?