7 ms·

I've finally switched (back) to firefox today. I switched from firefox to chrome for their superior devtools a few years back, but hopefully firefox has had ti

I've finally switched (back) to firefox today. I switched from firefox to chrome for their superior devtools a few years back, but hopefully firefox has had time to catch up. Everything old is new again!

echelon 2y ago
This is why we need to break up Google. Google is a de facto monopoly. They own the entire web. The gateway, the browser, the protocols, advertising, discovery. Google is too big.
- ragnese 2y ago
  Sure, but we saw this coming a mile away (as in, people have been saying this about Chrome for about a decade). People--especially tech nerds--didn't have to switch to the closed source, conflict-of-interest, browser. But, everyone did, and this is what we get for it. We now have proprietary DRM built in to the web standards, and all kinds of other bullshit, because a bunch of people decided to not learn any lessons at all from Microsoft and Internet Explorer. But, every time Mozilla does something slightly abrasive, HN users pile on about how Mozilla is ruining their privacy-respecting reputation, and then go back to using Chrome... The double-standard is really something else. Maybe instead of getting someone else to break up Google for us, we could just... stop using their shit? I'm typing this from Firefox, I use Proton Mail (and pay for it!) for email, and I mostly search with DuckDuckGo (I know that's not perfect, either). I certainly don't feel like I'm living like a caveman... /rant
  - ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
    > tech nerds you would be surprised how many devs these days have drunk the big tech coolaid. leetcode all the time and dream of working at google and using chrome and writing javascript. if the tech nerds took a stand and used firefox en masse, we wouldn't have this problem. unfortunately it is now normie season. we have to travel through these dark times.
    - ragnese 2y ago
      There's still hope. I would like to draw a parallel to Microsoft Windows, with my own narrative added over. Tech nerds mostly knew that Windows was not a good server operating system. It was also not a fantastic software development environment unless you were using a big, all-inclusive, IDE that was probably aimed specifically at developing Windows libraries and applications. But, Windows was (and still is) the choice for normies by a WIDE margin. The tech nerds continued to mostly ignore Windows for server stuff, and more and more ignored it for other dev stuff, too (many migrating to Macs, some to Linux, etc). If you have a lot of users, but no developers on your platform, you're playing a dangerous game. Eventually Microsoft found a way to have Linux running in Windows. I don't know or care if that "saves" Microsoft or Windows or whatever, but I do see that as a win for the tech nerds. All we have to do is get the tech nerds to stop using Chrome. Chrome can't survive forever if the nerds stop using Chrome, if we stop optimizing our web pages specifically for Chrome, and if we stop writing and maintaining extensions for it. Eventually, they'll probably cave and put back more stuff to make the nerds happy, in order to bring them back to the platform and save their normie userbase. Either that or Chrome will die. Both are fine with me.
      - ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
        > All we have to do is get the tech nerds to stop using Chrome. Chrome can't survive forever if the nerds stop using Chrome, if we stop optimizing our web pages specifically for Chrome, and if we stop writing and maintaining extensions for it. Agreed 100% with this.
      - seec 2y ago
        With the path Apple/Google are taking it looks like Microsoft will be the best bet for quite a while still. The thing with Microsoft is that while they lack taste and have some nasty corporate behavior, they are less greedy than the others and are willing to work with their customers more, respond to needs/demands better. Oh, and they don't try to have a captive hardware market, that is a massive plus. The reason the "normies" "choose" Microsoft is because it's the only choice that make somewhat sense from a financial standpoint if you don't care that much. There is a whole mythology about Apple hardware lasting longer and all but, in my experience, the reverse is true and you get much more for your money if you opt for a standard computer that happens to come with Windows. Linux would have a fight chance with better hardware/software support but dev/manufacturers can be arsed because it's a chicken and egg problem (there are also too many variations of what is Linux, so that doesn't help). With the iPhone success, Apple had a chance to gain market share for "real" computer in a way that would have long lasting effect both for business and consumer support, instead they went full greed mode and found many clever ways to close even more a platform that was already not the most open, while had the same time selling weak computer that are clearly lacking for the price, very often with terrible engineering decision (like their new Apple Silicon iMac, already having issues, less than 4 years after release, what a joke).
  - AdamJacobMuller 2y ago
    Google made something better than what existed with Chrome, it was obvious it would capture the market significantly especially among more technical people. I don't think the fact that Chrome is (was) better is the question, it's a question of how they got here. Google took tons of money and threw it into Chrome and therefore developed something better. It's better because Google put more money into it than anyone else would have because, in the absence of considering using it to enshrine their search and ad revenue, it wouldn't make sense. Isn't this part of the antitrust test?
    - ragnese 2y ago
      It was only true that Chrome was significantly superior (performance-wise, anyway) for a little while. Firefox had to play catch up and it took several years. It was (mostly) called the "electrolysis" (a.k.a., "e10s") project. It was considered complete by 2018, and had already offered significant performance and stability improvements for years before then. I wouldn't be surprised if Chrome still performs better on Google-owned web sites, for obvious reasons. But, nobody is really going to notice a difference between Firefox and Chrome when visiting, e.g., your bank's web site. So, it's been somewhere between six and eight years that Firefox has had comparable performance, comparable web dev tools, and way cooler extensions. I'm sure plenty of people will reply that this isn't true and there was some website just this week that FORCES them to stay with Chrome because they noticed a jitter once, but people on the internet are top-tier experts at rationalizing and I don't buy it. We could've all jumped on board with Firefox when the e10s project landed, but nobody did because it was just slightly less convenient to switch than to not. I hope it was worth it for them.
      - genocidicbunny 2y ago
        > I wouldn't be surprised if Chrome still performs better on Google-owned web sites, for obvious reasons. Most websites (except for those doing some really fancy stuff with new experimental web apis) tend to work just fine in Firefox. Google's sites are the only ones I regularly encounter that perform terribly and leak memory continuously.
  - mort96 2y ago
    Meh, the "slightly abrasive" stuff Mozilla is doing is stuff like buying up ad analytics companies and adding features to help ad tracking companies track users. Fuck Mozilla, and fuck Google even more. I admire your optimism by the way that a few technologists saying "stop using Chrome, Google is evil, use Firefox" is enough to overcome the market dominance of a monopoly like Google's, but I sadly don't share it. People have been saying it (and similar things, like "don't use Windows, Microsoft is evil, use Linux") for decades with little success. Even the few people who do get swayed will switch back after a few instances of "I was late for my important meeting/was unable to open this important document because the website didn't work with Firefox". Most people's tech choices are deeply pragmatic and based on familiarity. And to expect anything else is honestly foolish, in my opinion. This is coming from a Firefox and Linux user by the way.
    - Dalewyn 2y ago
      >"stop using Chrome, Google is evil, use Firefox" is enough to overcome the market dominance of a monopoly like Google's That is exactly how Firefox slew Internet Explorer.
  - r00fus 2y ago
    > People--especially tech nerds--didn't have to switch to the closed source, conflict-of-interest, browser. Do you not remember all the ads promoting chrome? First was chrome-frame IE extension, then came all the ads - then tie-ins where you got Chrome in addition when you really wanted some other app. They pushed it hard because they knew they had no real competitors and could eat up marketshare.
    - Dalewyn 2y ago
      Chrome won because it was more performant (read: only point of interest for Joe Average) and it was modern and cool (read: only point of interest for nerds). Firefox failed because it stagnated on performance and code quality (read: memory leaks for daaaaaaaaays) and ultimately because Mozilla was corrupted by Mitchell Baker and still is to this very day driving away nerds and engineers by the truckload. Lest we forget, Internet Explorer lost to Firefox despite bundling with Windows. Edge still loses to Chrome despite bundling with Windows. Safari despite bundling with iOS and MacOS only survives thanks to the Walls of Applestantinope holding against the SelEUk Empire's onslaught.
      - fatihpense 2y ago
        Thanks for the unexpected laugh at the end. Maybe there is a typo in that imaginary world: "Applestantinople". But maybe it is as intended :)
        Dalewyn 2y ago
        I didn't even notice that. lmao
      - the_gorilla 2y ago
        > Chrome won because it was more performant (read: only point of interest for Joe Average) It's hard to argue chrome won on merit here when they were using their monopoly to actively sabotage users running firefox on the most popular sites. > YouTube page load is 5x slower in Firefox and Edge than in Chrome because YouTube's Polymer redesign relies on the deprecated Shadow DOM v0 API only implemented in Chrome
  - endgame 2y ago
    I criticise Mozilla in tech circles, I recommend Firefox and a working adblocker to friends and family, and I donate to Ladybird. What else should I be doing?
    - chii 2y ago
      unfortunately, there's not much else you get to do. With the exception of the anti-trust suits on google coming out with a decent outcome (which i wouldn't hold my breath for), there's little that individuals can do to push back against google's might. If you're in a position of power in a corporation to dictate software usage, consider making firefox the default choice.
    - ragnese 2y ago
      That's it, I think. I think as long as enough of us actually do that, it'll make a difference. People seem to think that you need 50%+ of the users to "rebel" for there to be change, but the truth is that not all "users" are created equal. Developers, tech supporters (personal or professional), and "power users" matter more than typical users because it's our feedback, contributions, and demands that keep pushing these products forward. The "normies" will use whatever you put in front of them and they won't know or care that something could or should be different. If the nerds leave, the product will stagnate and other options will pick up steam.
      - endgame 2y ago
        Or, as Ballmer used to say, "developers, developers, developers, developers."
ttt3ts 2y ago
IMO they are still not as good although they have improved. I just develop in chrome and use Firefox for everything else.
- KTibow 2y ago
  What makes them less good? I'm used to Firefox and while the Chrome devtools have more features they're harder to use (eg smaller touch targets, can't accept JS suggestion with enter key)
  - tonightstoast 2y ago
    I use FF and my coworker uses Chrome. He says the thing that pisses him off the most when watching me use FF is that there is no fuzzy search when manually applying styles. I.e. you have to search "justif..." to see "justify-self". You can't just search "self". That's the only example I've really noticed between the two but I'm sure there are more. It doesn't bother me enough to change though.
- knowitnone 2y ago
  Same. I use Chromium for dev and firefox for browsing
- ezst 2y ago
  I know chrome dev tools are capable, but to me they feel much more dumb and convoluted. There's lots of convenience and golden nuggets in Firefox dev tools that makes you feel they've been designed by and for developers.
  - Jach 2y ago
    My needs for webdev debugging have always been satisfied by Firefox, but last time I was really in the weeds ~4 years ago I had the feeling both it and Chrome were still missing things I took for granted with Firebug long ago. I don't mind nice and powerful tools, but one thing I learned with Java (where the tools are so much nicer and so much more powerful) is that if you're leaning on them heavily, that's kind of a sign you've messed up. Like on the scale of severity (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts/refs/heads/master/Hickey_Rich/EffectivePrograms/00.27.19.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts...), at least as severe as really bad coupling or brittleness. Thank goodness for the tools that let people efficiently figure things out and get on with things, but it's really better to have not needed to be in such a situation to begin with. I have a similar view with valgrind -- amazing tool everyone would rather exist than not, one could imagine a "Google Valgrind" and "Mozilla Valgrind" competing on mild differences of amazing, but really, life is better if you can just use a managed language and never have to deal with any flavor of valgrind. I think there are ways to do webdev that significantly reduce the need to use any browser dev tools at all, though the domain necessitates some use. ClojureScript in 2014 was showing the way.
knowitnone 2y ago
their dev environment is still pretty bad
- huhtenberg 2y ago
  Have you seen Mozilla leadership team though? That is something else altogether.
ethagnawl 2y ago
I was going to make a joke about giving Firebug a look but (TIL) Firefox's Devtools actually subsumed Firebug a few years back. That's pretty cool and a nice note for that project to end on. https://getfirebug.com https://getfirebug.com
- Izkata 2y ago
  They make it sound nice, but the last release of Firebug was after that page says they were unified, and only about half a year before Firefox Quantum removed XUL, which would have killed Firebug anyway. I was still using Firebug because its console was still better than the built-in devtools.

echelon 2y ago

This is why we need to break up Google. Google is a de facto monopoly. They own the entire web. The gateway, the browser, the protocols, advertising, discovery. Google is too big.

ragnese 2y ago
Sure, but we saw this coming a mile away (as in, people have been saying this about Chrome for about a decade). People--especially tech nerds--didn't have to switch to the closed source, conflict-of-interest, browser. But, everyone did, and this is what we get for it. We now have proprietary DRM built in to the web standards, and all kinds of other bullshit, because a bunch of people decided to not learn any lessons at all from Microsoft and Internet Explorer. But, every time Mozilla does something slightly abrasive, HN users pile on about how Mozilla is ruining their privacy-respecting reputation, and then go back to using Chrome... The double-standard is really something else. Maybe instead of getting someone else to break up Google for us, we could just... stop using their shit? I'm typing this from Firefox, I use Proton Mail (and pay for it!) for email, and I mostly search with DuckDuckGo (I know that's not perfect, either). I certainly don't feel like I'm living like a caveman... /rant
- ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
  > tech nerds you would be surprised how many devs these days have drunk the big tech coolaid. leetcode all the time and dream of working at google and using chrome and writing javascript. if the tech nerds took a stand and used firefox en masse, we wouldn't have this problem. unfortunately it is now normie season. we have to travel through these dark times.
  - ragnese 2y ago
    There's still hope. I would like to draw a parallel to Microsoft Windows, with my own narrative added over. Tech nerds mostly knew that Windows was not a good server operating system. It was also not a fantastic software development environment unless you were using a big, all-inclusive, IDE that was probably aimed specifically at developing Windows libraries and applications. But, Windows was (and still is) the choice for normies by a WIDE margin. The tech nerds continued to mostly ignore Windows for server stuff, and more and more ignored it for other dev stuff, too (many migrating to Macs, some to Linux, etc). If you have a lot of users, but no developers on your platform, you're playing a dangerous game. Eventually Microsoft found a way to have Linux running in Windows. I don't know or care if that "saves" Microsoft or Windows or whatever, but I do see that as a win for the tech nerds. All we have to do is get the tech nerds to stop using Chrome. Chrome can't survive forever if the nerds stop using Chrome, if we stop optimizing our web pages specifically for Chrome, and if we stop writing and maintaining extensions for it. Eventually, they'll probably cave and put back more stuff to make the nerds happy, in order to bring them back to the platform and save their normie userbase. Either that or Chrome will die. Both are fine with me.
    - ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
      > All we have to do is get the tech nerds to stop using Chrome. Chrome can't survive forever if the nerds stop using Chrome, if we stop optimizing our web pages specifically for Chrome, and if we stop writing and maintaining extensions for it. Agreed 100% with this.
    - seec 2y ago
      With the path Apple/Google are taking it looks like Microsoft will be the best bet for quite a while still. The thing with Microsoft is that while they lack taste and have some nasty corporate behavior, they are less greedy than the others and are willing to work with their customers more, respond to needs/demands better. Oh, and they don't try to have a captive hardware market, that is a massive plus. The reason the "normies" "choose" Microsoft is because it's the only choice that make somewhat sense from a financial standpoint if you don't care that much. There is a whole mythology about Apple hardware lasting longer and all but, in my experience, the reverse is true and you get much more for your money if you opt for a standard computer that happens to come with Windows. Linux would have a fight chance with better hardware/software support but dev/manufacturers can be arsed because it's a chicken and egg problem (there are also too many variations of what is Linux, so that doesn't help). With the iPhone success, Apple had a chance to gain market share for "real" computer in a way that would have long lasting effect both for business and consumer support, instead they went full greed mode and found many clever ways to close even more a platform that was already not the most open, while had the same time selling weak computer that are clearly lacking for the price, very often with terrible engineering decision (like their new Apple Silicon iMac, already having issues, less than 4 years after release, what a joke).
- AdamJacobMuller 2y ago
  Google made something better than what existed with Chrome, it was obvious it would capture the market significantly especially among more technical people. I don't think the fact that Chrome is (was) better is the question, it's a question of how they got here. Google took tons of money and threw it into Chrome and therefore developed something better. It's better because Google put more money into it than anyone else would have because, in the absence of considering using it to enshrine their search and ad revenue, it wouldn't make sense. Isn't this part of the antitrust test?
  - ragnese 2y ago
    It was only true that Chrome was significantly superior (performance-wise, anyway) for a little while. Firefox had to play catch up and it took several years. It was (mostly) called the "electrolysis" (a.k.a., "e10s") project. It was considered complete by 2018, and had already offered significant performance and stability improvements for years before then. I wouldn't be surprised if Chrome still performs better on Google-owned web sites, for obvious reasons. But, nobody is really going to notice a difference between Firefox and Chrome when visiting, e.g., your bank's web site. So, it's been somewhere between six and eight years that Firefox has had comparable performance, comparable web dev tools, and way cooler extensions. I'm sure plenty of people will reply that this isn't true and there was some website just this week that FORCES them to stay with Chrome because they noticed a jitter once, but people on the internet are top-tier experts at rationalizing and I don't buy it. We could've all jumped on board with Firefox when the e10s project landed, but nobody did because it was just slightly less convenient to switch than to not. I hope it was worth it for them.
    - genocidicbunny 2y ago
      > I wouldn't be surprised if Chrome still performs better on Google-owned web sites, for obvious reasons. Most websites (except for those doing some really fancy stuff with new experimental web apis) tend to work just fine in Firefox. Google's sites are the only ones I regularly encounter that perform terribly and leak memory continuously.
- mort96 2y ago
  Meh, the "slightly abrasive" stuff Mozilla is doing is stuff like buying up ad analytics companies and adding features to help ad tracking companies track users. Fuck Mozilla, and fuck Google even more. I admire your optimism by the way that a few technologists saying "stop using Chrome, Google is evil, use Firefox" is enough to overcome the market dominance of a monopoly like Google's, but I sadly don't share it. People have been saying it (and similar things, like "don't use Windows, Microsoft is evil, use Linux") for decades with little success. Even the few people who do get swayed will switch back after a few instances of "I was late for my important meeting/was unable to open this important document because the website didn't work with Firefox". Most people's tech choices are deeply pragmatic and based on familiarity. And to expect anything else is honestly foolish, in my opinion. This is coming from a Firefox and Linux user by the way.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    >"stop using Chrome, Google is evil, use Firefox" is enough to overcome the market dominance of a monopoly like Google's That is exactly how Firefox slew Internet Explorer.
- r00fus 2y ago
  > People--especially tech nerds--didn't have to switch to the closed source, conflict-of-interest, browser. Do you not remember all the ads promoting chrome? First was chrome-frame IE extension, then came all the ads - then tie-ins where you got Chrome in addition when you really wanted some other app. They pushed it hard because they knew they had no real competitors and could eat up marketshare.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    Chrome won because it was more performant (read: only point of interest for Joe Average) and it was modern and cool (read: only point of interest for nerds). Firefox failed because it stagnated on performance and code quality (read: memory leaks for daaaaaaaaays) and ultimately because Mozilla was corrupted by Mitchell Baker and still is to this very day driving away nerds and engineers by the truckload. Lest we forget, Internet Explorer lost to Firefox despite bundling with Windows. Edge still loses to Chrome despite bundling with Windows. Safari despite bundling with iOS and MacOS only survives thanks to the Walls of Applestantinope holding against the SelEUk Empire's onslaught.
    - fatihpense 2y ago
      Thanks for the unexpected laugh at the end. Maybe there is a typo in that imaginary world: "Applestantinople". But maybe it is as intended :)
      - Dalewyn 2y ago
        I didn't even notice that. lmao
    - the_gorilla 2y ago
      > Chrome won because it was more performant (read: only point of interest for Joe Average) It's hard to argue chrome won on merit here when they were using their monopoly to actively sabotage users running firefox on the most popular sites. > YouTube page load is 5x slower in Firefox and Edge than in Chrome because YouTube's Polymer redesign relies on the deprecated Shadow DOM v0 API only implemented in Chrome
- endgame 2y ago
  I criticise Mozilla in tech circles, I recommend Firefox and a working adblocker to friends and family, and I donate to Ladybird. What else should I be doing?
  - chii 2y ago
    unfortunately, there's not much else you get to do. With the exception of the anti-trust suits on google coming out with a decent outcome (which i wouldn't hold my breath for), there's little that individuals can do to push back against google's might. If you're in a position of power in a corporation to dictate software usage, consider making firefox the default choice.
  - ragnese 2y ago
    That's it, I think. I think as long as enough of us actually do that, it'll make a difference. People seem to think that you need 50%+ of the users to "rebel" for there to be change, but the truth is that not all "users" are created equal. Developers, tech supporters (personal or professional), and "power users" matter more than typical users because it's our feedback, contributions, and demands that keep pushing these products forward. The "normies" will use whatever you put in front of them and they won't know or care that something could or should be different. If the nerds leave, the product will stagnate and other options will pick up steam.
    - endgame 2y ago
      Or, as Ballmer used to say, "developers, developers, developers, developers."

ttt3ts 2y ago

IMO they are still not as good although they have improved. I just develop in chrome and use Firefox for everything else.

KTibow 2y ago
What makes them less good? I'm used to Firefox and while the Chrome devtools have more features they're harder to use (eg smaller touch targets, can't accept JS suggestion with enter key)
- tonightstoast 2y ago
  I use FF and my coworker uses Chrome. He says the thing that pisses him off the most when watching me use FF is that there is no fuzzy search when manually applying styles. I.e. you have to search "justif..." to see "justify-self". You can't just search "self". That's the only example I've really noticed between the two but I'm sure there are more. It doesn't bother me enough to change though.
knowitnone 2y ago
Same. I use Chromium for dev and firefox for browsing
ezst 2y ago
I know chrome dev tools are capable, but to me they feel much more dumb and convoluted. There's lots of convenience and golden nuggets in Firefox dev tools that makes you feel they've been designed by and for developers.
- Jach 2y ago
  My needs for webdev debugging have always been satisfied by Firefox, but last time I was really in the weeds ~4 years ago I had the feeling both it and Chrome were still missing things I took for granted with Firebug long ago. I don't mind nice and powerful tools, but one thing I learned with Java (where the tools are so much nicer and so much more powerful) is that if you're leaning on them heavily, that's kind of a sign you've messed up. Like on the scale of severity (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts/refs/heads/master/Hickey_Rich/EffectivePrograms/00.27.19.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts...), at least as severe as really bad coupling or brittleness. Thank goodness for the tools that let people efficiently figure things out and get on with things, but it's really better to have not needed to be in such a situation to begin with. I have a similar view with valgrind -- amazing tool everyone would rather exist than not, one could imagine a "Google Valgrind" and "Mozilla Valgrind" competing on mild differences of amazing, but really, life is better if you can just use a managed language and never have to deal with any flavor of valgrind. I think there are ways to do webdev that significantly reduce the need to use any browser dev tools at all, though the domain necessitates some use. ClojureScript in 2014 was showing the way.

knowitnone 2y ago

their dev environment is still pretty bad

huhtenberg 2y ago
Have you seen Mozilla leadership team though? That is something else altogether.

ethagnawl 2y ago

I was going to make a joke about giving Firebug a look but (TIL) Firefox's Devtools actually subsumed Firebug a few years back. That's pretty cool and a nice note for that project to end on. https://getfirebug.com https://getfirebug.com

Izkata 2y ago
They make it sound nice, but the last release of Firebug was after that page says they were unified, and only about half a year before Firefox Quantum removed XUL, which would have killed Firebug anyway. I was still using Firebug because its console was still better than the built-in devtools.