Firefox has surpassed Chrome on Speedometer

Congrats to Firefox, it really has made substantial improvements over the years.
- Firefox a few years ago would kill my Mac battery in a couple hours, now it’s as good as safari for energy management. No reason not to use it as a daily driver now.
- Maybe it'll start maintaining Mozilla again. You know: its namesake project.
  
  Mozilla Suite, the thing discontinued seventeen years ago!?
  
  There is a project called Mozilla? Afaik it is the company name? What is it?
- Now all we need is that it provides a better experience than Chrome.
  
  Meh, I'll be honest and say that I'm not impressed by chrome in modern day. While I hate Microsoft, edge is a nicer browser to use than chrome, and that's saying something
  
  It already does. I dislike using Chrome. Firefox works better, looks better, and containers are really useful to me.
- I’ll stick to Safari. I don’t trust Mozilla any more than Google or Microsoft.
  
  Ah yes, an open source popular browser that is made by a nonprofit organization is less trustworthy than a close source browser made by a public company
  
  Isn't Safari made by Apple? It's not like Apple is some paragon of corporate virtue, why do you trust them?

I'm sticking with Firefox until some dev decides to use it's engine to make a new better browser. I truly enjoy Arc and Vivaldi, but since they're chromium i don't trust them an inch with my personal data.
- LibreWolf is an option. It's mainly just a Firefox fork but removes the adware and sponsored garbage as well as had more privacy-focused defaults, though IMO the defaults are too much and need to be toned back. No ads though so it's 100% worth the switch.
  
  Have you ever tried WaterFox?
- since they're chromium i don't trust them an inch with my personal data.
  This is such a ridiculous position. Do you have any evidence at all that every Chromium browser (even the ones specifically designed to avoid this) are transmitting your personal data?
  
  This is such a ridiculous position.
  I'm not the original person you responded to, but I am going to go out on a limb here and say that I disagree. While I personally do not think that all Chromium browsers (especially since there are projects like ungoogled-chromium) transmit your personal data, I can't verify this myself because the Chromium codebase is far too much of an undertaking for myself to review.
  While the same is also true for Firefox (and really any potential open source browser), on a pure personal-trust factor I trust Mozilla/Firefox to be more caring about protecting my personal data than I do Google, who literally revolves around data collection. Inevitably its a moot point for me since I do use Google services anyways, but I don't think its that far reaching for someone who potentially doesn't to take the original person's stance.
  
  Evidence? OF COURSE!
  Have you even tried searching for it?
  Google even says so for Chromium on its own official page!
  https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/144289/privacy-with-chromium
  You don't need to trust us. Trust Google, they are telling you legally if you want to listen.
  Also, look up the handful of open bugs on the Debian but tracker, where known people, with name and faces (I've met some on conferences), showcase and share how Chromium calls home and sends encrypted data. They share their Wireshark logs.
  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=792580;msg=53
  Look up how Debian removed Chromium for a time, until some of it got removed upstream.
  And all of this doesn't mean that Google cannot re-introduce it or add different approaches in new updates.
  Plus, Google actively creates and pushes for their "standards" via Chrome(ium), which allows them to push for even more surveillance.
  In addition, Chromium is not a community project. It's developed behind closed doors, with a secret roadmap, and a code dump happens on release. That's no way to develop the 90% of web browser market that society needs in this day and age. But, don't think you will care about that, do you? you are happy with papa Google for the foreseeable.
  
  The mere fact that you're forced to use a Google service for synchronicity between devices? Yes, Firefox has the same but i find them much more trustworthy.
  Give me a browser that allows for using a synchronization service of my own choice.
  Decentralize!
  
  Probably more/better fingerprinting techniques for chromium engine browsers but I feel like if invasive telemetry was discovered in the open-source codebase of the chromium engine we’d hear about it.

Firefox rules
- Chrome drools

Three chrome users said, “nuh uh!”.
- If only. Every chrome user said the same thing they’ve said after every other overtake. A poignantly disinterested silence. They just don’t care.

Great job Mozilla. I hope that Firefox will one day be as popular as Chrome or even more! ❤️
- Oh it was already- Before Chrome became popular. When Chrome came out, only weird people used it. All my friends were FF kids.
  
  Chrome took over FF because of Chrome being a default Android web browser after replacing its vanilla/AOSP browser.

Google is blitzscaled techbro big tech, the honeymoon is over, now it's time for enshittification !
- true for the industry at large --especially at these interest rates

I've been using Firefox since Windows XP days and speed has never really been a complaint. Well back in Flash days some sites got janky but that was probably Flash as much as Firefox.
- That was the act that most home computers and internet connections weren't that powerful yet, and when I was loading some old flash games I played back in the day recently, they were so absurdly fast.

anyone care to explain what we're looking at here?
As a Firefox Desktop/Android user this sure sounds awesome.
- The purple line is chrome's speed scorem the blue line is firefox's

Great, now do the phone browser
- I've been using FF on mobile for couple of weeks now, I dont see any major issues, in fact, no issues at all. Plus, it has extension support.
  Why do people hate FF on mobile?
  
  People hate on FF mobile? It works great for me. To be honest I think I like it more than the desktop FF.
  
  Actual answer?
  On Android, Firefox is still less secure than Chromium-based alternatives: Mozilla's engine, GeckoView, has yet to support site isolation or enable isolatedProcess.
  Not a reason to hate it though, just a reason why sadly Chromium-based browsers are preferable for now
  
  No hate on FF mobile from me, but I can objectively say Chrome, at least visually and subjectively, performs noticably faster than FF. That said, I still prefer FF over Chrome.
  
  I was happy with chrome performance. After switching to FF, based on the accolades on Lemmy, I've been mostly happy... But fuck if there's not major lag at times. It isn't connection related, as I've immediately popped over to Chrome for that site and had no issue.
  I'm not unhappy with Firefox, but I notice it's presence, which is not what I want in a browser.
  
  i feel like its laggy
  i use voyager for browsing lemmy on firefox, it often freeze while chromium fork doesn't do that
  
  It lags a lot on some websites, but it's fine for most
- We don't do that here
- Get your forks out

Good. Now, stop being forced as a snap, please.
- You could always use a distro made by sane people.
  
  Bro, I've been using Kubuntu for 4 years, it's the most I have spend with a single distro, but I'm this close to jump to Debian 12 (in fact I just tried it with VirtualBox today), I'm just waiting for the weekend because job.
- Kind of crazy that Ubuntu has some packages exclusively as snaps...
  
  Crazy is installing a package through apt and having it install the snap.
  
  It makes sense that they don't want to maintain 2 versions. What doesn't make sense is that when you ask it for an apt, instead of saying "this package isn't avalible as an apt" and maybe "by the way it is available as a snap if you want", it just installs the snap without telling you.
  
  I hate it.
- https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2022/04/how-to-install-firefox-deb-apt-ubuntu-22-04
  Unfortunately this is the best you can do with Ubuntu based systems

Browsers are cyclical like fashion, I guess.
Remember when chrome launched and they had all those commercials showing how fast it loaded webpages?
- If browsers are like fashion, Firefox is a well-tailored suit. Never out of style.
  
  @imaqtpie @ThePicardManeuver, in Vivaldi you can create your own style to your like and need, or also download one of te more than 3500 user made themes.
  https://themes.vivaldi.net

I use firefox and I like it but they have been dumbfying their UI and nagging users to use pockets.
Why on earth would I need to go to about window to update? Also, I don’t know where to find extensions so I just choose addons then manually go to extensions.
- Hm, where do they nag? I don't know what Pockets is and haven't seen anything about it.
  I also never manually update Firefox, I just restart when it tells me it's downloaded an update.
  
  Every other update would show an ad to use it. Also, you cannot remove it afaik.
- Going to the about window to check for updates is a decades old thing among thousands of different software(it's the same in Edge, Chrome, used to be in old Opera, etc.)
  Clicking on the "Add-ons and Themes" literally takes you straight to the extension tab(extensions are add-ons).
  
  First of all, I know other browsers keep update in about page, however, this is why I don't use them. It wasn't used to be in a burger menu tho.
  Second, add-ons and theme isn't saying exactly "extensions". Also, it would take you to the last tab which is by default plug-ins. try it.
  I like Firefox and I'd support the developers but they should stick to their roots to keep their current user base.
- Would love a more customizable UX for Firefox and the option of a more compressed UI. Aesthetically it definitely needs a rethink.
- Agreed, this is the main reason I switched to Librewolf over official Firefox. Firefox has devolved into adware.
  
  adware
  That's a gigantic stretch
- Yup, the new FF UI is unbearable. And it was the last straw (among other things) that convinced me that it was time to switch to something else (after 20 years).
  
  Yeah i can't stand it either, stayed on the old UI for 18 months or so until sites started breaking. I'm using this mod to make it work like the old UI and it's exactly the same, plus you only need to setup once updates haven't broken it for me so far. https://github.com/black7375/Firefox-UI-Fix

Never complained about its performance but that's awesome!

I'm still using Chrome, but it keeps getting shittier. At some point they'll push me over to Firefox. Hope Firefox can avoid getting shitty.
- While Mozilla is far from perfect, I think they've managed to avoid getting shitty for almost 20 years.
  
  That's because the Mozilla Foundation is a non-profit. They don't need to maximize value for their shareholders™.
  Thank you Netscape for setting Navigator free!
  The Enshitification cycle is a feature of for profit corporations, Google was always going to turn evil at some point.
  
  Somehow it's always the lead software in a category that becomes shitty while everything else is praised. Regardless of what's being talked about. (I know why)
- How about today? I believe in you. You can do it! Break the cycle. Ditch the Chrome.
  
  my friend actually convinced me to switch just a few days ago lol. i'm just super thankful that i could transfer all my bookmarks and stuff
  
  I live by, "never do anything you don't have to." But seriously I have some things customized in Chrome I'd have to adapt to Firefox. It would take a little effort on my part and I just don't want to deal with it until I have to. I'm sure it will happen sooner than later. I think the deprecation of Manifest V2 is going to force it because my browser is essentially a uBO support system. Until then I'll keep slogging along.
- Have you tried Brave? Idk the full story, but it is basically chrome with more privacy stuff and is way faster than normal chrome. Feels just like using chrome but faster.
  
  Brave has recently had some controversy around selling user data for AI training and isn't really a great suggestion for privacy due to this.

I've been avoiding Chrome as devil avoids holy water for years. So I'm glad FF does well.

What is exactly being measured here? Someone care to elaborate what kind of things they kept into account?
- It's this benchmark: https://browserbench.org/Speedometer2.0/
  TodoMVC is a popular UI example use-case, which illustrates basic interactivity concepts. Webdevs will often implement TodoMVC when learning a new framework to get the hang of all the core concepts.
  And well, there's a lot of frameworks, which may all have different performance in different browsers, so this benchmark tests many different implementations of TodoMVC, all done in different frameworks.
  Ultimately, it tries to simulate normal web usage, it's not some speciality benchmark.
- Exactly. Also, one might prefer 75, 80% of Chrome’s speed, but also 75% of the battery usage and maybe only 90% for RAM.
  I for one would definitely not be against less battery usage on laptop/mobile
  
  I would still use FF for moral reasons but I'd understand if uses it for the things you mention, but saying it's "faster" isn't really a good term in this case, faster in what? I mean, I'm not saying this is done in bad faith or anything, but would be even better if we could know that instead of simply clamoring over "fastness".

There's been a few comments on here talking about Firefox on Android being laggy compared to Chrome on Android.
Nobody seems to have mentioned this, but the main reason this is and/or appears to be the case is because Firefox is capped at 60Hz, whereas Chrome will display at 90Hz, making it feel much smoother.
No, I have no idea why.
Edit: The above is misinformation after I did some research - it appears that resisting fingerprinting causes the browser to set itself to 60Hz, but this can be disabled to get your screen's refresh rate, but of course this means throwing away a privacy protection...
- Could be one of those "optimisations" some brands make. I wasn't getting 120Hz on all apps on my OnePlus device. I had to force it with developer options or some 3rd party app. Gave up, installed a custom ROM (LineageOS), and it's 120Hz all the time without any issues 😎

i had left firefox for a while due to the google ecosystem but i’m happy i came back to it.
- Same. I have switched between the two several times, but I started on Firefox for a long time before switching, and now I've been back on Firefox for at least 5 years. There was definitely a good stretch of chrome in the early 2010s though.
  Firefox is well clear by now. I'm also using the Android version, and I think it's great.
  
  Firefox on Android using Ublock Origin is as good as it can get.
- Most Google web apps (Maps, Earth, Gmail, etc) work in Firefox.

I just love reading post like this, congrats Firefox and f*** Google!

Damn that's huge improvements in a relatively short span of time. I'm just waiting for more features on Firefox Android.
- Be aware that Firefox Android supports addons. So maybe there is already a fix...
  
  Seriously, I learned Firefox supports addons on mobile and suddenly the Internet became useable again on my old smartphone. Ads made browsing for me borderline impossible.
  
  Yes and they're awesome, but there's some QoL features in looking for. Like being able to enter reader mode from custom tabs, and set reader mode color scheme to match system theme, and more colors. Also dynamic color (Material You" support would be sweet.
- What features are you missing?
  
  For me, I l'd like to go into reader mode from custom tabs, for reader mode to sync with system color, and more colors on reader mode.
  Also Material You/Dynamic Color for the UI would be awesome.
  Improved PWA support would be nice, definitely lagging behind Chrome in terms of PWA implementation right now. Fission doesn't exist on Android yet, only desktop.
  Have your collections be synced to your profile, which definitely seems like a design oversight right now.
  Also better extension support since right now to add the non supported list it's a very complicated and convoluted process to do so that feels hacked in.
  Regardless, I'm still very happy with the state of the Android browser and it by far beats out the other browsers imo. Stuff like uBlock Origin, much better reader mode then Chrome, and first party bottom toolbar puts it miles above the alternatives for me. Also because Firefox is awesome. I use a fork called Fennec which is just Firefox Stable without telemetry/analytics/proprietary blobs removed, and is available on f-droid.
  
  For me, proper PWA support.

Can anyone verify that this is also true for platforms beyond windows (what is plotted in the link by default)?
(I tried to change the plot to show macOS and Linux, but the plotting site is dubiously functional on mobile, plus there are a bewildering number of plot options with long, confusing names).
- https://mozilla.social/@stevetex/110719022092047831
  Here are the Linux results. macOS looks a bit different as well.
  
  Awesome. What’s the difference between the three plots here?

So I tested both FireFox
and Edge
real quick and it's true.
Although, I enabled every security and privacy setting on both (just about the same set of extentions also). But even then, even with a lower score, Edge still feels much smoother to use. Also, every time test refreshed, FF flashed white for a split second as opposed to Edge's black. Since I use dark mode and Dark Reader, it's extremely annoying on FF's part.
- Chromium-based browsers still trounces Firefox on the Jetstream benchmark. I mean, I realize the Speedometer benchmark is supposed to test real-world scenarios, while Jetstream is more synthetic, but whatever work mozilla did to improve performance I'd expect to scale in other benchmarks too, so I'd expect Firefox to at least be bit closer to Chromium, even if losing a little.
  
  Mozzila re-writing parts of the browser in the rust programming language has made a decent improvement to the performance. For those who aren't to into programming rust is has a strict compiler, meaning better code quality (Less Bugs) and offers more optimization methods then other programming languages.

Fennec from fdroid, for android, is even better as it didnt originate from google play store. My understandong is Google Playstore injects data into the app package. I use fennec for my day to day access. It syncs with desktop Firefox so all my passwords and logins are there.
There is also Firefox Nightly for "developers". I use it for the custom add on packages and doom scrolling.
- Google playstore does not inject data in app packaging because it doesn't own the signature key. F-Droid, however, does. I mean, they own the signature, but they do not inject or modify apps. They could, though.
  
  do you know of any app developers that publish their signature, so one can compare it with the one in Google Play?
  I would love for my banks to do this, for example..

As long as they can't manage to make a half-decent mobile browser this hardly matters.
Performance improvements are nice and all, but unless the performance is truely terrible, it's the least relevant factor.
Much more importent are:
consistently good UX over all platforms, together with good sync
good support for all websites
Their Android version is completely useless since the reboot (which is especially sad since the version before was hands down the best UX for a mobile browser on the market). They even dropped their VR version, even though it was literally just their Android version with slightly adjusted UX. They don't even have any form of tablet UI or Android TV UI.
And since their market share is steadily approaching zero, more and more websites drop support for FF and it's noticable.
The support part is what really kills FF, since it's not really in their hands whether web devs test websites with FF.
Lower market share -> less support -> lower market share.
Especially users who "just want the browser to work" are affected by that. They don't care much about the browser, but about the websites. And if their favourite websites tell them to stop using FF, they will. And that kind of user makes up the biggest part of the market share.
And since FF has no platform where they can push their browser (contrary to all other major browsers), they also won't get new users.
As much as we would want it otherwise, FF is dead, they just haven't accepted it yet. And that's true for almost all Mozilla products and Mozilla itself.
The only way I see how this can be reversed is if e.g. the EU decides that Mozilla and/or its products have some special value and starts funding and pushing them.
- What is actually your problem with Android FF? I use it every day on my phone.
  Yes, it's not as snappy as Chrome, but besides that everything works perfectly. In addition to that: Fully fledged ad-blocker like on desktop, one big reason why I no longer use Chrome on my phone.
  
  No tablet UI, no tab bar: This is a big downside for me. I set the minimum width on my phone pretty high, so the screen fits as much on there as a small tablet. The lack of tablet UI/tab bar is a pretty big issue
  The tab drawer is a whole mess in itself. It's really clunky to use, tab reordering (an essential feature if you want to ever e.g. compare products) wasn't available for a very long time. Now it is, but it's super clunky to use. And it's still not available for private tabs.
  There are addons, but since they only allow a very small selection of addons, they boil down to adblockers and dark reader. There is hardly anything else in there, which is a shame, since FF on Android used to support all addons the desktop browser supported. Their "walled garden" approach to addons also hinders anyone from developing addons for FF on Android, because these addons will likely not be added to the curated list.
  Compare that to e.g. Vivaldi:
  It's got a great tablet UI including a tab bar.
  The tab drawer works just as expected, pretty much exactly like in old FF
  It doesn't have addons, but it has adblock (based on and compatible with uBlock Origin) built right into the browser, same with dark mode for websites. All of the addons that both are available on FF for Android and that I care about are built right into Vivaldi.
  The UI in general is much better. For example, opening a new tab is just one click. Same with switching tabs and closing tabs on the task bar.
  Additionally, Vivaldi doesn't get a "This page is not compatible with your browser" as often as FF does, and random bugs on websites are also rarer.
  The only advantage FF on Android has over Vivaldi is that it's easier to access the reader mode on FF for Android.
  
  I haven't used a different browser in a good while, so I'm not sure that these issues don't exist elsewhere, but here's a few:
  For a very long time after the rework, reordering tabs was not possible. Only recently was this added again. But there seems to be no acceleration, so moving an old tab to the front takes forever. Even worse, this feature is still not available for private tabs (since you can't select those at all).
  Quite often when I switch to the tab overview, it doesn't automatically scroll to my current tab so I need to do that manually.
  I'm also not a fan of the "jump back in" view that shows up every so often instead of the content of my tab. Why they would assume I'm interested in anything besides what I intentionally opened is beyond me.
  Creating a new tab is more cumbersome than it needs to be. I think you were able to do that by scrolling to the right on the address bar of the rightmost tab. A dedicated button would be even better.
  I think it's a great browser, and pretty much the only one I use, but in my experience everything does not work perfectly.
- I don't use desktop FF, but mobile off is the best there is around by the virtue of letting you use addons, and thus, an adblocker.
- Without explaining the actual problems you have with Firefox on Android, your post is really pointless.
  Also, "steadily approaching zero" is an intelligent an analysis as saying Edge is steadily approaching 100% just because its share is increasing.
- I want to use the same (synced) browser across all my OS's, so the main reason I stopped using Firefox is because their Android tablet UX sucks.
  Vivaldi works great though on all my devices and I'm super happy with it.
- Can you give an example of websites not supporting Firefox?
  From a personal use perspective, I have rarely encountered sites that do not work on Firefox, especially in recent years. Two years ago I may have needed to keep a Chromium browser around but recently I have had no issues.
  And from a professional perspective, dropping support for Firefox would be asinine. Most modern web frameworks handle browser compatibility for you, and you essentially get it for free these days. It is almost no extra effort to be compatible to all modern browsers, so why stop? Firefox is has great browser support in general and is far better than the current state of Safari
  I agree that they don't have a device which they can use to force or promote their browser like other companies can. Which is a shame and is why they should perhaps try to advertise more aggressively. However, it's a free, open source browser, I don't really want them to advertise or be profit driven
  
  I don't keep a log of websites that don't work on FF. The last one I came across is joyn.de, a TV streaming site. They don't tell you that it isn't working on FF, it just crashes when trying to play a video.
  For simple stuff not supporting FF is really asinine, but for deeper stuff, like hardware accellerated video streaming, it's not quite as easy. Especially if you are, for some reason, stuck with old frameworks or in-house developed stuff.
  Actually, the application that I work on (b2b software) frequently has FF-only bugs, because the frontenders in my team refuse to test every commit on FF. It's just me finding the bugs randomly.
  The thing with free and open source is that it's not free to develop. Mozilla still needs to pay the development. Even though the source is open, 99% of the development is done by full-time (and obviously paid) Mozilla employees. Being open source doesn't really help Mozilla bring down the development costs at all.
  And that's the second major point where Mozilla is in trouble: They don't really have any sustainable income.
- As long as they can’t manage to make a half-decent mobile browser this hardly matters.
  Um, what? Last I checked, Firefox was the only mobile browser that supports extensions, including the all-important uBlock Origin, without which the web is basically unusable.
  Their Android version is completely useless since the reboot (which is especially sad since the version before was hands down the best UX for a mobile browser on the market).
  What in the world are you talking about? I'm writing this comment in Android Firefox. It works fine. It's my daily driver. I only use Chrome for testing.
  good support for all websites
  If a website doesn't work in Firefox, there's a problem with that website, not with Firefox.
  I've done my share of web development. I had to deal with IE6 compatibility for years. Firefox is a dream come true compared to what I've been through. I test my work in all three major browsers, and I suffer no excuses from developers too lazy to do the same. Especially now that there are only three of them.
  And since FF has no platform where they can push their browser (contrary to all other major browsers), they also won’t get new users.
  That's the real problem. That's illegal, by the way; Microsoft got sued for bundling IE with Windows. Pity the courts these days don't care about upholding the law.
  
  Um, what? Last I checked, Firefox was the only mobile browser that supports extensions, including the all-important uBlock Origin, without which the web is basically unusable.
  Kiwi Browser gives you all desktop chrome addons. Yandex as well, if you prefer Russian surveillance over US surveillance.
  Even Samsung's browser offers addons.
  And Vivaldi has about everything I need (including an uBlock compatible adblocker and dark mode for websites) integrated directly into the browser.
  If a website doesn’t work in Firefox, there’s a problem with that website, not with Firefox. I’ve done my share of web development. I had to deal with IE6 compatibility for years. Firefox is a dream come true compared to what I’ve been through. I test my work in all three major browsers, and I suffer no excuses from developers too lazy to do the same. Especially now that there are only three of them.
  That's good of you, and as a dev I also test on FF (contrary to many of my colleagues), but that's not what everyone does. And thus, as a user, I frequently stumble over stuff that doesn't work on FF.
  What in the world are you talking about? I’m writing this comment in Android Firefox. It works fine. It’s my daily driver. I only use Chrome for testing.
  If everyone felt like that, don't you think FF on Android would have a market share higher than 0.48% on mobile?
  If a website doesn’t work in Firefox, there’s a problem with that website, not with Firefox.
  That, again, comes down to maket share. If FF on Android was alcohol, it's market share could be legally called "alcohol free" (at least over here).
  No market share -> no financial incentive to fix websites for that browser -> broken websites -> reduced market share
  That’s the real problem. That’s illegal, by the way; Microsoft got sued for bundling IE with Windows. Pity the courts these days don’t care about upholding the law.
  It actually isn't. Microsoft got sued in 2001 (so 22 years ago, and that matters), and they only got sued to open up their OS so that users could replace the browser if they wanted to. They were actually not prohibited from bundling IE with Windows.
  And putting ad-banners on their own website to market their own browser (like Google is/was doing with Chrome on the Google search site and on Youtube) was never part of anything like that.
  Unfortunately, maybe, illegal no.
- The Firefox version on f droid is pretty good - using that right now
- You just kinda listed bad website compatibility like 5 times. That's not even true lol, it's very rare there's a compatibility issue, and it's also very rare that websites refuse to support it. Can't think of any right now actually.
  Most of the issues is because Chrome actually incorrectly adds something, or has a bug. Then for compatibility sake, Firefox has to actually match that broken buggy implementation so the end result is the same. This is another big reason why a chromium monopoly is bad.
  Also the Android UX being bad is just funny to me. I find it by far the best, and you should absolutely not be speaking for other people. Would like to know what actual browser you think has better UX? Considering it's been so long since they changed the UI, I think you must've forgotten how truly bad it was before. Also that they added support back for some missing stuff people wanted, like grid list for tabs.
  
  You just kinda listed bad website compatibility like 5 times. That’s not even true lol, it’s very rare there’s a compatibility issue, and it’s also very rare that websites refuse to support it. Can’t think of any right now actually.
  Happens often enough. Just the other day I tried to watch something on joyn.de (a TV streaming service) and the videos just wouldn't play on Firefox. Had to actually switch over to Chromium to get it working.
  Most of the issues is because Chrome actually incorrectly adds something, or has a bug. Then for compatibility sake, Firefox has to actually match that broken buggy implementation so the end result is the same. This is another big reason why a chromium monopoly is bad.
  That's a frequently stated topic that's suspiciously always lacking any sources. Also, if you have >50% market share and if your engine has >75% market share, is there something like "incorrectly adding" something? Incorrectly as stated by whom? By the makers of a browser with <3% market share?
  This is another big reason why a chromium monopoly is bad.
  Well, if everyone is using Chromium, there is no such thing as an engine that has to implement someone else's stuff.
  Tbh, I really don't miss the early 2010's when web development meant you had to test on 10 different engines
  Also the Android UX being bad is just funny to me. I find it by far the best, and you should absolutely not be speaking for other people. Would like to know what actual browser you think has better UX? Considering it’s been so long since they changed the UI, I think you must’ve forgotten how truly bad it was before. Also that they added support back for some missing stuff people wanted, like grid list for tabs.
  Just to check, I reinstalled the old version of FF and the UX is amazing compared to the current one. It really is. If you want one that is closely comparable, checkout Vivaldi. FF feels like a student's hobby project compared to it.
- I guess we found a chrome fanboy that think being edgy at trolling.
  
  I don't even use chrome... But apparenty I found the Firefox fanboy who gets butthurt whenever someone says anything about the difficulties of the thing they fanboy...
  Sadly, this kind of attitude makes it really hard to (a) actually leverage constructive criticism and (b) drives people away from using the product the fanboy is defending.
  But yeah, if it makes you feel better to hurt Firefox and it's community, it's your call.