More and more people are getting upset about Chrome doing sneaky stuff. Good.
What absolutely baffles me, is that people are trying to find out if using a modified version of Chromium should still be ok.
You are BY DEFINITION engaging in a fight you CAN NOT WIN.
My previous 'subtle' attempts with #GoogleIsEvil apparently weren't clear enough, so here's another try:
If you don't want to get fucked in the ass, you shouldn't evaluate the pros and cons of 'just the tip'.
GET THE FUCK OUT!
"not anything decent" sounds a bit too harsh, but I get your point.
Their CEO should've been fired years ago. The allocation of money and priorities seems questionable. Their current funding model sucks.
So yeah, there's plenty of things wrong with Mozilla.
What they still got going for them is that their intend is not evil.
Also, remember those 'IE-only' sites? If FF' marketshare gets too tiny, that's what we'll get again. Highly doubtful that'll get 'fixed' again though.
I already thought there were chrome-only sites, but wasn't sure, hence the cautious phrasing.
It's a sad development, but also predictable. And it'll only get worse.
And unless some billionaire (or sth) gets some 'crazy ideas', we'll have a web fully controlled by
G👀gle. There was a time when people thought/realized monopolies weren't a good thing. But that was long ago and I haven't seen any sign of that changing (anytime soon). :-/
@FreePietje There's a reason people want to use chromium though, and it's because there's no good alternatives. In all honesty, as a longtime firefox fan, it just outright sucks for more js-heavy applications.
I don't recall such an experience, but I have no reason to doubt your/the statement.
I wonder if suck-age is because of (unfixable) technical inferiority, or bc sites are made for/optimized for Chrome, just like in the IE4 days.
At some low % marketshare, who's gonna care to make it work at all in FF?
Still assuming your statement is correct, and taking in account the problems with Mozilla I described in my other response, then I would still use Firefox.
For (purely) principal reasons.
The web is already practically controlled by G👀gle, via their dominance at W3C and with search causing websites to adhere to their whims.
Do you think it'll get better when they 100% control the web?
When there are no consequences to bad behavior, why change?
See Facebook and Amazon/AWS.
@FreePietje @kekcoin subscription based services such as Netflix, Disney+, Prime do not work flawlessly due to DRM while advertising based services happens to get stuck before of after an advertising.
I have never dug the issue, just switched to Chrome with which I do not recall similar problems.
n.b. this is my personal feeling, I may be doing something wrong with Firefox but UX is better on Chrome for multimedia afaic
I like locally stored music as I can't stand interruptions due to bad connectivity (or for any reason really). So I can understand your choice.
Still, we're moving fast away from a free and open web to one that is fully controlled by G👀gle. And there will be only 1 party benefiting from that.
I experimented with chromium based browsers like Opera and Brave for mobile recently and it certainly feels faster than FF.
That and the fact that Mozilla has taken some public stances recently that pissed me off a bit, so I looked into alternatives and there are indeed not a lot of choice. I still stick to FF on desktop
Ah yeah, forgot to mention those public stances, which pissed me off a lot. With extremely poor leadership it isn't surprising, but it's still bad.
I had hoped that f.e. the European Union would fund (a fork of) Mozilla as it would/could be in the interest of a free and open web. But since I saw https://chaos.social/@echo_pbreyer/105881380868004867 that hope went out the window.
(Apart from the discussion of a big political organisation choosing a certain browser)
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!