Also no Google connectivity
I wish people would see this as a feature, not a drawback.
Comment on "It has to be Chromium"
IDatedSuccubi@lemmy.world 1 year agoChrome defaultism, and so websites are usually made for Chrome, often disregarding testing on Firefox completely, and so they work a bit worse here and there
Also no Google connectivity
Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone 1 year ago
edgarallenpwn@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What sites have issues with Firefox? I’ve been using firefox exclusively since 06 besides trying chrome for 2009-2010 and never had any issues. Not saying they don’t exist but it seems like a very small amount that won’t function at all.
Ilandar@aussie.zone 1 year ago
People always bring this up like it’s a major issue to avoid Firefox and it’s just not even remotely true. I’m a long-term Firefox user like you and I can count on one hand the number of sites I’ve had problems with over the many years I’ve been browsing. For those very rare cases, I just use Brave to access the site. Problem solved. This idea that if the alternative isn’t 100% perfect, it is therefore completely unusable and the only realistic option is returning to big tech surveillance just needs to die already.
IDatedSuccubi@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Anything containing WebGL and anything containing complex CSS/JS animations comes to mind, also Canvas (even though it rarely used, still lags like a motherfucker), Firefox really suffers in that regard, but they recently promised that they will fix it; and I remind you that because of hardware decoder legal ussues Firefox sucked very hard at 4K and 120 Hz YouTube on Linux for a long time too
There are others, commonly created because Firefox focuses on privacy, and so, for example, all internal website timers can only count by 0.1 seconds because anything less will open you to tracking vunerabilities, often settings sacrifice performance for data safety like this