this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2023
1704 points (99.3% liked)
PC Master Race
14995 readers
79 users here now
A community for PC Master Race.
Rules:
- No bigotry: Including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No NSFW content.
- No Ads / Spamming.
- Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘stupid’ questions. The world won’t be made better or worse by snarky comments schooling naive newcomers on Lemmy.
Notes:
- PCMR Community Name - Our Response and the Survey
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Performance wise widely depends on the site used. Some sites (notably Google ones) are notorious for implementing anti-competitive behavior, where if their website is visited other than a chromium based browser, it slows down or a functionality stops working.
I mean its the whole reason why Microsoft switch from Edge Edge HTML to Edge Chromium/Blink.
The only good reason right now if you want to stick with Chromium based browsers such as Brave is you're heavily into browser based games as currently Chromium (and it's older brother, webkit) are the ones that have the best webgl performance, Firefox can do it but not as fast as Chromium and performance impact is very noticeable
Sometimes, simply changing the user agent string to that of Chrome is enough to make a site work again. For example Street View lags on Firefox, except when identifying as Chrome.
Noticed a while back that Google wouldn't do direct unit conversions for you unless you're using Chrome.
I assume you're referring to Google meet (and the screen blur functionally), this is an open issue in Firefox for years, Google is using open standards to implement that, it's an issue in Firefox with how deadlocks work which is an extremely low level part of the browser. So it's not an easy solve.
There's a lot to complain about with Google, but this one isn't their fault. They use non-proprietary implementations and it's not their fault that Firefox will crash if they allowed Firefox users to use screen blur, the issue isn't a high priority for Mozilla.
Nah, what I am referring to is Youtube. See here: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/mozilla-exec-says-google-slowed-youtube-down-on-non-chrome-browsers/
This isnt the only one too, there is this: https://www.ghacks.net/2019/05/28/googles-blocking-new-microsoft-edge-from-accessing-new-design/ or this one https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/19/18148736/google-youtube-microsoft-edge-intern-claims
First one you linked said Google patched Firefox performance by the time of the article, so that seems more like an oversight rather than asshole design.
Second one: rolling out redesigns is a complicated process. Most companies don't give everyone the new design at the same time, some roll out by geography, some by opt in, this was by browser type, which honestly makes the most sense.
Third one: an empty div is an easy accident to make, it's been removed. I also find it obscene to attribute an empty div to ruining battery performance. I wouldn't listen to that intern...
The worst of those three is number 2, but I can understand the decision from a web dev protective. Though I would've included all chromium based browsers in the rollout.