Chrome 91 Benchmarks On Linux Showing Off Even Better Performance

[smitty3268]

Why are you inventing various meanspirited ways to dismiss what I said, instead of engaging with it? It's very immature.

I apologize for being overly snarky, but I still fail to see what your response brought to the conversation other than a way for you to bag on Mozilla. It seems like you just wanted to complain about them?

It's not like Google's CEO doesn't have a large paycheck every year. It's not like Mozilla could have as many devs as Chrome does even if their CEO worked for free. It wouldn't be close.

So it's the equivalent of me responding by complaining that Google is restricting Google Photos and could choose to keep that free if they wanted. Which is true, but besides the point of the conversation.

[microcode]

The alternative is that your reply was completely off topic and added nothing to the discussion. Surely that's... Oh, ok.

Why are you inventing various meanspirited ways to dismiss what I said, instead of engaging with it? It's very immature.

[smitty3268]

If you can think of a way to interpret what I said that doesn't make sense, then maybe consider thinking of a different way to interpret it.

The alternative is that your reply was completely off topic and added nothing to the discussion. Surely that's... Oh, ok.

[microcode]

If you are claiming Mozilla has the ability to pay as many people to work on Firefox as Google pays to work on Chrome, I call shenanigans.

If you can think of a way to interpret what I said that doesn't make sense, then maybe consider thinking of a different way to interpret it.

[unic0rn]

Quickly, off the top of my head.

I will mention about:config, which is 100x more powerful than any Chrome configuration, I have so many custom modifications in there it makes my life easy.
I will also mention the css config file in Firefox, which allows me to bring back tabs below the URL bar, a personal must have. Or I use it to annihilate the zoomed omnibox effect, which makes the focused URL box ugly and impractical to use in most browsers.
In a nutshell, with Firefox you can easily tweak basically anything in the UI to make it work in the most efficient way (hence fast) for your own workflow.

To resume (for things you can't get in Chrome):

Firefox
*Tabs below URL bar
*Stop videos from autoplaying altogether - in about:config (no Google, just muting them is not enough)

Firefox + Edge
*Both have a favorite button (Chrome doesn't and you need either extra clicks and mouse movement, or a favorite bar which is a vertical waste of space)
*Both integrate well with GTK environments (the title bar integrates into Unite extension or Pixel Saver for Budgie, which means a noticeable vertical pixels gain, while Chrome is so monolithic that it doesn't).

I could take half an hour to list other stuff but I'm tired of doing it every time, and it's not worth spending more time. The bottom line is Chrome is an empty shell (hence the racing car analogy), so yeah sure it's fast. But for my use it's too rigid and hence it ends up making my workflow slower.

In comment sections, it's clear for a decent amount of users that Edge is better than Chrome, exactly for reasons like these, MS started filling the inside of the Chromium shell and made it more comfortable for everyday use.

looks mostly like personal preference than something that has an actual impact on usability. sure, one can get triggered by this or that, but in the grand scheme of things, it's mostly nitpicking.

if you're concerned about videos, why waste bandwidth at all - block them with ublock.

tabs below or above url bar - imho above is more logical, but to each their own.

gtk - couldn't care less. someone else could take a dump on everything not using qt, i just don't care as long as things look more or less consistent.

overall you seem to be terribly concerned with vertical space, down to a single pixel. personally i didn't care when i was using 1080p screen, now at 1440p i care even less. you can hide everything you can and use 5px fonts, and still a lot of stuff won't fit and you'll have to use so called scrolling. why does it matter if you have to scroll for a few pixels more or less? it doesn't.

wanna see a waste of screen estate in the name of overblown UI? check gnome. unless you're actually using it, in which case i see where all that hunger for more pixels comes from.

[Mez']

i would gladly drop chrome if only i could.

that being said, give us some real life examples of missing features in chrome, compared to firefox or even edge.

writing several paragraphs about your car phantasies doesn't drive your point home.

Quickly, off the top of my head.

I will mention about:config, which is 100x more powerful than any Chrome configuration, I have so many custom modifications in there it makes my life easy.
I will also mention the css config file in Firefox, which allows me to bring back tabs below the URL bar, a personal must have. Or I use it to annihilate the zoomed omnibox effect, which makes the focused URL box ugly and impractical to use in most browsers.
In a nutshell, with Firefox you can easily tweak basically anything in the UI to make it work in the most efficient way (hence fast) for your own workflow.

To resume (for things you can't get in Chrome):

Firefox
*Tabs below URL bar
*Stop videos from autoplaying altogether - in about:config (no Google, just muting them is not enough)

Firefox + Edge
*Both have a favorite button (Chrome doesn't and you need either extra clicks and mouse movement, or a favorite bar which is a vertical waste of space)
*Both integrate well with GTK environments (the title bar integrates into Unite extension or Pixel Saver for Budgie, which means a noticeable vertical pixels gain, while Chrome is so monolithic that it doesn't).

I could take half an hour to list other stuff but I'm tired of doing it every time, and it's not worth spending more time. The bottom line is Chrome is an empty shell (hence the racing car analogy), so yeah sure it's fast. But for my use it's too rigid and hence it ends up making my workflow slower.

In comment sections, it's clear for a decent amount of users that Edge is better than Chrome, exactly for reasons like these, MS started filling the inside of the Chromium shell and made it more comfortable for everyday use.

[timrichardson]

I don't know why you'd think my cat Spark Plug would help in Chrome benchmarks either. He's much better with compression.

I like Sparkplug's attention to security: it is wise these days to run in an isolated container, even when you are a sleeping process.

[smitty3268]

Keep in mind that Mozilla's top executive is paid a LOT of money, and fired a bunch of people last year while taking a pay raise. The foundation's revenues are not really a direct representation of their capacity to employ people.

If you are claiming Mozilla has the ability to pay as many people to work on Firefox as Google pays to work on Chrome, I call shenanigans.

[microcode]

Just a wild guess:

Keep in mind that Mozilla's top executive is paid a LOT of money, and fired a bunch of people last year while taking a pay raise. The foundation's revenues are not really a direct representation of their capacity to employ people.

[unic0rn]

There's no need to bring macOS in the picture; on the usability side Windows 10 is already miles ahead of Linux on the desktop.

actually, not really.

if you're after games and facebook, then maybe.

if you're a programmer, unless you're dealing with windows-only devkits, windows is a pain. most of the development these days is either for the web or for mobile. using windows for either is just a waste of time.

the only thing that linux does better than macos when it comes to desktop, is gaming, and the only thing that windows does better than linux, is (sometimes) gaming, and running windows-specific software.

usability-wise windows is a clusterfuck. once you'll configure your linux distro properly, it keeps working until you'll blow up your configuration, but that's usually easy to reverse (boot different kernel, restore system using timeshift, whatever). windows is just out of control.

but sure, random kids can install games with kernel-level malware, i mean anti-cheat, under windows with a few clicks, so it's 'miles ahead'.