- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- technology@lemmy.ml
The author may be a right-wing fellow. Nonetheless, the data he exposes are taken from official Mozilla docs.
The author may be a right-wing fellow. Nonetheless, the data he exposes are taken from official Mozilla docs.
The Mozilla Foundation isn’t the Firefox Foundation. It’s a charity that happens to build a browser, not the other way around. That’s intentional, and has been the default setup for years.
When the foundation wants to start a new project, they’ll often spin up a new company they own so the company can hopefully make a profit and become self sufficient while the Mozilla Foundation themselves remain nonprofit. Most companies fail, and so do most of Mozillas’s attempts to stay financially independent.
I agree with many of the projects the Foundation does and I don’t think many others need to use Mozilla’s funding specifically. That doesn’t matter, though.
I think this approach is doomed. People only care about Mozilla because of Firefox and Firefox is falling behind again, no doubt coinciding with the mass layoffs and the ejection of the Servo engine. They’ve caught up with Chrome on most fronts a year or three ago when their reinvented CSS and layout engine was released, but they’re still on the back foot these days.
The Firefox dev team makes the money Mozilla uses for browser development, through Google’s generous donation (which isn’t even necessary anymore now that Firefox is at 3% market share and Webkit and Edge form actual competition; the “keep your opponent alive so we’re not a monopoly” strategy is no longer necessary). Cutting down on the dev team during hard times while maintaining the Foundation’s ideological policies and keeping upper management well paid shows a troubling direction.
Everyone who’s donated to Mozilla has either looked up what they’re doing with the money or were complete fools with more money than sense. Don’t throw your money at nice words, most well-known charities spend the majority of their donations on ads and extracting more donations.
I understand this may be upsetting to some right wing individuals who want Firefox to succeed but don’t care for the progressive nature of Mozilla, but this isn’t exactly news.
This is incorrect. Firefox recently surpassed Chrome in a key benchmark and has generally been on a roll lately.
Yes, their current iterative improvements are not as sexy as the big release of Quantum, but to say they’re currently falling behind is the opposite of the truth. They’ve just pulled ahead.
Firefox beats that particular benchmark but gets its ass handed to it in every other benchmark. Chrome also boasts about having the best performance.
I’ve run the benchmarks on my machine and Chrome’s score (as well as Gnome Web’s) is about twice that of Firefox’s. The practical performance difference on Android is night and day as well.
I’m sticking with Firefox (because Google sucks, Google’s web monopoly sucks, and the lack of addons on mobile sucks) but performance certainly isn’t the reason I do.
This is not correct.
arewefastyet.com shows very clearly that although chrome beats firefox in some benchmarks, firefox trades blows with it and is similar to or faster in others.
I’m on Linux and Android and those benchmarks show that Chrome is clearly faster. There are some benchmarks where Firefox wins, but they’re a minority. I still find it weird that the graphs have better scores at the bottom. I’m counting 12 advantages for Chrome and 5 for Firefox on my platform.
Maybe Firefox on Windows is better, but Chrome is still just better on my computer and phone.
you can just move to chromium though, getting chrome performance without google spyware
Meanwhile, in the real world, running the two side-by-side tends to spell a whole different picture.