Look, I'm a Linux user, and I prefer to use Free apps. However, the truth must be told: Firefox is not as optimized as Chrome. On older devices, Chrome is twice as fast in youtube playback, and it uses way less RAM overall. Chrome is the better browser in terms of architecture, at least for older PCs (and I have a whole bunch of them). On my main PC, running Debian-Testing, which is a newer PC, I do use Firefox, because it can handle stuff ok with enough CPU power. But for all my older PCs (anywhere from 5 to 15 years old), I have to use Chrome.

Now, if you find me a de-googled, Free, WELL-MAINTANED Chromium browser, I rather use that than Chrome. No, Brave, etc don't cut it. I want a community-driven, well maintained Chromium browser. Currently, all de-googled versions are not well maintained, or not available as native packages on Debian.

EDIT: So, downvoted, huh? By fellow open source users who don't want to hear the truth?

[–] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 4 months ago

Google has a history of sabotaging Firefox in YouTube, because they can. This is a YouTube problem more than a Firefox problem. I know that's not really helpful for you as an end user, but I want to mention it because really, Google deserves the blame.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 4 months ago

I can't downvote you from my instance, but you do realise it's been pretty well-known, for at least a decade in certain circles, that YouTube specifically slows down on Firefox? I'm pretty sure you can test this yourself by changing user agents. So that hardly seems like a fair test of a browser's speed.

[–] art@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

So, downvoted, huh? By fellow open source users who don't want to hear the truth?

The truth is that you might have experienced this, but this might not reflect the average user's experience. My older ThinkPad feels no difference in better life based on the web browser.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

the truth must be told: Firefox is not as optimized as Chrome

what are you talking about? my desktop pc is amd fx4300. definition of old and subpar - https://i.imgur.com/WBm5Ub1.png - and i have 313 open tabs right now.

granted, that is slightly more affected by memory, before i updated from 8 to 32 gb recently, it was admittedly slightly more sluggish.

but at the same time normal people don't really have 300 open tabs at once and also you have to ask what is the threshold where you are willing to sacrifice your privacy for slight speed increase.

do you have some numbers to support that speed difference, or is it just your feeling, or anecdote that is being passed around and everyone repeats it and everyone believes it, because everyone says so?

[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Vivaldi, good maintaned, no calls to Google, inbuild and customizable ad and trackerblocker. If Chromium, than this one.

[–] beyond@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 4 months ago

A proprietary browser is a non-starter for me, especially when there are many free alternatives, even Chromium based ones. I'd take Ungoogled-Chromium on desktop or Cromite on mobile, heck I'd take Brave even.