>security is really important there is librewolf

Does librewolf do anything that you can't do via user.js?

As an outsider, it seems weird to me that you would go to Edge when you are unsatisfied by Mozilla's spotty long-term support. Edge exists because Microsoft dropped support for IE (and then for their own rendering engine altogether when they switched to Chromium). It seems to me that they have a strictly worse track record in the aspect you care about.

Or maybe I am wrong about the facts? I never used Edge.

sounds great, how do I install Edge on Debian?

> Why would I want to use the lesser of two evils when I can generally avoid popular modern browsers altogether. Zero evil.

What browser are you using?

This comment is submitted without using a browser

Not that it matters, but I am using a 935-character Bourne shell script

No Bash, no cURL

WWW users are free to choose whatever software they like

I daily drive Firefox serving a Chrome User-Agent, out of frustration with a couple applications that work perfectly on Firefox, but because they didn't test on Firefox, they just assume it won't work and block my connection (If there's any Devs at Snapchat who wants a free ticket completion, you can "Add Firefox support" by deleting your UA check)

I noticed this exact thing. While a lot of sites worked perfectly fine when I was informing them I was using Firefox, when I started lying, they ran faster. Drove me nuts.

Frontend Devs: If your code reads the user-agent string for any reason but logging/spying, you're doing it wrong.

The past few projects I've done, I've made some effort to just not polyfill anything, it's always too easy to wind up with fills for things long supported in every major browser for the past 3-5 years.

On the flip side... if you're running something bespoke relying on an older JS engine, it's becoming harder to find pure polyfills/shims that aren't a tangled mess relying on DOM specific features.

While there are some newer features I don't mind seeing early, I've mostly just avoided touching some of the more recent features for now, only to avoid the mess that are the current state of fills.

> I wish there were something that could thwart the “Chromium by default” assumption at large amongst devs...

I don't think that is possible. It used to be that lazy devs assumed people were on IE, these days lazy devs assume people are on Chrome. In the future if there is a new browser with a majority of the market, lazy devs will assume people use that browser. The problem isn't any one browser, it's that some people are lazy and seek out shortcuts rather than doing things the correct way.

> Every so often I run into one that was only ever developed for and tested against Chromium and has major performance issues under Gecko and/or WebKit

and invariable it's under a google domain

As a counter example, I remember that I needed to do big reviews in GitHub using Firefox because Chrome would slow to a crawl in the Files tab in GitHub, while Firefox was just as fast as it was with small reviews.

I don't think this is an issue anymore, but it shows that a few things have completely performance in different browsers.

I wonder how experiences can differ so much with the same program. I've never had an issue having 3-5 twitch streams open at the same time, across multiple computers and multiple FireFox versions.

CEOs always "resign" instead of being fired. Is there reason to believe that this particular instance was truly voluntary, unlike every other time a CEO gets fired and then the company lies about it? I'm genuinely asking - I don't know much about corporate culture at Mozilla so maybe it genuinely was a resignation. Just pointing out that companies always claim that, and in other cases it's a lie.

Does this approach ultimately lead to the conclusion that people on different sides of the abortion issue can't work in the same company?

Everyone can choose what they consider evil.

I consider harassment for political opinions, evil. Privately held political opinions. And Mozilla barred itself from working with a top engineer, inventor of Javascript, for privately-held political reasons, and gave reigns from engineers to business types of people. They kept Mozilla dependent on Google, an economic tie which sidesteps Mozilla from being an alternative to Google.

Some comments say I’m holding a grudge, but Brendan Eich is not the only one harassed, it was a statement from Mozilla, it meant We do not tolerate other opinions

I consider harassment for political opinions, evil. You are free to believe differently, but at least you cannot say with a straight face that Mozilla has a moral standing against Google.

Funnily enough, it's the same people who argue that corporations are people and should have free speech.

Firing the CEO was an expression of said free speech.

Do you see the comments posted in any discussion about Brave? Some people are hanging on to the vendetta.

When you build a phone and want that phone to work with salesforce classic- every time a page reloads. You must put the WebRTC in a pop out window. This window will not have focus because they are in salesforce . Even in lightning people want a pop out for the call. Firefox is broken

I've seen something similar in Windows corporate environments where Firefox is updated while you are using it, and the only indication that it has happened is that Firefox insists on restarting before you can load any more pages, although no UAC prompts were involved. It is annoying, especially if you are in the middle of submitting a form. I don't know whether to blame it on how IT has chosen to implement centralized updates, or on Firefox for not being as easy to centrally manage as other software, or some combination.

I just got it on my Windows, but haven been postponing updates for ages before that with zero issue. Hence I was quite surprised. I'm almost certain what triggered it was some application trying to load a website.

Not sure which technique the application used, but after few seconds it loaded the error message, and after that I couldn't open new tabs or windows without getting that error.

I don't think I have ever run into it on Windows, but I have seen it pretty much every time I update it on Linux through the package manager.

This is on a corporate PC, I don’t run into this issue with chrome (which I try to avoid using in general) whose update schedule is also managed by a corp IT policy.

Those settings don’t do anything bec even when I select “Check but don’t install” it still nags me and eventually installs even if corp IT policy is only to update monthly.

I wish there was a way to turn off the nagging too. Why can’t Firefox trust my corp IT to follow their process?

Then it sounds like Firefox has the "restart page" to mitigate this exact edge case. Better than having undefined behavior like that imo.

As I get it from other comments, this is not a problem with the built-in updater (as on Windows). On linux, when updating via package manager, you should now this can be an issue with any program. Yes, most programs survive running while being updated, but for a complicated piece of software (like a browser) this behavior is understandable.

See the Arch wiki for updating on Arch: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance#Restart_...

It's specifically a Linux ecosystem problem they're talking about. The package managers don't coordinate with Firefox and just change files out from under it. That means that you can end up with the processes Firefox spawns when a tab is opened not matching the main process. This caused problems often enough that Firefox implemented a mechanism to detect this case and tell you to restart the browser.

The issue isn’t time, it’s that I’m in the middle of working, I have unsaved work that I can’t save now bec the browser decided to update in the background.

On old and now obsolete systems this is maybe 20 seconds? I invoke the package manager to update just ff. It downloads, gets extracted, then I'm restarting it. It does it's thing, and restores my tabs. After killing it with -9 right before the update.