Hmm, do you mean in the web console?
I know Firefox has a bit of a reputation for being rather precise in how it handles web standards compliance. So, it'll show comparatively many warnings and errors, if you don't keep to the web standards.
This is actually quite useful for web devs, because it means, if Firefox is happy with your implementation, then it's relatively likely to run correctly on all browsers.
Yeah, if that's what OP means (though that's unclear), I'm not sure why OP thinks it's a bad thing. It's a good thing.
Or maybe OP means Firefox crashes more or something. In which case I can only say that hasn't been my experience.
My experience has been, however, that Firefox is quite usable on a Raspberry Pi 4 while Chromium is far too resource hungry to be usable on that platform.
Anecdotal, but I've never once had a problem with any function of Firefox in the decade I've been using it. On the contrary it's been the most stable browser I've had the pleasure of using, orders of magnitude more reliable in all situations than Chrome or Opera ever was.
This post smells of astroturfing. There's been an awful lot of "why is Firefox so shit?" posts recently, now that Google is proving itself untrustable.
Web devs don't make the pages Firefox friendly? Since the user base is smaller, they just don't care?
correct
also in the case of Google controlled websites the errors are often deliberately introduced to sabotage firefox
Wait, what? Do you have a source on this?
The browser war has been long and bloody, but here's a current battle.
https://fosspost.org/google-slowdown-firefox-users-when-watching-youtube
I don’t think I’ve experienced this. Do you mean some pages not working in Firefox, but working in Chrome? That’s mainly because of parts of web standards that are ambiguous or undefined, and Firefox and Chrome have different behavior. Some web developers (read lazy web developers) don’t test in Firefox, so they write bad code. Both Firefox and Chrome follow the standards, so if web devs just stick to the standards, everything should work.
Not a dev, but I work with them. It's often the product manager that pushes an ignore everything but chrome so we can ship more features. I've seen devs argue and lose on such things.
Back in the early days I found Firefox to be clunkier and slower than Chrome, which was the reason for my using Chrome for well over a decade. But since Chrome became Google's My Little Spyware, I've moved back to Firefox and it's so much better. More stable, better customization, and way more privacy focused.
Someone else said it but yeah, this feels like astroturfing.
it's like how something like 99% of computer viruses or tailored for windows. most of the people that you're going to be pulling revenue from are using Chrome, so optimize for Chrome and then ship
Once in a while I'll get the odd webpage that supposedly isn't supported on Firefox or doesn't render completely well. I always assumed web developers just made their stuff for the largest audience, which is Chrome users. Back in the day it was the same with IE...
Could you give an example of a web page that doesn't work right on it? I've never noticed browsers differing like you describe.
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~