• voxel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      it’s chromium
      also they have done some shady stuff in the past and the ceo is a hardcore homophobe

      • EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        also they have done some shady stuff in the past and the ceo is a hardcore homophobe

        It’s a boy-who-cried-wolf situation. Too many false homophobia accusations have gone around for be to believe any of them anymore.

    • exscape@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m never giving it up out of principle, but I dunno about the RAM usage. Firefox was above 7GB last I looked. I have RAM to spare though, so I don’t really care.

      • Klaymore@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        There’s a Tab Discarder extension that suspends old tabs so they’re stored on the drive rather than ram.

    • NightAuthor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Damn… is this why I feel so empty inside? I’m using Firefox but no tail plug or furry action?

            • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              But Chrome, the actual application you download (as well as several forks), is closed source.

                • grue@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  But that’s not the real issue. The issue is that any Chromium-based browser – open source or not – helps Google maintain hegemony over web standards. Even if makers of other Chromium-based browsers try to maintain a fork of the rendering engine, they’ll be perpetually playing catch-up removing user-hostile misfeatures because Google controls the upstream branch.

            • Dojan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Google still has control over Chromium. Manifest v3 is a Chromium thing, not a Chrome thing. All forks of Chromium will get it and none of the browsers using Chromium as a base has moved to fork and maintain their own version of Chromium.

              This means that Google effectively has a monopoly over all browsers that aren’t WebKit or Gecko based, which is a tiny portion of all browsers. Leading to Google deciding how people access the internet. It’s already worrying that Google is the internet for a lot of people, the fact that they can do more or less anything with Chromium means that they can do whatever they want with the web standard.

              That should be a major concern for everyone. Chromium needs to be taken away from Google.

              • ulterno@lemmy.kde.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                all browsers that aren’t WebKit or Gecko

                I don’t get this part. Are all engines other than those 2, based on Chromium?

                Perhaps you are forgetting Ze great Konqueror ?

                Because it has always been KHTML.

                There’s a meme for that. Check it out

                • xe3@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  I think Konquerer is no longer actively maintained.

                  Fun fact (which you may already know) the two most popular browser engines today are based on KHTML)

        • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Yeah I think so.

          Their quest for a revenue stream is leading them down a dark path imo.

          I mean I get that they need money. I don’t really have a solution. I just feel very uneasy about where this is headed.

      • xe3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Google is in the process of undermining the effectiveness of uBlock Origin and other adblockers on Chrome and other Chromium browsers. I believe that change comes into effect this year.

        But even before those changes were announced, uBlock Origin’s creator and main dev has stated that uBO is most capable on Firefox.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Does it work flawlessly on Android, iOS, and desktop? I’m really asking, because I ditched Chrome when it was less shitty than it currently is…

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          All iOS browsers have to use Webkit (or did last time I checked). So there’s not much of a point of running Firefox on iOS. It’s basically the same browser no matter what browser it says it is.

            • nudny ekscentryk@szmer.info
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              It is, but Apple being Apple, they are going all malicious compliance and will break evening else for non-Safari browsers lol

              Also this only applies in EU. To use 3rd party apps stores you won’t be able to leave the EU for more than 30 days at a time as well

  • rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    people don’t complain to get solutions, they complain so everyone knows how miserable they are

  • Nanomerce @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Ngl, I’ve never had issues with either for ram. my experience with Firefox is mostly the sameas chrome with ram usage. The main reason Im on Firefox is cause it’s been a whole lot more stable for me than chrome.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      If the majority of ram isn’t being utilized you either have a problem or have entirely to much ram. I’m not saying programs can’t be memory hogs, but they should utilize what resources are there to perform better. It would be like turning on a flash light, using all of the power and then covering half the bulb while trying to cross a field in the dark. The CPU and GPU use more electricity when running at higher percentages, ram is negligible for the most part.

    • mstrk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s about the amount of tabs you keep open. Every site will take a piece of RAM and a max of 5Gb per tab if not mistaken.

      I think GChrome has a feature now where it tries to “kill” the tabs you’re not using to mitigate this issue but it’s opt in.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I switched from Chrome to Firefox on my Mac desktop and the memory usage was cut in half at least. I only use it on my Linux notebook, so I have no idea about the memory usage difference there, but there was an unquestionable difference on the Mac. It has 16 gb of ram and is from 7 years ago, so it was before the M-chips and their ram hunger and still gave me memory warnings.

      Now I never have memory issues on it. All it took was switching to Firefox.

      So it definitely makes a difference on some systems.

  • RatBin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    As for the last question, yes the murring and the tail thingy aren’t forbidden, to be clear.

  • Veedem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’m all for people using Firefox instead of Chrome, but RAM being used up shouldn’t be a complaint unless something else needs that RAM. If it’s there, it should be considered usable.

      • xan1242@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s specifically about the efficiency of the usage. If it’s not used effectively, then it really is a waste.

        And we all know how efficient the Web is nowadays…

        • drem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Why could ram usage be a waste? I thought only the allocation is the performance heavy part, allocated ram does not cost extra performance.

          • xan1242@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            I’m referring to the philosophy behind the usage of said allocated ram.

            If you allocate 5 cookie jars to store 1 cookie in each jar, then that’s not good.

            If you store 2 cookies per jar, that’s better already, but still kind of crap.

            If the websites keep putting rocks in those jars, then you’ll obviously run rampant with usage. (Read: https://tonsky.me/blog/js-bloat/ )

            The goal is to store as many cookies in least amount of jars. You might crumble them down and reconstruct them later (compression and/or clever code) but that could take more brain (processing) power (of which we kinda have, especially on the desktop).

            As you’ve said, it’s often a tradeoff between processing power and memory usage and depending on the application, you can configure things the way you need them (at least when you’re coding it).