Why I use Firefox

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Firefox’s independent Gecko engine is seen as a crucial counterweight to a de facto Chrome/Chromium monopoly, even as many note the irony that Mozilla is heavily funded by Google’s search deal. Commenters praise Firefox for privacy features, powerful extensions (especially on Android), containers, customization, and open-source stewardship, but also point to real drawbacks: weaker PWA support, occasional site incompatibilities and performance issues, and concerns about Mozilla’s management, telemetry defaults, and spending priorities. Overall, it’s viewed as the best remaining non-Chromium option, valued as much for preserving a diverse web ecosystem as for specific features.

Independent engine & web monopoly concerns

  • Many value Firefox primarily because Gecko is an independent engine; without it, the web risks a de‑facto Chromium/WebKit monopoly.
  • Chrome is widely compared to the new Internet Explorer: dominating standards, shipping features first, and effectively defining what “works.”
  • Some argue Safari is “the new IE” in a different way (slow to adopt standards, weird bugs, frozen versions on old iOS). Others note Safari leads in some areas (CSS features, color spaces, accessibility).

Funding, trust, and Mozilla governance

  • Strong debate over Google’s search deal:
    • One side says it’s just Google wearing a mask and mostly an antitrust fig leaf.
    • Others argue it’s normal distribution money and Mozilla remains technically independent.
  • Privacy: some view Firefox as more privacy‑respecting; others point to telemetry and many third‑party integrations in the privacy notice. Self‑hosting Sync and E2E encryption are discussed.
  • Mozilla’s leadership and spending get heavy criticism: CEO pay, layoffs, and donations to social causes vs. core browser work. Others counter that side projects like Rust, LetsEncrypt, AV1, Firefox OS, VR, etc., materially improved the ecosystem.

Features users value

  • Containers, multi‑account containers, and strong cookie isolation.
  • Powerful customization: about:config, userChrome/userContent CSS, UI tweaks, vertical tabs via extensions (Tree Style Tab, Sidebery), real user stylesheets, bookmarklets.
  • Reader View, PDF.js, Picture‑in‑Picture, good developer tools (including CSS editing), and robust history search.
  • Extension ecosystem, especially uBlock Origin on desktop and Android, plus niche addons (Tridactyl, Google Search Fixer).

Mobile experience (Android & iOS)

  • Android Firefox praised for ad blocking and extensions, but some report crashes, slowness, and tab loss; others find it stable.
  • Expectation that EU DMA will allow real engines on iOS; some think this will help Firefox, others fear it will just strengthen Chrome.

Performance, compatibility, and UX issues

  • Mixed benchmark reports: some see Firefox beating Chrome; others the opposite. Extensions significantly affect results.
  • A minority report “unusably broken” sites or missing features (e.g., some video calls, Duolingo mic, WebSerial, some enterprise tools), though others can’t reproduce and blame site bugs or extensions.
  • Complaints about UX on macOS, weak PWA support, lack of customizable keyboard shortcuts, and occasional DNS/weird responsiveness bugs.

Alternatives & ecosystem

  • Brave, Vivaldi, Edge, Safari, Chromium forks, and LibreWolf are mentioned as alternatives with their own trade‑offs.
  • Many still use Chrome/Chromium for specific tasks (Google Meet, PWAs, some video or compatibility issues) while keeping Firefox as primary to support engine diversity.