I do this as much as possible. However the Firefox in-page translation software seems to do something that actually changes the page (and this can break things like forms) whereas chromium browsers do some kind of translation layer on top, so the page can run normally beneath it.
It’s an infuriating reason but right now it means I have to split my browser use depending on if I need translations or not.
It’s not a difficulty issue It’s that lots of us have tried Firefox and don’t like it.
Personally I don’t use Firefox because it is buggy, is missing critical features, implements some web standards weirdly and has weird user agent styles. The end result is that many websites don’t look right and don’t work correctly and/or fully
They’re pretty much just hating to hate or basing themselves on very outdated information, ‘missing critical features’ is a joke, because if it actually were critical it would’ve been implemented already (plus firefox is very extensible, with many plugins existing and forks adding specific features), if they actually had a point they maybe would’ve given a single example.
Weirdly implementing some web standards kinda did apply a bit until a few years ago where all the big browser engine developers got together and pinned down the standard. If something still breaks that probably means the website used some out-of-spec workaround that only works in Chrome. Some things do indeed behave differently between firefox and chrome (an example of my own: file input fields with multiple types, eg allow both video and image are handled differently at least in the mobile apps). Yet again if they had a point maybe an example would’ve been great.
Weird user agent styles?..?? I’m just confused honestly.
I just searched for chrome vs firefox and just about every article from the past year or so say firefox is more secure. Not that it matters a lot either way. Two party system is crap.
How so? at least on Android and Linux there is a lack of sandboxing and site isolation. This could be fixed up to a certain point but anyways it would be more insecure than chromium.
The problem with iron fox is that it’s so hardened about privacy that it breaks functionality l, for example you can’t even use add-ons if you don’t enable it first, it is disabled by default…
Literally just use Firefox for Android with uBlock. People act like this is difficult.
*uBlock Origin
I’ve seen the following types of people:
I do this as much as possible. However the Firefox in-page translation software seems to do something that actually changes the page (and this can break things like forms) whereas chromium browsers do some kind of translation layer on top, so the page can run normally beneath it.
It’s an infuriating reason but right now it means I have to split my browser use depending on if I need translations or not.
Is that new in the last couple years or so? I recall chrome breaking form entry left and right when translating before i could read the language.
You know you can install the “chromium-like” translation thing on Firefox as well, as an extension? E.g. this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/traduzir-paginas-web/
Not available for IOS. For android firefox is bad at sandboxing and security. Vanadium if it had adblocking would be perfect for me.
It’s not a difficulty issue It’s that lots of us have tried Firefox and don’t like it.
Personally I don’t use Firefox because it is buggy, is missing critical features, implements some web standards weirdly and has weird user agent styles. The end result is that many websites don’t look right and don’t work correctly and/or fully
Buggy? Huh.
Interesting. I use Firefox for everything and haven’t had any issues. Maybe I’m just not that picky?
They’re pretty much just hating to hate or basing themselves on very outdated information, ‘missing critical features’ is a joke, because if it actually were critical it would’ve been implemented already (plus firefox is very extensible, with many plugins existing and forks adding specific features), if they actually had a point they maybe would’ve given a single example.
Weirdly implementing some web standards kinda did apply a bit until a few years ago where all the big browser engine developers got together and pinned down the standard. If something still breaks that probably means the website used some out-of-spec workaround that only works in Chrome. Some things do indeed behave differently between firefox and chrome (an example of my own: file input fields with multiple types, eg allow both video and image are handled differently at least in the mobile apps). Yet again if they had a point maybe an example would’ve been great.
Weird user agent styles?..?? I’m just confused honestly.
Me too
Objectively more insecure and underperformant than ANY other chromium based browser.
Got a source for that incredible claim?
If you’re going to make wild claims that most people would disagree with, you better be able to back it up with objective facts
https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/firefox-chromium.html
I just searched for
chrome vs firefoxand just about every article from the past year or so say firefox is more secure. Not that it matters a lot either way. Two party system is crap.How so? at least on Android and Linux there is a lack of sandboxing and site isolation. This could be fixed up to a certain point but anyways it would be more insecure than chromium.
Firefox uses literally the Chromium sandbox on Linux, they have for years.
https://grapheneos.org/usage#web-browsing
that’s why ironfox is so valuable
The problem with iron fox is that it’s so hardened about privacy that it breaks functionality l, for example you can’t even use add-ons if you don’t enable it first, it is disabled by default…