I decided this is the best browser right now.

You should be using uzbl. It's the only web browser that adheres to the unix philosophy.

>>56914589
Idk, I use Windows 7..

>>56914589
surf

>>56914589
you don't have an idea of what you are talking about.

>>56914583
What theme is that

>>56914649
Built-in developer theme (Dark)

>>56914589
You mean the suckless philosophy of being a rotten pile of horseshit?

>>56914671
What are you using nightly or something?
Never played around with other versions but I've also never gotten an erection from a screenshot of a web browser before.

>>56914761
No, stable.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/devedition-theme-enabler/

>>56914583
Unless you can disable a page's CSS with your browser in that state it's going to remain worse than a Firefox with the menu bar enabled.

One way to make it better would be to just have an easy-access button to toggle CSS for a tab.

>>56914827
Thanks very much sir.

>>56914583
It's literally not. The best choice for retards who who only care about shitty meme extensions, maybe.

>>56915063
You're welcome. I'm a woman though.

>>56915174
Performance too, seems better than Chrome imo.

File: KBm8v.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>56915190
>Firefox performance
>better than Chrome

??????

>>56915205
I assume it depends on the connection. I have a 1Gbps connection, it doesn't perform like that for me.

Buy a mac and use safari, poorfag.

File: Untitled.jpg (489KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 2560x1440px

>>56915246
lolnothankyou

>>56915205
Fuck off, normie.

>>56915182
Woman don't have dick.

>>56915238
right, but it's the same connection for both browsers, here. It's not like he switched from dialup to cable before running Chrome.

>>56915296
I don't. Not attatched to my body anyway (;

>>56915281
nice argument, retard.

>>56915205
>what is cache

>>56915306
Idk, I anyiway set my browsers to load tabs on click only. I do open many links at once with snap links extension though and never faced that issue.

>>56915326
there's a bunch more webms like this and he wipes cache at the beginning of each one. nice try though.

>FF vs Chrome - 30 Random sites
https://webmshare.com/play/KBm8v
>FF vs Chrome - 11 News sites
https://webmshare.com/play/Meo8O
>FF vs Chrome - 40+ Instagram profiles on Windows
https://webmshare.com/play/Wn1GD
>FF vs Chrome - 40+ Instagram profiles on Arch Linux
https://webmshare.com/play/6wK0n
>FF vs Chrome on bad machine (2core/2thread - 2GB RAM)
https://webmshare.com/play/gBdJb
>FF vs Chrome with uBlock
https://webmshare.com/play/RAE86

>>56915182
LONDON
O
N
D
O
N

>>56915205
>i posted it again

>>56915367
aw, look. this triggers the firecuck.

>>56915205
>>56915343
Biased tests. Loading many tabs at the same time favors browsers that have multi-process optimizations, like chrome and firefox post-e10s.

Your benchmark favors these configurations even though they are actually slower, simply beacuse you're testing an unreasonable scenario (opening 30 tabs at the same time and waiting for them all to be completed) instead of a relevant scenario (e.g. responsiveness of a single website)

>>56914583
go back to sosach peetooh

>>56915433
this

>>56915385
>responsiveness of a single website
Chromium is better at this too.

t. firefox fan

>>56915566
Prove it.

t. qutebrowser user

>>56915622
I don't have any metrics, I can't prove it.

t. firefox fan

>>56915275

tits or gtfo

No (:

dicks out for harambe

>>56915385
>multi-process optimizations
its fucking 2016, cave mans can still use their prehistoric ff

>>56915385
>Loading many tabs at the same time favors browsers that have multi-process optimizations, like chrome and firefox post-e10s.

Tests were done in e10s Firefox.

>>56916092
IPC is slow

File: Drumpf.png (493KB, 580x385px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 580x385px

>>56915385
>gets BTFO
>its biased

>>56916674
I don't use Firefox. I ditched it months ago, because I got fed up with how slow and shitty it was as well as SJWzilla's constant fuckups.

But that doesn't mean I have to recognize or support a flawed test.

Unlike drumpfposters, I won't latch on to something that's technically wrong just because it agrees with my opinion.

Pale Moon.

Nuff said.

>>56916748
Firefox tends to be pretty slow not least of which because it thinks storing things on disks is appropriate for the 21st century. It's not a really bad botnet and with e10s (and hopefully servo) it's pretty cool.

If they (or you) hack the shit out of your profile to avoid writing anything to disk the performance is really quite good. Very likely it will perform favorably with chrome on retarded tab opening tests.