Is this actually a viable browser nowadays on linux? I've

>>62053706
it lags on twitter dot com while scrolling. It is a dump taken by sjwcunts.

But 57 is faster and smoother but breaks all the essential addons and there are no replacement for them. E.g. Htitle. Especially if you are on Linux.

>>62053735
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=513159
>reported 8 years ago
their best solution is to turn off windows decoration. lol
mozilla devs certainly don't give a fuck

File: 1502829869400.png (269KB, 445x334px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 445x334px

>>62053706
Uses less RAM for useless shit, slightly faster than chromium, but has no touch support.

Can't win 'em all so my T530 gets firefox and my X220 gets chromium.

lmao

>>62053706
Fagfox is dead along with Mozilla but the /g/ays are in self denial as usual.

>>62053706
They were on a very good path, see current nightly versions. but they are fucking it all up again since they are planning on collecting data now.

>>62054053
They are only doing this to improve user experiences

>>62053706
it's better than chrome from a privacy standpoint I guess
it requires pulseaudio though

>>62053793
I don't really understand, what is the bug?

>>62054090
(((improve)))

>>62054108
waste of vertical space if you are using gnome.

>>62054108
>it requires pulseaudio though
Anyone compiling it from source tried if adding this to the mozconfig works?

ac_add_options --enable-alsa
ac_add_options --disable-pulseaudio

There's also this: https://github.com/i-rinat/apulse

>>62054090
I really want to believe, but the way they phrase it, they sound like basically every data grabbing anti-consumer company on the planet.

I know they presented their way of reliably anonymizing the data they collect.

But have they talked about what they actually want to do with the data to "improve my user experience"?