Ask HN: For those who use Chrome, why do you?

47 points by naeeqn ↗ HN
It seems every other day there's news on the front page here about some major privacy or performance feat by Firefox or some other minor browser.

It makes me wonder, for those of you who use Chrome and browse this site (implying you're above average in tech knowledge, privacy worries, etc), why do you use Chrome?

117 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 184 ms ] thread
Because monoculture force me to (I only use it to test with).
It remembers all my (unimportant) passwords.
Firefox has a password manager too now.
I've used every popular browser (chrome/edge/old edge/firefox/opera/brave/chromium/vivaldi) on Windows. Chrome works most smooth of the time without any funny issues.

Supposedly people said Edge is Chromium based, and is better, less memory usage, etc. I tried it, it just feels more clunky, takes longer to open, pages take longer to load. I also dislike the interface, chrome's interface seems more natural to me. And of course doesn't have the same extensions.

Firefox feels faster than chrome for certain sites, but I find it has issues with other sites. Might be because sites design for Chrome these days. Also Firefox like the original Netscape has random freezes and bugs. A lot less, but I find chrome just works most of the time with less problems.

An example site I can think of, off the top of my head, youtube works way smoother in chrome than firefox. I'm not a huge youtube fan but lately I've been trying to view content that happens to be only available on youtube. Opera has even worse youtube support.

I can't remember why I stopped using Chromium but I think it was a lack of extension support. I recalled it lacked something Chrome had that was important to me. If it's important to you, I can use it again so I can remind myself what it was.

For the record I do use Firefox as my backup browser, and I would say it's better than Chrome at some things (it loads certain sites faster, and has better extension support), and better privacy options, but overall Chrome works better for every site.

Do you know which extensions are not available on Firefox? I'm considering moving to Firefox and feel like after I move there'll be that one Chrome extension that isn't on Firefox.
(comment deleted)
Firefox + Multi-Account Containers [1] + Container Proxy [2] + Cookie Auto-Delete [3] have completely changed the way I use the web. I can now have multiple Discord accounts open, multiple e-mail accounts, etc.

Cookie Auto-Delete removes all persistent traces of my browsing (Cache, IndexedDB, LocalStorage, Plugin Data, Service Workers, Cookies) unless I have whitelisted a site. And you can whitelist sites on a per-container basis - the integration with Multi-Account Containers is solid.

Container Proxy lets me set up different SOCKS proxies per container. For example, if you have a system-wide VPN with a killswitch running, but want to stream from Netflix or HBO, you can attach a SOCKS proxy to a new "Streaming" container that connects to a SOCKS server running on your local network, effectively bypassing your VPN. Alternatively, if you want to make sure a container is unable to connect to anything without going through a VPN connection, you can bind the container to the SOCKS server on localhost created by your VPN client. You can then use this to set up multiple geographically separate "identities" that don't mix with each other.

All three extensions are reviewed by Mozilla - and Multi-Account Containers is actually written by Mozilla!

After using this setup, I feel that context separation is the future to privacy (and perhaps even security, as Qubes OS demonstrates.)

[1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

[2]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/container-pro...

[3]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autode...

(comment deleted)
You can install any chrome extension from the chrome store in Edge, you just click the usual 'add to chrome' button and Edge will install it.
You can simply open youtube links with mpv.
Integration with Google services and account
The same question still stands.
Fast, stable, feature-rich, well tested, excellent security, continuously updated, first-rate support on all websites, cross-platform continuity, best extension ecosystem, excellent developer tools, easy to run different channels (e.g. stable and canary) simultaneously. I would use it on mobile if it supported extensions.
I try to use Firefox (I do) but there are still issues every now and then and I find that I have to use Chrome for something at least once a day.

Most developers develop for Chrome and don't even consider Firefox.

I'm not particularly fond of Google (and growing less fond by-the-week) but the best I can do for now is use Firefox for 95% of things and keep Chrome around for the rest.

No matter what my current dreamboat browser is at home, I always use Chrome at work. Their dev tools are unparalleled. I’m amazed MS hasn’t poached the Dev Tools director to work on VS.
It's a very good question, I'm afraid the answers will mostly be shallow post-defacto justifications. I think we do many things autonomosly, reflexively, and come up with justifications after-the-fact.
Habit. Also my employer some years ago settled on GMail and Google Sheets/Docs/etc. (Not that they don't work well enough in Firefox.) I tend to use Chrome for work and Firefox for personal stuff, just as a convenient way to keep GMail accounts separate.
I was there when IE was better than Netscape. Gmail became a thing and I loved Google and their quality since.
I use Chromium, but I've always had a better experience using hardware acceleration and it runs a lot faster than Firefox when playing videos and having multiple tabs open and uses less resources.
Chrome dev tools are great. Or maybe I'm just use to them by this point.

Chrome also just by far has the best compatibility throughout the web. Whenever I try going to another browser, I always keep a copy of Chrome just so that I can pay utilities (because, of course, their site is broken on Safari, for example).

Also, I use all three major desktop OSes, and Chrome has been the most consistent throughout all 3. Firefox use to have serious rendering issues on macOS; I believe they may have been fixed but I can't be arsed to keep track of that.

Passwords and autocomplete.
Only one reason: Chrome has hands down the best security track record.
Why not use Brave instead, then?
Because Brave have a worse track record than chrome. Chromium would be a better pick if security track record is your measuring stick.
Doesn't Brave use a Chromium backend?
It does. Brave adds it's own code on top. Like injecting affiliate id's on some links. The affiliate programs (Binance, Coinbase, Ledger, Trezor) allow Brave to view a detailed overview of purchases made.
I’m sure it says somewhere but i could not find out what version of chrome(chromium?) brave is based on while trying to find this out for maybe 5 minutes. So, just to be sure i am not installing an browser with known vulnerability I’ll stick with chrome for now.
I heard Chrome is faster. It might not be, given that I'm running a bunch of privacy extensions. But I don't really know how to benchmark this.
If privacy + security is your goal, you ought to change from Chrome to Brave. Brave is Chromium-based but actually protects your privacy.

If privacy above all is your goal, then Firefox is your best bet.

Brave have been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar multiple times. I don't know if it's more secure than Firefox but it's definitely less private.
I want speed, security, privacy. I'm not aware of any public comparisons between browsers using privacy and adblock extensions.
This subject has gotten extremely political and I simply don’t trust most of what’s posted on Hacker News. Everything looks like motivated reasoning to me. Only a small minority really understand the issues and they use motivated reasoning too.

It’s much like deciding which nutritional studies to trust when most people aren’t scientists and are just reposting memes.

And although I don’t know what’s going on anymore, I have residual trust in the Chrome team since I used to work for Google.

I think what you are saying is privacy concerns are a straw man. But just to accuse HN doesn't really help me. Can you share with us a bit about what is going on in Chrome. I would be genuinely interested to hear more about how it was made/runs etc.
Oh, I don't know anything. I didn't work closely with the Chrome team, and even if I did, I left Google years ago.

But I don't think my co-workers were evil, and though I didn't work personally with them much, I think the folks on the privacy and security teams know their business.

Public blog posts can be extremely difficult to understand though, I'm guessing because it's gotten so political. You can get a bit more from "intent to ship" emails on the public mailing lists.

> But I don't think my co-workers were evil,

You don't have to be evil to do things that result in terrible outcomes.

I genuinely don't think anyone at Facebook wanted to create a propaganda tool, but that was the aggregate outcome.

I don't think anyone at Google set out to build an invasive surveillance platform. But in aggregate that's what's happened.

There's real danger in assuming you will only get bad outcomes because of bad people. Unintended consequences are a thing and I personally think most of the negatives of big tech come from precisely that.

If we can't acknowledge that because we insist on labelling everything and everyone good or evil, we'll never actually solve these issues.

Yes, unintentional outcomes do happen, despite everyone’s best efforts. Sometimes we call them bugs, security holes, or design flaws. They aren’t unique to Chrome, either. There are bug bounties and hacking contests to encourage outside investigation.

Links about things like that do get posted here and that keeps me coming back. But it seems like for certain topics, good-faith critiques are often intermingled with large amounts of contempt. Often the contempt gets upvoted too, just because a lot of people agree with the sentiment.

I wonder if it would be possible to discuss such things without the contempt? Even the Chrome team’s attempts to improve security and privacy get discussed with contempt.

I won't make a blog-post detailing things, since you could just as well google your way into those details. Instead I'll note down:

- Best devtools, particularity regarding how the tools feel to browse around in.

- Feels slightly better to browse with. Only small differences, like how scroll is just a bit "smooth".

- Looks better ui-wise. (arguably a personal take, but also arguably not)

- (as others will note) Because it's essentially standard at this point, and I work with webdev.

I use chromium though, at least it makes things less google-y. And I thoroughly dislike the Alphabet-monopoly situation and all the bad things it brings. I really wish browsers were far less centralized than they are right now, and that some kind of web-standards consortium worked better than it does. But I don't pretend to be able to fix things like that right now. Besides, at this point, the whole Alphabet-monopoly situation is arguably a political issue rather than a technical one. (Political issues require political solutions)

Good reminder about chromium, I should install that too. The phone home requests while not even browsing with chrome is simply said excessive
This bothers me. I wonder if it is legal at all. Browser does not need to call home to work, so what gives?
>Best devtools, particularity regarding how the tools feel to browse around in.

been using firefox for about 5 years now, whenever i have to debug in chromium based browser I think the exact same thing about firefox. I feel like this could be a case of whatever you are used to. Like how android feels vs ios

Agree with you there. I find Firefox css devtools the best and while other browsers copied them they were the ones that implements them first. The big ones are the flex and grid layout tools and having a list of styles changes you made in the devtools.
(comment deleted)
Better dev tools. So I only use it for localhost. Everything else in Firefox.
I am on Android and see no reason to use Firefox
Chrome tab bar reduces width and overflows, Firefox tab bar scrolls

That’s makes chrome more power user friendly. Sadly

To me it's the opposite! I'm a tab hoarder. A tab bar like ||||||||||||||||||| is unusable, but Firefox's approach scales infinitely (and I'm on track to have inifinity+1 tabs open)
When I get to ||||||||||||||||||| situation, I just close the browser and start fresh and then type in sites I had opened if I remember any. I am left with just a few really important to me at the time and I find this less distracting.
I’m a tab hoarder as well. I often have 500+ tabs open.

Usually that means I open a ton of windows and can still see all the tabs in each window

Firefox also has vertical tab extensions you could switch on as needed.
Vertical tabs mean that all web sites (that are usually built to be somewhat symmetric) are no longer centered on the screen
I don't understand that complaint, but I rarely maximize my browser.
I don't but I can share a reason someone I know uses it instead of Firefox: profile switcher.

In Chrome you have pretty little button you click on that lists all your profiles in a nice looking way; with two actions you're done.

In Firefox, you have to type about:profiles, you get a horrendously looking list with all sorts of useless information, it's just a pain to access and look at.

Implement the same UX Chrome has for profiles in Firefox and you'll get more people on board.

Not sure what your use case is, but Firefox’s containers might solve your problem with the older profile system: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...
Containers are 1000 times better than profiles!
I'm afraid you're both wrong, containers are an add-on, profiles are a core functionality.

That person does not want something new, they just want to use their existing workflow, which is possible, but inconvenient due to bad UX and ugly UI. These are their words, not mine.

As a user of both containers and profiles in Firefox I have to agree with them. The UX needs to improve and the UI needs to be prettyfied.

container is a core functionality in Firefox, but it is mostly hidden away.

the add-ons are basically just the interfaces for you to access that core functionality.

If you don't want to trust the add-on developer just use the official one made by Mozila. It is the one i use.

https://addons.mozilla.org/pt-BR/firefox/addon/multi-account...

This has nothing to do with trust, a profile gives you a different set of add-ons, bookmarks, search history, saved passwords, cache and cookies, a container only gives you a different set of cookies.
This does not change the fact that container is a core functionality in Firefox.. and for some using addon is a matter of trust.. Also does not change the fact that chrome does not have anything like it..

Additionally Firefix also have profiles as a core funtionality, it already had it before chrome even existed so it had it much longer then chrome had.. But again is mostly hidden away..

You can access it with the command below:

firefox -ProfileManager

But as with containers there are add-ons to make as easy as chrome to switch between profiles.. Although i don't think there is an official one by Mozilla..

I settled on Chrome years ago, and it hasn't caused enough grief for me to investigate alternatives.
I use it on my work laptop.

- Most of our web-app users are on Chrome anyway.

- The dev-tools are excellent.

- I'm lazy and it already has all my passwords.