firefox-performance-dashboards VS hoverzoom

> Show me these pages that Firefox doesn't render well.

I'm not doing homework for you. Lots of pages don't render well in Firefox, it's a well known issue which is why it comes up in every thread about Firefox.

> Show me pages that tank Firefox performance.

Firefox in general performs poorly. Again, known long-term ongoing issue. Look at this thread where almost every top-level comment is sceptical that Firefox is even close to Chrome in performance: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36770883

You can find ongoing performance benchmarks between Chrome and Firefox here, and it's not flattering for FF: https://arewefastyet.com

> How many of them will have -webkit-* and other engine-exclusive markup/CSS?

I don't care, at all. It's not my job, as a user, to debug performance problems.

> Firefox updates every 6 weeks, just like Chrome.

Ok? I didn't say anything about update cadence.

The link is terrible. Maybe the article should link to https://arewefastyet.com or maybe the Speedometer selection at https://arewefastyet.com/win10/benchmarks/raptor-desktop-spe...

Well I would wager a guess it's due to consistency. The full site includes a bunch of different benchmarks, with a lot of them having the y axis as execution time in milliseconds. Meaning, lower is better. They probably just wanted to keep that consistency even with tests that use scores. Definitely a bit misleading without the full context. The full site is arewefastyet.com

They do... They just don't have the resources Google does. If you see https://arewefastyet.com you can see that Firefox has been steadily improving in speed, and they have actually recently been working to make react faster.

I filed a bug for that.

I will leave this as a gallery of emails with offers to buy extension hoverzoom: https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/discussions/670

Sidenote: The "collaboration" offers come from time to time even to non-extensions projects, if they are reasonably widely used. E.g. simple tools (rather widely used suite of android apps recently sold).

> Manifest V3 will stop this by limiting what Google describes "remotely hosted code." All updates, even to benign things like a filtering list, will need to happen through full extension updates through the Chrome Web Store. They will all be subject to Chrome Web Store reviews process, and that comes with a significant time delay.

So the author can't think of any other reason for this change other than to "slow down ad blocker updates"

Well how about stuff like this: https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/discussions/670

Where an extension dev details offers to "monetize" his app and basically perform a bait and switch and make it malicious.

These type of offers are actually quite common. See this[0] and the discussion[1]. I try to stick with only the most popular of extensions in the hope that any malicious changes would be widespread news, but it is still a gamble.

[0] https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/discussions/670

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37066680

As a maintainer of a semi-popular chrome extension[1], I receive so many buy-out offers that I started publicly collecting them[2] for everyone to see.

[1] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hover-zoom%20/pccc...

[2] https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/discussions/670

Also, here's a open source alternative.

I don't want to download a sieve from a russian forum. Hover Zoom+ is working fine.

Hover Zoom+: https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/ (this is the open source one, not the old one with malware)