In September 2018, Chrome now looks like Firefox 29-56 and Firefox now looks like Firefox 4-28 as far as tabs are concerned.<p>I can't wait Firefox looking like Chrome 1-60 and then Firefox and Chrome looking like NetSurf and deciding that tabs under the address bar are better because of matters related to mouse / hand traveling distance, and then removing the address bar altogether, and then adding back the status bar, and then presenting tabs as a lottery wheel, before deciding that one window per page is more user friendly according to a new user A/B testing experiment, after all. And because of some unfortunate extension API breaking change, your preferred tab browsing plugin will not work for the first shiny new versions of these browsers like that.<p>And then Edge (or whatever the current name of Internet Explorer at this time after a rebranding following a scandal related to some Cortana incident) catching up, and opening a new window each time a link is clicked in Firefox or Chrome to try and steal users (which will lead to some meaningless fine from the EU).<p>:q!
I honestly can't believe I'm reading this.<p>It takes Chrome + Ghostery + ABP + Privacy Badger 700MB and 17x processes just to start on Windows. Open a couple tabs and it instantly consumes 2+ GB of memory. Firefox is 300MB and 5 processes. You are delusional.<p>You have to tell it specifically NOT to stay running in the background FOR EVERY user on a machine.<p>It still has no idea what an FQDN is. And Google devs still don't care. They'd much rather search Google for a FQDN with a backslash than actually attempt to resolve the name. And that's a feature, NOT a bug.<p>I recently switched away from Chrome at work and Chromium at home BECAUSE it's not getting any better.
Is there any good data on how much larger sites are today compared to 10 years ago? It would be interesting to actually calculate how this has affected the loading times.