But worst of all is how mr_november's comment has been voted down. It's one thing to deny that the problem exists, but it's much worse to try to actively censor those who have merely pointed out a very legitimate and troubling issue.
'Actively censor ... a troubling issue'? You make it sound like a police state.
Firefox has been losing market share for some time now, and this trend will only continue as long as Firefox's performance problems go unaddressed
Firefox's problem is shedding it's past reputation. It really isn't that slow anymore - it depends on what you're doing in the chrome vs firefox wars. I work with a bunch of chromeheads, and they all spurn ff because of that past reputation.
In actuality, they have as many problems with chrome as they do with firefox - I'm constantly saying "[bug] not evident on firefox" and they express puzzlement that The Awesomeness That Is Chrome actually has a problem other browsers don't. Not to mention that a lot of the bugs I do run into on FF are because of their 'designed-on-chrome-for-chrome' default mindset. The bugs do get sorted out, but the perception that FF is so much worse than chrome isn't reflective of the truth of the matter. They're pretty similar these days, swings and roundabouts.
Yes, voting down a legitimate comment here so that it's greyed out, thus making it more difficult to read, is a form of censorship.
As for Firefox's reputation, I think it still has a reputation for poor performance because, contrary to what you and others may claim, a lot of people still find recent releases to be slower than Chrome and other browsers.
It will never be able to shed its reputation for poor performance as long as it still suffers from those problems. And these problems will persist as long as the Firefox community continues to deny that they exist, or go out of their way to suppress discussion of these very real performance problems.
'Actively censor ... a troubling issue'? You make it sound like a police state.
Firefox has been losing market share for some time now, and this trend will only continue as long as Firefox's performance problems go unaddressed
Firefox's problem is shedding it's past reputation. It really isn't that slow anymore - it depends on what you're doing in the chrome vs firefox wars. I work with a bunch of chromeheads, and they all spurn ff because of that past reputation.
In actuality, they have as many problems with chrome as they do with firefox - I'm constantly saying "[bug] not evident on firefox" and they express puzzlement that The Awesomeness That Is Chrome actually has a problem other browsers don't. Not to mention that a lot of the bugs I do run into on FF are because of their 'designed-on-chrome-for-chrome' default mindset. The bugs do get sorted out, but the perception that FF is so much worse than chrome isn't reflective of the truth of the matter. They're pretty similar these days, swings and roundabouts.