On the left we have Falkon browser with the new update, running the glorious QTwebkit.
And on the right we have stock firefox.
As you can see, Falkon is comparable in performance to firefox.
Why haven't you made the switch to Falkon yet, user? Are you scared?
Now, compare it to firefox nightly
mozilla.org
no extensions
holy kek, how did KDE retards manage to mangle chromium so that its slower than trannyfox?
QtWebEngine is just chromium. Falkon should be wiping the floor with trannyfox. its actually hilarious that falkon is so bloated that its slower than mozilla bloat
lmao
>no extensions
um firefox bros, what did they mean by this?
You have to run the test stock config and no extensions retard
why?
Because that'll happen
There is exactly one extension that matters and that is ublock origin.
I can only imagine how poorly shit optimized that generic whitelabel "Adblock" is compared to king ublock
because i use a webkitgtk browser
i prefer to not use chromium and it’s derivatives for ethical reasons
I'm using firefox because I want there to be alternatives to chromium based browsers. Opera is chromium, edge is chromium, qtwebkit is chromium. If we didn't have firefox, chromium would take over everything. And I don't like that idea. I don't like monopolies
>brave adblock 10x slower than ubo
holy kek
Firefox is mostly funded by Google user
theverge.com
Nice observation smart man, the other viable alternative (Apple WebKit) is also funded by google (to the tune of 15 billion dollars). Firefox is the only cross-platform not-chrome browser with its own extension store left. Enjoy your shit add-ons chromecuck
It seems pretty decent actually to tell you the truth.
I have ran both browsers - one with ublock and one with the Falkon adblock side by side - and I am frequently getting faster loads on Falkon
That's because adblock just lets ads through.
>no hard data
Facts don't care about your feelings Rajesh. Run this one in Falkon and Firefox
testdrive-archive.azurewebsites.net
firefox nightly is not secure.
>Doesn't elaborate
I only use two extensions (Bitwarden and ViolentMonkey) retard
So what is the point of calling it QTWebEngine and developing it? What is KDE adding to the equation here?
Surely it brings something to the table.
QTWebEngine exists as a basic embedding layer so applications can embed web content, its not designed for building an entire browser around it.
Anything QTWebEngine based will always be slower and missing features.