Both Firefox and Chrome owe their existence to people who were religiously fanatical about building better browsers than the status quo. Without those people, you wouldn't have your convenience in the first place.
These days browsers are good at following standards, but it's very important what's actually in the standards. There is potential for Google to use Chrome's market share to move the standards in a user hostile way.
Chromium being open source is good, but it's not everything.
> Chromium is free to fork. That's the only thing that matters.
Yet, we see browser after browser dropping their own engines and migrating to blink. The fact is, something being free to fork no longer means that it is practical to do so. These ostensibly open code bases are massive monoliths backed by morbidly bloated standards. It isn't practical for even big companies to fork and maintain. Aggravating this is the fact that these are developed primarily by just one company who rarely listens to its users and often silences them with CoC. Such code appear open, but not in spirit.
> Browser wars tend to get preachy at times and border on religious fanaticism.
> I'm not going to give up sweet convenience so that I can make a claim that am sticking it to the man. That's ridiculous.
People are calling for the use of any alternative due to an imminent threat to the open nature of the web. And yet, there are attempts like these to bill them as preachy and fanatic. It's not wrong to care about freedom! Convenience - if any (I don't feel inconvenienced on Firefox) - is no longer an excuse to neglect the seriously wrong turn the web has taken.
I'm not going to give up sweet convenience so that I can make a claim that am sticking it to the man. That's ridiculous.