I think the primary thing I've learned about open vs closed source products this last decade, is that the difference in marketing is huge.

Both Firefox and Chrome are great browsers, end stop.

But most articles on HN about Chrome start with glowing praise.

And most articles on HN about Firefox start with "What's wrong with FF" and condescention.

I'm past the point of thinking that this is actually reflective about the browsers and their organizations.

Chrome is actively ending ad block support in its plugins. Its CEO is actively engaging in the political process. Firefox has always had a messy relationship with advertising, in which it generally tries to walk the line between reality and ideology. There are pros and cons to both products, depending on what you care about. The fact that articles on each browser so consistently fall into the same pattern does not seem reflective of the actual products themselves.

I think the difference is down to marketing.