Hello! 
Last night, I decided to ditch Firefox and switch to Brave because the folks at Mozilla decided to degrade by following the rounded design trend. Firefox is no longer the most ergonomic browser, and its user interface raises serious questions about consistency, logic, and psychology in general. However, it used to have the most balanced design or user interface.
Today, within an hour, I transferred all my data from Firefox to Brave, and the browser is ready to go. No problems. However, I forgot to consider the browser’s efficiency. It turns out that Brave is not as efficient and economical as Firefox. Although years have passed, but Brave (Chromium) is still in the same place – practically nothing has changed in this regard.
Significant and unjustified consumption by Brave
Why does your browser consume so much more resources than, say, Firefox? Brave consumes ~2-4 GB more memory (overall system load) than Firefox under the same conditions: ~50 tabs, half of which are in use and the other half in standby mode. While Brave’s consumption is absolutely insane, Firefox works as it should.
It turns out that the internet meme about “even an infinite amount of resources for Chromium will never be enough” isn't really a meme – it's reality.
Why is this happening? Where does this crazy consumption come from? (both on Windows and Linux). Moreover, it is impossible to say which browser is faster, Brave or Firefox. If Brave were at least twice as fast (I agree, that sounds silly), then the consumption could be justified. However, there is no difference (and in some scenarios, Firefox may seem faster due to common sense considerations). Brave’s consumption is very significant, guys (Of course, you can buy 64 additional GB of RAM and use the browser. However, one cannot ignore the fact that there are browsers that are much more efficient, and it is difficult to say which one is faster).
Why is Brave as “sluggish” as Google Chrome? No, I understand that the Chromium engine is not the best (judging by practical results), but I assumed that over time, Chromium’s chronic problems would be eliminated. But years have passed, and practically nothing has changed. – It is fair to note that the process responsible for monitoring browser updates no longer hangs in the processes, even when Brave is not running. Thank you for that. Because before, it constantly hung in the processes and it was annoying, just like Google Chrome.
Inactive tabs
Why does Brave automatically load the content of all tabs, even unused ones, without my permission, thus overloading the entire system? Yes, I understand that this may sound silly, because browsers were created to be launched and to allow users to freely navigate different websites at maximum speed. However, it is 2025, and nowadays it is very common for users to have dozens of unused tabs waiting for their time (this is part of human psychology. In addition, technology allows this to be done due to increased computing power).
Yes, you added a feature where the browser itself disables tabs or puts them into a kind of “standby mode.” But why can’t users decide for themselves which tabs will be on standby and which will load after the browser is launched? For example, Firefox does not load tabs – their content is loaded when the user decides to use them. And that’s absolutely right! It’s logical (I have no idea if this can be configured in the Brave’s settings, but this logic is completely justified, and it should be the default in all browsers).
In addition, this “optimization system” or “tab standby mode” in Brave does not work predictably – sometimes unused tabs remain inactive, and sometimes it automatically loads a significant portion of unused tabs (and I still don’t understand why this happens, because I didn’t change anything in my actions). The system works in a completely random way – it’s like rolling the dice.
It’s really sad because this system works flawlessly in Firefox.
Scary and nasty rounded design
And finally, why does Brave have such an overly rounded design, just like the clunky Google Chrome? Based on Brave’s official logo, I can say for sure that the browser’s design should be less rounded – a rectangular shape (with smooth edges) should dominate over the circle (as is the case in the iOS app, for example).
Again, I understand that it’s Chromium, but that doesn’t mean you have to thoroughly copy the meticulous round and completely non-ergonomic design from Google and… Apple.
It’s a frustrating situation
I don’t understand where this global obsession with circular designs came from (there are too many circular shapes in the digital world now). All of you developers and designers are following in the footsteps of Apple and Google… but why? What makes you think they’re making the right decisions? Have you forgotten about selfish (by nature) investors and the constant desperate changes that the CEOs of big tech companies make in their quest for endless revenue growth?
Why are developers pushing annoying rounded designs (almost oval 
, I might add) everywhere they can? Rounded design even where it doesn’t belong – where it doesn’t fit in at all.
I have a revolutionary idea for corporations! Let's develop round monitors! How do you like that idea? A beautiful rounded design with no sharp, threatening edges – a clean, beautiful, MODERN CIRCLE!
Let me demonstrate for you
Many people don’t even realize that it’s much harder to hit a circle than a square: Imagine a situation where you need to hit a geometric shape with your mouse cursor.
I am absolutely certain that many people will find it more difficult to hit a circle than a square or rectangular shape. Even if you know where the hitbox is located, psychologically you understand that there is a possibility of missing and not pressing the button. It’s pure psychology! And I have no idea why leading technology companies ignore this incredibly important issue of ergonomics.
I am absolutely convinced that most people would say that a square is more “reliable”: it is more reliable and safer – you can safely rely on it and it will not let you down.
However, as for other geometric shapes, such as a circle or a ridiculously rounded square, not only do they cause a certain amount of “frustration,” but they also require more mental calculation: you have to make more effort – you have to think a little longer to get into a round shape.
A square means that you can either miss 100% or you don’t miss and definitely hit the object (it only has 4 directions where you can miss). However, round shapes can have their own special hitbox: a significant part of the user interface area is completely unused, and the user can easily miss and not press the button (in other words, in all directions there is emptiness where the user can press and nothing will happen).
Some people will surely say that “it’s a matter of habit” — absolutely right! — people get used to everything! (even the most unbearable things). However, it is foolish to ignore the existing facts.
However, this does not mean that “you always have to use sharp right angles!” – as in my example, my square has pleasant rounded edges (BALANCE is maintained!). And it is not necessary to stick to right angles everywhere – you can safely switch to other geometric shapes where they will better fulfill their role in the user interface for greater ergonomics.
Don’t get me wrong, I completely agree that it is necessary to take into account the system on which a web application or any other program (operating system) runs: its logic and user interface. However, we must not forget that there is a line between common sense and individuality that should not be ignored.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my opinion. I hope it will serve some purpose 
All the best!