Lichess is clearly less good.
On chess.com we have for example the possibility to have the game report which allows us to have the opinion of coach Stokfish telling us this is a big mistake, this is good etc. and finally it allows to have a chess population playing with a better "chess quality". (This is important because for example many chess programs are very powerful with many possible levels and therefore if the human population is too much in "the cult of ego" with a "chess bad quality" even if by dint of playing it can create strong players who are powerful in tactics, "opening memorization" etc. in the end it's better to play against AIs of his level).
Now let's be clear Lichess has the huge advantage to be free and to be able to invite a specific player to play against yourself in for example 5 minutes. And by the way I only use Lichess to play games against my Father.
It seems to me that Lichess has the big flaw of not having the function to blacklist a player.
The fact that a site is paid for may induce a sense of responsibility on the part of the player and with that responsibility the player will be less likely to do incorrect things such as using the help of a strong AI, consulting the opening encyclopedia of the AI, not playing the game but letting the time run out and coming back just near the end to play a move etc.
not to mention lichess again lol..but on that app it says the ping right on the top..it hovers from 200 to 300 ms..server 1ms
that seems very useful to have but chess.com probably doesnt want to copy that huh lol
but regardless of all that..why does my experience on lichess have less time issues than here..
other guy keeps mentioning other sites handle lag differently..in what way does it