Feature-wise, very little. But as I said - I do find I can work faster with Firebug - I much prefer the the DOM inspector (one click node editing, css editing, the fact that it live updates the DOM as it is changed via any JS running on the page) and the console (DOM/JS object inspection and having XHR logging in the console itself and not on another tab). Plugins such as FireQuery also make a difference for my needs.
Yes the Webkit DOM inspector lacks that.
> css editing
It does have that on the other hand.
> the fact that it live updates the DOM as it is changed via any JS running on the page
My DOM inspector does seem to do that as well, though it doesn't highlight the altered subtrees the way Firebug does.
> DOM/JS object inspection
Has been in for a long time, though it could be missing some bells and whistles.
> having XHR logging in the console itself and not on another tab
Matter of tastes there, we'll have to agree to disagree as I'm not fond of this at all.
> Plugins such as FireQuery also make a difference for my needs.
Yes that I will easily give you.
I know, but CSS editing is easier with Firebug.
> My DOM inspector does seem to do that as well, though it doesn't highlight the altered subtrees the way Firebug does.
Not nearly the in same way a Firebug does it, I find it very useful for the amount of DOM manipulation I do with JS.
> Has been in for a long time, though it could be missing some bells and whistles.
Again it's the "bells and whistles" that really make the difference for me some of the time. The less time it takes me to debug something, the better.
That said, I still use Chrome inspector on a daily basis, there's no fanboyism from my part.
Since you haven't described which bells and whistles you think are missing, I can't exactly agree with your position.