They fixed the memory issues in Firefox 5 and on :v: Atlas.
I think market share in browsers aren't really all that important these days. All browsers now are just about identical in speed an web rendering (IE9 has a few minor CSS issues which have been sorted in IE10) and all support web standards to a great degree. About the only major factor would be the UI and memory management, which are all about the same (not including addons which can easily throw comparability off).
Aww, Opera. Are you even trying?
I find the constant decrease in IE share to be quite amusing.
[QUOTE=squids_eye;33522713]This is how.
[img]http://blogs.law.emory.edu/elsit/files/2009/02/iemess211.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I fixed my neighbors computer because it was slowing down, and he was using firefox which had 3-4 toolbars.
I've switched back and forth between opera, firefox and chrome a lot of times. At first I didn't even like chrome because it lacked functionality that I was used to. Now it has all of that because of plugins. I've been using chrome for a good while now.
[QUOTE=squids_eye;33522713]This is how.
[img]http://blogs.law.emory.edu/elsit/files/2009/02/iemess211.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
That's what happens if you don't use IE in a few months
[QUOTE=Recco;33523129]Aww, Opera. Are you even trying?[/QUOTE]
I feel very sorry for Opera, they have many good ideas, but they only catch on when the other browsers use them.
I switched from Firefox to Chrome when Firefox kept having memory leaks all over the place (ages ago). My only experience of FF lately has been the university computers, and it still feels a bit too slow. I've tried Opera again as well, which feels godlike speed-wise, but I just can't be bothered moving everything over and getting used to how it behaves again.
Fuck this, too mainstream, switching to Opera.
Opera.
:zoid:
[editline]1st December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=person11;33523299]I feel very sorry for Opera, they have many good ideas, but they only catch on when the other browsers use them.[/QUOTE]
Opera has a lot more to offer to me than FF or chrome does, imo.
I've used both Chrome and Firefox, and I like Firefox a lot more.
Mainly because of it's layout and better memory management (Uses less memory, only runs two processes compared to Google Chrome's 5 processes for just opening the main page)
Firefox also starts up considerably faster on my machine.
For now, I recommend Firefox to my friends. Chrome has a ways to go before I will recommend it.
[QUOTE=FordLord;33523396]I've used both Chrome and Firefox, and I like Firefox a lot more.
Mainly because of it's layout and better memory management (Uses less memory, only runs two processes compared to Google Chrome's 5 processes for just opening the main page)
Firefox also starts up considerably faster on my machine.
For now, I recommend Firefox to my friends. Chrome has a ways to go before I will recommend it.[/QUOTE]Let's see here, one process that leaks like fuck, or a sandbox for each tab and addon, so that if something crashes you only loose that addon/tab instead of the whole browser.
Personally I'm using both Opera and Chrome, Firefox is too slow for me.
For some reason, I just don't like the way Chrome highlights things, it'll highlight whole element where as Firefox'll grab the text and images only, which is what I want.
It probably doesn't make a difference when copying/pasting but I just don't like it.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;33523431]It opens that many processes so the browser doesn't crash if something goes wrong on one page.
Learn how things work before calling it useless.[/QUOTE]
Maybe if they built a browser that doesn't crash, they wouldn't need to do that?
Plus, it seems odd having 5 processes just to open a single page. I opened 4 tabs in it and it ended up making 8 processes.
I've used Chrome a lot less than Firefox, and so far Chrome has had more problematic times vs non-problematic times than Firefox.
[QUOTE=TehWhale;33523433]Let's see here, one process that leaks like fuck, or a sandbox for each tab and addon, so that if something crashes you only loose that addon/tab instead of the whole browser.[/QUOTE]
Just because I could, I opened Chrome and opened up the same 4 tabs that I have open in Firefox. They include facebook, and 3 topics here on FacePunch.
I've had Firefox on Facebook for around an hour now, and the facepunch tabs have been open for about 15 minute or so each.
Firefox was using about 250mb of ram in one process, while the freshly opened Google Chrome was using about 295mb of ram spread over 8 proccesses.
From my experience, Chrome has had a lot more memory problems, which is why I stopped using it after I started using it. I remember leaving Chrome open overnight and having it using enough ram to cause my system to almost freeze.
Of course, this topic isn't for arguing over what people believe is a better browser. I was just trying to give my reason's for picking Firefox over Chrome.
[QUOTE=pawelte1;33523434]Personally I'm using both Opera and Chrome, Firefox is too slow for me.[/QUOTE]
Same here, chrome and opera are both open, I use opera for posting on FP and forums etc. and chrome for WebGL and stuff like that, and more intensive stuff.
This is where multiscreens come in useful :eng101:
[QUOTE=FordLord;33523495]Maybe if they built a browser that doesn't crash, they wouldn't need to do that?
Plus, it seems odd having 5 processes just to open a single page. I opened 4 tabs in it and it ended up making 8 processes.
I've used Chrome a lot less than Firefox, and so far Chrome has had more problematic times vs non-problematic times than Firefo.[/QUOTE]Chrome doesn't crash, addons such as flash do, and when they do they normally bring down the whole browser.
And the way Chrome does it is like this: A master process for Chrome, and then each tab, and extension create their own sandboxed process.
fags
ie is superior
I have no idea why the chrome/firefox argument gets so heated. They are almost exactly the same in looks, performance and addon support.
[QUOTE=CapsAdmin;33523239]I fixed my neighbors computer because it was slowing down, and he was using firefox which had 3-4 toolbars.
I've switched back and forth between opera, firefox and chrome a lot of times. At first I didn't even like chrome because it lacked functionality that I was used to. Now it has all of that because of plugins. I've been using chrome for a good while now.[/QUOTE]
I thought you loved Opera
[QUOTE=TehWhale;33523515]Chrome doesn't crash, addons such as flash do, and when they do they normally bring down the whole browser.
And the way Chrome does it is like this: A master process for Chrome, and then each tab, and extension create their own sandboxed process.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Atlascore;33523587]Chrome never crashes, and that's because of the multiple processes, idiot.
Every time one of the processes crash it's because of addons, and instead of it crashing the entire browser like Firefox, it just takes out one of the processes, you can relaunch the addon instantly and keep doing whatever you were doing.[/QUOTE]
No need to insult me.
Wouldn't it be more efficient to have one process for the pages, and another for flash?
I believe that is what FireFox does now, it has the regular firefox.exe as well as the plugin container running.
Technically, Chrome does crash.
[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;33523307][B]I switched from Firefox to Chrome when Firefox kept having memory leaks all over the place (ages ago).[/B] My only experience of FF lately has been the university computers, and it still feels a bit too slow. I've tried Opera again as well, which feels godlike speed-wise, but I just can't be bothered moving everything over and getting used to how it behaves again.[/QUOTE]
Same reason.
Though I really like Chrome now, just have to press 'g' to go to gmail 'y' for youtube etc etc.
Plus the most visited tabs page.
[QUOTE=FordLord;33523662]No need to insult me.
Wouldn't it be more efficient to have one process for the pages, and another for flash?
I believe that is what FireFox does now, it has the regular firefox.exe as well as the plugin container running.
Technically, Chrome does crash.[/QUOTE]No, it wouldn't. If a tab crashes (due to a plugin, or extension), it just crashes those plguins/extensions or maybe the tab. Your whole browser won't explode like Firefox does when this happens.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33522597]I just find using Chrome to be an uncomfortable experience overall.[/QUOTE]
I never liked using Chrome, a lot of shit breaks while I'm using it
Chrome, because Advertising your product on international highstreets and have the financial and promotional strength of google doesn't make a good product.
Wat I dislike about Chrome is that Adblock doesn't block the ads but instead just hides them.
[QUOTE=TehWhale;33523684]No, it wouldn't. If a tab crashes (due to a plugin, or extension), it just crashes those plguins/extensions or maybe the tab. Your whole browser won't explode like Firefox does when this happens.[/QUOTE]
I believe it would be more efficient that way.
Instead of every page and extension having it's own process, having the pages have one process while having the extensions have a separate process.
I've never had Firefox crash from an extension, so I don't know what it does.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;33523690]You have no idea how anything works, just stop.[/QUOTE]
I do know that Firefox runs flash in the plugin container process. If you try using cheatengine on Firefox.exe, it will do nothing to flash. Using it on the plugin container process does work however.
[QUOTE=scotland1;33523606]I have no idea why the chrome/firefox argument gets so heated. They are almost exactly the same in looks, performance and addon support.[/QUOTE]Its just another Mac vs. PC, CoD vs. BF, Ford vs. GM, etc. A never ending argument of people claiming that one of two similar products is better then the other rather then letting personal preference do the work.
[QUOTE=The mouse;33523711]Chrome, because Advertising your product on international highstreets and have the financial and promotional strength of google doesn't make a good product.[/QUOTE]Except it is.
[QUOTE=FlubberNugget;33523360]Opera has a lot more to offer to me than FF or chrome does, imo.[/QUOTE]
Too bad [B]BOTH[/B] Firefox and Chrome have plenty of addons to negate that comment, it's just not included [B]IN[/B] the browser from the install.
Really, that's the only upperhand Opera has, and sometimes that's even a disadvantage instead.
[editline]1st December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=The mouse;33523711]Chrome, because Advertising your product on international highstreets and have the financial and promotional strength of google doesn't make a good product.[/QUOTE]
Thank goodness it actually lives up to it's advertising.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.