- Status
I'll stick with FF. I have used Chrome, Safari, and Opera, still have Chrome and Opera on my machine. Sorry Safari, you just wasn't my cup of tea. Chrome does somethings faster, Opera does somethins faster, but all around in day to day use I still find FF is best for me. I haven't tried IE9 beta, I may try IE9 when it is released. All should consider that Google has virtually unlimited financial resources to put into Chrome, same for Microsoft and IE9. FF doesn't have that going for it but they are still able to compete on the same playing field. I'll say it again, Google is simply becoming what Microsoft used to be, they want to be your "only" software company. I have used Opera through many versions over the years, even when it was the only one you had to pay for. It has always been good. I just like FF a little better.
So Microsoft, which is more known for its PR than its performance, claims Javascript is a moot point. Yet Google, Mozilla, Opera and Safari are all working to improve their performance with JS...
So far, until just recently, all we have seen of IE are 'previews' based on their own set of demos. Its kind of like Google saying they have the best performance on the V8 benchmark when they tuned the engine around the benchmark... Incidentally, Firefox is the only one of the 4 other browsers that can perform decently on those demos. It's always suspicious when Microsoft makes claims about performance, especially when its using its own tests.
Another issue is Microsoft has NO plans for IE9 for XP. They did it before with IE7 for 2000. They'll probably do it again for the next greatest OS. Most companies don't go upgrading the entire organization's PCs to the latest OS every 3 years. These days, they are sticking with OS longer. Microsoft focus long ago stopped being about the consumer and about businesses. Every time they tried to kill off 2000 and XP, businesses have cried foul and MS has backed up from their plans. (Consider if you have just 100 computers, and it costs $50 (in a dream world) to upgrade each PC. That's $5000. 1000 computers, that's $50,000. For $50,000 you could buy 100 new entry-level PCs which last you another 3 years vs upgrading the OS which the return on investment is questionable).
Firefox and Opera still support Windows 2000. Supposedly you could run Opera on older Windows. Safari and Chrome will likely continue to support XP for some time (isn't it funny that APPLE supports XP which is NOT their platform but MS doesn't?).
Incidentally, if you install IE9, you loose your stable, patched (for what it is worth) browser for an unproven, unstable browser. Microsoft doesn't bother to ask you. Microsoft doesn't even bother to TELL you. I say that's pretty insincere of Microsoft saying they are focused on what their audience needs. There's also a whole list of things that can go wrong per Microsoft. IE9 seemingly would not install on my system. It threw an HTML file on my desktop documenting all the different issues that could occur in installation.) I rebooted and tried to install again at which point it told me that a NEWER version of Internet Explorer was installed.
Each party behind each of the browsers have their opinion of what the experience should be. Personally I like Firefox. When Netscape died off I took up Firefox and have kept following it. However, I believe each camp has their valid points and they will appeal to different people. Some people even use more than one browser for different reasons.
As for benchmarks, it is at the very least a starting point to compare the browsers performance-wise beyond 'Oh, I think Chrome just runs faster than Firefox.' When Kraken (Mozilla's benchmark) came out, Beta 6 actually scored below the other browsers. But even with certain prejudices assumed, you start to see patterns across all the benchmarks. Webkit (the underlying engine for Safari), Google, and now Mozilla too have JS benchmarks. Servicemark (makers of 3DMark) created a rather nice (and free) benchmark entitled rather interestingly 'Peacekeeper.'
So we have four different camps (one of which isn't even involved with Browsers) involving similar tests (although Peacekeeper also tests Canvas, which is a new non-plugin graphics rendering element in HTML5).
I think we all should continue to take what Microsoft says with perhaps a whole shaker full of salt especially when what they are saying flies contrary to what everybody else is doing.
So far, until just recently, all we have seen of IE are 'previews' based on their own set of demos. Its kind of like Google saying they have the best performance on the V8 benchmark when they tuned the engine around the benchmark... Incidentally, Firefox is the only one of the 4 other browsers that can perform decently on those demos. It's always suspicious when Microsoft makes claims about performance, especially when its using its own tests.
Another issue is Microsoft has NO plans for IE9 for XP. They did it before with IE7 for 2000. They'll probably do it again for the next greatest OS. Most companies don't go upgrading the entire organization's PCs to the latest OS every 3 years. These days, they are sticking with OS longer. Microsoft focus long ago stopped being about the consumer and about businesses. Every time they tried to kill off 2000 and XP, businesses have cried foul and MS has backed up from their plans. (Consider if you have just 100 computers, and it costs $50 (in a dream world) to upgrade each PC. That's $5000. 1000 computers, that's $50,000. For $50,000 you could buy 100 new entry-level PCs which last you another 3 years vs upgrading the OS which the return on investment is questionable).
Firefox and Opera still support Windows 2000. Supposedly you could run Opera on older Windows. Safari and Chrome will likely continue to support XP for some time (isn't it funny that APPLE supports XP which is NOT their platform but MS doesn't?).
Incidentally, if you install IE9, you loose your stable, patched (for what it is worth) browser for an unproven, unstable browser. Microsoft doesn't bother to ask you. Microsoft doesn't even bother to TELL you. I say that's pretty insincere of Microsoft saying they are focused on what their audience needs. There's also a whole list of things that can go wrong per Microsoft. IE9 seemingly would not install on my system. It threw an HTML file on my desktop documenting all the different issues that could occur in installation.) I rebooted and tried to install again at which point it told me that a NEWER version of Internet Explorer was installed.
Each party behind each of the browsers have their opinion of what the experience should be. Personally I like Firefox. When Netscape died off I took up Firefox and have kept following it. However, I believe each camp has their valid points and they will appeal to different people. Some people even use more than one browser for different reasons.
As for benchmarks, it is at the very least a starting point to compare the browsers performance-wise beyond 'Oh, I think Chrome just runs faster than Firefox.' When Kraken (Mozilla's benchmark) came out, Beta 6 actually scored below the other browsers. But even with certain prejudices assumed, you start to see patterns across all the benchmarks. Webkit (the underlying engine for Safari), Google, and now Mozilla too have JS benchmarks. Servicemark (makers of 3DMark) created a rather nice (and free) benchmark entitled rather interestingly 'Peacekeeper.'
So we have four different camps (one of which isn't even involved with Browsers) involving similar tests (although Peacekeeper also tests Canvas, which is a new non-plugin graphics rendering element in HTML5).
I think we all should continue to take what Microsoft says with perhaps a whole shaker full of salt especially when what they are saying flies contrary to what everybody else is doing.
At least I'll now have an excuse to switch back to Firefox. I used it ever since version 1.5 was out. Then when I got Windows 7, it didn't work, so I switched to Chrome. Chrome is a memory hog, but I've gotten use to the interface, which is very minimal. I hated it at first.
kayvonjoon
Distinguished
- Jul 25, 2009
- 58
- 0
- 18,630
All of these speedtest are mostly useless because 95% of the time your browsing speed depends on your internet speed ;Unless you have a 10mb/s connection ,then your bottleneck would be the browser.
damianrobertjones
Distinguished
- Aug 14, 2010
- 587
- 1
- 18,995
[citation][nom]jeraldjunkmail[/nom]Well written article, proper journalism is refreshing to see in web based media anywhere.[/citation]
Apart from the title, which is terrible. Casual users will read that title and...
Apart from the title, which is terrible. Casual users will read that title and...
Yo to all those chrome users, there is an addon... that allows you to use IE's rendering engine on certain web pages... FF users will find it sounds familiar. I use IE tab classic http://bit.ly/7G4iFF) for this reason with chrome... Chrome is miles ahead of firefox on RAM usage and PF usage(FF hogs this thats y sometimes FF takes a long time to close after loading 40+ tabs) ...
Compatibility Firefox losses only to IE. Sadly i had chrome crash too.. just a few times but its way faster in recovering, so no big deal....
Compatibility Firefox losses only to IE. Sadly i had chrome crash too.. just a few times but its way faster in recovering, so no big deal....
and um opera sux too... had a lot of facebook glitches and lotsa things don't work well... yes its feature filled... But also a buggy rendering engine. Sigh.... in real life scenarios, chrome is still faster...
and whats with Ctrl+Shift+Click to open in new tab....???
10.60 was the version i tried for a few months
10.61 keep on crashing for me.... left it
And Opera's Synch (i forgot the exact name), sux, unreliable... at times will not synch, at times will duplicate entries(can be somewhat forgiven though), and Synch not allowing browser to close gracefully...
and whats with Ctrl+Shift+Click to open in new tab....???
10.60 was the version i tried for a few months
10.61 keep on crashing for me.... left it
And Opera's Synch (i forgot the exact name), sux, unreliable... at times will not synch, at times will duplicate entries(can be somewhat forgiven though), and Synch not allowing browser to close gracefully...
neiroatopelcc
Distinguished
- Oct 3, 2006
- 3,078
- 0
- 20,810
[citation][nom]Mikeadelic[/nom]I'm curious as to how Chrome fails so often? Not flaming just wondering. I haven't had any stability issues with Chrome for months, starting from Chrome 5.[/citation]
I'm using chrome primarily too, but I've had trouble with many web pages because of it. It sucks for our company mail, it doesn't work at all with our time management system, it doesn't work with hp's ftp downloads when paired with tmg and there are dozens of other places where it just doesn't work. In it's defence, it's the website designs that prevent it from working, not the browser itself. But the bottom line is, that no matter what you chose, you need ie (or ietab for firefox/chrome) as backup if you're running windows
I'm using chrome primarily too, but I've had trouble with many web pages because of it. It sucks for our company mail, it doesn't work at all with our time management system, it doesn't work with hp's ftp downloads when paired with tmg and there are dozens of other places where it just doesn't work. In it's defence, it's the website designs that prevent it from working, not the browser itself. But the bottom line is, that no matter what you chose, you need ie (or ietab for firefox/chrome) as backup if you're running windows
I don't play the, this browser sucks or this browser rocks game. I'm not a fanboy or hater of any browser. I simply use what works for me and that currently is Firefox. I've tried them all and find that Firefox simply appeals more to me right now than any of the others. It has it's benefits and it's flaws, just like all the rest.
As far as all the benchmarks and what they tell us, it doesn't really add up to a hill of beans. All the benchmarks used to compare these browers are flawed and give very little indication of which outperforms the others. The real test should simply come down to consumer trial and error. We consumers should find what we like and how that product suits are needs and quit being influenced by very misleading numbers on benchmarks that really show us next to nothing about why to choose one product of another. For instance, as I mentioned, Firefox suits me currently and I've seen nothing that makes me want to switch to something different as my everyday browser. Someone else's experience may be Opera or Chrome or IE, etc. Either way, why switch because a benchmark tells you to, it's the cool thing to do or a marketing blitz makes you feel like you're no longer happy with what you use? I'm not saying don't try other products out, but don't fall for all the hype, when in real world situations, they hype points tell you very little about the experience. No matter who the company is that's hyping their product.
Another point I'd like to make. Fanboyism gets us nowhere. It's like some of these people can't be happy using what they use unless others jump on their bandwagon. I could care less if I was the only Firefox user in the world. If it continued doing what I want it to do and I was happy, I'd feel zero reason for others opinion's to change that. I could care less about popularity, market share or any other intangible which makes my experience not better/worse in the end. I don't find one company/developer more evil/good than the others and simply view them as what they are, business/organization/group trying the get their piece of the pie in the market share game.
What really matters is, we the consumers, are in a good position right now when it comes to browsers. There are several viable options, instead of just 1 or 2 and that benefits us all in the end. One guys/girls browser may not be anothers, but that makes it no better/worse necessarily. All the browsers have stolen ideas and innovations from one another and that's a good thing in the end too. If someone introduces something that seems to appeal to a vast number of people, I see no problem with the others following suit. No one has created a browser so unlike any other that everything that they've introduced is original and innovative and no one ever will. They simply keep building on or taking away features as people respond to them.
To sum up. It's a good time for the internet. Browser's are all evolving and there are many more realistic options to choose from. We're seeing all the major browser's (minor ones too) improving because of that competition and it benefits all of us. If you happy with what you use, stick with it until you find something better. Don't jump on whatever trend comes along simply because your told to. Be your own person and use what works best for you and quite caring some much about Market share and benchmarks that really mean very little.
As far as all the benchmarks and what they tell us, it doesn't really add up to a hill of beans. All the benchmarks used to compare these browers are flawed and give very little indication of which outperforms the others. The real test should simply come down to consumer trial and error. We consumers should find what we like and how that product suits are needs and quit being influenced by very misleading numbers on benchmarks that really show us next to nothing about why to choose one product of another. For instance, as I mentioned, Firefox suits me currently and I've seen nothing that makes me want to switch to something different as my everyday browser. Someone else's experience may be Opera or Chrome or IE, etc. Either way, why switch because a benchmark tells you to, it's the cool thing to do or a marketing blitz makes you feel like you're no longer happy with what you use? I'm not saying don't try other products out, but don't fall for all the hype, when in real world situations, they hype points tell you very little about the experience. No matter who the company is that's hyping their product.
Another point I'd like to make. Fanboyism gets us nowhere. It's like some of these people can't be happy using what they use unless others jump on their bandwagon. I could care less if I was the only Firefox user in the world. If it continued doing what I want it to do and I was happy, I'd feel zero reason for others opinion's to change that. I could care less about popularity, market share or any other intangible which makes my experience not better/worse in the end. I don't find one company/developer more evil/good than the others and simply view them as what they are, business/organization/group trying the get their piece of the pie in the market share game.
What really matters is, we the consumers, are in a good position right now when it comes to browsers. There are several viable options, instead of just 1 or 2 and that benefits us all in the end. One guys/girls browser may not be anothers, but that makes it no better/worse necessarily. All the browsers have stolen ideas and innovations from one another and that's a good thing in the end too. If someone introduces something that seems to appeal to a vast number of people, I see no problem with the others following suit. No one has created a browser so unlike any other that everything that they've introduced is original and innovative and no one ever will. They simply keep building on or taking away features as people respond to them.
To sum up. It's a good time for the internet. Browser's are all evolving and there are many more realistic options to choose from. We're seeing all the major browser's (minor ones too) improving because of that competition and it benefits all of us. If you happy with what you use, stick with it until you find something better. Don't jump on whatever trend comes along simply because your told to. Be your own person and use what works best for you and quite caring some much about Market share and benchmarks that really mean very little.
gogogadgetliver
Distinguished
- Apr 7, 2010
- 300
- 0
- 18,780
Here, just insert your fanbooy bullshit into here...
I use ____ browser and have been since ___. There is no way I'd ever let ____ on my machine or go back to ____. _____ is way faster than ____ and has better security.
All you people using ___ are just suckers. ____ is far more (stable/secure/lightweight) and the interface is (too minimalistic, too crowded) and IMHO looks like crap. I can't live without (some add on, some trivial feature, ad blocker, integrated auth).
Fer sakes people it's just a web browser.
I use ____ browser and have been since ___. There is no way I'd ever let ____ on my machine or go back to ____. _____ is way faster than ____ and has better security.
All you people using ___ are just suckers. ____ is far more (stable/secure/lightweight) and the interface is (too minimalistic, too crowded) and IMHO looks like crap. I can't live without (some add on, some trivial feature, ad blocker, integrated auth).
Fer sakes people it's just a web browser.
I don't know why Microsoft is even wasting time trying to compare browser speeds with anyone else. Even if IE9 became the fastest browser on release, it would still become the slowest browser 6 months later and remain in that position for the next 2 years. It's standard procedure for Microsoft to not upgrade the performance and features of the browser once it's released, so IE is always destined to be the browser that got left behind.
WarraWarra
Distinguished
- Aug 19, 2007
- 252
- 0
- 18,790
I was actually trying to download IE9beta the other day and I do not like MicroShaft vista / win7 so go figure.
If firefox stop getting their ego's and lazyness into the equation and start to just do their jobs / QOSon their products and test it they would end up being decent to great again.
Firefox 4B6 was still slower than IE9beta on amazon shelf with only the source linux compiled 3.6.?? that was the same speed as IE9beta.
Unfortunately the ugly IE9 or UGLY firefox4B* all looks like vista / win7 ugly theme / layout and stupid moved options that we are used to so will have to look for another useful web browser.
I am sure that if all firefox users had to source compile their copy they would rather make love to a liquidizer than use any browser.
So when firefox gets their act together and actually fix poor programing practices they might actually get to be 7 times faster than IE9beta and would not have to fake it or rely on "small man syndrome" measurements.
Still using firefox and firefox fanboy but dang they need to get their programing act together with GCC4.5* optimization issues they still have.
Firefox catch a wake up and stop measuring your private parts to microshaft private parts, both is small and can not satisfy a women / firefox users.
If firefox stop getting their ego's and lazyness into the equation and start to just do their jobs / QOSon their products and test it they would end up being decent to great again.
Firefox 4B6 was still slower than IE9beta on amazon shelf with only the source linux compiled 3.6.?? that was the same speed as IE9beta.
Unfortunately the ugly IE9 or UGLY firefox4B* all looks like vista / win7 ugly theme / layout and stupid moved options that we are used to so will have to look for another useful web browser.
I am sure that if all firefox users had to source compile their copy they would rather make love to a liquidizer than use any browser.
So when firefox gets their act together and actually fix poor programing practices they might actually get to be 7 times faster than IE9beta and would not have to fake it or rely on "small man syndrome" measurements.
Still using firefox and firefox fanboy but dang they need to get their programing act together with GCC4.5* optimization issues they still have.
Firefox catch a wake up and stop measuring your private parts to microshaft private parts, both is small and can not satisfy a women / firefox users.
Scott2010au
Distinguished
- Aug 8, 2010
- 248
- 0
- 18,710
"There has never been a better time for choosing a web browser. Realistically, you can’t really make a mistake by picking one."
The mistake is not picking a modern browser, it is not action but inaction. Standing still amoung all the new security threats that have emerged since Internet Explorer was integrated with Windows a little too much.
What is the IE v6.x (and below) share?
The mistake is not picking a modern browser, it is not action but inaction. Standing still amoung all the new security threats that have emerged since Internet Explorer was integrated with Windows a little too much.
What is the IE v6.x (and below) share?
firefox and chrome, use interchangeably, FF for saving tabs, since no other browser does that chrome for quick browsing. i like both of them, however, firefox is getting sluggish with addons so i have to run 4.0b6 in safe mode. (also in normal mode the close, minimise buttons disapear and there is a white pixel in the top left hand corner)
yes i haven't tried opera yet
yes i haven't tried opera yet
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
News TSMC founder says Intel should focus on AI, not advanced process technologies- Started by Admin
- Replies: 27
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
News Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger retires, effective immediately — also steps down from BOD, two co-CEOs step in
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 124
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram