-
You heard it here first: Black Friday 2024 has arrived!
- Status
eddieroolz
Splendid
- Sep 6, 2008
- 7,057
- 0
- 25,860
For those who are adversely allergic to Google Chrome (like I am) there's a good alternative called SRWare Iron. Not many know about it, but its pretty much the carbon copy of Chromium except with all Google privacy-breaching codes removed. Acts and behaves exactly like Chromium/Chrome, and you can use Chrome themes and extensions too. Its been my 2nd browser alongside IE8 for half a year now.
Firefox has become too bloated to even think about it. It takes 2 minutes to launch the window on my laptop and NO, my 7 Professional is perfectly fine. IE8 takes <1.5s to launch, Iron takes <1s, but Firefox takes >30s at best.
Firefox has become too bloated to even think about it. It takes 2 minutes to launch the window on my laptop and NO, my 7 Professional is perfectly fine. IE8 takes <1.5s to launch, Iron takes <1s, but Firefox takes >30s at best.
You're forgetting one thing: Firefox is Mozilla's bread and butter. IE and Chrome are not core, big-budget products for Microsoft and Google. They both do just fine whether their products exist or don't exist. But for Mozilla, if it abandoned Firefox it would be far, far less prominent. That means Mozilla won't allow Firefox to simply fall by the wayside, they are going to work and deliver big improvements.
sdemjanenko
Distinguished
- Apr 9, 2010
- 1
- 0
- 18,510
While Chrome is nice, Opera has just as good a development cycle. Its 10.52 beta is significantly faster than chrome5 in any test except V8 in which the two browsers are practically tied. I am excited to see ie9's usage of the gpu.
The problem that I see with firefox is that they are only copying people, they arent actually making any really new significant features. For chrome it was speed and just the google factor, for opera is was speed dial, unite and opera turbo, for ie9 it will be gpu support. firefox needs something.
The problem that I see with firefox is that they are only copying people, they arent actually making any really new significant features. For chrome it was speed and just the google factor, for opera is was speed dial, unite and opera turbo, for ie9 it will be gpu support. firefox needs something.
joe gamer
Distinguished
- Mar 11, 2010
- 109
- 0
- 18,680
Both Firefox and Chrome drive business to Google, you could argue that from a revenue generation angle they are both about the same. I'll bet that rather than trying to increase Chrome adoption by sacrificing Firefox Google will just keep on as is, although they will definitely negotiate a better deal. If Firefox vanished, many of those left browser-less would go to IE, Safari, or some other option that doesn't benefit Google.
Volkswagen will happily sell you a fully loaded Tuareg or a speedy little Porsche 911(not a perfect metaphor I know), either way they are getting paid. Me? I'll take one each please.
Volkswagen will happily sell you a fully loaded Tuareg or a speedy little Porsche 911(not a perfect metaphor I know), either way they are getting paid. Me? I'll take one each please.
I love Chrome. Firefox was getting incredibly bloated and slow. Losing most of my plugins was painful at first, but the speed increase to me was well worth the tradeoff. Ubuntu 9.10 user, and FF is total garbage on it, and always has been.
Shadow703793
Champion
- Feb 3, 2007
- 15,438
- 0
- 51,160
[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]When I buy a car, I don't have to choose who made the spark plugs, or the seat cushions, the battery, or any of its other parts and subsystems. If I don't like one of them, I can replace it; that's on me and I accept it. Why can't people accept that Microsoft has defined "The Product" as Windows including IE? If you don't like it, replace it. Simple. I did, and for the reasons cited by holylancer, expect I will continue to use Firefox. With ad revenue so important to Google, does anyone really think that Chrome will ever provide truly effective, all-inclusive ad blocking? I hear it's fast, and that's nice, but I don't mind a few seconds here and there if it means I don't need to put up with ads.[/citation]
Don't forget, Google is WATCHING YOU! :lol:
Don't forget, Google is WATCHING YOU! :lol:
Chrome's success is in no small part due to the strategy that Google is using to promote its browser. For a "Do no evil" company, it is advertising its browser using advertising real estate that no other company on the planet has access to -- the Google home page and Youtube pages. As one of the biggest advertising networks on the planet, Google also gets to use it's knowledge of remnant advertising to fill up cheap advertising slots in AdSense placements around the net.
Whereas FireFox has to organize its legions of volunteers, and Opera needs to get the EU to give it a chance, Google gets to just casually push advertise whatever it wants in places and at rates (free) that no one else can match.
Whereas FireFox has to organize its legions of volunteers, and Opera needs to get the EU to give it a chance, Google gets to just casually push advertise whatever it wants in places and at rates (free) that no one else can match.
henrystrawn
Distinguished
- Sep 9, 2009
- 297
- 0
- 18,810
Until another browser allows me to browse as ad free and flash free as I chose, firefox is the browser for me. I am very sensitive about the amount and tactics of advertising. Firefox was the easiest and most comprehensive browser to allow me to control the content I am viewing.
anamaniac
Distinguished
- Jan 7, 2009
- 2,447
- 0
- 19,790
[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]@TanookiTravis: Adblock for Chrome doesn't work like Mozilla's: in Firefox, Adblock prevents the browser from loading ads. In Chrome, Adblock loads the ad, scripts and all, then hides it.While Chrome is WICKED fast on normal pages, entering a site with lots of ads is PAINFUL in Chrome compared with Firefox+Adblock.Another thing which is overlooked, is that Mozilla is already working on improving Firefox. It came as a side note in the latest release, but Firefox 3.6.2 added out of process plugins: plugins run in a different process than the pages, making is o that when a plugin crashes, it doesn't bring down the whole browser. That's called 'a good start'.Plans for Firefox-next are: - independent processes for each tab and the UI (in progress) - hardware acceleration on Direct2D enabled OSes (landed in nightlies, debugging) - hardware acceleration on OpenGL capable OSes (not yet there, useful for XP, Linux, OS X and mobiles) - a sleeker UI - a faster Javascript engine - process separation for multicore processing.Just imagine: Chrome with Firefox extensions and IE 9 drawing speed... On your phone.[/citation]
That's pretty awesome to hear.
A healthy mix between Google Chrome and Mozilla FireFox is what I'd like to see. They're both nice, IE still sucks, Safari can stay on OSX, I'd rhather skip Opera, Chrome isn't yet perfect, so I'll use my FF for now.
That's pretty awesome to hear.
A healthy mix between Google Chrome and Mozilla FireFox is what I'd like to see. They're both nice, IE still sucks, Safari can stay on OSX, I'd rhather skip Opera, Chrome isn't yet perfect, so I'll use my FF for now.
THGossip with another hyped up panicky title - it's just '10, the end of the world is still advertised in '12, so keep your breath...
Playing a bit with statistics - those triple digit percentage, and 2 decimals numbers might look awesome, and fool the less knowledgeable reader, but are just statistically noise, aka garbage - and some graphs, the doom of FF is decreed.
Even if MF is getting it's most revenue from G, the dumbest move would be to shoot down the browser which provides a lot of it's own ad based revenue - Cr is still far from getting relevant market share - it's current rise is mostly from the hip factor.
Completely ignored is the fact that FF is FOSS - even in the least probable event of MF disappearing, FF would still go on.
Another factor is that G would never implement an ad block in Cr (it's biggest, if not only revenue), or desist it's spying on user habits - piss the users enough with intrusive tactics, and off they go...
The most funny part of the opinion article is: "Chrome’s forced upgrade ensures you always have the latest version on your PC and, whether you like it or not, the strategy seems to be resonating with users."
If pushed deep down the throat, the only result is gagging and/or puking, hardly "resonating"... Put enough pressure on users, and they're gone.
The other "alternative", micro$uxx' exploder can be reliably discarded as a viable contender - it's market share is purely due to deeply embedding it in the drm infested games loader - and the flooding litany of promises from redmond's marketing droids is already getting boring.
Another flawed view - mostly resonating with micro$uxx' monopolistic tactics - is that there should be a dominating broser. Even if FF's market share tends lately to remain constant, it doesn't mean at all it's demise...
Playing a bit with statistics - those triple digit percentage, and 2 decimals numbers might look awesome, and fool the less knowledgeable reader, but are just statistically noise, aka garbage - and some graphs, the doom of FF is decreed.
Even if MF is getting it's most revenue from G, the dumbest move would be to shoot down the browser which provides a lot of it's own ad based revenue - Cr is still far from getting relevant market share - it's current rise is mostly from the hip factor.
Completely ignored is the fact that FF is FOSS - even in the least probable event of MF disappearing, FF would still go on.
Another factor is that G would never implement an ad block in Cr (it's biggest, if not only revenue), or desist it's spying on user habits - piss the users enough with intrusive tactics, and off they go...
The most funny part of the opinion article is: "Chrome’s forced upgrade ensures you always have the latest version on your PC and, whether you like it or not, the strategy seems to be resonating with users."
If pushed deep down the throat, the only result is gagging and/or puking, hardly "resonating"... Put enough pressure on users, and they're gone.
The other "alternative", micro$uxx' exploder can be reliably discarded as a viable contender - it's market share is purely due to deeply embedding it in the drm infested games loader - and the flooding litany of promises from redmond's marketing droids is already getting boring.
Another flawed view - mostly resonating with micro$uxx' monopolistic tactics - is that there should be a dominating broser. Even if FF's market share tends lately to remain constant, it doesn't mean at all it's demise...
If offence is the best defence, why yes, please go into survival mode, Mozilla! Firefox 3.7 is shaping up very nicely. Fennec nightly as well. Weave is a killer add-on. Stability has improved rapidly.
Webkit is the king of half-baked implementations and MSIE9 still has long ways to go. What's needed is more serious journalism that goes beyond Acid3 scores and so called "support charts" and also looks at the quality of an implementation. Superficial journalism is Mozilla's main problem today!
Webkit is the king of half-baked implementations and MSIE9 still has long ways to go. What's needed is more serious journalism that goes beyond Acid3 scores and so called "support charts" and also looks at the quality of an implementation. Superficial journalism is Mozilla's main problem today!
JohnnyLucky
Glorious
- May 30, 2007
- 10,902
- 10
- 44,315
So far I have not been tempted but I might have to give the browsers a try just to see what they are like.
I think because FireFox wanted to be like internet explorer too much.
I chose firefox for it's low memory footprint, and fast browsing, but with all those extras like skins etc.. It became too bloated!
I still prefer FF over IE though!
I chose firefox for it's low memory footprint, and fast browsing, but with all those extras like skins etc.. It became too bloated!
I still prefer FF over IE though!
It does no such thing. Where are you getting this nonsense from?
Chrome wins because it cheats. The V8 benchmark leaves out stuff Chrome is extremely slow at. If they didn't leave out these things, Opera would have crushed Chrome at Google's own benchmark.
The same goes for Chrome.
Because Microsoft broke the law by using their car monopoly to prevent other people from competing with Microsoft's own spark plugs. Microsoft actively tried to prevent you from buying spark plugs from someone else. They were able to do so because of their car monopoly.
[citation][nom]Ramar[/nom]I have 50 tabs open right now.][/citation]
Doesn't that get really annoying though? I get annoyed when I have more than 10-15 tabs open... but then again, my internet split over that many loading pages is fairly slow...
Doesn't that get really annoying though? I get annoyed when I have more than 10-15 tabs open... but then again, my internet split over that many loading pages is fairly slow...
The best thing Mozilla can do right now is to stop trying to compete with Chrome as a lightweight fast browser. It should aim to be something much more (like having Firebug, Adblock, NoScript, web page editor, etc. built directly into it). What you'll have is a situation akin to Photoshop (Firefox) verses Paint.net (Chrome). Or Word verses Wordpad. Both have their purposes and can peacefully coexist. As the web becomes our OS, there's definitely room for more than one "alternate" browser.
Bruceification73
Distinguished
- Oct 5, 2009
- 416
- 0
- 18,810
Personally, I will always use Firefox as my main browser. I have been considering getting Chrome as a secondary, and have used it on other people's computers. It is definitely fast, but only slightly faster than Firefox, so it doesn't make that big of a difference. I just like all the add-ons and customizable features of Firefox. I'm an open-source guy. Linux is my favorite OS, so Firefox and Chrome are naturally my favorite browsers.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Review AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review: Devastating Gaming Performance- Started by Admin
- Replies: 202
-
-
Question PC freezes completely in certain games and then I can only shut it down with the power button ?- Started by EmiN1711
- Replies: 5
-
Question Gaming PC Issue which I think is GPU-related ?
- Started by surreysteve
- Replies: 1
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram