Google Chrome, Internet Explorer, Opera or Firefox

[Renegade334]

Not sure...from what I heard the alpha preceding this build proved to be quite unstable - but then again, it's an alpha: it takes care of new tech implementation and performance boosting, whereas betas are supposed to stabilize the core.

I'm still withholding on 11.10 until either RC or final build. The only bells and whistles they cared showcasing were the evolution of the speed dial, which has been mentioned in my previous posts, but otherwise it's seems it's a roundup of exotic crashes and other internal/GUI improvements.


As for IE9, it makes no doubt there is a Chrome GUI factor playing a sizable part in the design, but they've been wanting to simplify things with the fusion of the search bar and the address bar, as well as giving the page display area more real estate (the detail is ridiculous, but they went even as far as eliminating the pixel line / lower edge below the address/bookmarks bar). It is nevertheless possible to return to a more IE8-like appearance if you decide to bring all tabs to a separate row and force all other bars (menu, bookmarks, status) to become visible.


And, oh, contrarily to what I also posted before, it seems Mozilla actually deigned compile an RC2 - which is the last build until next week's RTW.

[felix]

I've tried both firefox and the opera (there was a recent build to fix RC bugs).

Opera's speed dial doesn't look better to me, it just looks different; overall there's nothing to it, it's just your average bugfix release—I'm getting this impression it's slower though. I'll post here if it crashes on me and I switch back.

As for Firefox. Am I the only one who think the interface is damn ugly? It feels like it's designed by a non-designer. You just have random padding here, random margin there, some things too small, other things too big. And the color pallet is pretty ugly and random. There's no symmetry or synergy in the design at all. If they wanted just a interface they should have simply emulated the OS's interface more, rather then botch something together like this. Personally I don't like fighting with the interface, no matter how good the technology behind it is.

I feel like, with the exception of Chrome, major browsers are just becoming more lame with each new version. The only good thing in recent years is that the support for standards is strong.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Dist

It's a fact that IE has many, if not all, complex software have security flaws though. You're putting your computer on constant risk by using that piece of crap connecting to the internet :x

See what I just did there?

[Kotohono]

Originally Posted by monster

See what I just did there?

You edited a fact and an opinion, good job?
And on what you made say if you're running a different browser the risks aren't the same at all IE has a had an awful track record with security flaws in addition since it has the largest share of web browser usage[about 56.8% currently] anyone attempting to exploit a security flaw for profit or causing damage would generally want to effect as many targets as easily as possible to get the most done from their work, which means it's a more likely target so having less security isn't acceptable for such a large share of the users to be put at risk.

And on the security source you used earlier, Pwn2Own 2011, you either intentional didn't mention the fact that no1 had managed exploit firefox during it this year or didn't realize that was the case.

[Lilithium]

I'm using Chrome at the moment, and it is indeed faster than what I was experiencing in Firefox. I wasn't a big add-on user, so I'm not really noticing a loss of what I can do with this browser. I'll keep using it for awhile longer. Nostalgia: I remember when Firefox was first released. It beat the shit out of what I was using at the time, that being Internet Explorer. Tabbed browsing, and all those standard features of browsers these days! Firefox was certainly great back then.

[spikexp]

I remember firefox back with 1.5, I came from IE and it was so great, the best browser I had and I still remember all the love I gave him
After came firefox 2.0, was great, A good upgrade for 1.5.
Than 3.0, ok, I still was using it I wasn't knowing anything else.
3.5... Bof
3.6 I hate it from all my might.
Than I got opera 10 beta, wow, I had difficulty at first, my first love was still in my heart, but with time I start to fall in love and now I can't let it go.
Tried chrome, but didn't love it, I don't know why.

Firefox 4.0
...
...
really, I don't know what to say about it, I just hate what it became.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Konakaga

You edited a fact and an opinion, good job?

Obviously, you missed the point. Good job.

And on what you made say if you're running a different browser the risks aren't the same at all IE has a had an awful track record with security flaws in addition since it has the largest share of web browser usage[about 56.8% currently] anyone attempting to exploit a security flaw for profit or causing damage would generally want to effect as many targets as easily as possible to get the most done from their work, which means it's a more likely target so having less security isn't acceptable for such a large share of the users to be put at risk.

Oh, I don't know about that, I've been using IE for most of my browsing history on Windows going back the past 13 years and I've had much more problems with malware by using p2p and other software than I do by simply using IE.

The point is, unless you're still using IE6 on XP today, the risk of being a victim of malware by simply using IE is not as great as to discount IE as a usable browser. Today, IE9 + Win7 is perfectly an acceptable option for browsing the web.

You'd be more likely to be a victim of social engineering than an IE exploit.

And on the security source you used earlier, Pwn2Own 2011, you either intentional didn't mention the fact that no1 had managed exploit firefox during it this year or didn't realize that was the case.

Clearly you're confused.

[Kotohono]

Originally Posted by monster

Obviously, you missed the point. Good job. Oh, I don't know about that, I've been using IE for most of my browsing history on Windows going back the past 13 years and I've had much more problems with malware by using p2p and other software than I do by simply using IE.

The point is, unless you're still using IE6 on XP today, the risk of being a victim of malware by simply using IE is not as great as to discount IE as a usable browser. Today, IE9 + Win7 is perfectly an acceptable option for browsing the web.

You'd be more likely to be a victim of social engineering than an IE exploit.

Most Social engineering still depends on some flaw the web browser unless it's a phishing attempt, and I've never gotten anything from p2p malware wise personally, though I've had some on[either my comp or someone in the family's] non-FF browsers ussually due to site being infected, or the rare infected adds on a site from google. And IE being an "acceptable" browser is better than it was in recent history, but unless microsoft actually starts handling security flaws when they occur in a more timely manner then it will still leave you at risk. And I don't see how I missed you're point before since the first part is fact unless you have some proof[regardless of time it getting hacked means it has vulnerabilities], while the second part you crossed out was their opinion.

Originally Posted by monster

Clearly you're confused.

Firefox contestant Sam Thomas withdrew as he felt his exploit wasn't stable.

Which means firefox successful "survived" during Pwn2Own 2011 while IE did not, which you didn't mention before hence my comment.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Konakaga

And I don't see how I missed you're point before since the first part is fact unless you have some proof[regardless of time it getting hacked means it has vulnerabilities], while the second part you crossed out was their opinion.

The point that you missed is that you can say the same thing about many other complex software. So that post was pointless.

Which means firefox successful "survived" during Pwn2Own 2011 while IE did not, which you didn't mention before hence my comment.

You're confused because I never even brought up Pwn2Own in the first place.

[Sugetsu]

Personally, I like Chrome the most. It is fast, minimalistic, simple, has a very clean interface and, best of all, its interface is so well put together that it takes very little space and you get to see most of the web page.

The addons I use for it are iReader, WOT, Adblock plus, and IE tab.

[demonix]

Just so everyone knows firefox 4 was released yesterday (those on XP have to update to 3.6.16 before being able to update to 4 of which the former only got released today) and even though it is starting to look like chrome it looks a bit neater (if you use adblock plus the icon isn't glued into the address bar like it is in chrome) and if you use either windows vista or 7 you have two options when looking at your bookmarks (the bookmarks button on the right or the bookmarks option when you click the funky firefox button on the top left of the window).

[Himeji]

Originally Posted by demonix

Just so everyone knows firefox 4 was released yesterday (those on XP have to update to 3.6.16 before being able to update to 4 of which the former only got released today) and even though it is starting to look like chrome it looks a bit neater (if you use adblock plus the icon isn't glued into the address bar like it is in chrome) and if you use either windows vista or 7 you have two options when looking at your bookmarks (the bookmarks button on the right or the bookmarks option when you click the funky firefox button on the top left of the window).

Firefox 4 works fine here on my Kubuntu Maverick
If you want to try it on (K)ubuntu, just add the following repository in Synaptic:
ppa:mozillateam/firefox-stable
https://launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+...firefox-stable

[Kotohono]

Originally Posted by monster

The point that you missed is that you can say the same thing about many other complex software. So that post was pointless.

Just because other software has security flaws doesn't somehow make it anymore acceptable for them to be left there like IE has done in the past .

Originally Posted by monster

You're confused because I never even brought up Pwn2Own in the first place.

Oh sorry, I thought you had, but it was someone else using it as a source.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Konakaga

Just because other software has security flaws doesn't somehow make it anymore acceptable for them to be left there like IE has done in the past .

Maybe not, but it sure clarifies the situation. I'm not trying to excuse the flaws. I'm just saying that, especially with today's IE, just because it has flaws does not make it objectively unusable. If you don't want to use IE, that's alright. But there are also other people, such as myself, who know that there are risks but who use IE just fine. It doesn't make us silly or anything.

It's like the people who don't want to use Windows because it's targeted by malware. That's fine for them, but the existance of malware targeting Windows wouldn't stop me from using Windows completely. Heck, I've been using Windows for nearly 20 years and I rarely have problems due to malware. And the last time was over seven years ago, and it was not from using IE.

[Kotohono]

Originally Posted by monster

Maybe not, but it sure clarifies the situation. I'm not trying to excuse the flaws. I'm just saying that, especially with today's IE, just because it has flaws does not make it objectively unusable. If you don't want to use IE, that's alright. But there are also other people, such as myself, who know that there are risks but who use IE just fine. It doesn't make us silly or anything.

It's like the people who don't want to use Windows because it's targeted by malware. That's fine for them, but the existance of malware targeting Windows wouldn't stop me from using Windows completely. Heck, I've been using Windows for nearly 20 years and I rarely have problems due to malware. And the last time was over seven years ago, and it was not from using IE.

The problem is most people whom use IE aren't aware of the risks, if you know them and choose it for whatever that's fine, but since it's the default most people who don't understand the risks tend stay with it. Thus the flaws becoming a large issue than if it weren't such a well known browsers.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Konakaga

The problem is most people whom use IE aren't aware of the risks, if you know them and choose it for whatever that's fine, but since it's the default most people who don't understand the risks tend stay with it. Thus the flaws becoming a large issue than if it weren't such a well known browsers.

Well, that's as much the user's faults, if not more, than it is the browser's. And it would certainly help if the users would update their software regularly and not turn off and/or ignore security features.

So my original point still stands that IE, especially IE8 and IE9 on Vista/7, is a perfectly usable browser for browsing the web today.

[chikorita157]

I tried Firefox 4 on Mac OS X... the speed is very good considering that they have finally switched over to 64-bit like Safari 5. I tried it for a few hours and as always the memory usage is very excessive. It was using 400-500 MB at one time when I have 1 window open.

I did a test right now comparing the memory usage, and it uses 38.5% more memory than Safari... probably this percentage will be more if compared to Chrome (including the individual processes). Until then, I will stick with Safari on Mac OS X until they fix this issue.
Result:

[Archon_Wing]

Firefox on Mac never seems to have worked well, for whatever reason.

[chikorita157]

Originally Posted by Archon_Wing

Firefox on Mac never seems to have worked well, for whatever reason.

This is the main reason why I never really used Firefox or any apps that are based on Mozilla XUL... they are too bloated compared to browsers that are native (Chrome, Opera and Safari.) I could of use Camino, but the rendering engine is still outdated compared to the ones in Firefox.

I guess the wait continues... until Firefox 5 fixes these issues.

[Himeji]

Originally Posted by chikorita157

I tried Firefox 4 on Mac OS X... the speed is very good considering that they have finally switched over to 64-bit like Safari 5. I tried it for a few hours and as always the memory usage is very excessive. It was using 400-500 MB at one time when I have 1 window open.

400-500MB? That's indeed excessive
Right now, I've been using Firefox 4 for some time already, and it's using 200MB.
This is the 64-bit version on Kubuntu Maverick from the Mozillateam repository I gave above.