Google chrome

[dvenardos]

So, when google chrome first came out I was like who needs another browser. :dizzy:
But I was just listening to a show on the possible development of chrome into an OS which peaked my curiosity. In looking at google chrome they have actually made some nice architectural design choices if you used tabbed browsing a lot. They have implemented each tab as a separate process. What this does is keep an errant link from bringing down your browser. Say you have several tabs open and you click on a new link and it is a slow website and your browser gets locked up waiting for the page to load. By implementing each tab as a separate process this doesn't happen you can keep active in all you other tabs until that errant website loads or you can just close the tab without having to wait for it to load.

The only bad thing so far is that I started using google bookmarks to be able to manage my bookmarks across computers and it doesn't integrate google bookmarks. :crazy:

and so far only for windows, so you can only load on your windows computers.

[geekinthehood]

My only problems with it are:

1. No plug-ins yet, so no FlashBlock, NoScript, etc.
2. Flash from every tab runs as one process
3. Doesn't run on Windows 2000 (One of my work computers and one of my home computers is still on Win2K)

Otherwise, yeah, nice job. Unfortunately those issues, especially the first two, keep me from using it on any computer.

[quadman]

My only problems with it are:

1. No plug-ins yet, so no FlashBlock, NoScript, etc.
2. Flash from every tab runs as one process
3. Doesn't run on Windows 2000 (One of my work computers and one of my home computers is still on Win2K)

Otherwise, yeah, nice job. Unfortunately those issues, especially the first two, keep me from using it on any computer.

Just curious.... what do the first two things on your list do? And how is not having them a bad thing? I'm about to dump AOL entirely (yeah, slowly coming out of the dark ages) and since I always just used AOL's integrated IE, I never worried about browser plug ins or flash stuff.

[spl_nut]

I'm happy with Mozilla :yes:

[quadman]

I'm happy with Mozilla :yes:

Mozilla is Firefox correct? In what way is it different/better than IE?

[django1]

From Wikipedia
"Because Firefox has fewer and less severe publicly known unpatched security vulnerabilities than IE "..."Firefox 3 uses less memory than Internet Explorer, Opera, Safari, and Firefox 2 in tests performed by Mozilla, CyberNet, and The Browser World."...
"Latest Firefox features[6] include tabbed browsing, spell checking, incremental find, live bookmarking, a download manager, private browsing, location-aware browsing (aka "geolocation") based exclusively on a Google service[7] and an integrated search system that uses Google by default in most localizations. Functions can be added through add-ons, created by third-party developers,[8] of which there is a wide selection, a feature that has attracted many of Firefox's users."...
"Mozilla Firefox is a free and open source web browser"

I like it...

[Jed M]

I switched from Mozilla to Chrome a couple months ago and really like the minimalist feel of Chrome. There are a few things I miss about Firefox, but so far have no desire to switch back.

[geekinthehood]

Just curious.... what do the first two things on your list do? And how is not having them a bad thing? I'm about to dump AOL entirely (yeah, slowly coming out of the dark ages) and since I always just used AOL's integrated IE, I never worried about browser plug ins or flash stuff.

It might be more of a bad thing for me than most people because I tend to have many windows and possibly over 100 tabs open at once.

Having al Flash run as one process means that if you have a resource hogging flash program, you won't know which tab it's associated with, so having each tab as a separate process won't help you there.

FireFox accepts add-ons (I mistakenly called them "plug-ins"), which are essentially extentions that change the way it acts. There are hundreds of these add-ons, and some of them are very useful. One of them is FlashBlock. It prevents any flash application from loading up unless I click on the area where the flash was going to be. If it's a site that needs it, I can just approve the site, but some of the most annoying flash are ads. I never see them so they don't annoy me or use CPU time.

NoScript blocks any script from running unless you approve the site it's from. Some sites don't work at all unless you approve them, but that's fine - it's mainly the scripts from other sites - ads, counters, etc that I'm trying to prevent. If a script isn't running, it can't hog CPU time.

Most people would probably find NoScript annoying, butt I think that FlashBlock is very useful.

[geekinthehood]

When it comes down to it, browsers are a matter of personal preference - use what's right for you. For me, I need FlashBlock. If you only have a few pages open at once, it might not matter.

In your search, don't forget Opera. (That's what I'm using right now.) No FlashBlock, but a great email client, and sometimes it's just convenient to use the browser that's already open.

[dweekie]

I love Opera. The user interface fits my browsing style perfectly. Even though it's less known, it still seems like the most copied browser over the years.