Author Topic: 2013 Version: Browser Wars (Read 74358 times)

KynloStephen66515 · « **on:** January 28, 2013, 01:36 AM »

What browser do you use, and why don't you use the others?

I use Opera (Still), mainly because IE sucks heavily, Firefox and I don't get on very well (Although, it really isn't all that bad of a browser), Chrome just plain fails constantly and isn't worth the time, nor energy. I don't really care about any of the other browsers out there, but, I HAVE tried the greater majority of them (Windows) and also SOME Linux (Although, not very many there)

HOW ABOUT YOU?!

relipse · « **Reply #1 on:** January 28, 2013, 01:58 AM »

chrome rocks!

Jibz · « **Reply #2 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:44 AM »

I am using Chrome mostly, and I think coupled with WOT and some kind of adblocker it offers a good compromise right now.

I installed it as a second browser besides firefox a year or two ago, with the plan to keep my google account logged in on Chrome and only use it to check gmail and such. Since then I have shifted to mainly using Chrome, primarily because it has just worked for me -- no annoying update procedures that sometimes do not work from non-admin accounts, no fighting with noscript to get sites to work, no updating flash player every other week.

What dawned on me was that I don't really browse the more shady parts of the internet, and the cost of google knowing that I visit DonationCoder and a couple of coding resources -- to me -- was greatly outweighed by not having to waste time fighting with a piece of software that is so rudimentary to our online lives now, that it has to just work.

Ampa · « **Reply #3 on:** January 28, 2013, 03:14 AM »

I too have stuck with Opera, though the most recent versions (certainly everything 12 and the tail end of 11) have had me questioning my browser choice.

My chief frustration is some sort of compatibility problem between Opera and my email host (Dreamhost) where a proportion of my mail simply doesn't arrive! I have a work around - all messages show up if I manually "Resynchronise all messages" but it is a real hassle!

Beyond that I have found 12 to be more unstable than previous versions, web compatibility seems to be getting worse, and it frustrates me that newer features of CSS3 and HTML5 are being added significantly slower than in other browsers.

Why don't I change to something else?

Despite the above issue - I still really love having my email accounts in one place, in a proper desktop app, inside my browser.

And every time I try Chrome or FF I spend a day or more installing addons to incorporate basic out of the box Opera like behaviour.

Renegade · « **Reply #4 on:** January 28, 2013, 05:01 AM »

I use Opera, Chrome, IE, and Firefox, in that order.

Opera is my main browser.

IE I use for some specific things.

Chrome I used because Google has decided to make things break in Opera.

Firefox I use for when I want to check a site that I've not signed into or for when I have cookies in other browsers that muck up what I want to do and I don't feel like deleting individual cookies.

On my Mac, I use Firefox as my main browser.

They all have strengths and weaknesses. It all just depends on what you want to get done.

dr_andus · « **Reply #5 on:** January 28, 2013, 06:03 AM »

I went from Firefox > Waterfox > Pale Moon > Chrome, mostly against my will. Firefox has been getting too slow on my Win7, 64-bit system. Waterfox worked fine for a while (except during checkout process while online shopping), but at one point stopped working with Google services (Calendar, Drive etc.). Switched to Pale Moon, which was fine (though same issues with online shopping as Waterfox). But I stopped using it because it doesn't display the opened window preview in its pinned place in my taskbar.

During switching between these I set up Chrome as a temporary measure but now I've ended up using it because it seems to be the fastest. But I don't like the font rendering. Everything (e.g. fonts) seems to be less sharp (greyer) than with Firefox somehow. But various Google services work more smoothly for obvious reasons. I do feel that I've fallen into some kind of trap set by Google though but the other options just failed me when I needed them.

Renegade · « **Reply #6 on:** January 28, 2013, 06:29 AM »

But I don't like the font rendering. Everything (e.g. fonts) seems to be less sharp (greyer) than with Firefox somehow.
-dr_andus (January 28, 2013, 06:03 AM)

Interesting. I had the same page open in Chrome, Firefox, and Opera, and the Chrome version text was noticeably worse - as in OBVIOUSLY!!!!!!! worse.

Here's a PSD for comparison:

Opera-Chrome-Firefox-type-comparisons.zip (194.63 kB - downloaded 310 times.)

I put a border around the text where in Chrome it is quite blurry, but the same text in Opera and Firefox is very clear.

I'd never noticed that before. Good observation there!

Giampy · « **Reply #7 on:** January 28, 2013, 08:26 AM »

They all have strengths and weaknesses
-Renegade (January 28, 2013, 05:01 AM)

I don't understand mankind. If every browser has strengths and weaknesses, and if those features are worldwide known, why nobody gathers the best of every browser and creates an almost perfect one????????

(of course this applies to every product, not only browsers)

Renegade · « **Reply #8 on:** January 28, 2013, 08:33 AM »

They all have strengths and weaknesses
-Renegade (January 28, 2013, 05:01 AM)

I don't understand mankind. If every browser has strengths and weaknesses, and if those features are worldwide known, why nobody gathers the best of every browser and creates a perfect one????????

(of course this applies to every product, not only browsers)
-Giampy (January 28, 2013, 08:26 AM)

It's much harder than it sounds. They're all trying, but they succeed in some areas, and do poorly in others. It's a matter of resource allocation.

What I see as a major problem is the business guys pushing to have their agenda. That does jack all for the technology, but creates short term profits. Anyone that has worked in the industry has seen this -- the MBAs are the ones that just make the world a horrible place.

Josh · « **Reply #9 on:** January 28, 2013, 08:38 AM »

Chrome! Plain and simple.

I would not use any other browser. It is fast, has the extensions I need to remain productive, and works on any page I throw at it. In fact, I can't remember ever seeing chrome crash since I started using it.

Renegade · « **Reply #10 on:** January 28, 2013, 08:51 AM »

Chrome! Plain and simple.

I would not use any other browser. It is fast, has the extensions I need to remain productive, and works on any page I throw at it. In fact, I can't remember ever seeing chrome crash since I started using it.
-Josh (January 28, 2013, 08:38 AM)

You are very fortunate. I've seen Chrome crash more times than I care to count. Mind you, those were likely (guessing here) entirely due to the Adobe Flash plugin.

Still, a plugin *shouldn't* crash a browser. Error? Sure. Crash? no.

I've had better luck with Opera being graceful with crashes.

But, again, it's all about what you like. Chocolate, vanilla, strawberry - they all have their charms.

Paul Keith · « **Reply #11 on:** January 28, 2013, 09:21 AM »

Flash/Shockwave crash a common story for Linux on all browsers.

Btw I disagree.

Vanilla and Strawberry can't be used for mud facials like chocolate - Opera, is the most gracious, has an extension for speed dial reminders, has a long click on link to create background tabs, has stacks

Chocolate and Strawberry tend to ruin Coffee unlike Vanilla - Firefox overall has the best cross-platform stability and integration. It has unique add-ons like Scrapbook Plus. It has the most advanced session manager. With less than 50 tabs, Firefox is still better than both Chrome and Opera

Strawberry may not be as unique as Vanilla or as robust as Chocolate but it mixes well with both - Chrome's link to google account means it has the most guaranteed "you already have this account" for online sync, it also has some unique feed readers like FeedSquare and News Factory that is not just your regular RSS Reader Prettifier. It has unique to-do lists like My Time Organizer and Do it Later Alligator. It may crash pages but most session managers for it also treat session links like checkboxes. Coincidentally it also has context for extension icon management and it has the most unique and colorful library synching with the look of tablets.

If you're a dedicated web reader, it really has been "locked in to this feature or no alternative" for a while with the exception of IE and that's only because of Maxthon. If Flock is not dead, it would have been offering users another unique sidebar taste. (But god I hate how it slows down and the orange icons).

2013 Browsers Wars are the Browser PIM wars i.e. the Extension and Exclusive Feature Wars

If you use Zotero, you would be highly leaning towards Firefox.
If you play HTML5 games, the apps of Chrome is much more friendly.
If you like native smart drag, Maxthon.
If you like fit width to screen, you go Opera

...and that's just some of the examples of recommended extensions for recommended programs. It's the coders nowadays that have the simpler choice. Regular users have to use, experience and browse all the new extensions all the time as blogs have gone totally commercial on the list of top extensions to install on browsers thread while user reviewers have been extremely harsh on one end while extension developers have gone through a dry spell of resurrecting old extensions. Anything that's banned from Google Chrome's extension list probably won't be blogged or praised. Anything that has barely any reviews on Firefox Add-ons probably won't have much people pointing out the existence of that extension. Anything that's on Opera will be mostly ignored. Maxthon won't even make a dent.

Curt · « **Reply #12 on:** January 28, 2013, 10:15 AM »

Here's a PSD for comparison:
(see attachment in previous post)
-Renegade (January 28, 2013, 06:29 AM)

-to make full sense, I guess I must have the same fonts installed?

---------------------------

I use Waterfox (64-bit version of Firefox) because of the many add-ons; "have it my way".

paulobrabo · « **Reply #13 on:** January 28, 2013, 11:31 AM »

Long story short?

IE > Netscape Navigator > Opera > Firefox > Firefox > Firefox (that's many faithful, star-eyed years of Firefox) > Chrome > Firefox

I was lured by how blazing fast Chrome used to be, and was converted when it got many of the extensions I used on Firefox. But then Chrome started to *feel* slower and slower, and Firefox started to *feel* leaner and leaner wherever I tried them (desktop PC, notebook, netbook).

Firefox, my darling, Chrome didn't mean nothing to me. At all. Please take me back.

mrHappy · « **Reply #14 on:** January 28, 2013, 11:52 AM »

Here's a PSD for comparison:
(see attachment in previous post)
-Renegade (January 28, 2013, 06:29 AM)

-to make full sense, I guess I must have the same fonts installed?
(see attachment in previous post)
---------------------------

I use Waterfox (64-bit version of Firefox) because of the many add-ons; "have it my way".

-Curt (January 28, 2013, 10:15 AM)

no, the fonts you're missing are only for his numbers, not for the "important" part of the psd

Paul Keith · « **Reply #15 on:** January 28, 2013, 11:58 AM »

You don't really judge Chrome's speed nowadays by how fast Chrome is but by how fast SRWare Iron Portable Version is. At least on Windows system.

https://www.srware.n...re_iron_download.php

Iron is still faster than Chrome and Firefox.

40hz · « **Reply #16 on:** January 28, 2013, 01:19 PM »

No war where I am. Just a bunch of seedy characters standing around under a streetlight swapping dirty looks and waiting to see which I pick to use this time.

2013 Version: Browser Wars

I swap between all the majors (FF,OP,CH.IE) depending on what I'm doing. But I don't think any of them are perfect. And none of them do everything I want them to do - or work they way I think a browser should.

About the best I can say is that I'm glad I didn't have to pay for any of them. Which is probably at the root of what the problem is with browsers and browser development in general: Who's paying for it?

I would gladly pay for a browser if somebody did a really good one that wasn't quietly gearing up to make money by trying to become my next desktop.

Paul Keith · « **Reply #17 on:** January 28, 2013, 01:22 PM »

About the best I can say is that I'm glad I didn't have to pay for any of them. Which is probably at the root of what the problem is with browsers and browser development in general: Who's paying for it?

I would gladly pay for a browser if somebody did a really good one that wasn't quietly gearing up to make money by trying to become my next desktop.
-40hz

You can't say Opera did not try but you weren't paying enough for either it's ad-free version and Opera Mini.

40hz · « **Reply #18 on:** January 28, 2013, 01:31 PM »

About the best I can say is that I'm glad I didn't have to pay for any of them. Which is probably at the root of what the problem is with browsers and browser development in general: Who's paying for it?

I would gladly pay for a browser if somebody did a really good one that wasn't quietly gearing up to make money by trying to become my next desktop.
-40hz

You can't say Opera did not try but you weren't paying enough for either it's ad-free version and Opera Mini.
-Paul Keith (January 28, 2013, 01:22 PM)

Oh I agree. And I did pay for Opera (for a while) when it first came out. The developers were responsive and doing their best for their customers. But Microsoft kept doing an end run around them (as did Netscape to a certain extent) by constantly attempting to preempt web standardization by doing their own implementations. Once that started it was purely a numbers game with the biggest gorilla(s) winning out because websites want to be seen. And if that means the webmasters have to play nice with the musclebound bullies to do so - so much for ethics or standards.

Sad state of affairs, but there ya have it. $:-\$

Paul Keith · « **Reply #19 on:** January 28, 2013, 01:56 PM »

Agreed.

Still you have to admit, there are people who seem to really hate Opera.

After IE, Opera became the whipping child of Firefox. After Firefox, Opera became the whipping child of Google with their constant breaking of Opera's sites regardless how many times they try to fix it. After Google, Opera just happened to not catch fire in the tablet market. (though I have no clue which is the most used browser on those end).

40hz · « **Reply #20 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:15 PM »

Still you have to admit, there are people who seem to really hate Opera.
-Paul Keith (January 28, 2013, 01:56 PM)

Hate's a bit strong an emotion to waste on a piece of software IMHO.

But dislike or frustration aren't.

Still, for forum browsing and posting it works better than most other things I've tried. It's fast and light on it's feet without being as feature-challenged (by design) and platform restricted (Win 32-bit only by dev's decision) that something like K-Meleon can be.

Actually, my biggest "gimme" is that a browser be native 64-bit and multiplatform. But that's me - and most people wouldn't put those two criteria up very high on their wish list. Well...maybe the 64-bithood might; but probably not the multiplatform part.

Paul Keith · « **Reply #21 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:21 PM »

Oh wow, I totally forgot about K-meleon.

To be fair to K-meleon, they don't really have the staff to go head to head with something as innovative as Opera and at least by not being more cross-platform they are more stable than Midori. (At least based on the comments I hear for it.)

Plus I don't know if it's still the same today but I recall K-meleon having one of the fastest loading (surpassing Chrome and Opera) for plain webpages back in the day. Could be false memory but I really wanted that gold gecko to have matured. Unfortunately it does not seem to have taken some of the mature features of other mainstream browsers.

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #22 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:50 PM »

Hate's a bit strong an emotion to waste on a piece of software IMHO.
-40hz (January 28, 2013, 02:15 PM)

(Darth Vader)
"Feel the Hate of Software flowing within you! Soon your path to the dark side will be complete!"

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #23 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:54 PM »

Well I'm been hovering around FF for my entire modern comp career (since about 2007), though I keep poking at Pale Moon here and there. Then random thing cloud the Pale Moon (uh...)

The latest bug is that Miles' little script BBSS doesn't currently play nice with Pale Moon for me, and requires generic FF.

4wd · « **Reply #24 on:** January 28, 2013, 08:11 PM »

Firefox or one of its 32/64bit derivatives.

Never really got into Opera, too much like the old Netscape Navigator, tries to do everything instead of doing one thing really, really well, (yes, I know I can just not use the parts I don't want to but then...why have them there in the first place?).

Chrome/Dragon/SW Iron is too crippled. I have to sign into a web service just to get basic security for the browser? Give me a break.
Not to mention the interface basically can't be customised to my needs/wants. I use Dragon Portable occasionally when I just want to quickly look at a site but that's about it.

IE....yes well....everything that applies to Chrome based browsers plus a fair bit more but I do use it occasionally for those sites even more retarded than it, (usually because they can't track me enough in Firefox).

Interesting. I had the same page open in Chrome, Firefox, and Opera, and the Chrome version text was noticeably worse - as in OBVIOUSLY!!!!!!! worse.
-Renegade (January 28, 2013, 06:29 AM)

Using Pale Moon and Dragon for comparison, the only difference I can see is that Dragon has less contrast otherwise, on my screen, apart from a 1 pixel difference in spacing that creeps in they are exactly the same.

Pale Moon on top:

2013 Version: Browser Wars