Chrome or Firefox & Why (Windows 8)

P5-133XL

Xmas '97
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,173
Location
Salem, Or
Because I like Chrome: It's simple and clean. My opinion is that you should try both and pick whichever you like to use most.
 

Clocker

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
3,552
Location
USA
I do have both... They both seem OK. Wondering what I can learn from the experts and what the pros and cons of each are.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
I use Firefox because it was the first one I used after IE and haven't had a reason to switch. Because I am familiar with it I recommend it to my friends and clients just because it is easier for me to support.
 

timwhit

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
5,278
Location
Chicago, IL
I used Firefox for a long time. There were some extensions that just weren't available for Chrome.

I switched over to Chrome about a year ago mainly because Chrome feels a lot faster. The application I was developing at the time with a very intensive JavaScript front-end performed much better in Chrome than in FF. Chrome's developer tools are very good, not that Firebug is bad. It's also nice to have Chrome sync all my bookmarks, extensions and settings as soon as I sign in to Google.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,363
Location
USA
I'm still a Firefox user. I occasionally use Chrome for verifying certain things with web pages but I'm mainly on Firefox. I'm just more familiar with the UI and I like the plugin structure and options better. It was a while before Chrome offered decent plugins (mainly ad block plus) so I didn't want to wait for them to catch up and I never grew attached.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
20,362
Location
I am omnipresent
Website
s-laker.org
Here's how I break it down for my students:

Firefox
+ Rich ability to customize, particularly for things outside what mainstream sites want you to be able to do (e.g. Ad blocking on mobile, Streaming video downloading)
+ Easier to secure because of Noscript/Ghostery
+ Uses fewer resources for intensive browsing (more than maybe four tabs)
+ Doesn't report every goddamned thing you do back to Google or demand you make a Google account for full functionality
- Needs plugin version of Flash, PITA to keep updated
- Occasionally unsupported by moron web sites

Chrome
+ Less customization means more consistency
+ Starts more quickly, slightly more resource friendly on old-ass computers as long as number of tabs is under two or three
+ Ridiculous integration into Google's ecosystem
+ Self updating including major internet helpers like PDF and Flash
- Ridiculous integration into Google's ecosystem
- Presently seems an easier target for malware
- Occasionally unsupported by moron web sites

IE8
+ IE is STILL the thing that's most likely to work in places. Sob.
- Pretty much zero support for ad blocking or customization, unless you love toolbars and malware
- Fuck IE8 or less in particular

IE9+
+ Finally has Adblock+ equivalent functionality
- It's a pain in the ass to set up unless you know how
- It's like herpes and you can't make it go away
- Not as bad as things before IE9


Opera
+ Has a lot of weird extra stuff for a web browser, like direct torrent support
- Adblocking support sucks mightily
- Yet another webkit derivative with no reason to exist

Safari
- Everything bad about Chrome except the Google reporting part
- The Windows version sucks like the black hole cluster at the center of the milky way
- Yes, it's like that on purpose
+ It's good for a hearty laugh
 

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,172
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
I'm a Firefox user at home simply because of NoScript, AdBlock Plus, Ghostery and Lightbeam (aka Collusion). I've also got YouTube Downloader, FireBug and SQLite Manager for their various functions, but these are really used...

Work has mandated Chromium (on Linux)...
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,432
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Chrome: the airline chicken of browsers - utterly bland, completely lacking in any noticable virtue
Firefox: fast becoming another pointless Chrome clone.
Opera: by far the best browser ever made until a few short months ago, now a very poor quality clone of Chrome
Seamonkey: the last island of sanity in a mad, mad world. But, like Firefox, not robust enough to stand up to genuine heavy-duty use with many, many tabs and windows.
 

mubs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
4,908
Location
Somewhere in time.
I use both Firefox and Chrome equally. Started using Chrome because Yahoo mail was terribly slow in Firefox and used to hang frequently. So Chrome is used for email.

Firefox is used for SF and another forum; these are the only two sites that have permanent cookies. All other cookies are deleted upon program close in Firefox. ALL cookies are deleted in Chrome upon close. FF is also used for net banking and CC transactions on the net.

Both are used when I need to refer to two different sites; I alt-tab between FF & Chrome.

IE is used for a single site that I visit occasionally that appears to be coded to work properly only for it.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,363
Location
USA
From the viewpoint of storageforum's user-base, here is a breakdown of browsers used to visit this website.

browser_wars.png
 
Last edited:

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
20,362
Location
I am omnipresent
Website
s-laker.org
Firefox: fast becoming another pointless Chrome clone.
Just to argue this a bit: Firefox has a different layout and javascript engine than Chrome/Safari/Opera, so one thing it absolutely is NOT is a Chrome clone. I know you've never liked or appreciated the power of Firefox's addons, but for the application that we probably all spend the single most time using, it's well worth the effort to customize to our needs. Firefox is also incredibly consistent across all platforms; things that the desktop version can do generally work the same way across all supported platforms, including Android (there's no Firefox for iOS because Apple is dildos).
Firefox has user environment sync that doesn't require a Google account and also has its own cross-site authentication platform (Mozilla Personas), both of which are quite handy.
Finally, Firefox is kind of the one player in web "stuff" that seems to argue in favor of open tech standards.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,363
Location
USA
Just to argue this a bit: Firefox has a different layout and javascript engine than Chrome/Safari/Opera, so one thing it absolutely is NOT is a Chrome clone. I know you've never liked or appreciated the power of Firefox's addons, but for the application that we probably all spend the single most time using, it's well worth the effort to customize to our needs. Firefox is also incredibly consistent across all platforms; things that the desktop version can do generally work the same way across all supported platforms, including Android (there's no Firefox for iOS because Apple is dildos).
Firefox has user environment sync that doesn't require a Google account and also has its own cross-site authentication platform (Mozilla Personas), both of which are quite handy.
Finally, Firefox is kind of the one player in web "stuff" that seems to argue in favor of open tech standards.
The cross-platform consistency of Firefox is also something I've appreciated. I agree with Apple being a bunch of dildos with their tactics in forcing only one type of web browser. It is nice to see Firefox on Android work/function almost the same as on my desktop.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,363
Location
USA
Are you able to get the same sort of report showing OSes used to visit? (Assuming the user agent the browser is using hasn't been faked).
Sure do. I also added screen resolution.

OS:
os_wars.png

Screen resolution:
screen_wars.png
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
The Linux and Apple bars are much larger than I would have anticipated. And there are no appreciable stats for resolutions above 1920x1600? The only screens I use are 2560x1600 and 2560x1440.
 

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,172
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
Sure do. I also added screen resolution.

OS:
View attachment 706

Screen resolution:
View attachment 707
Very surprised not to see Solaris on the list of OSes? (Considering that's were I access SF from most). But there are 14 visits not listed, so guess it's in the bottom of the list...

Very interesting that Linux is ahead of Mac as well!

@Dave, The resolutions is not a complete list, but the top 10. I would expect that most are on 1920x1080, and go downward from there. (The Steam Hardware survey shows similar trends).

Considering I run 3360x1050 (dual 1680x1050), I'm not surprised that's not on the list.
 

P5-133XL

Xmas '97
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,173
Location
Salem, Or
Windows needs to be broken down further to versions. I was really surprised to see Chrome OS there at all.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,363
Location
USA
Very surprised not to see Solaris on the list of OSes? (Considering that's were I access SF from most). But there are 14 visits not listed, so guess it's in the bottom of the list...

Very interesting that Linux is ahead of Mac as well!

@Dave, The resolutions is not a complete list, but the top 10. I would expect that most are on 1920x1080, and go downward from there. (The Steam Hardware survey shows similar trends).

Considering I run 3360x1050 (dual 1680x1050), I'm not surprised that's not on the list.
There are some in the full spreadsheet I just linked to. It has the OS labeled as SUN OS. That might be from your machine(s). :)
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
^ they are all passworded!

Edit: but don't worry about fixing it just for me; I can guess most of the data and fake it for the rest. (Just ... er ... like someone I know.)
They are working fine for me. Perhaps it is your inferior browser? ;)
 

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,172
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
Thanks for that!
+1.

Very interesting to see.

And yes, The SunOS would be me. Interesting to the count is only 4? (I visit SF daily). Mind you, that could be an artifact of the tracking system being used is blocked/subverted by my Ghostery/NoScript setup... (Or do these stats come directly from the Apache server logs)?
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,363
Location
USA
^ they are all passworded!

Edit: but don't worry about fixing it just for me; I can guess most of the data and fake it for the rest. (Just ... er ... like someone I know.)
There is no password set. There isn't any other option. I have them all set to "Anyone who has the link can access. No sign-in required."
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,363
Location
USA
+1.

Very interesting to see.

And yes, The SunOS would be me. Interesting to the count is only 4? (I visit SF daily). Mind you, that could be an artifact of the tracking system being used is blocked/subverted by my Ghostery/NoScript setup... (Or do these stats come directly from the Apache server logs)?
This data comes from Google Analytics. If you are using Ghostery, it is likely blocking the Javascript used for tracking the data.
 

Tea

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,732
Location
27a No Fixed Address, Oz.
Website
www.redhill.net.au
They are working fine for me. Perhaps it is your inferior browser? ;)
Perhaps you are right, David. Chrome is inferior. But Tannin hogs Opera and Seamonkey so I have to make do with the inferior products. Sigh.



There is no password set. There isn't any other option. I have them all set to "Anyone who has the link can access. No sign-in required."
Nope: definitely wants a password. The screenshot above is what I get when I click on any of the links.
 

Tea

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,732
Location
27a No Fixed Address, Oz.
Website
www.redhill.net.au
It is the browser! If I copy and paste the link into Firefox, it gives me a spreadsheet.

Seamonkey works. IE works. Firefox works.

Opera fails. Chrome fails.

The answer seems to be that:

(1): if you have don't have a Google account (so far as Firefox, Seamonkey and IE are concerned, I don't have a Google account 'coz I've never logged into Google with any of those browsers), it works fine.

(2) If you do have a Google account and you are logged in, it works fine. (Assumption, not actually tested.)

(3) If you do have a Google account and you are not logged in, it fails. (See screenshot.)

Clearly a bug. Can anyone be bothered filing a bug report? I'm more interested, just at this moment, in lunch.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
I can see them all just fine in both Chrome and old Opera (12.15). So it's not a browser issue in isolation.

Perhaps the monkey has lost the knack?
 

Bozo

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 12, 2002
Messages
4,394
Location
Twilight Zone
As this is a computer enthusiast or geek site, I expected more Linux or Unix type OS's.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,363
Location
USA
As this is a computer enthusiast or geek site, I expected more Linux or Unix type OS's.
I use Linux quite a bit at work but for home/personal stuff the majority of my computer systems are all Windows (except for one iOS and one Android device). I use a few Linux-based VMs for various small servers at home but I never browse the web with them. In the small amount of time I've used Linux as a desktop and browsing the web, I found it less pleasant when compared to windows. I found Firefox to be slower and the fonts looked crappy. Granted that might be Ubuntu or SLES causing the issue but I never spent enough time digging into it to make it better.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
20,362
Location
I am omnipresent
Website
s-laker.org
I don't have any specific complaints about browsing under Linux, but the computers I use the most from day to day are Windows machines. The Linux machines sort of sit quietly and just behave themselves. Most of the time if I'm using one it's through a shell prompt anyway.
 

timwhit

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
5,278
Location
Chicago, IL
Both of my computers at home are Linux and my work computer is Linux. A good portion of the Linux visits are probably me.
 

sedrosken

Allergic to Sunlight
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
1,125
Location
The Sticks
For Windows I'd use nothing less than Chrome. Or IE 10, on machines that can really handle it. On Linux however, I see no difference in speed and reliability between the two. Then it's really a matter of preference.

But IE 10 seems fairly quick, and it is fully Acid test compliant (make of that what you will). I like Chrome's syncing bookmarks, addons, and settings though, but I don't like that it nags you to sign in if you aren't already.

Firefox comes preinstalled on most Linux distros, and it's a major PITA to get Chrome working correctly (you have to reinstall flash player, of all things). Seriously though, Flash and Java are pretty much standard web browsing components, why doesn't every modern web browser bundle them by default? I mean, yeah, include an option to uninstall the extensions if the end-user so desires, but bundling them would be a nice touch.
 

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,172
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
Firefox comes preinstalled on most Linux distros, and it's a major PITA to get Chrome working correctly (you have to reinstall flash player, of all things).
It's because the Flash installer (or package manger you're using) only installs the plugin for found installations of supported web browsers... eg.
1. Install Firefox...
2. Install Adobe Flash. The installer/package manager only sees Firefox installed so only installs the flash plugin for FF.
3. Install Chrome.
4. ???
5. Profit?
Seriously though, Flash and Java are pretty much standard web browsing components, why doesn't every modern web browser bundle them by default? I mean, yeah, include an option to uninstall the extensions if the end-user so desires, but bundling them would be a nice touch.
Software Licenses. Adobe IIRC doesn't allow bundling in that manner... And I would have to question Java as a plugin for a web browser these days for the general populace. (Enterprise needs Java plugins due to the many devices that use Java Applets for C3). I'm not aware of any day to day item for a general home user that would require Java in the browser. (Except for those that deal with Banks that use Applets to interface with the banks systems).

Anyway, Oracle doesn't allow anyone to deliver their JVM other than themselves. (Hence why most Linux distro's give you OpenJDK and not the Oracle JDK when you install Java from their repository). If you want the Oracle JVM, you need to install it yourself.

Also from a security standpoint, the less software exposed in such a hostile environment as the WWW, the less plugins you are running by default the better... How many home users have been hit hard due to certain configurations being extremely lacking security wise, simply to make the user experience more dumb, oh, sorry I meant user friendly? (And Yes, Flash, Acrobat and Java have all been major influences in this matter).

PS. C3 = Command, Control and Communications.

Also out of interest, you mentioned Chrome over IE on Windows? Does Chrome take advantage of the sandbox and lowering of user privileges that IE does when running on Windows to help mitigate against malware?
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,432
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
What Chewy said. Well, most of it.

On Windows, there are two different identical Flash players. (Yes, yes, I said "different identical" which sounds like an oxymoron. In this case it isn't.) One Flash player is for Internet Explorer, the other one is for Opera, Firefox, and pretty much everything else. I'd have expected Chrome to use the "everything else" Flash player. Apparently it doesn't - I have no idea why that would be.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
20,362
Location
I am omnipresent
Website
s-laker.org
I'd have expected Chrome to use the "everything else" Flash player. Apparently it doesn't - I have no idea why that would be.
Chrome on Windows is bundled with its own Flash libraries that get updated at the same time the browser does. It's a special case. Since Chrome updates are always background, behind the scenes things, Google can push out an update that just updates its Flash library.

Chrome's installer and auto-updater are also EXTREMELY easy to break, which is something I've seen malware doing lately.
 
Top