- Dec 11, 1999
- 16,698
- 4,660
- 75
Which is why I keep trying SrWare Iron. But I keep going back to Firefox for the plugins. (And the menus - where are the menus?!
)Here's my list of demands before I'll prefer Iron over Firefox:
Dealbreaker plugins:
- Adblock
- CookieSafe (something to block cookies for most sites)
- Firebug (a Javascript development environment)
- Greasemonkey (this site wouldn't be the same without it!)
- NoScript (something to block scripts for most sites)
- Sage-Too (an RSS feed reader in a sidebar)
Preferred plugins:
- Linkification (turns things that look like links into links, on all sites)
- Platypus (makes Greasemonkey scripts visually)
- SkipScreen
- Stylish (a user styles manager)
- Tab Kit (tab grouping, multiple rows, manipulation help)
- Torbutton
- Undo closed tabs
Oh, and I can't seem to import my bookmarks from Firefox either.
secretanchitman
Diamond Member
- Apr 11, 2001
- 9,352
- 23
- 91
mb
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2004
- 10,233
- 2
- 71
No, they are not compatible. And most extensions made for Chrome do not even work that well.
videogames101
Diamond Member
- Aug 24, 2005
- 6,783
- 27
- 91
Babbles
Diamond Member
- Jan 4, 2001
- 8,253
- 14
- 81
Opera is, in my opinion, hands down the best browser. Firefox gets too bloated and slow which in many cases is caused by the use of extensions. It is somewhat interesting in that if Opera was used in place of Firefox much, if not all or possibly even more, functionality will remain without "bloating" up Firefox.
I get a kick out of people wanting their Firefox extensions when so many of those functions have been standard in Opera for a long time before they became extensions for Firefox.
Now with all of that being said, I do tend to use Chrome on my netbook in that due to the smaller screen real estate on my netbook I think Chrome offers the maximum screen utility of all browsers without having to constantly being in full screen mode. That and the university I am at uses Google apps for your domain and I thought that using Chrome on my school netbook would be beneficial.
I get a kick out of people wanting their Firefox extensions when so many of those functions have been standard in Opera for a long time before they became extensions for Firefox.
Now with all of that being said, I do tend to use Chrome on my netbook in that due to the smaller screen real estate on my netbook I think Chrome offers the maximum screen utility of all browsers without having to constantly being in full screen mode. That and the university I am at uses Google apps for your domain and I thought that using Chrome on my school netbook would be beneficial.
mb
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2004
- 10,233
- 2
- 71
I don't understand what you all mean by firefox being slow or bloated.
I use it at work (2.4Ghz P4, 512MB ram, 5400rpm 40gb hdd) and home (I7 920, 6GB, raid0 drives) and it is fast on both machines. I've used Opera and Chrome and they don't feel any faster and they severely lack the features you can add to FF.
I use it at work (2.4Ghz P4, 512MB ram, 5400rpm 40gb hdd) and home (I7 920, 6GB, raid0 drives) and it is fast on both machines. I've used Opera and Chrome and they don't feel any faster and they severely lack the features you can add to FF.
SunSamurai
Diamond Member
- Jan 16, 2005
- 3,914
- 0
- 0
Can someone tell me if Chrome has a plugin/addon service going for it yet?
Its the only reason im still with FF.
FF is slowly becoming a bloated piece of shit.
Its the only reason im still with FF.
FF is slowly becoming a bloated piece of shit.
SunSamurai
Diamond Member
- Jan 16, 2005
- 3,914
- 0
- 0
mb
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2004
- 10,233
- 2
- 71
LOL! What a terribly weak argument! How much RAM do you have? 256MB?? Cry me a river, just because it uses memory doesn't mean it's slow or bloated. Even budget machines are coming with 2+GB installed now.
Just because FF may use more memory doesn't make it slower. 150 is nothing. If it was using 500+ then it might be a prob, but not 150.
sourceninja
Diamond Member
- Mar 8, 2005
- 8,805
- 65
- 91
AstroManLuca
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2004
- 15,628
- 5
- 81
Firefox because of Adblock. Do not tell me that Chrome has Adblock because it does not. It has bad imitations of Adblock that don't work properly and are impossible to install without a master's degree in CS.
sourceninja
Diamond Member
- Mar 8, 2005
- 8,805
- 65
- 91
A master's degree in CS must be easy to come by then.
https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/chmimgmjdabgiilljdjfbonifbhiglao
https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/cfhdojbkjhnklbpkdaibdccddilifddb
https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/fkkedmmdcjakdoeffbpakigjpjgkkfjj
https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/gighmmpiobklfepjocnamgkkbiglidom
TridenT
Lifer
- Sep 4, 2006
- 16,800
- 45
- 91
It was like that for a while, but they finally made it doable. The google search results just suck when you trying searching for extensions... Google probably doesn't index their own god damn website. >_<
Anyway, the adblock implementations are SHIT. THEY FUCKING WORK AFTER YOU LOAD THE GOD DAMN PAGE. Imagine loading an entire page after a second or two. Then the page flashes and those advertisements THEN disappear whereas in firefox THEY NEVER SHOWED UP TO BEGIN WITH!
I found a fix for this using adthwart! Go to the options page and check that box off.
mb
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2004
- 10,233
- 2
- 71
sourceninja
Diamond Member
- Mar 8, 2005
- 8,805
- 65
- 91
Yea, I don't know how well they work, because I don't block ads. if a site has obnoxious advertisement I don't want to support them with my traffic.
AstroManLuca
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2004
- 15,628
- 5
- 81
Thanks for the links... when I last checked just a few months ago, nothing seemed to be available. Only adblock-like thing for Chrome was really complex (moreso than editing a hosts file) and didn't work. Perhaps they just weren't showing up in search results.
EDIT: I wonder if Google just doesn't want people to know how to block ads in their own browser... maybe has something to do with them being an ad company.
Last edited:
Abe Froman
Golden Member
- Dec 14, 2004
- 1,064
- 11
- 81
I have a problem opening pdfs with Chrome, otherwise it's all I use. But I keep Firefox on the machine for certain sites that aren't chrome friendly.
GodlessAstronomer
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2007
- 17,009
- 5
- 0
I don't understand the memory usage argument at all. My piece of shit laptop has 2gb of memory and my desktop has 4gb. I never max either of them out, so any memory that isn't being used is being wasted.
However, Firefox is definitely slow and bloated. It takes all bloody day to launch and feels sluggish compared to Chrome.
However, Firefox is definitely slow and bloated. It takes all bloody day to launch and feels sluggish compared to Chrome.
TridenT
Lifer
- Sep 4, 2006
- 16,800
- 45
- 91
Could be for you, but for me... Firefox loads pretty fast and loads pages pretty fast too. I don't notice much of a difference between it and chrome. Although I do use Chrome more and more for websites like Facebook because the chat is fuckzorzed in Firefox. >_<
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter