• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why Chrome is inferior and always will be inferior

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
AnMig said:
Wow lots of Chrome supporters, must be a good browser based on the responses. I have used Firefox but love chrome appears faster on my linux system.

Did not know about missing adblocking on chrome.
Click to expand...

It's not missing at all. Chrome has adblocking.
 
I can't remember the last time I had a problem with a browser on my system. I use FF mostly, sometimes IE. Once in a while I install Chrome, but I don't really dig the interface personally. Old timers will remember when there were substantial differences between browsers, eg : Netscape 3 Gold vs. IE3, lol. Now I think people are a bit batty when they go apeshit over one browser over the other. They all work pretty damned well, and if you run into an issue, try the page in another browser? Big whoop.
 
TridenT said:
Because everyone goes to sketchy warez sites where they're just asking for it.. I forgot we all do that apparently. :thumbsdown: fail troll fail...


And FIREFOX FOR TEH WINZ... Fucking hate chrome because of that stupid shit it does. Fucks with my browsing constantly when I tried to use it. I have video proof! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhgt8AC5qBE
Click to expand...

Troll? I'm just repeating WHAT EVERY SECURITY AGENCY has said for the last year:

http://s0.2mdn.net/1451021/tgdaily....-features/44602-firefox-most-insecure-browser

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2304

http://www.dailytech.com/Security+S...Browser+IE8+Among+the+Safest/article16796.htm

http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/0...50-with-insecure-flash-only-30-click-through/

etc etc etc....
 
rudeguy said:
the point is...WHO CARES?????

I ask my unanswered question....what's the worst they are going to do, send you and email??
Click to expand...

Track you all over the web, retain your browsing history, use that information for advertising. It's a privacy issue.
 
dwell said:
Track you all over the web, retain your browsing history, use that information for advertising. It's a privacy issue.
Click to expand...

1. Track me all over the web.
OK...and....??? So they know that I go to a nerd forum, download mods for my cell phone and randomly tag myself in facebook pics that I'm not in.

2. Retain my browsing history.
Isn't this the same as 1?

3. Use that information for advertising.
So the worst they are going to do is email me? EVERYBODY PANIC!!!!
 
rudeguy said:
1. Track me all over the web.
OK...and....??? So they know that I go to a nerd forum, download mods for my cell phone and randomly tag myself in facebook pics that I'm not in.

2. Retain my browsing history.
Isn't this the same as 1?

3. Use that information for advertising.
So the worst they are going to do is email me? EVERYBODY PANIC!!!!
Click to expand...

If the CIA or some random website was tracking you like that, would you be concerned then? If privacy is of no concern to you, then go ahead and use Chrome. Even then it still has inferior ad-blocking compared to FF unless of course you don't mind the web looking like Times Square.
 
Mike Gayner said:
I would use Failfox, but I prefer my browser to not be a fat, ugly, insecure bloated piece of shit. So I chose Chrome, the superior browser.
Click to expand...

Ah the perpetual browser cycle.

10

A new, lean browser comes out that does little more than display webpages. The internet rejoices and everyone switches over to it. It's faster, more stable, more secure, it's lean and it's mean. But it doesn't do <x>, or <y>, so those features are added, and so is <z>. Ad blocking, mouse gestures, dial pads, etc. Then people start to complain that its bloated.

GOTO 10

Just wait until the people who need adblocking for some reason hack chrome to get it to work. Then chrome will get inundated with extensions and people will load it with stupid fucking toolbars and bonzai buddy to get it to do everything they want, then they'll bitch that it's bloated and the process will repeat.
 
No I wouldn't be concerned. You don't think someone is monitoring what you do online? Do a couple Google searched on the Anarchists Cookbook, Jihad and nuclear reactors if you are so safe.

The ads are what makes the internet free. Would you pay $250/month for ad-free internet?
 
dwell said:
It's not ad-blocking. It's ad retrieving, showing, then hiding. See the OP as to why.
Click to expand...

It happens in a split second, unless you have a shit computer or something.

It's unreasonable to completely disqualify Chrome's functionality because it works slightly differently than another browser's like-goal extension.

Even WITH that added download/block time, Chrome is STILL faster than the rest.

It's also compact, stable, and not bloated.
 
dwell said:
Track you all over the web, retain your browsing history, use that information for advertising. It's a privacy issue.
Click to expand...

Like I could give one little shit about all of that? I don't care if google is standing over my shoulder with a fucking movie cam recording my every move. It doesn't affect me in the slightest.

Next weak excuse?
 
Nik said:
It happens in a split second, unless you have a shit computer or something.

It's unreasonable to completely disqualify Chrome's functionality because it works slightly differently than another browser's like-goal extension.
Click to expand...

It's not slightly different, it's a flawed implementation on Chrome. To explain it.

Firefox:

1) Load the page.
2) ABP parses the document for ads loaded from external sites, blocked elements, etc. and they are stripped from the document.
3) Firefox only requests referenced elements that are not ads.
4) Firefox renders the page.

Chrome:

1) Load the page.
2) Render the page.
3) "Ad-blocker" hides the elements considered ads.

If the page you are loading is 500K of content and 1MB of ads, Chrome requests and renders 1.5MB of data where FF only request the valid 500k, therefore is quicker to load the page and the page is rendered faster.
 
I know exactly how both work. You seemed to miss the part where it doesn't matter because Chrome still kicks firefux's ass because it's still faster, the end product is the same.
 
Nik said:
I know exactly how both work. You seemed to miss the part where it doesn't matter because Chrome still kicks firefux's ass because it's still faster, the end product is the same.
Click to expand...

But the milliseconds of speed Chrome may have are wasted if that time is spent downloading and rendering ads, especially if they are in turn hidden by the blocker.

I get it, you like Chrome.
 
I primarily use Firefox as of today.

I feel slightly uncomfortable surfing the web without NoScript.

I honestly prefer the speed and layout of Chrome, though. With some tweaking I can get the UI of Firefox to look fairly sleek.
 
dwell said:
But the milliseconds of speed Chrome may have are wasted if that time is spent downloading and rendering ads, especially if they are in turn hidden by the blocker.

I get it, you like Chrome.
Click to expand...

Right, but it's still faster. And you forgot to address the bloat issue. Does the current version still have memory leaks? I can't be bothered to re-read this thread 😛
 
Nik said:
Right, but it's still faster. And you forgot to address the bloat issue. Does the current version still have memory leaks? I can't be bothered to re-read this thread 😛
Click to expand...

It depends on your internet connection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top