Why I never use Google Chrome dspite it being teh fastest

[G73S]

Apart from automatic Google translate i hate all the features and UI on the Chrome. It crashes always. I do use Firefox for years and am happy with it.

ditto!!!

 

[crashtech]

The new Firefox 29.0.1 looks more like Chrome than ever, and features a new sync feature. Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, I presume.

 

[bbhaag]

The new Firefox 29.0.1 looks more like Chrome than ever, and features a new sync feature. Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, I presume.

IDK about that. I use Chrome on my Win8 machine and FF29 on my Linux machine and I don't think they look or interact the same at all.
Sure there are a few similarities like the curved tabs and the sync feature but overall they are really different. Especially the sub menus, book marks, and ability to customize.

 

[crashtech]

I can still use them more or less interchangeably. I guess I am just insensitive to the differences. I was a long time Netscape user and still cannot stand IE, but Chrome won me over a while back because they made syncing so easy. I might switch back I guess if the Firefox sync works good...

 

[Ichinisan]

It hasn't had memory leaks in a long time, and I'm not convinced it ever did. I never had any, and some of the confirmed leaks I read about were caused by addons. You can't blame Firefox for third party code.

This is absolute bull****. It has awful memory leaks since I started using it (probably just before 3.0) up to the point where I stopped using it.

It had memory leaks on systems with no extensions whatsoever. A common scenario for me: Fresh OS and Firefox install. No extensions. Do some intensive browsing opening and closing lots of tabs through the day. System becomes terribly slow, while it thrashes the hard disk to swap things between RAM and the virtual memory page file. Task Manager shows Firefox using hundreds (or thousands) of MB in RAM, even though only a few tabs are open. Open a new tab to about:blank and close all the others. A few MB are freed and it still occupies hundreds (or thousands) of MB in RAM

Maybe it never did this in Linux, but you simply can't ignore the problem for Windows users as long as Mozilla did. I think it still had the same problem when I tried it again sometime last year. Or, at least, people were still complaining about it. For 7+ years, it simply wasn't possible to use Firefox in Windows with normal / default settings and not encounter this problem often.

I sometimes used AdBlock. Rarely any other extension. I can confirm that this exact problem happened whether-or-not AdBlock or Flash was installed.

 

[Ichinisan]

I reworked my bookmarks to work with chrome. Rather than being stuck with the idea of having them on the left side of the screen ala firefox I put individual folders in the bookmarks toolbar.... so when I click on a folder the bookmarks open up.. synced across all browsers... in the end I prefer it to what I was doing... looks something like this...

I do that.

...and if I want to press [Alt]+[PrintScreen] to take a screenshot of the browser window, I use the super-convenient [Ctrl]+[Shift]+ keyboard shortcut to hide the Bookmarks Toolbar first.

I use the iCloud sync tool in Windows to synchronize the bookmarks with my iDevices and it works well.

 

[ninaholic37]

Open a new tab to about:blank and close all the others. A few MB are freed and it still occupies hundreds (or thousands) of MB in RAM

Type "about:memory" in the url, press "measure", and post your results. Then try pressing the "Minimize Memory Usage" button and post your results.

I think it saves some of your history in it's memory cache for fast retrieval (in case you visit those sites/images again). You can also open the last 10 pages you closed by pressing Ctrl-Shift-T. Both settings are changeable.

Have you tried Firefox since version 24?

 

[coasthub]

Above all I prefer Chrome but unfortunately it's memory intensive.

I always end up with 90% memory consumed. I open the same amount of tabs in the other browsers but they don't consume a portion of what Chrome does

 

[gizbug]

I'm using Chrome 64 bit, even though beta, seems to run fine on my Windows 8 Machine. Anyone else running the 64 bit version?

 

[Kaido]

Above all I prefer Chrome but unfortunately it's memory intensive.

I always end up with 90% memory consumed. I open the same amount of tabs in the other browsers but they don't consume a portion of what Chrome does

I love Chrome, but I can easily eat up 10 gigs (!) when doing serious browsing. Then Shockwave crashes :biggrin:

 

[Ichinisan]

Type "about:memory" in the url, press "measure", and post your results. Then try pressing the "Minimize Memory Usage" button and post your results.

I think it saves some of your history in it's memory cache for fast retrieval (in case you visit those sites/images again). You can also open the last 10 pages you closed by pressing Ctrl-Shift-T. Both settings are changeable.

Have you tried Firefox since version 24?

I don't plan to try Firefox again. I put up with that major problem for 6+ years and it was never addressed while I was still a Firefox user. I've moved on.

I used to be a Firefox evangelist. I installed Internet service and personally recommended / installed Firefox for hundreds of people. I donated money to support Firefox. I bought a Firefox hat from their site and wore it every day. I greatly appreciated the fact that Firefox was less likely to get hijacked with malware, which made my job much easier.

The release of Google Chrome jump-started innovation in web standards and features. Firefox adopted a lot of it, and Firefox is still a better option than IE in my opinion. Last I checked, Firefox devs had abandoned hope of going to a multi-process model that probably would have resolved its memory woes. Chrome has some quirks too, but I've adjusted to them already and I'm now a Chrome user. A lot of the productivity enhancements I used with Firefox are also available with Chrome (though some are deep in the settings), so I've been a happy Chrome user for years now.

 

[Ichinisan]

I love Chrome, but I can easily eat up 10 gigs (!) when doing serious browsing. Then Shockwave crashes :biggrin:

At least Chrome frees up the memory when you close your tabs.

When I last used Firefox, it would still be using gigabytes of RAM after I opened a new tab to about:blank and closed all the others. It had this problem for many years. Apologists and deniers claimed it wasn't true or blamed plugins. That's simply delusional. It affected every single system I ever used for any significant period of time. I reinstalled operating systems routinely and worked on hundreds of different computers. I never used themes or skins. I avoided using plugins other than adblock (and Firefox had the same problem with NO plugins). It was a problem inherent to Firefox.

I've heard apologists and deniers say many times "that was fixed in version [x]." So you'll understand why I can't trust if someone tells me it has been fixed in the few years since I finally stopped using Firefox.

 

[crashtech]

I use Chrome and Firefox and I can say for sure that the memory issue does not affect me at all even with only 4GB RAM and both browsers open with lots of tabs. I can eat up all 4 GB without too much trouble, but it comes back when the tabs gets closed. I just checked again to be sure (version 31). Not that you care or will change, just fyi.

 

[Ichinisan]

I use Chrome and Firefox and I can say for sure that the memory issue does not affect me at all even with only 4GB RAM and both browsers open with lots of tabs. I can eat up all 4 GB without too much trouble, but it comes back when the tabs gets closed. I just checked again to be sure (version 31). Not that you care or will change, just fyi.

I certainly hope Firefox has fixed it. Sounds like they finally have, but I can't really know unless I see how it responds to my own browsing habits. I'm probably not going to bother switching again unless Google really ruins Chrome with some major changes.

 

[Chiefcrowe]

Is that the problem you were having for 6 years?

I just ran a test with the latest firefox and after closing 23 tabs it did reclaim the RAM, so it seems like that they fixed that problem.

At least Chrome frees up the memory when you close your tabs.

When I last used Firefox, it would still be using gigabytes of RAM after I opened a new tab to about:blank and closed all the others. It had this problem for many years. Apologists and deniers claimed it wasn't true or blamed plugins. That's simply delusional. It affected every single system I ever used for any significant period of time. I reinstalled operating systems routinely and worked on hundreds of different computers. I never used themes or skins. I avoided using plugins other than adblock (and Firefox had the same problem with NO plugins). It was a problem inherent to Firefox.

I've heard apologists and deniers say many times "that was fixed in version [x]." So you'll understand why I can't trust if someone tells me it has been fixed in the few years since I finally stopped using Firefox.

 

[ninaholic37]

Has anyone here been following the hack Chrome uses to make itself "the fastest browser" on Windows?

Author's report: http://www.belshe.com/2010/06/04/chrome-cranking-up-the-clock/
Bug report: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=153139

Recent news articles:
Forbes - http://www.forbes.com/sites/ianmorr...e-web-browser-is-killing-your-laptop-battery/
ZDNet - http://www.zdnet.com/google-will-fix-the-battery-eating-bug-in-its-chrome-browser-7000031830/
PCWorld - http://www.pcworld.com/article/2455...-for-years-but-google-promises-to-fix-it.html
Softpedia - http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-to-Fix-Chrome-Bug-Killing-Windows-Laptop-Battery-451267.shtml

Seems like the 1ms "feature" drains power/battery and Microsoft is against it.

 

[Chiefcrowe]

I have read about it and it sucks that it drains the battery but there you go... they will do whatever they can, despite the consequences. I'm kind of glad i don't use it even though it is faster.

 

[ringtail]

Merely on principle, there's just too much power being concentrated into Google. They own your ass re: search, maps, so much else. World history has graphically PROVED over & over that over-concentration / over-centralization of power (i.e., what the obama-ites are aggressively doing) is B-A-D, hurts people.

I like Firefox.

 

[TheSlamma]

You pro Chrome guys really should look into where that rag installs itself, right to your user profile and has no GUI setting to control the amount of cache it dumps on your hard drive/user profile slowing down your computers greatly. You should see what this does in roaming profile environments especially and the logon time for your user profile local or roaming is slowed down a ton. IMO crap move to put it directly in the profile, Program Files is there for a good reason.

Now if you are savvy enough to grab the for business edition and use the command line or group policy to not have it dump all that cache on your hard drive or the portable edition then you are fine. But until then you guys are really not doing a service for your computer. Windows is just slowing down, your hard drive is just filling up and your SSD is getting unneeded write cycles.

Firefox/Palemoon and even IE at least have a GUI spot in their options to get rid of that cache,portable editions by default have it disabled and why I prefer them. IMO browsers should detect internet speed, if it's faster than a modem then cache should be disabled.

 

[Ichinisan]

You pro Chrome guys really should look into where that rag installs itself, right to your user profile and has no GUI setting to control the amount of cache it dumps on your hard drive/user profile slowing down your computers greatly. You should see what this does in roaming profile environments especially and the logon time for your user profile local or roaming is slowed down a ton. IMO crap move to put it directly in the profile, Program Files is there for a good reason.

Now if you are savvy enough to grab the for business edition and use the command line or group policy to not have it dump all that cache on your hard drive or the portable edition then you are fine. But until then you guys are really not doing a service for your computer. Windows is just slowing down, your hard drive is just filling up and your SSD is getting unneeded write cycles.

Firefox/Palemoon and even IE at least have a GUI spot in their options to get rid of that cache,portable editions by default have it disabled and why I prefer them. IMO browsers should detect internet speed, if it's faster than a modem then cache should be disabled.

Installing to your user profile directory is one of the best things about Chrome. It doesn't require elevation to do seamless / transparent updates. You don't need to have admin privileges to install "Mozilla Maintenance Service" or whatever. Combined with an internal design that's centered around sandboxing, it's fundamentally more safe than a browser that was installed with admin privileges to access even more of the system. There are alternate installers that do things in a more traditional way, but I wouldn't want to.

 

[LPCTech]

Im a remote tech support guy, meaning remote in with bomgar and fix pc, usually remove malware from old peoples pc's. Usually the the malware(searchprotect, truvio, sendori, conduit etc) makes it hard for them to get to a web page on IE or firefox, and download a file and I usually have to boot to safe mode with networking and it takes a while, my call time is an issue, but Chrome almost always is the last browser standing against the malware and if they have it, I can usually get in without safe mode(i boot to it later to clean). Faster for me and Im happy when people have it on their pc.

Chrome is my favorite browser, I hate when the caller has FF cuz then after they HAVE to save the file and not run it right away (which is what I want, to run it), I have to direct them to the download folder to run it, which isnt a huge deal, but speed is money to me and the faster I can get things done the better.

Chrome all the way.

 

[TheSlamma]

Installing to your user profile directory is one of the best things about Chrome. It doesn't require elevation to do seamless / transparent updates. You don't need to have admin privileges to install "Mozilla Maintenance Service" or whatever. Combined with an internal design that's centered around sandboxing, it's fundamentally more safe than a browser that was installed with admin privileges to access even more of the system. There are alternate installers that do things in a more traditional way, but I wouldn't want to.

So how big is your user profile right now?

And why is sandboxing listed as part of that alternate download you won't use?

http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/browser/features.html

 

[Sattern]

I used to use Opera until they got rid of their control + number = redirect.

It used to be the best browser for me, but now I just use chrome with bing as a search engine.

 

[Chiefcrowe]

That is true about installing to user profile and sandboxing, but one of our Dept. IT managers told us he has been seeing more reports of malware infecting the user profile folder since Chrome was the browser they were using. So now he is not a fan anymore.

If you install Firefox once with admin privileges, then you don't need them anymore to install updates anymore. (you used to in old versions)

Installing to your user profile directory is one of the best things about Chrome. It doesn't require elevation to do seamless / transparent updates. You don't need to have admin privileges to install "Mozilla Maintenance Service" or whatever. Combined with an internal design that's centered around sandboxing, it's fundamentally more safe than a browser that was installed with admin privileges to access even more of the system. There are alternate installers that do things in a more traditional way, but I wouldn't want to.

 

[postmortemIA]

I'm forced at work to use chrome, and it is ok, some people do like minimalist approach.

as said above, non-customizable toolbars, weak bookmarks management (and display of them too, as in you can see only ones pinned to toolbar), having to navigate too many things for basic tasks (a lot of clicking just to install an extension, for example) are my main gripes with it.

And how did I forget it... no menu bar!

It seems that firefox lately is dying to look like Chrome (hoping to get back lost share by imitating )